Police ban describing scientology as a 'cult'

[jumpy]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/may/20/1

ncie. I feel safer already.

Do we really need to waste the cps' time over this? I'd have that copper in court for wasting time and public money.

Never saw a copper do the same for any of those peaceful fellows waving signs calling for the beheading of those who insult islam... why on earth could that be :hmm:


As someone on another forum commented: "What a cult."

:rotfl:

[kurtz]

Too right!

I believe there's a law coming up to make spiritualist et al and possibly 'cults' prove that whoever they're in contact with really exists. Perhaps this could be extended to religions who are apparently somehow different to cults:hmm:

[Skybird]

Ah, the British are battling "discrimination" again. PC at its best. Pfui Deibel.

In Germany, Scientology just had lost another appeal at the Administrative Court in Münster (to be precise, they gave up when it became clear to them that their failure was imminent). German intel service, especially the Bundsverfassungsschutz (office for protection of the constitution) are allowed to continue following the order from all 16 federal ministre presidents to keep them under surveillance and report about their activities.

Meanwhile, kids of key personell of Scientology Germany, who fled the sect and asked for "asylum" and protection by the police, still are kept in the hidden by the authorities, to protect them against the sect. They do not want to be returned to their parents.

No wonder that scientology hates Germany like the plague and internally talks of the "battlefield Germany" that must be "conquered" and "controlled" in order "to take over Europe". Not my wording, but theirs, and it is hardly the woprding of a religion, or a belief system intersted in peace or the good of man. Conquering europe leads over making Germany submit and tolerate scientology as a relgion. Their european strategy thus is heavily aiming at germany, by infiltrating the educational sector, targetting politicians on an individual basis and deceive them over accepting policy changes in favour of Scientology, propaganda campaigns, having erected their european HQ in germany (and in very close neighbourhood to the Berlin Reichstag - seat of the Bundestag -, and the chancellor office), and finally by a flood of campaigns meant to harass critical individuals, and engage them in endless, discouraging chains of court battles. Intimidation, pursuing of apostates, and threatening critics always has been part of their agenda.

There is political consensus amongst all parties and leading politicians, that it ranks as a business corporation and a dangerous psycho-sect and in no way qualifies as a religion, and that it is in open violation of key items of the constitution and that it is working against the sovereignity of the state, and basic human laws. Good for us to fight against them, it shows that Germany is no longer the third Reich, but now fights against powers that compare to the maliciousness of the Third Reich. That in other countries events can happen like Joea reported on Britain, and that the US year by year dares to criticise Germany for not accepting it as a religion, frightens me nevertheless, and tells something about the deeply messed-up thinking in these countries, regarding Scientology. Thank God America has no right to demand this from us, or cannot enforce its view against us.

German ministre presidents hope to legally ban scientology in the forseeable future. Without doubt we will be accused by some of being Nazis when we do that. But speakers joining this criticism have not learned all the lessons of the past, nor on scientology.

Sometimes I think Britain is a mental asylum, all surrounded by water. British readers here who know me a bit, also know how I mean it.

[kurtz]

first off, I'm not here to defend scientology, I've second hand experience of them and they are maniacs prepared to use physical violence as well as intimidation to further their aims.

However I'm not sure how that differentiates them from religions who do the same but on a more grandiose scale.

[Platapus]

This kid is stupid and deserves what he got.

"A policewoman later read him section five of the Public Order Act and "strongly advised" him to remove the sign. The section prohibits signs which have representations or words which are threatening, abusive or insulting."

When a law enforcement officer starts quoting and showing you the law that you are breaking, it is a really good idea to listen to them.

If you don't agree with the law, go through your representatives and urge them to change the law.

If you try to "make a statement" by continuing to break the law in front of a law enforcement officer, you can't be surprised if you get in trouble.

"On the website he asks for advice on how to fight the charge: "What's the likelihood I'll need a lawyer? If I do have to get one, it'll have to come out of my pocket money.""

Of course it should come out of your own pocket! You were the idiot who insisted on breaking a law in front of a frickin policewoman after she warned you!!!

Personally I think the law is inappropriate. But inappropriate or not, it is the law and he was warned.

He may have thought he was a big tough man bucking the system, but it appears he is sniveling another tune now.

It is ok to disagree with a law, but that does not give you the right to break it and not accept the consequences. If you want a law changed, don't break it, work though the system.

"We're completely peaceful protesters expressing a perfectly valid opinion. This whole thing stinks."

He is probably right. But the law is the law. Intentions aside, you should not expect to break a law (no matter how much you disagree with it) in front of a policewoman and not get into trouble.

Not that this stupid kid will get into any actual trouble, I am sure the charges will be dropped. Maybe this experience will but the scare into him so that he tries to affect changes within the legal system, instead of without.

[Letum]

Hmm, I wonder if the same chief of police who cut the tape when this very same
Scientology place in London was officially opened had a hand in this. :hmm:

Or perhaps it was the chief of police and his deputies who all got presents worth
a few thousand pounds from the cult of Scientology.

They claim the CPS advised them to remove the signs, but the CPS say they
have not given any advice to the police about it.

Who bets they got advice from the cult instead of the CPS?

This stinks of corruption.


I would agree with Platapus, if the kid broke a alw.
But he did not break any law!
The term "cult" is not abusive or insulting; it is factual.
No one would give two hoots if someone called subsim a cult, or any other
organiseation. Scientology don't like it because it is close to the bone.

“Somebody someday will say, ‘This is illegal.’ By then be sure the orgs [Scientology churches] say what is legal or not.”
- L. R. Hubbard

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by kurtz

first off, I'm not here to defend scientology, I've second hand experience of them and they are maniacs prepared to use physical violence as well as intimidation to further their aims.

However I'm not sure how that differentiates them from religions who do the same but on a more grandiose scale.

That dogs balk, and that I can balk, too, does not make me a dog.

[kurtz]

Originally Posted by Skybird

That dogs balk, and that I can balk, too, does not make me a dog.

And religions can do things cults cannot do I thought the converse would be true.

[jumpy]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7416425.stm

as expected.

[STEED]

Originally Posted by jumpy

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7416425.stm

as expected.

"Scientology is not a religion, it is a dangerous cult"

If his sign said.......

"Scientology is a pervert cult religion for perverts, it is a dangerous cult"

Then may be. :hmm:

[Letum]

My faith in British Justice is not completely destroyed yet.