Page 2 | Place of worship raided on Thursday

JazzyContemporaneousNotes · 2025-03-29T15:59:53+00:00

I'm shocked by this, Quakers are hardly places where violence is condoned, or terrorism plotted! What a topsy turvey world we are all living in, now. [[https://www.quaker.org.uk/news-and-events/news/quakers-condemn-police-raid-on-westminster-meeting-house https://www.quaker.org.uk/news-and-events/news/quakers-condemn-police-raid-on-westminster-meeting-house]] For those of a certain age Brian Eno wrote this press release about it: PRESS RELEASE 28 March 2025 From Brian Eno: On the Arrest of Young People at a Quaker Meeting House Last night, six young people were arrested by police during a peaceful gathering at a Quaker Meeting House. They had assembled to talk, reflect, and organise around two issues of overwhelming moral gravity: the climate emergency, and the continuing destruction in Gaza. That the police chose to forcibly enter a Quaker space—a site known throughout history for its deep commitment to peace and nonviolence—is both alarming and telling. These young people were not disrupting the peace. They were enacting it. We live in a time where the greatest threats to our future go unchallenged by those in power, while those who speak out are increasingly met with suspicion, hostility, and force. When the state begins to treat moral concern as criminal intent, we should all be paying close attention. The people arrested last night were not extremists. They were citizens who care—young people who see the interconnected crises of climate collapse and human suffering and refuse to turn away. They gathered not in violent defiance, but in peaceful conscience. I stand with them. I believe their voices are not only valid, but vital. If the institutions meant to protect us cannot bear to hear these voices, then it is not the protesters who are disrupting order—it is the silence of those who look away. — Brian Eno

SummerDaysOnTheWay · 30/03/2025 08:22

mumofoneAlonebutokay · 29/03/2025 16:11

This is to be expected

That labour party that people believed was so 'reformed' under keir starmer was always going to be like this

Attacking the people too poorly to work but can't get pip, by slashing the lcwra element by 50% (Edit- for new applicants from next year, I think)

Attacking freedom of speech and protest (it's alright though, as long as some right wing nut job can still say the r word)

Kier was heavy handed when punishing the rioters in 2011, heavy handed with dealing with the racist riots (I agreed punishments were needed but his were extreme)

This is who he is, and who the Labour Party are. Terrifying times.

Edited

What a load of utter crap!
The labour party was attacked for sympathising with the Palestinian cause pre-Starmer.

cakeorwine · 30/03/2025 08:27

It seems like people having a meeting in a Quaker meeting House.

Not Quakers who were meeting but a group who could use one of the meeting rooms they have available - I know that I have had meetings in such places and I am not a Quaker.

However - the police do have a tendency to arrest people in advance if they think they might be going to commit protests that they think are going to be disruptive. Which is not right.

cakeorwine · 30/03/2025 08:28

HeddaGarbled · 30/03/2025 02:11

Religions aren’t renowned for being entirely innocent of criminal activity. Do you really think they should be immune from law enforcement?

It was a room that was being hired out.

Nothing to do with the Quakers - except they just happened to rent a room out.

cakeorwine · 30/03/2025 08:29

JazzyContemporaneousNotes · 29/03/2025 16:12

I'm a Quaker - I didn't make it clear, sorr

I'm just actually speechless about this, it's like raiding a mosque, synagog, church or gudwara. Aren't they supposed to be places of sanctuary?

Do you think the people arrested were Quakers - or do you think it was a meeting room that they rented out that was raided?

SirDanielBrackley · 30/03/2025 08:48

Flytrap01 · 30/03/2025 02:03

If i had access to Mi5 files then i can answer with more authority in my answer, i suspect there are more to this than we know.

Show quote history

They are claiming it was a "public order" issue.

More like 20 coppers wangling some overtime, IMO.

mumofoneAlonebutokay · 30/03/2025 10:26

SummerDaysOnTheWay · 30/03/2025 08:22

What a load of utter crap!
The labour party was attacked for sympathising with the Palestinian cause pre-Starmer.

Show quote history

Yes, what's wrong with being sympathetic to the Palestinian cause?

Now that starmer is here, it isn't.

devourfeculence · 30/03/2025 18:27

JazzyContemporaneousNotes · 29/03/2025 16:12

I'm a Quaker - I didn't make it clear, sorr

I'm just actually speechless about this, it's like raiding a mosque, synagog, church or gudwara. Aren't they supposed to be places of sanctuary?

Sanctuary from what? The law?

I agree it was heavy handed, but I don't see what it being a place of worship has to do with anything. If this had happened in a community centre or someone's home, why would that be different?

Echobelly · 30/03/2025 19:33

528htz · 29/03/2025 16:18

What a road we're going down eh?

And it's infuriating that ersatz concerns about antisemitism are being used as justification when the authorities and media only seem to care about Jews when they can use us as a stick to beat people they don't like with

IfYouPutASausageInItItsNotAViennetta · 30/03/2025 19:48

Catullus5 · 30/03/2025 03:21

You assume they're intelligent.

I'm sure people said the same thing when Jean Charles de Menezes was shot dead

Show quote history

Indeed - Ian Tomlinson also immediately springs to mind too.

Catullus5 · 30/03/2025 20:14

GarlicStyle · 30/03/2025 03:11

No worship was taking place at the time but rooms at the meeting house, in St Martin’s Lane in central London, are regularly rented out to other groups and activities

[Youth Demand] has been posting on social media about a plan to “shut down London” over April, using tactics including “swarming”, which involves a non-violent direct action strategy used by protesters to block roads. Last year, the group was responsible for spraying the Ministry of Defence with red paint.

On Friday, police made a further five arrests of four men and one woman in their early twenties across London and Exeter on suspicion of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance.

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/society/article/met-smash-down-door-of-quaker-meeting-house-to-arrest-activists-jhhchrtlt

I realise opinions differ on mass disruption as a protest strategy, but it's been well publicised that the government - both this one and the last - intended to crack down on protests without a permit, as they've been escalating in size, frequency and violence.

Of course other places of worship are raided by legal enforcement agencies - sometimes even during ceremonies. They always have been.

ETA: Public nuisance has been a crime since the 12th century. The current form of the law was made in 2022, mainly to clarify 'conspiracy to cause' which has been a common law offence all this time.

Edited

Do the UK authorities still rely on common law offences?? That's archaic. I suspect the common law offence you mention wasn't used, which is why the last government had Parliament enact the law.

Regardless of that, there are many offences that the police could use to bust into various private spaces but you trust them to have a sense of proportion that seems lacking in this case.

GarlicStyle · 31/03/2025 00:05

Common law is law, @Catullus5. It's converted into legislation after consideration of the judgements passed and their relevance to modern life. If 900 years doesn't provide sufficient evidence of the offence's evolution with society, how much longer would you like?

The police could bust into various private spaces all day, every day if they were looking for excuses to do so. They don't, do they? So it might be reasonable to suppose they have a sense of proportion.

Catullus5 · 31/03/2025 00:17

GarlicStyle · 31/03/2025 00:05

Common law is law, @Catullus5. It's converted into legislation after consideration of the judgements passed and their relevance to modern life. If 900 years doesn't provide sufficient evidence of the offence's evolution with society, how much longer would you like?

The police could bust into various private spaces all day, every day if they were looking for excuses to do so. They don't, do they? So it might be reasonable to suppose they have a sense of proportion.

Common law, ie, case law, is a very poor basis for the elements of a criminal offence. Case law is by its nature less clear than legislation because there is, quite simply, lots to argue over. That's the reason why common law offences were abolished where I live sixty years ago. That's the reason why I would be surprised to discover that the UK authorities rely on them now, which is what makes Parliament creating a new offence significant. On the basis of your argument, that was a waste of time and I don't see why the fact that a law existed at the time of racks and thumbscrews is relevant - unless that's what you're heading back to.

I think breaking in like this in respect of a non-violent public demonstration lacks proportion and I think it's a shame if the public no longer see that.

moto748e · 31/03/2025 01:45

Or does it lack proportion, or does it send a message?

Flytrap01 · 31/03/2025 02:35

Catullus5 · 31/03/2025 00:17

Common law, ie, case law, is a very poor basis for the elements of a criminal offence. Case law is by its nature less clear than legislation because there is, quite simply, lots to argue over. That's the reason why common law offences were abolished where I live sixty years ago. That's the reason why I would be surprised to discover that the UK authorities rely on them now, which is what makes Parliament creating a new offence significant. On the basis of your argument, that was a waste of time and I don't see why the fact that a law existed at the time of racks and thumbscrews is relevant - unless that's what you're heading back to.

I think breaking in like this in respect of a non-violent public demonstration lacks proportion and I think it's a shame if the public no longer see that.

Show quote history

Ah, of course. You see, there's a certain line that, once crossed, makes one question the motives behind such actions. Blocking roads, obstructing emergency services these are not acts of noble resistance. These are reckless and irresponsible displays of self-serving outrage.

Let’s be blunt: when protestors stop ambulances, fire trucks, or police from reaching those in dire need, they’re no longer fighting for their cause. They’re sabotaging the very fabric of society. People could die. Innocent lives are put in danger, and for what? To make a point? To amplify their own voice at the expense of others’ safety? That's not activism. That's anarchy masquerading as principle.

It’s easy to talk about the power of protest until it starts affecting real people, people who have nothing to do with the protest, people whose lives hang in the balance. If they were truly concerned with the greater good, they’d understand that there are lines you simply don’t cross. But here we are people using the suffering of others to elevate their cause, without any regard for the consequences.

The public must see this for what it is: an act of selfishness, a display of ego, rather than a legitimate fight for justice. They’ve lost their moral high ground, and now all they’re doing is standing in the way of the very thing they claim to want to protect human life. There’s no greater hypocrisy than that.

Catullus5 · 31/03/2025 03:06

Flytrap01 · 31/03/2025 02:35

Ah, of course. You see, there's a certain line that, once crossed, makes one question the motives behind such actions. Blocking roads, obstructing emergency services these are not acts of noble resistance. These are reckless and irresponsible displays of self-serving outrage.

Let’s be blunt: when protestors stop ambulances, fire trucks, or police from reaching those in dire need, they’re no longer fighting for their cause. They’re sabotaging the very fabric of society. People could die. Innocent lives are put in danger, and for what? To make a point? To amplify their own voice at the expense of others’ safety? That's not activism. That's anarchy masquerading as principle.

It’s easy to talk about the power of protest until it starts affecting real people, people who have nothing to do with the protest, people whose lives hang in the balance. If they were truly concerned with the greater good, they’d understand that there are lines you simply don’t cross. But here we are people using the suffering of others to elevate their cause, without any regard for the consequences.

The public must see this for what it is: an act of selfishness, a display of ego, rather than a legitimate fight for justice. They’ve lost their moral high ground, and now all they’re doing is standing in the way of the very thing they claim to want to protect human life. There’s no greater hypocrisy than that.

Show quote history

Gosh. You must have been in the room.

Such a malevolent bunch. That must be why one will face no charges and the remainder have been released on bail.

ThreeFeetTall · 01/04/2025 14:01

Totally over the top action by the police. Seems to have also given the protestors lots of publicity before they even did the protest

Here is the statement by the recording clerk of Quakers in Britain on this issue https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wh4RhkW3hg0