Recently an e-petition was submitted to the UK government calling for the prohibition of the use of Narconon by the police force. The petition text read as follows:
The Times detailed, on the 20th Jan 2008, that the “Church” of Scientology is exploiting the British Police to distribute materials with no basis in fact. I quote: “Officers have been handing out booklets that praise the science fiction writer L Ron Hubbard, the church’s founder, and describe both prescription and illegal drugs as “poison”.” This is irresponsible at best, and at worst, manipulating the Police to promote a commercial organisation. These “anti-drug leaflets” are nothing of the sort- the charity DrugScope said “These booklets… should not be allowed in schools.” The booklets went so far as to claim that Scientology’s version of drug “therapy” was “the safest, most effective - and only - detoxification procedure of its kind”. This is, of course, a complete untruth. In conclusion, leave drugs policies to the experts, and sever any future links between the Police and any other commercial organisations.
This is a reference to the article “Scientologists enlist police to push antidrugs drive in school,” published in The Times on 20th January of this year, not exactly a lifetime away. The government responded today, as follows:
You have signed an e-Petition about severing links between the Church of Scientology and the British Police.
The day-to-day management, use of resources, policies and deployment of staff are operational matters, and so they are the responsibility of the Chief Constable of each individual police force.
Your petition may relate to news reports about the City of London Police using scientologist drugs literature, or supporting a scientologist drugs campaign. In response to these reports, the City of London Police issued the follow statement:
“The City of London Police has not given any support to drugs campaigns, nor have we endorsed their drugs education and rehabilitation programmes. There are no plans for the Force to work with Scientologists on any programme in the future.”
You will see, therefore, that there are in fact no ‘links’ that need to be severed.
There are two major problems with this response:
1. The petition did not refer to any one police force, but instead to “British police”.
2. The article in question referred not to the City of London police, but to the Metropolitan police, making only a passing reference to the City at the end in reference to a previous scandal in which the cult was revealed to be bribing police officers.
In short, the “response” does not respond to anything at all, but combines a brushoff with false information.
One can only hope this is simple government inefficiency.
Links:
- The petition (and response),
http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page15283.asp
- The Times article, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/education/article3216965.ece
- Previous incident with the City of London police, http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/nov/22/freedomofinformation.religion
The Times detailed, on the 20th Jan 2008, that the “Church” of Scientology is exploiting the British Police to distribute materials with no basis in fact. I quote: “Officers have been handing out booklets that praise the science fiction writer L Ron Hubbard, the church’s founder, and describe both prescription and illegal drugs as “poison”.” This is irresponsible at best, and at worst, manipulating the Police to promote a commercial organisation. These “anti-drug leaflets” are nothing of the sort- the charity DrugScope said “These booklets… should not be allowed in schools.” The booklets went so far as to claim that Scientology’s version of drug “therapy” was “the safest, most effective - and only - detoxification procedure of its kind”. This is, of course, a complete untruth. In conclusion, leave drugs policies to the experts, and sever any future links between the Police and any other commercial organisations.
This is a reference to the article “Scientologists enlist police to push antidrugs drive in school,” published in The Times on 20th January of this year, not exactly a lifetime away. The government responded today, as follows:
You have signed an e-Petition about severing links between the Church of Scientology and the British Police.
The day-to-day management, use of resources, policies and deployment of staff are operational matters, and so they are the responsibility of the Chief Constable of each individual police force.
Your petition may relate to news reports about the City of London Police using scientologist drugs literature, or supporting a scientologist drugs campaign. In response to these reports, the City of London Police issued the follow statement:
“The City of London Police has not given any support to drugs campaigns, nor have we endorsed their drugs education and rehabilitation programmes. There are no plans for the Force to work with Scientologists on any programme in the future.”
You will see, therefore, that there are in fact no ‘links’ that need to be severed.
There are two major problems with this response:
1. The petition did not refer to any one police force, but instead to “British police”.
2. The article in question referred not to the City of London police, but to the Metropolitan police, making only a passing reference to the City at the end in reference to a previous scandal in which the cult was revealed to be bribing police officers.
In short, the “response” does not respond to anything at all, but combines a brushoff with false information.
One can only hope this is simple government inefficiency.
Links:
- The petition (and response),
http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page15283.asp - The Times article,
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/education/article3216965.ece - Previous incident with the City of London police,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/nov/22/freedomofinformation.religion
Homepage:
Comments
Hide the following comment
Because this government is in the grip of freemasonry and the occult
18.04.2008 21:21
"The great strength of our Order lies in its concealment; let it never appear in any place in its own name, but always covered by another name, and another occupation. None is better than the three lower degrees of Free Masonry; the public is accustomed to it, expects little from it, and therefore takes little notice of it. Next to this, the form of a learned or literary society is best suited to our purpose, and had Free Masonry not existed, this cover would have been employed; and it may be much more than a cover, it may be a powerful engine in our hands. By establishing reading societies, and subscription libraries, and taking these under our direction, and supplying them through our labours, we may turn the public mind which way we will." - Adam Weishaupt, founder of the Illuminati in John Robison's Proofs of a Conspiracy, 1793.
Tony Gosling
Homepage:
http://www.bilderberg.org