Preachers arrested in Bristol
http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/1791E/production/_90324569_broadmead.jpg
From: http://christianconcern.com/our-concerns/freedom-of-speech/street-preachers-convicted-for-quoting-bible-in-modern-day-heresy-tri?utm_content=buffer23335&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
"Two street preachers have been convicted of public order offences, after a public prosecutor claimed that quoting parts of the King James Bible in the context of modern British society "must be considered to be abusive and is a criminal matter".
"The prosecutor had argued that free speech must yield to multicultural reality in modern Britain, and that there was a clear threat to violence due to the words of the preachers and the criticism of Islam.
Street preacher in Broadmead, Bristol, UK . November 2000
"Michael Overd and Michael Stockwell were convicted today (28 FEB) at Bristol Magistrates' Court. On Friday (25 FEB) the court dismissed the case against a third man, Adrian Clark, ruling that there was no case to answer.
"During the four-day trial, prosecutor Ian Jackson, claimed:
"To say to someone that Jesus is the only God is not a matter of truth. To the extent that they are saying that the only way to God is through Jesus, that cannot be a truth."
The men were found guilty under Section 31 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, for using "threatening or abusive words or behaviour or disorderly behaviour within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress, thereby, and the offence was religiously aggravated."
Quakers under arrest, Alnwick Quakers.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/0f/2f/15/0f2f1535820264ae56c7b4bd7d540243.jpg
Comment
Stating your (Christian) religious belief in public in England is now (apparently) a crime! This ridiculous, dangerous and unconstitutional decision has been made by Bristol Magistrates Court. Perhaps the Magistrates, Police and Prosecutors would benefit from a crash course on Locke who was born not far away 385 years ago when religion and the state was a far bigger issue than it is today. He asserted that the civil authority had no business interfering in the area of religious belief unless it had direct impact on the security of the state; and vice versa. Further that belief and the expression of it was a basic freedom that should be protected by the state and not be criminalised. We associate the persecution of religious believers and proselytisers with totalitarian and repressive states, not a liberal and tolerant Britain, that many would argue, has been created in large measure, by Protestant Christian belief and practice over the centuries.
George Whitefield 1714 - 1770
https://lexloiz.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/george-whitefield-preaching-in-1749.jpg?w=636
Significantly they were prosecuted under Section 31 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 not because anything they said or did encouraged crime and disorder, but simply because they asserted long held basic Christian dogma, that others might disagree with and be upset by. The offending assertion was a quote by Jesus himself, stating "I am the way, the truth and the light. No man comes to the father but by me." It has been a foundational principle of the Christian faith for two thousand years but apparently it is no longer legal. In fact, in this multi-cultural society, it is a crime to assert it publicly.
John Wesley 1703 - 1791
https://lexloiz.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/john-wesley-wednesbury1.jpg
We must therefore assume that on the basis of equality, it is illegal to assert any religious view publicly - or indeed any view at all if someone can claim they are upset by it! Does the same principle apply if the statement is made in a church, a chapel or a tent? If HM the Queen were present when it was claimed, would she and the congregation now be complicit in a crime?
The defence lawyer, Michael Phillips rather summed it up when he said: "This prosecution is nothing more than a modern-day heresy trial – dressed up under the public order act." It also drives a coach and horses through the principle that Christians - or indeed other faiths - are permitted to evangelise in public.
John Wesley's statue in Broadmead, Bristol
http://www.speel.me.uk/sculptplaces/scplacepicb/bristol/wesley/bristolwesleyhitch.jpg
By definition others will disagree and are equally free to do so. Neither side may use it as an excuse for abuse or violence for which there are clear remedies. Preachers of this sort have always attracted ridicule and debate - it comes with the territory. It is seldom successful in its objective but this does not negate its purpose or legality and it would be a fundamentally different country if free speech in public was criminalised. In fact it is not difficult to envisage very ominous overtones.
True Christian belief is a humanising and civilising influence. Indeed Bristol has had a high profile in this area with Quakers, Methodists and other non-conformists having had a major social impact locally and further afield. Such preachers as John Wesley and George Whitefield preached to huge open air crowds with largely beneficial consequences. Bristol was also an important area for Quakers and Plymouth Brethren who undertook open air preaching.
George Muller 1805 - 1898
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/6b/6b/af/6b6baffb3dbc2ecfd80a5279d116dc29.jpg
Ironically it now appears it is Bristol that has set this backward and dangerous precedent, contrary to all British constitutional and historical principles. Will it be appealed? Will the conviction be upheld? Whatever happens, the ramifications go far beyond two rather perhaps naive individuals holding forth in Broadmead. Some might infer it is yet another indication that Britain has jettisoned its Christian past, with its guiding moral principles, for something far less certain and destructive, in fact a lawless society where all or anything goes, rather reminiscent of the crowds to whom Wesley and Whitefield preached, but worse.
http://christianconcern.com/our-concerns/freedom-of-speech/street-preachers-convicted-for-quoting-bible-in-modern-day-heresy-triutm_content=buffer23335&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
,_BRO_Picbox-7-PBA-22,_1250x1250.jpg)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/Bristol_Harbour_(St_Stephen's_Church,_St_Augustine_the_Less_Church,_Bristol_Cathedral),_BRO_Picbox-7-PBA-22,_1250x1250.jpg
From: https://lexloiz.wordpress.com/tag/persecution/
Wesley recounts the injuries he had received whilst preaching
Wesley genuinely believed he was spared pain and danger, trusting, as he did, in the sovereignty of God. He recalled his various injuries during his efforts to preach the gospel:
‘By how gentle degrees does God prepare us for his will! Two years ago a piece of brick grazed my shoulders.
‘It was a year after that the stone struck me between the eyes.
‘Last month I received one blow, and this evening two; one before we came into the town, and one after we were gone out; but both were as nothing:
‘For though one man struck me on the breast with all his might, and the other on the mouth with such a force that the blood gushed out immediately, I felt no more pain from either of the blows, than if they touched me with a straw.’
Having watched the BBC programme, I am somewhat gratified that I don't believe anything in my initial assessment requires editing. In fact think the programme rather supports it. I and I assume others, come away from it thinking something strange went on in Poland in connection with his death, but that Spiers likely contributed to it by an admitted drug habit within the context of a psychotic and paranoid personality. Further that he was part of a wider group of "conspiracists" - clearly quite mad and unreliable all of them.
Elements of this unspoken inference may or may not be true. Spiers claims about himself may be exaggeration, untrue or the product of a drug induced unsound mind, or they may not be. As his claims were never properly examined, it is clear what the programme makers thought and wanted the viewer to think. Basically that Spiers was irrational and not worth listening to or even debunking. And by extension, that those "conspiracists" associated with him, were tarred with the same brush. This was rather confirmed by one individual who claimed any dead person could be resuscitated for up to six hours, and another who thought it possible that Spies might himself return to life.
But even if we leave this criticism aside, the programme makers, and by this I assume we must mean those credited at the end ( Katie Spedding, Production Coordinator; James Stewart, Researcher; Trace Taylor, Film Editor; Alison Gee, Executive Producer; Jeremy Skeet, Editor; India Rakusen, Producer) did not even achieve a modicum of clarity regarding the circumstances surrounding his death or cause of it. It is not altogether clear who the interviewer is from the title or credits. Where was the attempt to establish an exact time line, who actually attended, when he was admitted to hospital (if he was), interview with doctors and emergency crew, biographical background of his interviewers and hosts?
Right at the beginning an unidentified official (strange!) states they were unable to carry out a post mortem, which close to death may have provided some certainty as to cause, but no explanation is given for this failure.
Presumably tests and autopsies were carried out on his return to England and are presumably with the Coroner but the passage of time and inevitable decomposition could not have helped
The only Polish interviewee spoke in generalities about "conspiracy theorist", confirming they were a danger because not only were they naturally more more fearful and doubting but that they encouraged these damaging attitudes in society at large.
Ah! Here I think we have the nub and real intention of the programme. Purveying a real example of "fake news" that will have the effect of undermining any that seeks to question the official narrative of events. If it was, I think for a lot of people it might have succeeded.
India Rakusen's 'Linked In' profile is reproduced below.
India Rakusen
Experience
Producer BBC Current Affairs
BBC
https://m.youtube.com/channel/UC-TDTcXU6FkEhJpH9il5ZqA
Presenter/ producer "I Carried Out My Own Abortion" BBC Three
BBC
It's estimated that up to 200,000 women are carrying out their own abortions in Texas, a state in which the procedure is actually legal. But a controversial law has forced clinics to close, making abortions less accessible. As the future of what many see as a restrictive law hangs in the balance, reporter India Rakusen finds out why 23-year-old Eliza opted to cross the border into Mexico and take matters into her own hands.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/item/fd8e1eaf-384d-4ded-93a2-5807dcbd7e4f
Producer / presenter
'Assignment': BBC World Service
Produced and presented this half hour doc for BBC World Service. Exploring what life is like for some of the migrants arriving in Germany. It follows the stories of two people in particular. Ali from Afghanistan and Alaa from Syria.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0340jpp
Producer
BBC Trending; BBC World Service
Assistant Producer
Outlook: BBC World Service
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p002vsxt
Producer: Outside In
Prison Radio Association
Producer: Outside In
Prison Radio Association
Producer - Stirring Up A Revolution
BBC Radio 3
Assistant Producer
BBC World Service
Assistant Producer
BBC Radio 4 Documentary Unit
Producer - Diamond Street
Phantom Productions
Assistant Producer
BBC Radio 4 "You and Yours"
Assistant Producer
BBC 6 Music
Production Trainee
BBC
TV- Factual Development
BBC Bristol
AP/ Producer
BBC Radio 4, Front Row
Researcher
BBC Wales, X-Ray
Runner
BBC Drama, Torchwood
Theatre Administrator
Canal Cafe Theatre
Box Office
Theatre 503