Heavy handed police action at Quaker Meeting House.

Available information:

Checked out: Youth Demand had called publicly for a peaceful rally Tuesday 1st April @ 6.30pm, Senate House Library, Malet Street. They did so on the 26th March before the raid.

eazybee

The Just stop oil protester who was unable to wear a tag on her arm or ankle identified as a Quaker.
Have not seen any report of this incident anywhere, which is not to say it has not happened. I wait and see.

Strange that this has not been reported in any UK mainstream media. 🤔

An exaggeration?

A tag was found that fits and she is/was on home detention curfew. (Jan 31st 25), Guardian report)

The balance between the freedom to protest and protections against harm are hard to keep - but crucial.

For example, I just read that Yvette Cooper is to extend protection for places of worship (mosques and synagogues ) by changing the route or timing of organised protest marches.

Abortion Clinics have already been given protective zones of course.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/mar/27/police-to-block-intimidating-protests-near-places-of-worship-says-home-office

I wonder how different things would be if police had raided a Synagogue, a Christian church, a Hindu temple or a Mosque.
A Quaker meeting house is a place of worship.
The official name is The Religious Society of Friends, (commonly known as Quakers)

Their history goes back to 1652 in the North West of England when their founder George Fox held a meeting.

Rather later in the USA when William Penn, from an Irish aristocratic family, who had been a follower of Fox, founded the state known as Pennsylvania, whose capital city is Philadelphia - The city of Brotherly love.
He and those early Quakers went to America where they had Religious freedom. They made peace with the Native Americans instead of killing them.
No Quakers would ever promote violence.

The Just stop oil protester who was unable to wear a tag on her arm or ankle identified as a Quaker.
Have not seen any report of this incident anywhere, which is not to say it has not happened. I wait and see.

Wyllow3

GrannyGravy13

We do not know what information the police have or how they obtained it.

In this day of cuts and shortages I doubt that they went into this on a whim they must have had enough information in order to obtain a warrant to enter without permission and arrest those inside.

I can see no reason whatsoever for not simply waiting, instead of smashing into what was after all a religious space.

Perhaps we'll be told why it was so apparently urgent so's to do just that.

Like I said you have no knowledge of what information the police have.

I don’t know why they met but would they not play down
any talks ?

Wyllow3

They threw Tomato soup over the painting. They were from the Just Stop Oil Group.

And were arrested. (2022).

www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/14/just-stop-oil-activists-throw-soup-at-van-goghs-sunflowers

Just Stop Oil is disbanding at the end of April

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy0d047810no#:~:text=The%20climate%20action%20group%20Just,its%20disruptive%20direct%20action%20tactics.

I can't agree with their disruptive tactics. Won no one over, created a lot of distress, and probably was a motivating factor for the 2023 Public Order Act which now has put peaceful protest at risk.

I agree Wyllow, it was a stupid, reckless action..

However from what I have read about this Quaker Meeting House incident this meeting was to discuss peaceful protest...

It's sad that the government brought in that Public Order Act.. democracy and free speech is being eroded quite visibly and I find that really worrying.

A risk worth taking ?

Anyone can harm.

Question is, what harm were they doing last night that warranted that level of response.

How can anyone think young people cannot harm

GrannyGravy13

We do not know what information the police have or how they obtained it.

In this day of cuts and shortages I doubt that they went into this on a whim they must have had enough information in order to obtain a warrant to enter without permission and arrest those inside.

I can see no reason whatsoever for not simply waiting, instead of smashing into what was after all a religious space.

Perhaps we'll be told why it was so apparently urgent so's to do just that.

They threw Tomato soup over the painting. They were from the Just Stop Oil Group.

And were arrested. (2022).

www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/14/just-stop-oil-activists-throw-soup-at-van-goghs-sunflowers

Just Stop Oil is disbanding at the end of April

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy0d047810no#:~:text=The%20climate%20action%20group%20Just,its%20disruptive%20direct%20action%20tactics.

I can't agree with their disruptive tactics. Won no one over, created a lot of distress, and probably was a motivating factor for the 2023 Public Order Act which now has put peaceful protest at risk.

We do not know what information the police have or how they obtained it.

In this day of cuts and shortages I doubt that they went into this on a whim they must have had enough information in order to obtain a warrant to enter without permission and arrest those inside.

Young people poured paint over a Van Gocb ,

M0nica

just read the link to the organisation's website. I cannot, honestly say they scare me. It reads like the unoriginal rubbish that most Sixth Formers could produce, Not even undergraduate level. Lace curtains and no food type organisation.

I've done the same and presume the police could have.

I hope it gets discussed today more widely. Not happy where someone can get arrested for suspicion for something possibly happening

The action taken were only made possible by the very controversial Public Order Act 2023.

It is designed to stop actions such as the motorway blocking, and major disruption, however the extent of the powers do threaten the ability to carry out normal peaceful demonstrations.

The bill and the critique

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Order_Act_2023#cite_note-theguardian-badshah-6

Worth reading to see what its intended to cover and the powers it gives the police.

""it is concerned the offence could encompass demonstrators who simply link arms with each other, and that it should be amended. [...] The committee said measures relating to the obstruction of major transport works covered actions that were not intended to cause significant disruption, while those related to interference with key national infrastructure covered those that were neither "key" nor "national". The proposed serious disruption prevention orders could prevent people being able to exercise their right to protest, the committee said, and represented a "disproportionate response" to any resulting disruption.

It also expressed concerns about the extension of stop and search powers,

allowing police to carry out searches where there were no reasonable grounds for suspicion.

The definitions of "serious disruption" are very broad indeed.

So under that 2023 law the police didn't even need "reasonable grounds".

I definitely think there were no grounds for the police to forcibly enter the building as there was no imminent law breaking whatsoever: they could have waited for the meeting to end.

A pre-emptive strike like this against the suspicion of law breaking is very dangerous imo

just read the link to the organisation's website. I cannot, honestly say they scare me. It reads like the unoriginal rubbish that most Sixth Formers could produce, Not even undergraduate level. Lace curtains and no food type organisation.

I read it on BBC News.

Strangely enough I am able to look beyond the source or the language and think about the issue. I am the absolute opposite of partisan as I think the group are muppets. I have concerns about police behaviour with regard to protests due to other incidents. In fact I don't entirely blame the police I think legislation etc makes things very difficult for them. It is a societal issue more than a police issue.

Well it’s good to hear such faith in the police. 👮 I don’t share it.

The quoted report doesn't say they were a small group or suggest they were Quakers. It says it was a hired room which to me suggests the group were not Quakers.

Lathyrus 👏👏👏.

The initial report came from a partisan source and was written to cloud facts -suggesting a small group of 6 and that they were Quakers- and using emotive language.

Clearly some posters have swallowed that - there’s a number of posts defending Quakers for instance, whereas the only connection is that the group rented a room that was open for public rental.

Does anybody actually know what happened? How many protesters! How many police? Were the doors broken? Did they knock first?

Can I suggest that nobody really knows….

"without warning" would indicate no knock on the door don't you think?