Thursday, September 21, 2006

UK Muslims demand death of Pope

The day after Pope Benedict XVI apologised for the consequences of his remarks against Islam, a British Muslim leader stated that the Pope should 'face execution' for his comments. Outside Westminster Cathedral, Anjem Choudary of Al-Ghurabaa told demonstrators: ‘Those who insulted Islam should be subject to capital punishment.’ He added: ‘Muslims take their religion very seriously, and non-Muslims must appreciate their religious sentiments, and must also understand that there may be serious consequences if you insult Islam and the Prophet.’

The demonstrators held placards saying: 'Pope, Go to Hell’, ‘Trinity of Evil’, ‘Western Crusade against Islam’. Choudary insisted, however, that while he would support the death penalty for the Pope, his intent was for a ‘peaceful demonstration’. He qualified this with: ‘But there may be people in Italy or other parts of the world who will carry that out. I think that warning needs to be understood by all people who want to insult Islam and the Prophet.’

In addition, in Iraq, the Mujahideen's Army has threatened to ‘smash the crosses in the house of the dog from Rome’. In Kuwait, an important website called for violent retribution against Catholics. In Somalia, the religious leader Abubukar Hassan Malin urged Muslims to ‘hunt down’ the pope and kill him ‘on the spot’. In India, a leading imam, Syed Ahmed Bukhari, called on Muslims to ‘respond in a manner which forces the pope to apologise’. A top Al-Qaeda figure announced that ‘the infidelity and tyranny of the pope will only be stopped by a major attack’. In Gaza, the ‘RedState’ blog carried the ironic heading: ‘Pope implies Islam a violent religion… Muslims bomb churches’.

This round of Muslim outrage, violence, and murder has a routine element to it. There were similar reactions in 1989 to Salman Rushdie's novel The Satanic Verses; in 1997, when the US Supreme Court did not take down a representation of Muhammad; in 2002 when Jerry Falwell called Muhammed a terrorist); in 2005, over the alleged ill treatment by the US military of the Qur’an; and in February 2006 over the Danish cartoons.

Yet the Vatican insists that the Pope did not intend to give ‘an interpretation of Islam as violent’. Cranmer doubts that His Holiness ever intended to cause offence on a scale that might cause a nun to get shot, but he was certainly issuing a pointed (if coded) message, to those who have ears, about Iran’s nuclear ambitions, and indirectly reiterated his desire to keep Turkey out of the EU. The latter, of course, puts him at loggerheads with the official UK policy of both the Labour and Conservative parties. Cranmer awaits a Government minister (or member of the Shadow Cabinet) who will challenge Papal policy on this.


Anonymous religion of pieces said...

Twenty facts about Islam every infidel should know.

Islam ...

1) Is a mind-control and information-control cult founded by a murderer, torturer, brigand, rapist and pedophile called Mohammed. The mind-control and information-control aspects require that all criticism be silenced.

2) Is Mohammed's personality cult. Has no foundations other than Mo's murderous rantings (Koran and Hadith). The Koran consists of two conflicting parts - Meccan and Medinan (peaceful and violent respectively). The Medinan stuff supersedes ('abrogates') the Meccan stuff. Muslims act Medinan, but quote Meccan verses to the gullible infidels.

3) Claims to worship the same God as Christians and Jews, but in fact worships Allah - a demonic channelling through Mohammed's psychopathic ego. The Death Cult mixes garbled versions of Christian and Jewish scriptures with pagan practices such as moon and meteorite-worship, and cut-throat blood sacrifice of animals and non-believers.

4) Has no rational, philosophical nor theological basis, and the whole belief-system is contradicted by science, philosophy, commonsense, human decency and internal inconsistency.

5) Cannot withstand rational criticism. Can only spread and maintain itself by ignorance, illiteracy, war, terrorism, and intimidation. Islam has bloody borders and cannot co-exist peacefully with other belief systems. Winston Churchill said that Islam in a man is as dangerous as hydrophobia (rabies) in a dog.

6) Has a superstitious dread of images of pigs, crosses, Buddhas, Saint George (and his flag) and of course Motoons.

7) Regards Islamic women as semihuman. Wife-beating, incest and child abuse (including mufa’khathat or 'thighing' - the ritual abuse of infants) are encouraged.

8) Regards all unbelievers (Kaffirs, Kuffar, Kufrs, Kafirs) as ritually unclean subhumans to be killed, subjugated, enslaved, exploited or parasitised. Kafirs are described by the Arabic word 'najis' - literally 'filth'. That's why Muslim hatred of Kafirs is intrinsic to their 'religion'. A Kafir doesn't need to DO anything to offend a Muslim, his very existence is enough of an affront.

9) The ethical system applies only to Muslims. Allah encourages rape, pillage, extortion and enslavement of non-Muslims. Morality does not extend beyond the global gang (ummah). Muslim ethics are the ethics of the Mafia.

10) Allah's followers are motivated by hatred, greed and lust. There is no love, mercy or compassion. Allah is vindictive, unpredictable, capricious and devious - "Allah leads astray whom he pleases".

11) The only religion NOT founded on The Golden Rule. Morality is based on Mohammed's example. If Mohammed did it then it's OK for all Muslims. Hence the encouragement of rape, pillage, subjugation and murder of non-believers and the institutionalised pedophilia prevalent throughout Muslim society (justified by Mohammed's activities with Ayesha, his child sex-slave - see and listen to

12) All human relations are defined by Dominance/Subjugation. Muslims have schizoid inferiority/superiority complexes. (A well-balanced Muslim is one with a chip on each shoulder). They respect strength but despise compromise as weakness. Appeasement invites more aggression. The only political system which has been strong enough to subjugate Islam is Stalinism.

13) Polygamy ensures alpha-males get extra women, leading to a shortage of women for the betas. Beta-males must either jerk off (a sin leading to hell), or form dog-packs and rape or capture kafir women as booty in a razzia, or else self-destruct in the presence of infidels then they can screw 72 mythical virgins in Allah's bordello in the sky (see and listen to Beta-males are often encouraged by their relatives to become suicide bombers because of the belief that such murderous 'martyrs' will be able to intercede with Allah to take 70 of their relatives to paradise with them.

14) Lying and deception of infidels (taqiyya) is encouraged. This may take many forms, including outright lies, feigned moderation, and condemnation of terrorist attacks to the Kaffir while rejoicing with fellow Muslims. All Muslims need to regard themselves as victims of some group of Kafirs so they can harbor grudges against them and against Kafirs in general. Individuals may appear law-abiding and reasonable, but they are part of a totalitarian movement, and must be considered potential killers who can flip in an instant (SJS -'Sudden Jihad Syndrome').

15) Muslims are forbidden to befriend Kaffirs except for purposes of deceit or where conversion may be possible.

16) The Koran is Allah's final word and cannot be changed or challenged. To do so is punishable by death. Consequently, the Death Cult can never change or be reformed. The instructions to murder and rape infidels are just as valid now as the day they were written. Since Islam cannot be modernised, the Muslims are attempting to Islamise modernity. This requires spreading Islam in the West and simultaneously preventing any criticism of the cult by intimidation and PC legislation to curtail freedom of expression.

17) Treaties and agreements with Kaffirs are made to be broken (Hudna). The word of a Muslim to a Kafir counts for nothing in the eyes of Allah. Allah is The Father Of Lies.

18) The world is divided between Dar-al-Islam and Dar-al-Harb (the domain of war, the Kufr lands). Muslims living in Dar-al-Harb must work to disrupt their host nations until these can be brought into Dar-al-Islam.

19) Muslims have no obligation to their host nations and in fact are encouraged to parasitise them. Welfare fraud, identity theft, forgery etc are endemic in Western Muslim populations, and serious crime against Kaffirs is regarded as normal and justified. Extortion rackets against Kafirs are mandated by the Koran ('jizya' is the Arabic term for 'protection money' payable by Jews and Christians to Muslims).

20) The attack on the host nation isn't just against its religion and economy, but is aimed at its very cultural identity. Islam is a complete system, including a culture, which Muslims regard as superior (despite all evidence to the contrary) to other cultures. Muslims are therefore required to destroy the symbols of 'Jahiliya' (sometimes sp. Jahiliyya) - non-Muslim culture. In the East this has included destruction of Hindu temples and Christian churches and replacement with mosques, and destruction of Buddhist artwork and universities and replacement with heaps of rubble. This process of cultural replacement is now beginning in the West..

21 September 2006 at 14:21  
Anonymous Rick said...

Anjem Choudary looks reasonably healthy - why do I as a taxpayer pay him not to work ?

Why did he ditch his family to rush off to Lebanon and then return - do a Tessa Jowell Separation - and let the taxpayer feed his wife and family to the tune of £1700/month ?

These are the actions of a man following in his master's footsteps ? Looting the caravans of the rival traders ? Stealing, deceiving, and screaming hatred and violence.........?

Yes.........this is the view we get of Islam...........edifying it is not. No wonder so many poor souls are oppressed and ground down by the fear of violence from these thugs throughout the Ummah

21 September 2006 at 15:01  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Pieces, you could make a very similar case against Christianity. But taking the worst examples as representative of either faith is more likely to stir up trouble than bring about resolutions.

21 September 2006 at 16:06  
Blogger istanbultory said...

An Islamist and a lawyer Choudary also claims £202 a month in income support and his wife £1,700 a month in housing benefit and income support....a chap truly withot redeeming features. He lauded the September 11 hijackers as 'magnificent martyrs' and praised Asif Hanif, the British suicide bomber who killed three in Tel Aviv in 2003.
Choudry opined thus on the 1st anniversary of 7/7:
" reality the real terrorists are the British regime, and even the British police, who have tried to divide the Muslim community into moderates and extremists, whereas this classification doesn't exist in Islam."

He has openly incited people to murder, "glorified terrorism" and is a drain on the public purse. And is apparently free to do and say whatever he wishes. Over to you Mr. Bliar...

21 September 2006 at 16:14  
Blogger Croydonian said...

A little English law for everyone's diversion:

Incitement to murder

s.4 of the Offences against the Person Act, 1861[110]. This provides that: "…whosoever shall solicit, encourage, persuade, or endeavour to persuade, or shall propose to any person, to murder any other person…shall be guilty of a misdemeanour, and being convicted thereof shall be liable to imprisonment for life…". source

Citizen's arrest

The notion of `citizen's arrest' is most relevant to people employed in a quasi-constabulary role, such as security guards. In general, private security personnel don't have any greater powers of arrest than any other private citizen. However, English law recognizes a number of circumstances in which one private citizen may lawfully arrest another. This article describe these circumstances, with examples of how they apply in practice....An `arrestable' offence is one for which there is a general right to arrest without warrant. Most other offences require the arrestor to obtain a warrant of arrest from a magistrate. However, a number of statutes grant powers to the police to arrest without warrant in specific circumstances. So what is an arrestable offence? Essentially it is offence for which an adult could - at least in principle - be sentenced to at least five years' imprisonment. This includes homicides, serious and indecent assaults, rape, criminal damage, arson, and most theft-related offences. source

21 September 2006 at 19:00  
Anonymous Rick said...

It also probably comes under the heading of "immediacy" whereby it prevents an offence taking place........but as with all English law it comes up against some barrister and black is suddenly white as the judge he remembers he slept with her a month ago and offers her the honest citizen to be sentenced rather than the miscreant

21 September 2006 at 19:05  
Anonymous Colin said...

His Grace, Archbishop Cranmer, reported:

"British Muslim leader stated that the Pope should 'face execution'.."

Hopefully, they won't do it by using the Cranmer-Lite.

21 September 2006 at 19:16  
Blogger Croydonian said...

Rick, speaking of which I know a barrister (female...) who had a lengthy affair with a judge she has appeared before.

Apologies for the non-sequitur.

21 September 2006 at 19:46  
Anonymous Colin said...

Religion of Pieces criticized Islam by claiming:

"Cannot withstand rational criticism. Can only spread and maintain itself by ignorance, illiteracy, war, terrorism, and intimidation."

Two-hundred years ago, the great English intellectual Thomas Paine made the same observation, thereby predicting the need for political correctness and its enforcement by law:

"When an objection cannot be made formidable, there is some policy in trying to make it frightful; and to substitute the yell and the war-whoop, in the place of reason, argument, and good order."

21 September 2006 at 19:59  
Anonymous Colin said...

The masterful British comedian Rowan Atkinson, seems to defend the Pope's lecture by remarking on proposed legislation outlawing such religious hate speech, in a letter to the Times of London, October 15, 2001:

"However, would a film like 'Monty Python's Life of Brian,' criticized at the time of its release for being anti-Christian, be judged under the proposed law? Or that excellent joke in 'Not the Nine O'Clock news' all those years ago, showing worshippers in a mosque simultaneously bowing to the ground with the voiceover: 'And the search goes on for the Ayatollah Khomeini's contact lens'? Not respectful, but comedy takes no prisoners. However, in period and in context it was extremely funny and I believe that it is the reaction of the audience that should decide the appropriateness of a joke, not the law of the land."

21 September 2006 at 20:35  
Anonymous Colin said...

Anonymous said:

"Pieces, you could make a very similar case against Christianity. But taking the worst examples as representative of either faith is more likely to stir up trouble than bring about resolutions."

What about the resolutions?

21 September 2006 at 20:58  
Anonymous Colin said...

Is the resolution to be found “an inclusive circle of love” or in "Muslims as allies in the struggle against secularism"?

Relevant citations from an article by the Fjordman of the 19th September 2006:

"Bat Ye’or claims that dhimmitude in the Middle East has often progressed because Christian leaders have sold out their own people, either for short-term personal gains or in the mistaken belief that they have a “shared religious heritage” with Muslims. It is also frequently Christian leaders and bishops in the West who are calling for open borders for poor, destitute Muslims because “it is the Christian thing to do.”

"In the UK, church leaders wanted to invite the families of the London suicide bombers to a national memorial service in honor of the victims. Two senior Church of England bishops believed that extending the invitation to the bombers’ families would acknowledge their own loss and send a powerful message of reconciliation to the Muslim community. Dr John Sentamu, the Archbishop of York, urged the nation to unite and turn would-be suicide bombers into friends by building “an inclusive circle of love.”
"The same Archbishop has also said that British Christians should see Muslims as allies in the struggle against secularism."

21 September 2006 at 21:07  
Anonymous Colin said...

Religions of Pieces wrote:

"Islam ...regards all unbelievers (Kaffirs, Kuffar, Kufrs, Kafirs) as ritually unclean subhumans to be killed, subjugated, enslaved, exploited or parasitised. Kafirs are described by the Arabic word 'najis' - literally 'filth'. That's why Muslim hatred of Kafirs is intrinsic to their 'religion'. A Kafir doesn't need to DO anything to offend a Muslim, his very existence is enough of an affront."

The famous British scientist Sir Peter Medawar wrote in "The Question of the Existence of God," from The Limits of Science (1984):

"It goes with the passionate intensity and deep conviction of the truth of a religious belief, and of course of the importance of the superstitious observances that go with it, that we should want others to share it -- and the only certain way to cause a religious belief to be held by everyone is to liquidate nonbelievers."

21 September 2006 at 21:39  
Blogger Terror-Free said...

New Pope Shows Spine
Islamonazi CAIR Is Not Impressed - video

Please Call The Vatican Embassy In Washington, DC at (202) 333-7121 to Express Your Support!

22 September 2006 at 03:06  
Anonymous Rick said...

The Dutch/German comedian Rudi Carrell had to have police protection in 1978 for sketches about Khomeini.

The simple fact is that many C of E prelates are poorly educated. It is astounding how little they know about the Jewish roots of Christianity, how many have tossed aside the O.T. and run along with a slim volume called the N.T. as if it were a series of jottings for a 'Make Your Own Religion' and tailor it to your lifestyle choices.

Western Europe has lost its bearings. I should bet that Cranmer knew more theology in his day though he had not the benefit of The Dead Sea Scrolls or other archaelogical finds to substantiate his faith. The trouble is that so many clerics do not believe and are simply parrotting workplace mantras - they look for something else to is the danger of an over-staffed Church which simply is too top-heavy

22 September 2006 at 05:48  
Anonymous Colin said...


You wrote: "The trouble is that so many clerics do not believe and are simply parrotting workplace mantras - they look for something else to is the danger of an over-staffed Church which simply is too top-heavy"

Who is paying the clerics of the C of E?

As you probably know (you know so many things about Germany to my amazement), the clerics in Germany depend on the government and its favorable tax laws. The taxes of the church are automatically retained along with the governmental taxes from the salary of Christians. The churches depend heavily on the favor of politicians.

"Whose Bread I Eat -- His Song I Sing."

How is the situation in the UK?

22 September 2006 at 10:22  
Anonymous vikki said...

".....and there were four leprous men at the entering in of the gate: and they said one to another, Why sit we here until we die?

4If we say, We will enter into the city, then the famine is in the city, and we shall die there: and if we sit still here, we die also. Now therefore come, and let us fall unto the host of the Syrians: if they save us alive, we shall live; and if they kill us, we shall but die.

5And they rose up in the twilight, to go unto the camp of the Syrians: and when they were come to the uttermost part of the camp of Syria, behold, there was no man there." 2 Kings 7:3-5 (King James Version)

If we talk about Islam we are in...... trouble. If we dont talk about Islam we are still in trouble.........

22 September 2006 at 10:25  
Anonymous Colin said...


Do you imply that our mission is impossible and we should put on our running shoes?

22 September 2006 at 10:33  
Anonymous Rick said...

Colin, Germany has a Kirchensteuer introduced by Bismarck as compensation for sequestration of Church lands.

The C of E funds itself through its landholdings, and its equity funds pensions through parish contributions

US churches do not pay taxation which s in effect a subsidy from the taxpayer - English churches pay all taxes including VAT and get no State funding

22 September 2006 at 11:00  
Blogger Croydonian said...

One of the advantages the C of E has is that it is not subject to some of the planning laws, hence the many, many hideous extensions one sees on churches.

22 September 2006 at 11:11  
Anonymous vikki said...

Colin you said "Do you imply that our mission is impossible? " This am afraid you need to ask mission impossible. BTW where is he? He is....probably still reading the book of proverbs.......or maybe he has decided to take the advice of the anon who said " so full of venom...are the taliban still recruiting? perhaps he should give them a call....." I need to put on my running shoes again....before MI calls for my head...

rick, I apologise if my attempt at humour was ill-conceived. Perhaps I should expunge the word comic relief from my vocabulary.....

22 September 2006 at 12:04  
Anonymous Colin said...

Rick and Croydonian,

It seems that the C of E is rather independent of the British government, is it?

In that case, their behavior is difficult to understand because it implies that they would hurt their own self-interest by promoting Islam in the UK.

What about obtaining tax payers' money for charity operations etc?

I am trying to follow the money trail, to find out if they might have any advantage in promoting Islam.

According to Rick, the C of E has three major resources of income: landholdings, equity and parish contributions for pensions.

Let's try a thought experiment and imagine that the large majority of Christians have been replaced by believers in Islam in the UK. What would be the result?

(1) The priests of the C of E would lose parish contributions and their pensions. If they want to continue to live comfortably by talking instead of working, they would have to convert to Islam and become Imams. That would secure their pensions from Islamic believers.

(2) The leaders of the C of E are probably not affected by the pension crisis of the lower ranks. Their future is secured by landholdings and the equity portfolio. However, they risk expropriation of their property if an Islamic majority rules the UK. This clearly is not in their self-interest. They might contemplate to convert to Islam if necessary. But that would not save their property and influence as history appears to demonstrate in other Christian countries taken over by Islamic believers.

If the promotion of Islam in the UK by the C of E is contrary to their self-interest (but I am not sure about that yet), it appears like folly. It is difficult to believe that individuals, who have fought hard to rise to the heights of power within the C of E, are idealistic fools.

Alternatively, could it be the syndrome of hubris caused by power and described by the ancient Greeks and Barbara Tuchman in the Mach of Folly? In the latter case, it would be wise to restrict power.

22 September 2006 at 12:09  
Anonymous Rick said...

Colin I detect you do not know how the C of E should always remember Lenin's dictum when dealing with Institutions - "Kto Kovo ?" ("Who ? Whom ?) and look at the human dimension.

The C of E is institutionally independent though its Prayer Book requires Parliament to vote on it......which is why the 1662 Prayer Book is the only legal PB in the C of E but the Church has sidelined it with ASB and Common Worship where they even used fake 1662 Prayer Book verses.

The simple but little known fact is that the C of E is the largest single employer of Social Workers in that again !

They are funded by local authorities and so the projects cannot be identified with the Church under EU law. The Community Centres etc are a way that public money has kept many churches afloat - but they must remove Christian emblems.

I know of one church St Augustine's which is a Community Centre with the signing in Urdu.

The big problem for the C of E is real-estate and costs so they accept public money to keep a reduced presence but get used to secular funding to stay in place. This govt has basically taken over a large number of charities such as Barnardo's by getting them to bid for govt contracts - they are now so dependent on State funding that they are effectively organs of the State.

So the other thing to remember is this............the Church of England has Bishops and two Archbishops appointed through the Office of Prime Minister - they are in every community - which cannot be said of Post Offices or effect only churches and pubs are in every village or city.

So the Govt urges the bishops to build bridges to the Muslims - the Bishop of Bradford says he sees himself as representing Muslims - which is very illuminating for those who have read the BCP Ordinals for Bishops of the C of E.

Anyway, they are busy in the social work tasks and "reaching out" - to the point where they get involved in left-wing causes such as taking groups to Menwith Hill where the naughty Americans have a listening station - or simply by having visiting Protestants from Denmark tour local mosques in England.

The revelation that Jesus died and was resurrected is downplayed lest Muslims get confused, the schools teach Comparative Religion which is basically - Mohammed had lots of wives, the Pope has none, and C of E vicars might well have His and His towels.

The State has a pernicious influence insofar as the American Protestant Sects are to the right whereas the establishment churches are on the left more akin to the European model especially in Denmark and Sweden where the State funds the Church and in Denmark there is a Govt Minister for Religion.

22 September 2006 at 12:59  
Blogger Little Black Sambo said...

Anonymous 4:06 pm

"Pieces, you could make a very similar case against Christianity. But taking the worst examples as representative of either faith is more likely to stir up trouble than bring about resolutions."

Very even-handed. So let's hear the similar case - similar in being based on the teachings of Christ as the other was based on the teachings of Mahomet.

22 September 2006 at 17:34  
Anonymous Colin said...


You are right, I don't know much about the organization of the C of E. That's why I asked.

I suspected that the C of E was somehow dependent on the British government. To my surprise, I learned from your first answer that they seemed to dependent only on "its landholdings, and its equity funds pensions through parish contributions".

Therefore, I tried to understand what might be their motivations. Or as the Romans said "Cui bono", Lenin's dictum "Kto Kovo ?" ("Who ? Whom ?)", or as the Americans like to say "Follow the money trail".

I am most grateful for your second answer indicating clearly that the C of E is the footman of the government as is the case in most countries.

Does anybody know who is paying the Islamic priests, the Imams, in the UK?

[BTW, you seem to command a great amount of knowledge. Not many people in Germany know about the early death of the father of Wilhelm II. and that his English mother, the sister of the English Queen, lived in Kronberg in a beautiful English-style castle, now one of "The Leading Hotels Of The World".]

22 September 2006 at 17:42  
Anonymous Rick said...

Yes and I used to visit the Schlosshotel Kronberg when I lived in Koenigstein........Victoria Adelaide Mary Louise, mother of Wilhelm II was Princess Royal, ie. eldest daughter of Queen Victoria and Prince Albert...............she in turn had 8 children of whom only one outlived her firstborn, Kaiser Bill.

I suspect Saudi Arabia is paying for mosques and imams - they are so generous in their "moderation" for Islamic matters (LOL)

22 September 2006 at 18:15  
Blogger Croydonian said...

The readership might find this story about the Saddam Hussein mosque" in Birmingham illuminating.

22 September 2006 at 21:57  
Anonymous Colin said...

Anonym 4:06 PM said

"Pieces, you could make a very similar case against Christianity."

Little Black Sambo replied

"Very even-handed. So let's hear the similar case - similar in being based on the teachings of Christ as the other was based on the teachings of Mahomet."

Colin thinks that the demand of Little Black Sambo is only fair. Let's see if we can find anything?

Jesus Christ and his religion of peace

"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother..." -- Matthew 10:34-35 (AV)


Man has been naturally so created that it is advantageous for him to be submissive, but disastrous for him to follow his own will, and not the will of his creator. -- Augustine, in Elaine Pagels, Adam, Eve, and the Serpent, quoted from The Dark Side of Christian History by Helen Ellerbe

Inferiority of women

"Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission.." -- I Corinthians 14:34-35 (NIV)"

"Have you allowed all the women to live?" he [Moses] asked them.... "Now ... kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man." -- Numbers 31:1-18 (NIV)

"As regards the individual nature, woman is defective and misbegotten, for the active power of the male seed tends to the production of a perfect likeness in the masculine sex; while the production of a woman comes from defect in the active power." -- Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica

“Women should not be enlightened or educated in any way. They should, in fact, be segregated as they are the cause of hideous and involuntary erections in holy men.” -- Augustine (attributed: source unknown)

Child sacrifice

"God did tempt Abraham, ... And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest ... and offer him there for a burnt offering..." -- Genesis 22:1-2 (AV)

"Jephthah made a vow to the Lord: "If you give the Ammonites into my hands, whatever comes out of the door of my house to meet me when I return ... will be the Lord's, and I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering." ... and the Lord gave them into his hands.... When Jephthah returned to his home..., who should come out to meet him but his daughter, dancing to the sound of tambourines! And he did to her as he had vowed. And she was a virgin." -- Judges 11:30-32, 34, 39 (NIV)


A 1493 papal Bull justified declaring war on any natives in South America who refused to adhere to Christianity. As the jurist Encisco claimed in 1509:
The king has every right to send his men to the Indies to demand their territory from these idolaters because he had received it from the pope. If the Indians refuse, he may quite legally fight them, kill them, and enslave them, just as Joshua enslaved the inhabitants of the country of Canaan.

By 1570 the Inquisition had established independent tribunal in Peru and the city of Mexico for the purpose of "freeing the land, which has become contaminated by Jews and heretics." Natives who did not convert to Christianity were burned like any other heretic. The Inquisition spread as far as Goa, India, where in the late 16th and early 17th centuries it took no less than 3,800 lives. Link

In 1614 the Shogun of Japan, Iyeyazu, accused the missionaries of "wanting to change the government of the country and make themselves masters of the soil."

Raping of women

The same sort of thinking also gave Christians license to rape women. In his own words, Columbus described how he himself "took [his] pleasure" with a native woman after whipping her "soundly" with a piece of rope. Link


"... all who are under the yoke of slavery ... who have believing masters ... must serve all the better since those who benefit by their service are believers."

“Slavery is not penal in character and planned by that law which commands the preservation of the natural order and forbids disturbance.” -- Augustine, quoted fromThe Dark Side of Christian History by Helen Ellerbe

St. Paul instructed slaves to obey their masters [Ephesians 6:5; I Timothy 6:1; Titus 2:9-10]. The early St. John Chrysostom wrote:
The slave should be resigned to his lot, in obeying his master he is obeying God ...

The eighteenth century Anglican Church made it clear that Christianity freed people from eternal damnation, not from the bonds of slavery. The Bishop of London, Edmund Gibson, wrote:

The Freedom which Christianity gives, is a Freedom from the Bondage of Sin and Satan, and from the Domination of Men's Lusts and Passions and inordinate Desires; but as to their outward Condition, whatever that was before, whether bond or free, their being baptised, and becoming Christians, makes no manner of Change in it.

The wisdom of the anointed

“As to the fable that there are Antipodes, that is to say, men on the opposite side of the earth where the sun rises when it sets to us, men who walk with their feet opposite ours, that is on no ground credible. Even if some unknown landmass is there, and not just ocean, there was only one pair of original ancestors, and it is inconceivable that such distant regions should have been peopled by Adam's descendants.” -- Augustine (attributed: source unknown)

"... And whereas it has also come to the knowledge of the said Congregation that the Pythagorean doctrine -- which is false and altogether opposed to the Holy Scripture -- of the motion of the Earth and the immobility of the Sun, which is also taught by Nicolaus Copernicus in De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium, and by Diego de Zuñiga On Job, is now being spread abroad and accepted by many... Therefore, in order that this opinion may not insinuate itself any further to the prejudice of Catholic truth, the Holy Congregation has decreed that the said Nicolaus Copernicus, De Revolutionibus Orbium, and Diego de Zuñiga, On Job, be suspended until they are corrected." -- The Roman Catholic Church, from The Decree of the Roman Catholic Congregation of the Index which condemned De Revolutionibus on March 5, 1616

"Who will venture to place the authority of Copernicus above that of the Holy Spirit?" -- John Calvin, citing Psalm 93:1 in his Commentary on Genesis

"People gave ear to an upstart astrologer who strove to show that the earth revolves, not the heavens or the firmament, the sun and the moon.... This fool wishes to reverse the entire science of astronomy; but sacred scripture tells us that Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, and not the earth." -- Martin Luther

Conversion by violence

“The wounds of a friend are better than the kisses of an enemy. To love with sternness is better than to deceive with gentleness.... In Luke [14:23] it is written: "Compel people to come in!" By threats of the wrath of God, the Father draws souls to his Son.” -- Augustine, setting forth the principle of Cognite Intrare ("Compel them to enter"), Christ's infamous mandate that all must become Christian -- by force, if necessary.

“It is indeed better (as no one ever could deny) that men should be led to worship God by teaching, than that they should be driven to it by fear of punishment or pain; but it does not follow that because the former course produces the better men, therefore those who do not yield to it should be neglected. For many have found advantage (as we have proved, and are daily proving by actual experiment), in being first compelled by fear or pain, so that they might afterwards be influenced by teaching, or might follow out in act what they had already learned in word.” -- Augustine, Treatise on the Correction of the Donatists

When Columbus landed in America in 1492, it was his avowed aim to "convert the heathen Indians to our Holy Faith" that warranted the enslaving and exporting of thousands of Native Americans. That such treatment resulted in complete genocide did not matter as much as that these natives had been given the opportunity of everlasting life through their exposure to Christianity. Link

"We must remember that the main purpose of the trial and execution is not to save the soul of the accused but to achieve the public good and put fear into others ." Inquisitor Francesco Pena stated in 1578.

Portuguese missionaries in the Far East destroyed pagodas, forced scholars to hide their religious manuscripts, and suppressed older customs.

The Inquisition was merciless with its victims. The same man who had been both prosecutor and judge decided upon the sentence. In 1244 the Council of Harbonne ordered that in the sentencing of heretics, no husband should be spared because of his wife, nor wife because of her husband, nor parent because of helpless children, and no sentence should be mitigated because of sickness or old age. Each and every sentence included flagellation.
Of the sentences, pilgrimages were considered the lightest. Yet, undertaken on foot, such penances could take years, during which the penitent's family might perish. Carrying a much greater stigma than pilgrimages was "wearing the crosses," also known as poena confusibilis or "humiliating punishment." The penitents were required to wear large saffron-colored crosses on the front and back, which subjected them to public ridicule and hindered every effort of earing a livelihood. A more frequent sentence was perpetual imprisonment, which always entailed a scant diet of bread and water, sometimes meant being kept in chains, and occasionally entailed solitary confinement. The life expectancy in all the prisons was very short.

The harshest sentence of burning at the stake was given to those who either failed in their previous penance, relapsed into heresy, or who would not confess to any crime. … By far the cruelest aspect of the inquisitional system was the means by which confessions were wrought: the torture chamber. Torture remained a legal option for the Church from 1252 when it was sanctioned by Pope Innocent IV until 1917 when the new Codex Juris Canonici was put into effect. … The Inquisition spanned centuries and was still active in some places as late as 1834.” Link

His Grace, Archbishop Thomas Cranmer was burned alive in 1556.

Killing for Islam

“Kill those who join other gods with God wherever you may find them.” -- Holy Qu'ran, Sura ix, 5-6

“When you meet the unbelievers, strike off their heads; then when you have made wide slaughter among them, carefully tie up the remaining captives.” -- Holy Qu'ran, Sura xlvii.4

Killing for Christianism

"Kill them all; for God knoweth them that are His. (Tuez-les tous; Dieu reconnaitra les siens.)" -- Arnaud-Amaury (Abbot of Citeaux, 1209) when asked by the Crusaders what to do with the citizens of Beziers who were a mixture of Catholics and Cathars, the Abbot takes the concept of the afterlife to its logical conclusion, in Henry C. Lea, The Inquisition of the Middle Ages, also in Helen Ellerbe, The Dark Side of Christian History.

Inquisition as Christian form of the Sharia

“If forgers and malefactors are put to death by the secular power, there is much more reason for excommunicating and even putting to death one convicted of heresy.”-- Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica

In 1231 Pope Gregory IX established the Inquisition as a separate tribunal, independent of bishops and prelates. Its administrators, the inquisitors, were to be answerable only to the Pope. Its inquisitional law replaced the common law tradition of "innocent until proven guilty" with "guilty until proven innocent." Despite an ostensible trial, inquisitional procedure left no possibility for the suspected to prove his or her innocence; the process resulted in the condemnation of anyone even suspected of heresy. Link

Everything is property of the Church

"It is not doubted, and you know it, that Ireland and all those islands which have received the faith, belong to the Church of Rome; if you wish to enter that Island, to drive vice out of it, to cause law to be obeyed and St Peter's Pence to be paid by every house, it will please us to assign it to you." Pope Adrian IV (1154-1159), in a letter to King Henry II, presuming to own even Ireland that he would "assign" it to the King of England, in Lloyd M Graham, Deceptions and Myths of the Bible (1975), p. 468, quoted fromThe Dark Side of Christian History by Helen Ellerbe

Religious robbery

“Inquisitors grew very rich. They received bribes and annual fines from the wealthy who payed to escape accusation. The Inquisition would claim all the money and property of alleged heretics. As there was little chance of the accused being proven innocent, there was no need to wait for conviction to confiscate his or her property. Unlike Roman law that reserved a portion of property for the convicted's nearest heirs, canon and inquisitional law left nothing. Pope Innocent III had explained that God punished children for the sins of their parents. So unless children had come forth spontaneously to denounce their parents, they were left penniless. Inquisitors even accused the dead of heresy, sometimes as much as seventy years after their death. They exhumed and burned alleged heretic's bones and then confiscated all property from the heirs.

Inquisitors rarely shared the money collected with the episcopal courts, the civil government, or spent it building churches as planned. One historian writes how the inquisitor was often able to "seize everything for himself, not even sending a share to the officials of the Inquisition at Rome." Inquisitors were reluctant to pay even for the cost of feeding their victims, encouraging the families or the community to pay such costs. It was hardly a coincidence that the eagerness of the Inquisition in any given region was proportionate to the opportunities for confiscation. Ironically, inquisitors were most often chosen from Dominican and Franciscan orders, both of which originally professed vows of poverty. The Church did little to encourage their ideal of poverty. .. While inquisitors themselves prospered, their activity left communities impoverished.

Missionaries often took part in the unscrupulous exploitation of foreign lands. Many became missionaries to get rich quickly and then return to Europe and live off their gains. In Mexico, Dominicans, Augustinians, and Jesuits were known to own "the largest flocks of sheep, the finest sugar ingenios, the best kept estates ... "

Mayan scribes in Central America wrote: Before the coming of the Spaniards, there was no robbery or violence. The Spanish invasion was the beginning of tribute, the beginning of church dues, the beginning of strife.

Emigration of the successful

A writer in 1538 described life in the Spanish city of Toledo:
... preachers do not dare to preach, and those who preach do not dare to touch on contentious matters, for their lives and honor are in the mouths of two ignoramuses, and nobody in this life is without his policeman ... Bit by bit many rich people leave the country for foreign realms, in order not to live all their lives in fear and trembling every time an officer of the Inquisition enters their house; for continual fear is a worse death than a sudden demise.


The Inquisition often targeted members of other religions as severely as it did heretics. The Inquisition now lent its authority to the long-standing Christian persecution of Jews. Particularly during the Christian Holy Week of the Passion, Christians frequently rioted against Jews or refused to sell them food in hopes of starving them. At the beginning of the thirteenth century, Pope Innocent III required Jews to wear distinctive clothing. In 1391 the Archdeacon of Seville launched a "Holy War against the Jews." By 1492 the Inquisition in Spain had become so virulent in its persecution of Jews that it demanded either their conversion to Christianity or their expulsion.“ Link

Life after death and the paradise

“Everybody hates death, fears death, but only those, the believers who know the life after death and the reward after death, would be the ones who will be seeking death.”

-- Mohamed Atta

“Keep a very open mind, keep a very open heart of what you are to face. You will be entering paradise. You will be entering the happiest life, everlasting life.”

-- Mohamed Atta (attributed), in a five-page hand-written document found in luggage belonging to Atta which had been placed on the wrong plane, in a section of the document titled "The Last Night," quoted from Bob Woodward, "Hijacker Leaves Behind Sheaf Of Prayers And Instructions," Washington Post (September 28, 2001)

“Religion teaches the dangerous nonsense that death is not the end.”

-- Richard Dawkins, "Religion's Misguided Missiles" (September 15, 2001)


It must have been a real pleasure to live in the good old times before Christian ethics were destroyed by secularism.

“The clash we are witnessing around the world is not a clash of religions, or a clash of civilizations. It is a clash between two opposites, between two eras. It is a clash between a mentality that belongs to the Middle Ages and another mentality that belongs to the 21st century.”--Wafa Sultan on Al-Jazeera TV (Qatar) - 7/26/2005 , See-Clip #783

“Over the centuries, we've moved on from Scripture to accumulate precepts of ethical, legal and moral philosophy. We've evolved a liberal consensus of what we regard as underpinnings of decent society, such as the idea that we don't approve of slavery or discrimination on the grounds of race or sex, that we respect free speech and the rights of the individual. All of these things that have become second nature to our morals today owe very little to religion, and mostly have been won in opposition to the teeth of religion.”-- Richard Dawkins, quoted in Natalie Angier, "Confessions of a Lonely Atheist," New York Times Magazine, January 14, 2001

The citations above from the Dark Ages of Christian faith prove that if migration of Christian Europeans from the time of Middle Ages in our present time would be possible, the danger to our contemporary liberal Western societies would be comparable to the threats the West is facing by immigration from regions with a comparable medieval politico-religious system and mentality.

Intolerant belief systems whether from Christian Middle-Ages, from 19th century nationalism, 20th century socialism and fascism or from 21st century Islamism endanger the life, well-being and happiness of all humans, not only of its opponents but also - as history has demonstrated several times - of its believers and supporters.

23 September 2006 at 00:00  
Anonymous Rick said...

As I recall there was no Inquisition in England, and in Spain it was under the control of King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella rather than the Roman Church

23 September 2006 at 06:42  
Blogger istanbultory said...

It seems that the Anglican Church’s conservative wing have moved towards creating formally a new Church structure for anti-gay evangelicals in the United States- a two-church solution. A new Church structure would potentially offer a home to conservative parishes within liberal dioceses. The two Anglican Churches would not be in communion with each other, but both would remain in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury.
I am sure the Vatican is enjoying all of this. No doubt the Islamists are having a wry chuckle too.
Divided we fall...

23 September 2006 at 08:40  
Anonymous vikki said...

Colin, I apologise for my earlier post concerning MI. It was really un called for. I was just trying to be mischievious. If MI calls for my head this time he wont be too.... wrong but I hope he wont. Perhaps I should take a cue from croydonian who said "dizzy thinks and then blogs, alot of us do it the other way round. Or did he mean to say women do it the other way round :-) Bear with me for a while, You guys will soon be rid of me. When Cranmer decides to start the chit-chat institute for women and intellectually challeged men I shall be the first to join!

ulsterman informs me the Court
Jester is on holiday......perhaps I should hold the fort........

23 September 2006 at 10:04  
Anonymous Colin said...

"Divided we fall... "


Why don't people unite to fight Medievalism in all its forms?

Obviously, some want to use the cruelty of Medievalism for their own purposes, for something they would not dare to demand themselves, namely to oppress and destroy what they consider to be their enemies. Their irrational emotionality dictates them that the enemy of their enemy should be their friend.

All cultures are equal, is the mantra of the "progressivist religion" on the left.

But they don't treat all cultures as equal. Quite the contrary, a large number of cultures are treated as evil and are bitterly fought, e.g. catholic culture, nationalist culture, fascist culture, capitalist culture, Israeli culture, American culture, Chinese pro-capitalist culture. Did I forget something? Ah yes, science and technology.

In the view of "progressivists", our own Judeo-Christian, Western, capitalist, scientific and technological culture is evil and should be destroyed, if necessary with the help of all its enemies including Medievalism.

Therefore, contrary to any logic, the "progressivists" of the Left apparently fight Medievalism in one form by promoting Medievalism in another form.

23 September 2006 at 10:17  
Blogger Mission Impossible said...


Ulsterman ... Cornix cornici oculos non effodiet. Aut disce aut discede!

My poor little Vikki, of course, along with everyone else, I am in absolute awe of your soaring intellect, your conspicuously learned contributions, and your complete avoidance of argumentum ad hominem posts since your first arrival at Cranmer blog ...

... nevertheless ...

... brevior saltare cum deformibus mulieribus est vita!

To the remainder: a powerful group of 20 primates has just issued a statement -- from the Global South leaders (a body, mainly from Africa and Asia, who represent about a third of active Anglicans in the 70 million-strong Communion) -- saying "the time has now come" to begin forming "a separate ecclesiastical structure" and that they reject the authority of the new leader of the American Episcopal Church, the Presiding Bishop-elect Ms. Katharine Jefferts Schori. This speaks volumes about the sorry cultural and spiritual condition, the Liberal & Feminized West now dwells in, doesn't it? I guess this means our angry-white-females will have to revert to being ... well ... errr ... just women! Mmmmm ... for that to happen, I must assume the vast majority of the "lost generation" (i.e., those aged over 25 or so) will have to enter their knitting and/or incontinence years first.

As for our no-hope Muslims, who will one day see the effective annihilation of their Mohammedan Cult ... a message for those accommodating fools amongst us who persist in looking only for the good in Islam: Cave ab homine unius libri.

Meanwhile, during the evening 21st September, in the Yorkshire town of Heckmondwike, a 16 year old British schoolgirl was chased a short distance from a filling station to just outside a Pub on the town’s Bradford Road where her assailant slashed her throat. Eye witnesses described the attacker as of Asian appearance (i.e., Muslim). The girl was rushed to hospital but was confirmed dead on arrival. In England today, there are white, indigenous people being terrorised in their own communities by foreigners, drunk on an historically violent ideology, and nobody bats an eyelid. Little or nothing has been reported of this obscene (and plausibly racist) incident in the British media. Why?????

What a weird race we have become.

23 September 2006 at 10:17  
Anonymous Colin said...


Your marvel of wit and irony has disarmed me. What can I respond as an unwitty learner of ESL, struggely to express his clumpsy thoughts? Maybe just, I surrender, have mercy.

Merci. :-)

23 September 2006 at 10:23  
Anonymous vikki said...

Colin, on a more sober note. You said "Do you imply that our mission is impossible and we should put on our running shoes?"

No,the lepers did not run they faced the situation squarely. I believe that as long as we are either too scared to speak out because of muslim backlash or because we want to be politically correct, we might as well forever hold our peace! The muslim "violence" is going nowhere. It has to be addressed. I agree with Dr Carey's postulation on these.... The Pope was quoting another source.......but can anyone sincerely tell me what has changed since the original 14th century dialogue? If the Muslims felt misunderstood,instead of going berserk, had they registered their displesure in a civil manner, would they not have succeeded in proving the Pope wrong? What have they done instead?Behaved true to type! This was what I meant by refering to the lepers. If we keep quiet we will lose our freedom slowly but definitely......if we talk we will still lose our freedom by coming under attack for daring to speak in the first place. The Pope saga speaks for itself. The big question should be what is the alternative? Definitely not silence nor ignorance! should we pacify? A resounding Noooooooooo!!

23 September 2006 at 10:28  
Anonymous Rick said...

I really don't think the Church of England is of great importance nowadays. The notion of an Anglican Communion is something of a joke sustained by ECUSA paying the bills for conferences and junkets. ECUSA was adored for its money not its theology.

Considering that the US Episcopal Church could not initially affiliate with Canterbury owing to UDI rebels refusing to acknowledge The Act of Supremacy, it is bemusing that a Church in the United States with barely 2 million adherents and fewer attendees should cause so much trouble.

The current US Presiding Bishop - a woman - has a diocese of just 30.000 and the apostate Bishop of N.H. has barely is getting to absurd levels.

The issues which obsess the Church of England are Staffing issues and how far they wish to relax the rules laid down in Leviticus, the Prayer Book of 1559 onwards, and Canon Law.........

The issues of Theology are tangential to the re-shaping of the Church as a secular institution - it is rapidly losing any religious significance and I think the Muslims have less to fear from a C of E than they do from resurgent Cromwellian Puritanism. Indeed both the Netherlands and England were at the height of their power under Protestant Ascendancy.

The 1960s generation were political obsessives and having gained power after their Gramscian march through the institutions they have destroyed all faith in politics, they now sit somewhat bereft as the tide has gone out and the public is totally turned off.

In time new forces will arise to deal with imminent threats, some will turn to religion others to a debased form of focused politics. Personally I believe Fascism is in for a re-run on the European stage simply as a means tohold fragmenting countries together. The EU has brought neither prosperity, nor security, nor democracy. The Germany that existed 1949-1990 was in every respect superior to the one today, just as Britain was superior up to 1986.........ironically that year is regarded as a boom year of success - but it was due simply to the collapse in oil prices as Saudi increased output to undermine Iran during the Iran-Iraq War - it simply allowed Britain to boom on the back of low energy costs and the Lawson Boom to seek entry into the ERM to cut interest rates and control monetary growth.

The later booms were due to the Y2K hoax and the collapse of the subsequent Dot-com boom vcreated by easy credit and liquidity - this led to huge price increases in property which are the basis for trade deficits in US, Australia, Spain, UK and boosted China.

As this is scaled back and bankruptcies mount with European de-industrialisation - say when GM and Ford merge and close plants - then the dissonant pubnlic will look to religion for hope as politics shows marked inability to cope with anything more substantive than a slogan

23 September 2006 at 12:00  
Anonymous vikki said...

mi, thanks for not calling for my head and your refreshingly generous words.i shall remember not to test the patience of a saint......

rick, I truly hope I have not said something that did not go down well with you. If I did, I sincerely apologise.

23 September 2006 at 12:35  
Anonymous Colin said...

Vikky, MI, Rick, CG, friends,

Stop the quarrels. I just learned about a tragic loss for mankind.

One minute silence, please.

Our savior, our hope, has died. He died of an infectious disease. How unfortunate, how tragic, that he could not be saved by medical treatments developed by infidels as his brothers living in these most dreadful countries do.

The minute is over. You may talk again, my friends.

The French secret service has informed the President of France that the secret service of Saudi Arabia has evidence of his passing away in Pakistan on the 23th of August 2006 following a severe crisis of typhoid leading to a partial paralysis of his legs. Medical help was impossible because of his geographic isolation.

Some might claim that Allah punished him for his disobedience, i.e. for distorting the words of his messenger. Others should feel happy for him because he might now live a happy life in paradise among numerous beautiful virgins.

You can be assured, my friends, he will come back to save us on judgement day. Messiahs always do.

May peace be with him!

23 September 2006 at 13:31  
Anonymous Colin said...

"then the dissonant public will look to religion for hope as politics shows marked inability to cope with anything more substantive than a slogan."

I agree, Rick, also with most of your other conclusions in your analysis of 12:00 PM.

And a big round of applause goes to Vikky for the "resounding Noooooooooo!!"

23 September 2006 at 13:43  
Anonymous Rick said...

Chirac spoke at a news conference with Russian President
Vladimir Putin and German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Compiegne, France, where the leaders were holding a summit.

Pity they destroyed the railway carriage !

23 September 2006 at 14:37  
Blogger Mission Impossible said...

In the midst of Colin's unseemly and frankly nauseating obsession with kissing the feet of young Vikki (how many more sycophantic posts of the 1:43 PM, last paragraph type are you going to contribute?) and Vikki's profound expressions of immaturity and neurosis, coupled with her quaint belief she is the centre of this Blog's Universe ...

... it is indeed refreshing to again read an intelligent, mature, and perceptive contribution from Rick (12:00 PM).

Dic mihi solum facta, domina!

23 September 2006 at 14:38  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

If you ever return let me assure you that you are not the only person who finds Mission Impossible to be a crashing bore.
He really needs to find another hobby and come back to his computer when he has far less time on his hands.

23 September 2006 at 15:57  
Blogger istanbultory said...

I suspect that rumours of OBL's demise are somewhat premature. The Direction Generale des Services Exterieurs report is unconfirmed. So the 72 virgins could well have to remain in holding pattern a bit longer...

23 September 2006 at 16:04  
Anonymous Colin said...

Mission Impossible wrote

"In the midst of Colin's unseemly and frankly nauseating obsession with kissing the feet of young Vikki"

How do you know that she is young? She might be much older than that. What about 70? Or 80? I beg your pardon, 90?
Vikky, would you mind telling us your age to protect me from accusations of sexual ambitions.

"(how many more sycophantic posts of the 1:43 PM, last paragraph type are you going to contribute?)"

Many more, my friend, because according to "An Introduction to Satire", a lecture delivered, in English 200, in November 1998, by Ian Johnston:

"Reductio ad absurdum: is a popular satiric technique (especially in Swift), whereby the author agrees enthusiastically with the basic attitudes or assumptions he wishes to satirize and, by pushing them to a logically ridiculous extreme, exposes the foolishness of the original attitudes and assumptions. Reductios are dangerous sometimes either because the reader does not recognize the satire at work.."

MI, I ain't no Swift, I know. And I apologize for my clumpsiness.

You seem to prefer another satirical technique termed Lampoon by Johnston. According to the latter, "Lampoon: generally refers to a very harsh and personal attack on a very particular recognizable target, focusing on the target's character or appearance."

I am only able to see a subtle difference in style between your and my postings. However, since we are not identical twins (at least not that I know of) it doesn't seem to matter much that one person prefers a sword and another a foil. Or does it ?

Oh, come on Peter,

Honestly, do you really believe that Vikky's undoubtedly valuable contributions (alert MI! This is satire) might be a substitute for MI's posts? Style is one thing but content another. What would this blog be when populated only with Vikkys instead of MIs. In my humble view, both, MI ! and Vikky contribute to the charm of this blog. Or am I wrong?

Anyhow, none of you are grieving because of the reported death of Osma, the Great?

Or maybe you did not care to click on the link provided in the 1:31 PM post.

Sorry, I just saw, at least GC cared to click. Thank you GC. "So the 72 virgins could well have to remain in holding pattern a bit longer... " I am wondering how long they are willing to wait.

23 September 2006 at 16:27  
Blogger istanbultory said...

Thanks Colin.
Rick, I am a little sceptical that the European unwashed, secular-humanist majority will ever return to Christianity. Clearly, the ruling class and cultural leaders in western Europe are anti-religious or "Christophobic”. Bookstores across the continent carry huge ranges of titles on occult, witchcraft, mysticism, eastern religions and esoteric spirituality on shelves where once 'Christian religion' books dominated. According to recent data, only about 6.1 million Germans or 7.4 per cent go regularly to church on Sunday, comprising 4.5 million Catholics and 1.6 million Protestants. Every Muslim knows that these numbers were quite different just a few decades ago. This is one of the reasons they (quite logically from their own perspective) refuse to integrate into the European mainstream.

Among the consequences of Europe's abandonment of its religious roots and the moral code that derives therefrom is a collapse in its birth rates to below the replacement level. Abortion, birth control, acceptance of gay marriage and casual sex are pushing the trend. Europe is systematically depopulating itself.
Europe must "come to its senses" but its hard to see how prodigal Europe will return anytime soon to the very faith that once defined it… rather a growth in some kind of vague pantheism or paganism could supersede Christianity altogether.
I am terribly pessimistic on this point.

23 September 2006 at 16:45  
Anonymous vikki said...

Mission impossible you said "Vikki's profound expressions of immaturity and neurosis, coupled with her quaint belief she is the centre of this Blog's Universe ..."

I believe Colin like me is someone who values peace. Does the Bible not say you should pursue it at all cost?

What manner of man are you? What sort of intellectual would stoop to this level? I can assure you this level of verbal abuse would be out of place even in a womens chit-chat institute.! To reply to your comments in the same vein, is entirely out of the question for me because I simply cannot condescend to such!

I do joke a lot .I also try not to be misunderstood neither do I feel too big to offer unreserved apologies. However the fact that I enjoy a good laugh does not mean I have to take everything dished out. If you must know, your comments sometimes really does make my blood run cold! If not having any dissenting voice is your idea of intelligence and erudition........I will make your day........ . a break would be in order for me......

23 September 2006 at 17:40  
Anonymous Colin said...


Thank you for your quick response and your well reasoned argument. I am as pessimistic as you are if I look at the 3 major forces in the West which strongly support immigration from Islamic countries.

As far as I can see, these 3 major forces support immigration for different reasons:

(1) Businessmen want lower salaries, the destruction of the welfare state which burdons them with high taxes, and new markets.

(2) European politicians resent the world supremacy of the USA and want to build an even more powerful Empire, the EU including the oil rich countries of the Islam. If another religion or people is necessary to achieve their dream, so be it.

(3) The priests of the progressivist religion (i.e. the socialist Left) want to destroy the "evil" capitalistic Empire of the West world in order to establish their envisioned paradise on earth, i.e. equality of all humans.

Looking at these 3 powerful forces (business, government and the dominant religion) from a static point of view, I agree that there is more than sufficient reason to be pessimistic.

However, if I look at it from a developmental perspective than I can see some reason for optimism.

(1) Economics

The Nobel laureate Milton Friedman explained it quite clearly by stating "You cannot simultaneously have free immigration and a welfare state.".

Thus, if immigration continues the welfare state will collapse sooner or later. Result: End of welfare -> no incentive for immigration, low pensions -> incentives again for having children -> Changes in demographics.

(2) Politics

will change because the present political elites will have lost credibility due to the breakdown of the welfare state and of economics. Result: similar to the breakdown of the Soviet Union.

(3) Religion

The priests of multiculturalism will lose their power over public opinion because the promised paradise is - clearly visible to everyone - not a paradise. The Islamists are very helpful in this regard. The more they shout, threaten and kill, the stronger the reaction of the population against the false religion of progressivism, against immigration and against the EU Empire.

Despite the strong forces at work, the fact that the entire development is not sustainable, is reason for optimism.

23 September 2006 at 17:58  
Blogger Mission Impossible said...

Reductio ad absurdum?

You know Colin, quite honestly, this possibility had crossed my mind. My error. You see, I am not completely misunderstanding you after all! I'm very happy to see someone interpreting my (aah-hemm ... boring*&!?*) style with intelligence and wit.

Aged 70, 80, ... a possibility. OK, shall we settle for a mental age of 20?

P.S. I had read your French article, but rather slowly! Remember, the demise of OBL has already been reported several times.

Me thinks Peter Hitchens (is this the authentic Peter, or an imposter?) is still smarting because I once "smacked his wrists" (about 5 articles ago) over an extended playground exchange with Frunings and friend, which had completely scuppered debate here. Perhaps my impatience got the better of me. Of course, at the time, I considered Peter Hitchens to be the nom de plume of an imposter!

Peter, about coming back to my computer when I have less time on my hands ... you know, you may have a point there. I'll have to take a closer look at my priorities. Thanks. But, if you are so bored, then why don't you post comments yourself instead of just hovering quietly in the background? I do find it very odd that certain people only post when they have something derogatory to say (Ulsterman is another) about someone (there are others!) who has done much to help bring this Blog up to a high international rating. Maybe you should show more respect?

If you find my treatment of this bimbo "Vikki" so distasteful, then perhaps you could do me the courtesy of reading all the comments she has posted thus far, starting with the rude & loudmouthed manner in which she first presented herself to the Cranmer blog. Why should I tolerate being singled out by some jerk who just wants to make a momentary name for him or herself? If you cannot identify mental instability and lack of erudition in her contributions (i.e., when it is staring you in the face) then what can I say? Don't insult me just because I seek to judge people as people, and not according to gender, which evidently has been Vikki's ploy all along ... to endlessly play on her gender. This kind of nonsense is not needed here. We can read it any and every day in Britain's tabloids and broadsheet newspapers, ad infinitum. If you are the real and honourable Peter H. then you won't need any reminder of this by me.

Damnant quod non intellegunt.

23 September 2006 at 18:02  
Anonymous vikki said...

Peter hitchens, thank you for your encouraging words.I had already posted my 5.40 post before I saw yours.I've had enough of MI for now.In a "womens chit-chat institute" at least you know what to expect!

Colin you said,

"Vikky, would you mind telling us your age to protect me from accusations of sexual ambitions."

If it helps, I am in my early 40s.

23 September 2006 at 18:29  
Anonymous Rick said...

the European unwashed, secular-humanist majority will ever return to Christianity.

I think you have rendered that tautological and it is very hard to argue against a circularity. I do not know if the majority were ever Christian - Church attendance is no guide simply because in bygone eras there was a penalty charge for not attending Church and comulsion had the effect of bringing horses only to water................

The Calvinists play up the issue of Grace and if you read the XXXIX Articles so do they - the majority of persons are destined for oblivion anyway, but noone knows how many of those currently ruling us have a future............the point is that Christianity is not - as in its debased form - all things to all men, but a selective - nay an Elective Credo - and the Selection rests with God and is is by His Grace that Election takes place - no other qualification is is not Comprehensive but very Selective.

The point is that the economic largesse that has graced the European consumer for five decades after WWII is coming to and. It is funny how few realise that the era of mass-consumption is a very short span of human existence, the bulk of that period being poverty for most.

The emergence of India and China as consumers of resources such as energy and raw materials brings close to 2.7 billion people into the world economy....................a greater number than the population of all industrialised countries to date - in short the 600-800 million population of the industrialised world will be joined by another 2.7 billion.

That is a factor noone seems to consider. A Chinese girl may earn 20 pence/hr today and the shopgirl at Curry £5/hr to sell her product, but roles will be reversed and the huge welfare subsidy to keep the show on the road will be seen as economically inefficient.

In fact unskilled labour should sink to the world price globally - say a bowl of rice a day - even in Western Europe. If the only tax imposed on a car made in China is 17.5% VAT why should it be made in Europe with social charges and maternity/paternity leave, sick pay, pensions, etc.

Indeed Der Spiegel has a nice article on this -,1518,438372,00.html

The retreat of the welfare state - it is already getting hard to justify funding Islamic militants to live at taxpayer expense, or to fund waves of immigration by generous provision of free healthcare, schooling, English lessons, housing and living expenses - no country has hithero promoted immigration so generously and it is hard to see why there should be any limit to spending in this area. The Govt has already taxed the substance of many pension funds to keep this show on the road and, through tax credits is promoted high levels of low-wage subsidised employment which is by its nature non-pensionable.

In short the pay-as-you-go welfare system has reached its final stage, and the substitution of The State as provider in place of family and Church charity may be reaching endgame as governments seek to unload responsibility onto charities and individuals but retaining for themselves the funds extracted from those future claimants.

Were it not for the black economy the public backlash would have been much more visible before now

23 September 2006 at 18:35  
Blogger istanbultory said...

Colin, I very much hope to be proven wrong. And yes, the end of welfarism and the removal of current political elites are entirely possible.
I just can't envision the scope for a revival of Christianity in the European space as a consequence of such changes. Secularism, humanism and moral relativism are forces deeply embedded in most European societies. Many people have accepted the idea that there are no moral absolutes and refuse any boundaries on hedonism. The adherents of such "false gods" are not going to be easily returned to the Christian fold under any circumstances.

The slow but steady growth of evangelical and Pentecostal groups across Europe possibly offers the only glimmer of hope, in my view. But's it a long haul proposition and the odds favour the paganists at present.

23 September 2006 at 18:35  
Anonymous vikki said...

Mission Impossible, I was going to sign off when I saw your 6.02 post. I simply cannot descend to your level..... The Book of Proverbs says "...go from the presence of a foolish man, when thou perceivest not in him the lips of knowledge..." If anyone disagrees with you, you rain abuses on them like one would expect from an uneducated member of my gender ....! Even a poorly educated one would exercise more restraint. Since you have decided that the normal courtesy accorded a gentleman does not necessarily apply to you, I should hope this Bible passage would indeed be apt ! (I would hesitate to use the word 'man' because men are simply not expected to behave like this !)"....continual dripping on a very rainy day and a contentious woman are alike; Whoever restrains her restrains the wind....." I also agree with Peter. You have too much time on your hands! Being on this forum with you brings yet another saying to mind... "It is better to dwell in the wilderness, than with a contentious and an angry woman...." I am off to the wilderness.......!

23 September 2006 at 20:35  
Anonymous Geraint said...

Islam - well thats another religion foistered upon the indigenous people of Britain. Why choose Cranmere? The man who was responsible for the Cornish holocaust?

23 September 2006 at 21:35  
Anonymous Colin said...

Rick described the economical problem well.


Concerning a revival of Christianity in the European space, people normally try to return to their traditions when confronted with seemingly unsolvable problems.

That's the reason why the Islamic world wants to return to their traditions. They see that they are unable to survive in the modern world, that Japan, South Korea, China are quickly catching up with the West and that they are unable to do so. Therefore, they want to return to their traditions, to times when Islamic countries were powerful.

The same is true for the Western world. You can already observe that people want to return to their Christian tradition because of violent Islamism.

However, - hopefully I do not hurt your feelings by claiming - religions only rarely solve problems. In my view, the fascination of humans with religions has to do with its use of an eternally and universally powerful storyline. This storyline is so powerful that it has been employed in all cultures and in all times. We all know the development of the plot because we have seen it probably a thousand times.

It is the eternal story of a monster, the fight of a brave hero against the monster, an apocalyptic climax, victory, and a great reward as happy ending. The Writer's Journey: Mythic Structure for Writers by Christopher Vogler

Fairy tales, Hollywood and religions present us with endless variations of the rescue plot. The plot stimulates the basic emotions of all living creatures, i.e. fear and reward, the famous carrot and stick which moves animals and humans alike. The rescue plot is very enjoyable for us humans. Children and adults alike can't never get enough of it.

However, real life is neither a fairy tale nor a Hollywood movie. In real life, the bad guy wins more often than the good guy. We don't like that. Therefore, we introduced jugement day in the religious storyline. Moreover, real life does not have a happy ending. It ends in something humans fear most. It ends in death. An ending we don't like for a compelling story. No wonder that we chose an enjoyable happy ending for the religious storyline, i.e. afterlife in paradise.

In regard to the latter, the famous Erasmus of Rotterdam remarked ironically already in 1508 that some people talk about paradise as if they had been there. I am sorry that I am unable to see how a pleasant fairy tale could be a useful guide for mastering one's own real life. Inevitably, it will lead to a disappointment. If only Atta could tell.

As long as the promised reward is localized in afterlife, nobody can prove that it is an illusion. However, secular religions such as nationalism, socialism, fascism, welfarism have a problem. Sooner or later, customers realize that it does not work. And the dissatisfied customer continues his search for the desired product by trying to shop elsewhere and promptly falls for another storyteller. The customers of eternal happiness stories never seem to realize that the promoted product does not exist because - given the nature of the universe - it simply is impossible to manufacture.

The best advice people can get for their life does naturally not come from fiction tellers but from reality.

A glance at reality shows that storytelling is a profitable business, in Rome, in Hollywood and in other parts of the world.

The business model consists of promises (to be delivered in a distant future) for money. Deception has never been and never will be morality. Since deceptions are only profitable as long as customers are unaware of it, it can't be really surprising to anyone that deceptive businessmen try to suppress the bad news. Inquistition, political correctness, control of the media, antidiscrimination laws, blasphemy laws, new laws for controlling the internet etc. have all the same purpose, i.e. to limit freedom of speech for preserving the business of deception. In my point of view, religion is not the solution but the problem.

Let's assume that all people living in Europe would be Christians. How would life be? History has seen this already in the Middle Ages: Robbery and killings in the name of Christian religion (see my 12:00 AM post above).

Let's assume that all people living in Eurasia would believe in the national state as their savior. How would life be? History's reply: WW-I, WW-II.

Let's assume that all people living in Eurasia would be Islamic believers. How would life be? History says: Sharia, dhimmitude, and poverty.

Let's assume that all people living in Eurasia would be believers of social progressivism. How would life be? History refers to the Soviet Union: Slavery, robbery and killings in the name of the equality of all humans.

Let's assue that all people living in Eurasia would be agnostics. How would life be? History says: I don't know. It has never happened before. People always believed in rescue and an happy ending and committed crimes over crimes for achieving that goal. Probably, they would fight over ethnicity like in Yugoslavia.

Geraint , I fear I am ignorant in regard to the Cornish holocaust. Can you tell me more about it?

Altruism, i.e. moral, exists in animals and in all human cultures suggesting that Christianity is not a requirement for morality.

GC , hopefully, my writing did not offend your or His Grace's feelings. If it does, please let me know and I will stop talking about such matters.

23 September 2006 at 21:59  
Anonymous Colin said...

Vikky said,

"I am off to the wilderness.......!"

Oh no, Vikky come back, it's dangerous out there in the wilderness!

MI , I guess you have to go and find her in this wilderness before a lion will be eating her, the poor little girl. She is still so young, nearly a child, only 40 years old, too young to die.

Vikky ,

Please come back. Don't do this to us. MI loves you, he told me secretly. Everything is a misunderstanding like in these romance novels. There will be a happy ending.

Voiceover of speaker ,

Will Vikky come back? Does MI secretly love Vikky? Is Vikky too young for MI? Will they find to each other? Are they going to marry? Or will a lion have her for dinner?

Don't go anywhere. We will be right back with the soap.

To be continued on Archbishop Cranmer's block ....

23 September 2006 at 22:18  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

MI is a pathetic old poofter, yes it a cheap jibe but screamingly obvious.
I cant recall the last time I read so much misogynistic bile.

And MI
"Slap on the wrist" ?
I visit this blog because I enjoy reading Cranmers postings, and those of others (I exclude you)
Don't presume to tell me which blogs I should or should not visit.
Apart from being a bore you also "lift" many of your postings from other sources.
You are a bore , a Woman hater and a plagarist .

23 September 2006 at 23:23  
Anonymous Colin said...

Next Episode of "Vikky in mission impossible"

And we are right back with our soap "Vikky in mission impossible", here on Archbishop Cranmer's famous blog.

What happened in our last episode?

MI called Vikky a bimbo.
Deeply hurt, Vikky went off to the wilderness.......!
Colin begged MI to save her from certain death in the wilderness.
MI did not react.
Peter came to Vikky's rescue and called MI a boring plagiarist and a poofter with a misogynistic bile.

Is Peter's mission possible to rescue Vikky?
Is MI a plagiaristic poofter or a boring misogynist?
What did MI plagiarize?
Is MI really mad at Vikky or is this just a recap of Dallas with Vikky acting as Sue Ellen, MI as J.R. Ewing, and Peter Hitchens as Bobby Ewing?
Are Bobby and JR going to shoot it out?

Questions over questions.

Don't go anywhere. We will be back with the next episode of Dallas and JR's Shooting in the religion of peace, sorry of pieces, and the important question: Did Bobby shoot JR to rescue Sue Ellen?

To be continued on Archbishop Cranmer's famous block ....

24 September 2006 at 00:28  
Blogger Mission Impossible said...

religion of pieces ... before I forget, whilst in the midst of dealing with children. An excellent post Sir. Well put together and very accurate.


Ha-ha-ha ... oh dear, what a childish state this Blog has recently descended into.

Well, at least we now know the person posting under the "Peter Hitchens" nom de plume is an imposter. The real Peter H. would not have descended into puerility. He has just proven my earlier paragraph [6:02 PM] which begins: Peter, about coming back ... I particularly enjoyed his "pathetic old poofter" jibe because it was quickly followed by his hysterical claim ... it's screamingly obvious. An emotional wreck is our "Peter Hitchens." As for the remainder of his bi-sexual rant, well, what can one do except offer our condolences

Mmmmm ... come to think of it ... perhaps for the community good, I should have knocked a few teeth out, 5 articles ago, instead of just slapping him on the wrist?

Frankly Colin, you are responsible for this episode. It is you who, for reasons we can speculate if we had time to waste, has played a rather silly game, and taken upon himself to encourage the continued presence of this mental & emotional retard who signs herself "Vikki". Her stated chronological age (early 40s) is almost exactly what I had imagined it to be (late 40s). She's never grown up (along with so many others of her generation) and she's now passing through that period in person's life when he/she is being challenged to finally leave childhood behind.

A woman walked up to a little old man rocking in a chair on his porch. "I couldn't help noticing how happy you look," she said. "What's your secret for a long happy life?"

"I smoke three packs of cigarettes a day," he said. "I also drink a case of whiskey a week, eat fatty foods, and never exercise."

"That's amazing," said the woman, "how old are you?"

"Twenty-six," he said

That one was plagiarised my darling Peter.

There are a lot of people visiting Forums and/or Blogs who are simply looking to work out their inner demons; the products of chronic mental problems. Believe me, I've seen it all.

It is Mr. "Colin" who has, unilaterally decided to encourage the retard "Vikki" to stay, despite overwhelming evidence she is slightly off her rocker. Rather arrogant of you old boy, isn't it? Especially considering you are still quite new to the Cranmer blog. What are you trying to achieve here? Certainly nothing that one could, or should consider wise or respectful of Blogging etiquette.

If you are so enamoured with the Vikki's of this world, then why don't you trot over to the forums at Yahoo? There you will find scores of Vikkis, mincing male homosexuals, and assorted ignoramuses who would fill your world with multi-culti colour, and gaiety, and absolutely nothing of any value. As for discussing serious issues like adults, you'd be hard pressed to read two cogent responses in a row.

A few days ago, you boasted of having a beautiful wife. I must assume, by your almost desperate need to have a Vikki to correspond with, she is now having an affair.

Incidentally, FYI, several weeks ago, I did contact Richard Littlejohn of the Daily Mail to invite him to the Cranmer Blog for inspiration. Perhaps some journalistic types from the Daily Mail (or is it Mail on Sunday?) have been shocked at the ability of non-journalistic types to grasp topics with vigor, honesty, and erudition? These journalists might be out of a job if they don't buck up soon. Serves them right.

Now, let's all sing along. You know the tune:

You've got me (Mission Impossible) ... under your skin! You've got me ... deep in the heart of you!

Now, all of you ... for a finale ... start whistling the Mission Impossible tune. In harmony if you wish. Queers can't whistle, so Peter H., just tap your feet, that's right. Very, very good! You all know my theme tune well, although I can see some of you are having problems with your dentures.

OK, allegro, allegro! Yeah. That's so good.

Losers beware. You should all remember the truth. There is no impossible mission ... for ... Mission Impossible.
Excuse me for a second, I'm just having a private conversation with my lady here.
Anyone written any of this stuff before? Nah, it's just too damned good, too original. Though I bet you'll be plagaerised, err, plaigerised, err-hem, plagia ... oh stuff it ... copied verbatim! Probably by the Mail on Sunday.

Oh, blogs are so energized when I am around. And enervated when I am gone.


Me transmitte sursum, caledoni

24 September 2006 at 05:14  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The person posting as Peter Hitchens however under English Law could land Cranmer with a libel writ as provider of a platformn, if the real Peter Hitchens felt he might suffer economic loss to his earnings as a journalist/author by being associated with opinions he did not in fact hold or authorise.

It does indeed cause Blog operators some difficulty when people impersonate a named person and cause damage to reputation...........

24 September 2006 at 07:09  
Blogger istanbultory said...


No I am not offended at all but merely wanted to clarify my thinking on the reasons why a change in socio-economic conditions in Europe might not necessarily lead to a Christian revival.
As for the Cornish genocide mentioned by Geraint and the specific role of the venerable Cranmer I am not entirely certain as to what is being referred to unless it is the Prayer Book Rebellion. Following the passing of the Act of Uniformity by Parliament, which replaced Latin with English as the language to be used in church services from the 9th. June 1549, an unsuccessful uprising occurred in Cornwall. Eventually, the ringleaders were captured, some were publicly executed others lost their property and lands. But this hardly qualifies as a genocidal act and the role of Cranmer is far from clear in the governmental reponse to the Cornish uprising. Thus, I surmise that Geraint is referring to the role of Cranmer in the completion of the Book of Common Prayer as the cause of the rebellion.

24 September 2006 at 08:23  
Anonymous Colin said...

MI ,

Thanks for your comments. I made several observations:

(1) You are intelligent, knowledgable. You certainly do not suffer from a mental disorder.

(2) You are constantly overreacting at the slightest opposition. You feel very energetic, move quickly from one idea to another without being illogical. You have grandious ideas about your importance. These are all signs of an episode of mania.

(3) Since you are so familiar with psychiatric diagnoses, it probably is not the first episode.

Whatever you say or might say about me in the future, I won't take it personal.

Please take your lithium to prevent hospitalisation.

24 September 2006 at 08:45  
Anonymous Shosanna said...

Well, some progress being recorded on this blog. It seems like folks have seen through MI...and they don't like what they see- unadulterated bigotry, a slightly weird fixation on Latin and an overly rapid response to even the mildest of opposition to his treasured viewpoints. In short, people see a guy consumed by his own self-righteousness, the ultimate bore. Keep taking the lithium dude!

24 September 2006 at 09:14  
Anonymous Colin said...

GC ,

Thank you for explaining to me the Prayer Book Rebellion, which I am not familiar with. You are right, it hardly qualifies as a genocide.

I am also most grateful to you for relieving me from the discomfort of being guilty to possibly have offended your religious feelings.

You are certainly right that "a change in socio-economic conditions in Europe might not necessarily lead to a Christian revival." In the USA, it probably would. However, in Europe with its strong faith in socialism, I suspect that it will be rather a combination of socialism and a return to the faith in the nation as savior: a combination of nationalism and socialism as can be observed in Russia; hopefully without the outcome of the German republic of Weimar; i.e. fervent national socialism.

Depending on the increasing influence of the Islamic population in Europe, we might witness a combination of socialism, nationalism and islam. Isn't that the combination of Erdogan's party with its emphasis on justice (= socialism), nationalism, and Islam?

Hans-Peter Raddatz, an experienced orientalist, explained a few days ago on German TV that the intellectuals of the Islamist movement are already creatively combining socialistic with Islamic ideas and therefore he thinks that the time of socialism is far from being over.

I fear that a fervent Islamo-Socialism might be as dangerous as National Socialism was in the past. Islamo-Socialism would also probably contain an ethnic element similar to Turkishness (a reminder of the German Deutschtum of the past). Antisemitism was motivated by the envy of the success of rich Jewish businessmen. Similarily, we hear the Islamic youth in Europe enviously complaining that the white Europeans have everything, that the Islamic people are poor and that this is unfair. Their feeling of envy, the rant of Islamist against ethnic Europeans, might lead to a similar result as European antisemitism in the past. But this time with Europeans as substitute for the Jews.

Antiwesternism seems to be for Islamism what antisemitism was for Nazism, the powerful emotion of envy leading to hate, robbery and the lust of killing.

24 September 2006 at 09:50  
Blogger Mission Impossible said...


Clearly, I have made several observations too, beginning quite some time ago.

(1) You are a disarmingly charming creep;

(2) You can't take a joke, even when I exaggerate;

(3) You will take personally whatever I say about you in the future, which is exactly what you have just demonstrated, you two-faced little creep;

(4) As I expected, some of you actually believe all that self-aggrandizing stuff I wrote near the end of my 5:14 AM comment. Which is why I fed you the bait!! What a sorry and pretentious little bunch some of you are;

(4) I have already told you it is not the first episode, you dolt! Certain people have overreacted in precisely the same manner to my earlier comments about feminism and women with big chips on their shoulders. The disease is widespread, and so can be expected. I enjoy smoking it out;

(5) To criticise a single female in Britain today elicits exactly the same hysterical reaction the Muslims have demonstrated in their own reactions to the Pope's recent speech. Feminism = Taliban.

(6) shoshanna demonstrates the umbilical relationship. Unadulterated bigotry? She must have gotten that idea from some magazine article she read when at Uni.

(7) If "entertain" is the right word, then I am quite certain I can move a lot more grey matter in the right direction than some spiteful little creature like shoshanna.


As stated recently by T. BRADSHAW, of Oxford in his letter to the Editor (Times), and I quote:

The main point to secure is freedom to debate and discuss.

As David Starkey put it once, he was happy for Cardinal Winning to call him a pervert as long as Winning was happy to be called a bigot. The growing use of claimed “offence” to suppress legitimate debate is deplorable, and the exile from The Netherlands of Hirsi Ali shows where it can lead.

Like it or not, Western culture depends of freedom of thought and expression, without fear or favour.


Colin, you have seen me as a threat from the beginning and acted accordingly. You are worse than a pretentious prat. It will surely seem to at least some here that it is you who has the greater need for therapy. It's just that you hide it well, as all creeps do. As for your allegedly beautiful wife, I think she needs to find a real man, and dump the pseudo-intellectual jerk who prefers playing effete games in eminent blogs.

For me, one session of Yoga will be sufficient to wipe clean the tedium I have recently felt with prevailing attitudes in this once enjoyable Blog, particularly since your arrival. I now have better things to do, which is what in truth I was thinking two weeks ago.

My congratulations, gratitudes and best wishes, to Rick, gc, Croydonian, and of course Cranmer, who have more grace and manners in their little fingers than much of the remainder have in their buttocks.

24 September 2006 at 10:13  
Blogger istanbultory said...

Colin, I am afraid that I tend to agree with your predictions. The ideological similarities between Islam and Socialism, a truly unholy alliance, are striking.

It is fascinating to see in the publications of leftist groups and commentators, for example, how history is being rewritten and the language of political argument adjusted to (as it were) accommodate the new accommodation between radical Muslim organisations and sectarian leftist factions. The almost suicidal desire of today's European Leftist to see the United States of America defeated by someone, anyone, trumps all other considerations and points to the implicit ideological harmony between the two sides.

Yes, we might also witness a combination of socialism, nationalism and islam in the Europe of the future. I would also draw to your attention the likes of David Myatt, a founder of the hardline British National Socialist Movement (NSM) who had been jailed for racist attacks in the past, and has changed his name to Abdul Aziz ibn Myatt. In an internet essay entitled From Neo-Nazi to Muslim, Myatt asks: “How was it that I, a Westerner with a history of over 25 years of political involvement in extreme right-wing organisations, a former leader of the political wing of the neo-Nazi group Combat 18, came to be standing outside a mosque with a sincere desire to go inside and convert to Islam? “These were the people who I had been fighting on the streets, I had swore (sic) at and had used violence against — indeed, one of my terms of imprisonment was a result of me leading a gang of skinheads in a fight against ‘Pakis’.”

In a later interview, Myatt supports the killing of any Muslim who breaks his oath of loyalty to Islam, and the setting up of a Muslim superstate. He describes himself as having been “staunchly opposed to non-white immigration into Britain and twice jailed for violence in pursuit of my political aims”.
He added: “I spent several decades of my life fighting for what I regarded as my people, my race and my nation, and endured two terms of imprisonment arising out of my political activities.”
But his belief is now that: “The pure authentic Islam of the revival, which recognises practical jihad (holy war) as a duty, is the only force that is capable of fighting and destroying the dishonour, the arrogance, the materialism of the West . . . For the West, nothing is sacred, except perhaps Zionists, Zionism, the hoax of the so-called Holocaust, and the idols which the West and its lackeys worship, or pretend to worship, such as democracy.
“They want, and demand, that we abandon the purity of authentic Islam and either bow down before them and their idols, or accept the tame, secularised, so-called Islam which they and their apostate lackeys have created.
“This may well be a long war, of decades or more — and we Muslims have to plan accordingly. We must affirm practical jihad — to take part in the fight to free our lands from the kuffar (unbelievers). Jihad is our duty.”

In the current clash of civilisations, this particular type of neo-jihaddist may not be alone in the new European order.

See here:

24 September 2006 at 10:53  
Anonymous Rick said...

the Cornish genocide

It is amazing how much has been miniaturised since 1945........we can even get "micro-genocides" today when hyperbole is needed to inflate the self-importance of the publisher

As for Anti-Semitism being motivated by envy of rich businessmen I take that as being an attempt at humour rather than wishing to appear ridiculous. The roots of Anti-Semitism have more to do with Central European Orthodoxy and a failure to integrate, the use of a different language, and the notion of Separateness which was deliberately engendered on both sides. Many of the Jews making up such a large proportion of Poland's population - probably as a result of the Tsarist policy of restricted residency in The Pale - did not speak Polish but only Yiddish.

Those in the shtetl were often the cattle brokers and seed merchants whose infuence over the lives of peasants could be malign or benign; and since the Robot had operated in much of the Austro-Hungarian empire there was no real middle class but a peasantry and a mercantile class, and a landowning class.

In common with all political systems the people on top polarise the people on the bottom against the middle, it is quite fashionable in Great Britain where both Conservatives and Labour despise the middle class yet seek to persuade it each is not as bad as the other. In the absence of Class, Race becomes the issue...........

The nature of Anti-Semitism was rooted in peasant povert across Central Europe, the notion in Germany was overlaid with the fact that those who produced the Bolshevik takeover of Russia were predominantly Jewish, those who founded the German SPD (which was a revolutionary Socialist Party until 1957) were Jewish, and that those who had signed the Versailles Treaty were predominantly Jewish. It was the SPD which created the Weimar Republic in 1918 and overthrew the Monarchy - which had not been intended until Philip Scheidemann jumped the gun - and it was reportedly Jewish financiers who did very well out of Weimar Inflation in 1923-25 to acquire assets with devaluing debts while the small shopkeepers and industrial workers went to the wall.

Monocausal explanations do not work for complex issues and tend to be the instrument of the firebrand and political extremist looking for a scapegoat

24 September 2006 at 11:19  
Anonymous Rick said...

GC - I fear you look at it from the wrong end. What unites such people is what they are AGAINST not what they are FOR

24 September 2006 at 11:21  
Blogger istanbultory said...

Indeed, I am merely commenting on the interesting marriage of convenience that now exists between these two sides. Although they are both in search of unattainable utopias, what unites them, of course, is essentially an overriding passion to demolish Judeo-Christian civilisation. That is what this particular union is all FOR. I am not in disagreement with you on this point, Rick.

24 September 2006 at 11:52  
Blogger istanbultory said...

Spare a thought for those of us who live in the Mohammedan lands (Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Bradford and Berlin-Kreuzberg, wherever) and will now have to endure the month of Ramadam. Its a grim time. As several of you would no doubt agree from bitter experience....

24 September 2006 at 13:12  
Anonymous Colin said...

Rick and GC ,

I am also in line with the point you both made in your last post of 11:21 AM and 11:52 AM.

So where then is the difference?

Rick and I seem to differ in regard to the cause of antisemitism.

I stressed the importance of envy and rick emphasized the lack of disintegration.

Again, there is no disagreement between his and my views. Probably, the combination of envy against outsiders is more powerful for inciting hate than one of these factors alone.

For example, in the East Asian countries of Thailand, Vietnam, Philippines, Indonesia and Malaysia, the Chinese minority is economically more successful than the native populations. The less successful native population of these countries envies and hates the Chinese merchants and persecutes them. Malaysia has anti-discriminatory laws which unfairly discriminate against Chinese. And the contemporary history of Indonesia has witnessed several anti-Chinese riots similar to the anti-Jewish riots in Medieval Europe.

Furthermore in the USA, East Asian and especially Korean merchants in the ghettos are economically more successful in comparison to other minorities. During the last racial riots in Los Angeles, some groups from the poorer Afroamerican population attacked Korean and East Asian shop owners.

In regard to Hitler, the German historian Ernst Nolte, a specialist of the history of fascism and author of "The Faces of Fascism" revealed the origins of Hitler's antisemitic emotions and thinking in his article "Rückblick und Rechenschaft nach vier Jahrzehnten". He wrote (my attempt of translation):

"In the earliest and especially important document of Hitler's thinking, in his letter of the 16th of September 1919 to Adolf Gemlich, the word "Bolschewism" does not exist. The main theme is the pursuit of money, the "Dance around the golden calf" which is the nature of Jews and which make the desire of the "removal of Jews" an essential command for the preservation of the own life-form. Only at the end, Hitler wrote that the Jews were "the driving force behind the revolution". The relationship between Jewry and finance has been emphasized again and again in Hitler's speeches, which he gave after October 1919 when he became a member of the "German Party of Workers"; obviously, it was a modified form of the condemnation of "capitalism" by the Left parties."

Reading this, I wonder whether there can be any doubt that anti-semitism is an early form of anti-capitalism and that national socialism is an antisemitic form of socialism? Currently, another modification of the socialist belief is being developed, the anti-Western socialism.

Rick , my interpretation of the East Asian, American and European experiences is that the success of minorities stimulates in the majority the emotion of envy, hate, the development of an ideology for justifying persecution, subjugation, robbery, killing, and sometimes genocide. If you see it differently, I would be happy to learn about your interpretations. Maybe I am wrong. I certainly cannot guarantee the correctness of my attempts to understand the past and current developments.

GC , please accept my sympathy for your hardships during the month of Ramadam. Since most of us probably never lived in Mohammedan lands, would you mind to share some of your experiences with us so that we know what the future has in stock for us in the evolving EU Empire?

24 September 2006 at 14:11  
Anonymous Rick said...

I would be most cautious in citing Ernst Nolte who is regarded with some suspicion in Germany, even being accused of denying The Holocaust. His views are changeable and highly contentious.

The issues you raise on minorities I do not disagree with - indeed Amy Chua wrote about the problems globalisation has created with Chinese elites using their political contacts to grow rich throughout Asia.

The issue of 1930s anti-Semitism was very different..........and it should not be forgotten that Hitler was Austrian not German; that Germany had seen economic collapse follow military collapse and Communist insurgency in German cities put down by the Freikorps under Noske.........and the murder of Liebknecht and Luxemburg by command of the first SPD President, Friedrich Ebert.

This was a society far more unstable than any today and Germany was faced in 1932 with the choice of an Army Junta or the coalition of Von Papen and Hitler...........there is no Western country in that position today

24 September 2006 at 14:46  
Blogger Croydonian said...

Hmm, if I might wade in on the topic of anti-semitism:

I would see the first driver in the West as being the notion of the Jews as Christ killers and collectively responsible for the crucifixion. This has come up again, and again, and again in anti-semitic texts.

Subsequent to that, the notion of envy is not a million miles off beam, as Jews were not included in the canon laws on usury, and being forbidden entry to many trades, to own land etc etc, money lending was a fairly appealing business opportunity. One might note that Jewish moneylenders were often dealing with the powerful, and when those people could or would not repay their debts, what better way to deal with the problem than demonising or killing the lender?

One might note that two of the clauses of the Magna Carta are concerned with bilking Jewish lenders (source) and the English invented the blood libel with the tale of William of Norwich (source)

24 September 2006 at 14:50  
Anonymous Rick said...

That is naturally a key factor - I was looking at the Central European perspective where agricultural holdings made peasants dependent upon the seed-merchant and cattle-broker - something I have heard from many East Europeans...............after all only a minority of people in any society is rich...........certainly not enough to justify persecuting a poor Jewish bootmaker or stallholder.

It is the essential poverty of many of those Jews - Michael Marks walked from his village near Grodno to get to Leeds and start as a pedlar............the Jews from The Pale who came to Barrons in Leeds loking for work in sweatshops were no different from others in economic terms

24 September 2006 at 14:57  
Anonymous old red socks said...

Rick, I'd be intrigued - as doubtless would the Baroness Finchley were she ever to stumble upon this august site - to hear your justification that the Conservative Party despises the middle class.

Was the majority of the German Cabinet in 1919 Jewish? The depiction of the SPD as "revolutionary socialists" during the Weimar Republic is also somewhat puzzling. (Unless, I suppose, you would regard the Labour Party in the same light until it revoked Clasue IV in the mid 1990s.

(I expect a stern rebuke from His Grace for irrelevance to the topic at hand, and will accept such admonition without demur in advance.)

24 September 2006 at 15:00  
Blogger istanbultory said...

You are right. It may be useful for the citzens of the future Eurabian state to acquaint themselves with the “pleasures” of Ramadam, which generally involves:

1.Having to tolerate the foul bad-temperedness of the fasting majority. Tempers certainly do fray.
2.Not being able to eat outside during the daytime.
3.Ramadam drummers. Their job is to wake up people to partake of the pre-fast meal eaten before the sun rises. These chaps walk around the neighborhoods with a big double-headed drum. They beat out a variety of rhythms and sometimes may also sing a rhyming couplet. This is no joke at 5.00am.
4.Many businesses and public services will close early in order to allow staff to return home in good time to break the fast. Horrific traffic congestion on major roads, etc.

It’s not the best of times…But I digress.

24 September 2006 at 15:04  
Blogger istanbultory said...

I always thought Ernst Nolte was a revisionist. He has certainly said that Hitler may have had "rational" reasons for attacking the Jews. However, he has also asserted that radical feminism joins Third World anti-Occidentalism and multiculturalism to "instrumentalize" the Holocaust for political purposes. He feels these groups place the Holocaust in the context of "various genocides by the predatory and conquering West, so that 'homo hitlerensis' ultimately appears as merely a special case of 'homo occidentalis.'"
There I would tend to agree with Nolte...although not with his revisionist inclinations.

24 September 2006 at 15:13  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

See how easy it is to pull somebody down by making them lose control with a few pointed comments?
All I did was point out the blindingly obvious, you are a reasonably intelligent person, however, you apparently lack social skills and have a very tenuous grip on reality, combine that with your misogyny, attention seeking, repressed homosexuality and religious mania and it appears to me that you are crying out for some kind of medical attention. I hope you have somebody close who can help you get the kind of help you so badly need.
God bless.

24 September 2006 at 15:36  
Anonymous Rick said...

to hear your justification that the Conservative Party despises the middle class.

Well you may, but it has done little for the middle-class - the bulk of grammar schools were destroyed by Margaret Hilda Thatcher as Education Secretary; the public schools which she used and which produce most Conservative Cabinets remained untouched.

The SPD was founded by August Bebel together with Wilhelm Liebknecht..........I suggest you review the Erfurt Programme of 1891 and the role of Eduard Bernstein and Karl Kautsky

The Labour Party has never been a Marxist Party - the SPD was until 1959 Godesberger Programme. The SPD split first in 1916 over War Credits when Luxemburg and Liebknecht formed the Spartakist League, and again in 1919 when the USPD split off finally joined with the Communists KPD.

From the point of view of the Monarchists the SPD had declared a Republic, the SPD was a Jewish Party, and the Spartakists were to the left of the SPD.

It was very easy for the Right to blame war defeat - Dolchstoss - and destruction of the Reich on the SPD and they did.

24 September 2006 at 15:54  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

misogyny, attention seeking, repressed homosexuality and religious mania

and what is your aprticular problem that you must hide behind another person's real identity ?

24 September 2006 at 15:56  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

Revisionists can argue themselves blue in the face, like MI they tend to be fixated people who probably wouldnt know a bar of soap if you beat them around the head with it, they fixate on detail rather than the whole picture.
Hitler/Stalin/Mao/The Pope /charlamagne , The Bush crime family, Its all about the acquisition of power, socialism/political correctness is just the latest means to that end all helped along by useful idiots like Blair and his coterie of social workers, lawyers and nail chewing cyclops'

24 September 2006 at 16:00  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

and what is your aprticular problem that you must hide behind another person's real identity ?
An what is the problem that you have that means you dont have an identity?

24 September 2006 at 16:02  
Blogger istanbultory said...

anonymous! Get yourself a name.

Rick is right to observe that the British Labour Party owes little to Marxism. Its ideological roots have much more to do with John Ball, Robert Owen, William Morris, Keir Hardie, John Burns, and Sydney Webb and owe comparatively little to Marx or Engels.

24 September 2006 at 16:02  
Blogger Croydonian said...

The classic take on socialism a l'anglais is that it owes more to Methodism than to Marx.

24 September 2006 at 16:15  
Anonymous old red socks said...

Rick, So Mrs. Thatcher despised the middle classes on the basis of her three years as Education Secretary 1970-74 rather than on the 11 as Prime Minister. Hmmm.

As regards the SPD, you overlook the simple point I was making, namely, that when in power during the 1920s in coalition with the 'bourgeois'parties (not least in the Prussian Diet), the party was hardly 'revolutionary socialist' in practice. Or are you disputing that too? And was the Cabinet that finally submitted to the Versailles Treaty dominated by Jews? I don't know the answer: I'm assumming you do.

Oh, do try and be a little less patronising and arrogant in your omniscience.

24 September 2006 at 16:32  
Anonymous Rick said...

Old red Socks - educate yourself

24 September 2006 at 17:55  
Blogger istanbultory said...

It's not all bad news though... Almost 70 percent of Swiss voters backed moves today making it easier to send rejected asylum seekers home, as well as lengthen periods of detention for potential deportees and cut financial aid to people whose claims are turned down.

24 September 2006 at 18:02  
Anonymous Rick said...

Almost 70 percent of Swiss voters backed moves today

Oh for a referendum.............!!

24 September 2006 at 18:10  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

Send them home?
What I like about the Swiss is (apart from the free assault rifles) is that that not only do they put "asylum seekers" in a camp, they put them in a subterranean camp!
They also put their run of the mill law breakers underground.
I know this as i once spent a few days in a cell with a pakistani drug smuggler, according to him Dutch prisons were the easiest, but the swiss had the best facilities and best rations , although not much fresh air.

24 September 2006 at 21:07  
Anonymous Colin said...

Many interesting postings and comments. I am learning quite a lot. Thank you!

In regard to Ernst Nolte, I honestly don't know what to think about him, if he denied the Holocaust or if he is a "revisionist". I am always suspicious if people are labelled one way or another. Usually, it is an attack ad hominem for avoiding to rationally disprove the person's argument.

For example, most members of this blog are against migration from Islamic countries because they are fearing an increase in violence. The rational way against your argument would be to demonstrate that immigrants from these countries are not more violent than the native population. Howver, if it is impossible to disprove an argument by facts, an attack ad hominem by labelling is the only method left. Therefore the defenders of the true and only faith will simply try to character assassinate you by association with a negative label such as you being a xenophobic, islamophobic racist. Never mind that Islam is not a race but a religion.

Another method I often observe in the media is the claim: The "controversial ... has ...(e.g. published a book about the dangers of socialism / welfarism / Islamism etc.). The unspoken message behind the label "controversial" is: Don't bother with his arguments, he or she is not credible. In fact, everything is controversial, one rarely finds two persons agreeing on anything. But we never hear the media saying "The controversial ... has published a book about the dangers of the greenhouse effect/neoconservatism/Christian religion etc."

To make a long story short, I do not know if Nolte is a Holocaust denier or a revisionist. I suspect that he is a victim of the labeling technique. If you can show me the text where he said such things, I will be more than happy to accept the view that he is an evil Nazi supporter.

On his website, Nolte explains quite convincingly that he was labelled as "controversial" because his writing provided evidence by citation of Nazi leaders for Hitler's fear of Bolschewism and that the Nazis viewed themselves as saviors of Western civilization from the dangers of Lenin's murderous revolution for other countries by his use of an international communist movement "Workers of all countries, unite".

Naturally, this connection in Hitler's mind had to be denied by faithful socialists because socialism is in their view the only and truely humane religion and its opponents can only be devils who's sudden appearance is entirely unexplainable (similar to the postulated incomprehensibility of the current population's fear from the call of the international Islamist movement "Islamic believers of all countries, unite" and the opposition against the EU membership of an Islamic country.)

Lenin was the Bin Laden of his time. Lenin's followers were organized in parties across the globe and its members were weekly marching in the streets of European cities. He not only destroyed a building and a few subways as Bin Laden's men did but he already had the largest European country in his grip where he had assassinated millions of educated people. Is it any wonder that some people in neighbouring countries were afraid of his movement and wanted to stop it at all costs? Is it really unexplainable that some people want to stop the spreading of the international Islamist movement which threatens to kill the Pope and the infidels in their own countries?

As far as I understand Nolte, he was interested in finding the motivations behind Hitler's murderous regime and the Holocaust. Nolte was accused of "putting the blame for Nazism on socialism". He did not, as far as I can see, but for orthodox socialist believers it was blasphemy.

If Nolte's thesis is correct that Hitler's murderous regime and the Holocaust was a reaction to the fear of another murderous regime, we should learn a major historic lesson; namely that aggressive actions cause aggressive defense reactions and that the defense can be as disastrous as the attack. The horrors of the Holocaust should be always in our mind, when people are suggesting to destroy Islamism by all means, even by atomic bombs. I can understand the emotional reaction but I cannot in any way approve the mass killings of human beings.

24 September 2006 at 22:00  
Anonymous Rick said...

Ernst Nolte is an historian - he was involved in the Historikerstreit - that does not render all his views false or even valid merely means that whenever you cite him as an authority you should be aware that his views are contentious even if there were to be proven perfectly true...............

24 September 2006 at 22:20  
Anonymous Colin said...


I did not and do not want in any way to hurt your feelings but I am working in this profession and I know the signs. If this is your first episode and you are not familiar with the signs, please take a look at the NIMH website .

The following signs are obvious to me:

* Increased energy
* Extreme irritability
* Racing thoughts and jumping from one idea to another
* Unrealistic beliefs in one's abilities and powers
* Provocative, intrusive, or aggressive behavior
* Denial that anything is wrong

If not treated properly, it can endanger your life. So please see go and get some medical help. Honestly, no offense is intended.

24 September 2006 at 22:24  
Anonymous Rick said...

Heidegger was highly suspect - he was a Nazi.............yet another of his students was the great Hannah Arendt

24 September 2006 at 22:27  
Anonymous Colin said...


Thanks for your view about Ernst Nolte. I appreciate your pointing me towards Hannah Arendt in yesterdays post, I believe. Following your advice, I already did some reading about her.

Have a good night, also for GC despite Ramadan.

24 September 2006 at 22:30  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

So Colin,
You are suggesting that MI is a certifiable loon?
(No offence MI)
As a Doctor who specialises in dealing with nut jobs I came to the same conclusion.
MI there you go, the opinion of two medical professionals and it was "gratis".
Will you section him colin or shall I ?

24 September 2006 at 23:33  
Blogger Death Bredon said...

This rally sounded like the perfect opportunity for the appropriate employment of automatic weapons -- Oops, I forgot, John Bull gave away his inaleinable Right as a free Englishman to bear arms.

I sonder who Labour will surrender to first -- Islam or Brussels?

25 September 2006 at 01:01  
Anonymous Colin said...


Such language is inappropriate for a MD, if you really are.

And let's not forget that Churchill, Hemingway and many other geniuses or outstanding minds also suffered from that disease.

25 September 2006 at 07:18  
Anonymous Dr. Crippen the Younger said...

In dealing with Mission Impossible, we need to be fully cognizant of the following factors:

The treatment of a psychosis depends entirely on the reason for the psychosis. Most people will need to take anti-psychotic medications. For MI, electroconvulsive therapy could be effective if medications do not provide sufficient relief of symptoms.

Unfortunately, if left to themselves, many will forget to take them or decide they do not need them. They may end up psychotic again. The support of family, friends, and social services to help a person stay on their medication is a necessity. Delays in treatment of psychotic illness contribute to increasing rates of hospitalization, lengths of stay, long-term functional disability, and poor outcomes.

25 September 2006 at 08:51  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

Dr Crippen
A second opinion is always most welcome. I agree that a course of ECT combined with a moderate dosage of Lithium may indeed be the best treatment for the patient, however, in this case i believe that coercion will be neccessary . I propose we section MI, strap him down then plug him into the mains and give him a Lithium enema, even if this doesn't cure him it will at least give the rest of us a jolly good laugh.

25 September 2006 at 10:28  
Anonymous Rick said...

I think we'd be a lot better off if you stopped hi-jacking this thread.

25 September 2006 at 10:55  
Anonymous dr. crippen the younger said...

Dr. Hitchens- I appreciate the diagnostic input and your versatile approach to the potential treatment of the patient in question.

A recent study found that patients with severe mental illness who were noncompliant with their medication regimen have a significantly increased risk of being seriously violent in their community.

Thus, as Dr. Hitchens' has indicated, the scope for acute ECT exists in the case under consideration. The average number of treatments is seven, spread over two to three weeks. The Lithium enema approach while potentially entertaining may not represent the optimal course of treatment at this stage.

25 September 2006 at 10:58  
Blogger Little Black Sambo said...

Colin, I asked you to make the case against Christianity similar to that that had been made against Islam, which you said would be easy to do. The case against Islam was based on the teachings of Mahomet, so the similar case should be based on the teachings of Christ. As I thought, you couldn't do it. You cite plenty of atrocities, including many done mistakenly in Christ's name, and some which are nothing to do with him, but you can't blame Christ himself. Unlike Mahomet, he was not a genocidal murderer, serial rapist or child abuser. "Not peace but a sword" is a pretty feeble example of incitement to Jihad. In context he clearly means that his teachings would divide people, as they always have, because as we respond to them so we are judged. Islam is essentially locked into an Old Testament, or primitive or mediaeval outlook: it must always come back to the words of the Prophet. The words of Christ are not constricting in that way, and the similar case has not been and cannot be made. Christ and Mahomet: there is no parallel.

Cranmer: are you going to say anything about the Dean-elect of Westminster and his plan for a multifaith Coronation?

25 September 2006 at 13:38  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Drs Crippen & Hitchens, is the intervention not a bit late?

25 September 2006 at 14:10  
Blogger istanbultory said...

As Chief Education officer of the CoE it was Canon Hall who argued that whilst Anglican schools do promote the Christian faith, they do not 'proselytise' but instead 'present the possibility of faith'.
Given his fervent dedication to the the Anglican cause, I think a multi-faith coronation could well be on the Dean-elect's agenda.

25 September 2006 at 14:15  
Anonymous Colin said...

Crippen, Hitchens, et al. ,

Making fun of people suffering from a medial disorder is tasteless and immoral. He is not responsible for his behavior but you are, unless naturally you also have a medical problem.

Rick is absolutely correct. Maybe we could all return to the topic of Cranmer's thread and discuss the relationship between the Pope and Islam.

Little Black Sambo,

I appreciate your point that there are differences between the teachings of these two monotheic religions. And I tend to agree with you.

Unfortunately, it does not make a big difference to the people killed if it was in the name of X, Y or Z or any misinterpretation thereof. The result is the same: they are dead. And the killing of innocent human beings in the name of some abstract idea is simply inacceptable to me.

According to the latest news, Bin Laden is still alive, the Pope met Islamic leaders and demanded respect for the religion of Islam. Is this interpretation correct? Or is a different interpretation more appropriate?

25 September 2006 at 14:27  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

Just as undertakers , soldiers and police officers have to be able to see humour in tragedy so do Doctors.
If this whole episode has left you feeling a little stressed maybe either my colleague Dr Crippen or myself could reccomend a short course of anti depressants, I think maybe a dopamine such as bupoprion may be helpful perhaps for 4-6 months.

25 September 2006 at 14:40  
Anonymous dr.crippen the younger said...

Hear, hear, distinguished colleague. Anononymous- It’s never too late to treat psychotics. The admission of intramuscular haloperidol at regular three-hour intervals can lead to the almost complete remission of cardinal symptoms (thought disorder, hallucinations, and delusional activity) of acute functional psychoses, with relatively minor side effects.
It may also be possible to use a long-acting benzodiazepine (eg, diazepam 5-10 mg orally or IV) for the treatment of acute psychotic symptoms. I find the preferences of Dr. Hitchens somewhat extreme in nature if obviously well-intended.

25 September 2006 at 14:54  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dr colin, are you not in agreement with your colleagues? Is your original diagnoses wrong then? Drs Chippen & Hitchens, you need a fourth opinion!

25 September 2006 at 15:18  
Anonymous dr. crippen the younger said...

The use of 'atypical' antipsychotics such as Olanzapine or risperidone could also reduce negative symptoms in MI.

25 September 2006 at 15:39  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Children, children,

His Grace has been remarkably tolerant of discursive, tenuous, and tangential contributions to this thread, but discussion appears to have become irrelevant to the topic of the post.

If you need to discuss trivia, hijack a conversation, or are obsessed by the superficial and inane, please migrate elsewhere.


25 September 2006 at 16:16  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

Esteemed colleague ,Taking into consideration the fact that "MI" is clearly an old coot then prescribing Risperdal, Seroquel) in an elderly patient who clearly shows signs of dementia may be dangerous.
As you should know.

25 September 2006 at 16:20  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

Your Grace..
Take these, have a cup of tea and lie on this trolley until we can find you a bed.

25 September 2006 at 16:23  
Anonymous dr. crippen the younger said...

Dr. Hitchens, I hadn’t taken into account the notion that MI might be an ‘old coot’. I must review his case history.
Yes, recent analysis of some clinical trials in elderly patients with dementia suggests that the use of Risperdal in dementia patients may be associated with an increased incidence of reports of cerebrovascular adverse events including fatalities. For other antipsychotics, both typical and atypical, the choice of prescription should be based on the side effect profile and risk factors such as cerebrovascular events, postural hypotension and tardive dyskinesia.

Cholinesterase inhibitors show some promise for the psychotic symptoms of neurodegenerative disorders, but they have yet to be licensed in the UK to treat all dementias and may not be applicable in the current case. Much can also be achieved with non-pharmacological interventions such as environmental changes, etc.

25 September 2006 at 17:04  
Blogger istanbultory said...

His Grace displays the Patience of Job...and then some.
"Confess [your] faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much"
James 5:16

25 September 2006 at 17:20  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

lighten up (+:
"While Jesus was having dinner at Matthew's house, many tax collectors and sinners came and ate with him and his disciples. When the Pharisees saw this, they asked his disciples, 'Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?' On hearing this, Jesus said, 'It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick.'"

-Matthew 9:10-12

25 September 2006 at 17:38  
Blogger Croydonian said...

My name is Legion: for we are many (Mark 5:6-9)

(Memorably rendered by the Good News Bible as 'My name is mob - because there are a lot of us'. Or words very much to that effect).

25 September 2006 at 17:46  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

What is the word for a group of Doctors ?
A bunch of Hippocrats?

25 September 2006 at 18:04  
Blogger istanbultory said...

The phenomenon of healing was an important factor in the growth of the church...
The Israelite health-care system is frequently depicted in the canonical texts. See: Ps. 38; Isa. 38.10-20 and Job 5.18.

25 September 2006 at 18:24  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is healing for today?

25 September 2006 at 18:30  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

25 September 2006 at 18:58  
Anonymous Colin said...

His Grace,

is admiringly patient with the adolecent boys frolicing in his church and impersonating Drs. Hitchens and Crippen.

Although their unsaintly behavior is caused by the steady rise of testosterone levels between the ages of 13 and 18 and could in principle be treated by chemical (cyproteronacetate) or chirurgical castration, this procedure is not recommended for several reasons.

First, it might be too dangerous for the boys considering that "the NHS is falling apart .., that the service is now on the terminal ward," and that - despite Gordon Brown's promises in his speech of today - Labour is unlikely to cure the NHS, according to an article by Melanie Phillips in the "Daily Mail".

Second, when the kids have grown up, their virility might be urgently needed for defending the C of E against its enemies.

Third, Jesus said "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven."

Kids, having fun by blogging is no substitute for the more important activities of your age, i.e. soccer and girls. So why don't you play outside and do what boys usually do at your age?

No chances? Don't give up. Persistance is the key.

25 September 2006 at 20:05  
Blogger istanbultory said...

We digress. Nevertheless, The National Health Service was a product of the 1940s - that is of a collectivist era of state control and central planning. The NHS, under Labour's model, is based on equality of access at the expense of quality, and is prepared to accept mediocrity. The continued existence of the NHS in its present form owes much to the complex psychological inner world of a Labour Party which is no longer a socialist party in a world where socialism is (or should) be irrelevant. Big Gordo is part of the problem not the cure.

25 September 2006 at 20:47  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

25 September 2006 at 21:23  
Anonymous Colin said...


You are right, I was disgressing.

However, I thought that it is difficult to talk if some teenagers are constantly interrupting the conversation just for having fun.

I don't want to put anybody down. But I am convinced that Hitchens and Crippen are one or maybe two kids who just want to have some fun by putting MI down. And I just wanted to let them know that we understand the reason for their puerile jokes and childish manners.

Thank you very much for your view on the NHS.

Since the large majority of the bloggers here is probably more familiar with British politicians than I am, I would be delighted to learn something about the expected consequences of a change in Labour leadership.

Why should Blair be replaced by Brown since the British people have elected the former for a full term?

What might Brown do differently in regard to the EU, to the EU membership of Turkey, to Islam, to welfarism and to Christianism?

Maybe we can get the debate back on the healthy track of reason instead of its recent preoccuption with the joyful games of puberty. But I wouldn't bet on it.

25 September 2006 at 21:38  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

Well colin I am no "kid" and should you wish to discuss the NHS I would be delighted to do so(tommorow).
Let me have a guess you are a "counsellor" ?

25 September 2006 at 21:46  
Anonymous Colin said...


You wrote: "Well colin I am no "kid" and should you wish to discuss the NHS I would be delighted to do so(tommorow)."

Well Peter, I checked your contributions on this thread to see if I might be wrong with my assessment. This is what I found:

"MI is a pathetic old poofter,.."

"i once spent a few days in a cell with a pakistani drug smuggler,.."

"You are suggesting that MI is a certifiable loon?
Will you section him colin or shall I ?"

"I propose we section MI, strap him down then plug him into the mains and give him a Lithium enema, even if this doesn't cure him it will at least give the rest of us a jolly good laugh."

"Just as undertakers , soldiers and police officers have to be able to see humour in tragedy so do Doctors."

"Taking into consideration the fact that "MI" is clearly an old coot.."

Doctors don't make such jokes about patients. If such an incredible amount of cynicism would be common among NHS doctors, no further proof would needed that the system is not for the benefit of patients. In fact, all the MDs I know in the UK display a high degree of professionalism and would never talk like you did. Furthermore, mania is not treated by EST as suggested by you. Therefore, I conclude that you are either a kid, who might have learned a bit from mam or dad or at best you are psychiatric nurse because a few of the latter sometimes have a negative view about aggressive patients.

Anyhow, this debate does not belong in this blog and is boring for all the others. Therefore, I am not going to discuss the matter any further.

25 September 2006 at 23:06  
Blogger istanbultory said...

Gordon Brown is often described by the British press as one of the most eurosceptic ministers in the Labour Party. In fact, the European Commission President called on Brown to be more enthusiastic about the EU earlier this year. He has for example said that people are more attached to "national values" than an "outdated" federalist ideal and that the French and Dutch rejection of the EU constitution had finally overturned the belief that a "European identity could supersede national identities". Brown has also attacked the European Union's social model. His pamphlet, Global Europe: full-employment Europe, warned that the high unemployment across the continent means Europe's 'old' model “is not working”, and calls for "fundamental" change. Brown has spoken out in favour of EU enlargement but I suspect he is less enthusiastic on Turkish accession than Bliar (but will not say so openly)

For more on Gordon Brown and the EU

26 September 2006 at 05:33  
Blogger istanbultory said...

I see that German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier intends to map out a timetable for the European Union's constitution... by the end of its EU presidency in 2007.

26 September 2006 at 08:26  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

Colin you said..

Doctors don't make such jokes about patients.
maybe not in front of you (+:
No, you are right all Doctors are saints.
I could care less what you think of me or what I do to earn my crust , however, this is indeed not the place to discuss ECT and Lithium enemas.
I can do that elsewhere.

26 September 2006 at 12:42  
Blogger istanbultory said...

Oh Venerable Cramer,
Posting seems to be uncommonly light. A new thread perhaps?

26 September 2006 at 15:05  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Mr GC,

His Grace begs your indulgence.

Certain pressing matters of state.


26 September 2006 at 16:37  
Blogger istanbultory said...

Doubtless, His Grace shoulders a multitude of burdens.

26 September 2006 at 21:00  
Anonymous Colin said...


Thank you for giving me some insight into the ideas of Gordon Brown. There seems to be some reason for hope that the British government might have a positive influence on the development of the EU.

However, there is every reason to be suspicious of the German EU presidency, especially of its Foreign Minister who was a major figure in Schroeder's government which was strongly in favor of Turkey becoming part of the planned EU Empire.

In Turkey, it appears that a battle is going on between the Islamist government of Mr. Erdogan on the one hand and academia and the judiciary on the other if I interpret correctly the latest report on the Middle East Forum (MEF).

According to the MEF, "On October 14, 2005, police in the eastern Turkish city of Van arrested Yücel Aşkın, the rector of Yüzüncü Yıl University, ...Aşkın has been in the eye of a storm centering on Islamist encroachment in Turkish universities. As Yüzüncü Yıl rector, he defied pressure from Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), which has sought to break down the barriers between mosque and state in Turkey. Aşkın defended secularism, questioned the qualifications of those with exclusively religious educations to gain admittance to secular universities, and enforced the headscarf ban...The Turkey Higher Education Board (YÖK) has condemned the situation. Soon after Aşkın's arrest, it released a statement indicating that "defending the rector amounted to defending the republic." Prime Minister Erdoğan responded by warning the rectors to "mind their own business." ..Rule-of-law has suffered under the AKP as the party implements its agenda to weaken Turkey's secular foundations."

Meanwhile in Germany, dhimmitude is steadily advancing. Now, the performance of an opera of Mozart has been stopped for fear of Muslims blowing the opera house into pieces even before any faithful of the religion of peace has uttered a single word, according to a report by "Der Spiegel". The commentator of "Die Welt", a major German newspaper, cited under the headline Anticipated Surrender Winston's Churchill's famous definition of appeasement "An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last!" and wished "Good luck!"

26 September 2006 at 22:56  
Blogger istanbultory said...

Thank you Colin.
Turkish PM Erdogan has long been covertly using the need to implement EU-inspired reforms as a means to destroying secularism and the gradual creation of an Islamic state. The case you referred to is merely one instance of their grand plan. The fact that the EU leaders still back Erdogan so enthusiastically is proof of their ignorance and stupidity. But Erdogan's designs will become slowly more visible even to the EU in the near future...and they will come to regret ever dealing with a secret Islamist who could have taught Machievelli a thing or two.

Obviously, you are right on the Deutsche Oper's immense dhimmitude.Wolfgang Schäuble, the German Interior Minister, said that the decision to cancel the opera was insane, laughable and unacceptable. Tuvia Tenenbom, the provocative Israeli-American playwright, said “This self-censorship shouldn’t be happening anywhere, but least of all in Germany. This is where the Nazis burnt books. If you cancel performances because you’re scared, then you’re burning your own books on behalf of the fanatics. You don’t get crazier than that.”
I obviously would agree.
Yet the two events- Turkey's EU accession process and this instance of self-censorship are clearly interlinked. They demonstrate the unilateral desire of the West to accommodate and compromise with the world of Islam while receiving practically nothing in return.

27 September 2006 at 05:45  
Blogger Cranmer said...

His Grace has decided to re-visit Turkish accession to the EU in his next post, which (D.V.) will appear at some point today.

He exhorts the knowledgeable, intelligent and erudite to refrain from the topic until the post appears.


27 September 2006 at 08:41  
Blogger istanbultory said...

His Grace's noble exhortation will be heeded from this quarter.

27 September 2006 at 09:45  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

gc, (knowing you live in their midst) I was looking at the placard carrying Mohammedan pictures on this blog but couldnt spot you. Should I look harder?

27 September 2006 at 10:58  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

Johhny Turk is going to get a good bashing, I am very much looking forward to reading that.

27 September 2006 at 12:10  
Blogger istanbultory said...

10.58 AM

While I do live amongst the Mohammedans, I am not of a bearded disposition nor do I believe that "Jesus is the slave of Allah".
Nor do I believe in the crashing of jumbo jets into tall buildings or the beheading of infidels.FYI.

27 September 2006 at 12:25  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Pardon my weird sense of humour gc. I did not expect to see you there was just pulling your leg.

27 September 2006 at 13:19  
Anonymous Colin said...


Anonymous likes to always remain anonymous.

So also in the second picture of Cranmer's posting. He is the guy standing on the right side of the handsome man with the sign "May Allah curse the Pope", hiding his face courageously behind a scarf to remain anonymous.

27 September 2006 at 13:29  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Colin, I just spotted you! You are "the handsome man with the sign" very courageous!

27 September 2006 at 13:47  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

All well and good GC ,however where do you stand on public beheading and flogging?
In the right circumstances I am all for it.

27 September 2006 at 14:11  
Blogger istanbultory said...

Mr. Hitchens,
I am not well disposed towards public beheading but there's nothing wrong with the feel of the lash (in the right circumstances). As I am sure you would agree.

27 September 2006 at 15:08  
Anonymous Colin said...


Shush! Be quite, buddy. Dr. Hitchens is looking for me to take me to his ward and do me in.

27 September 2006 at 15:59  
Anonymous vikki said...

gc, I was the "courageous one (coward) according to Colin. I am sorry if you found it distasteful...Colin I am relieved you saw the funny side but then its easy when you are not in gc'shoes. Perhaps I should push my luck a bit.....where is my very good friend rick? Is he fasting? Afterall, gc did say ....tempers do fray" at this time......or did he stage a walk out alongside Saddams defence team?
It looks like you guys are stuck with me till the Court Jester returns!
Gentlemen, I propose you petition His Grace to start the "chit-chat womens institute" blog immediately!

27 September 2006 at 16:26  
Anonymous vikki said...

"Shush! Be quite, buddy. Dr. Hitchens is looking for me to take me to his ward and do me in."

I will shout it from the mountain top! Behold Dr Hitchens!! Alas Colin, Dr Hitchens is upon you!

27 September 2006 at 16:35  
Anonymous Peter hitchens' schlong said...

vikki luv, 'missing Mission Impossible, are ya? He's got a way with the ladies, hasn't he?

27 September 2006 at 19:09  
Anonymous Colin said...

Yeah, Peter,

I am missing him too.

27 September 2006 at 20:29  
Blogger istanbultory said...

Me too. Especially his random use of Latin....

27 September 2006 at 20:52  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

I feel a little Guilty,
It is very easy to be cruel to somebody online and not realise the hurt you may have caused, people type things they wouldn't say face to face..

27 September 2006 at 22:44  
Anonymous dr. crippen the younger said...

On the other hand, MI was stunningly boorish and ill-informed.

28 September 2006 at 15:34  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

Dr Crippen
I agree
Definate DNR

28 September 2006 at 16:52  
Blogger Croydonian said...

So this is what you all get up to when His Grace isn't looking.

28 September 2006 at 22:07  
Anonymous vikki said...

we've been treading where even angels fear to tread.

29 September 2006 at 15:06  
Anonymous Colin said...

Also angels apparently enjoyed the adrenaline kick of fighting.

1 October 2006 at 11:04  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Happy feast of the sept.11

EUtnika Resistence ... in Bruxells with some toys: Cocktails Molotov - gifts for the religions of peace.

Ingrédients nécessaires à la fabrication de Cocktails Molotov :

- de l’essence ou de l’alcool à brûler
- de l’huile (pas de l’huile de cuisine, hein !)
- une bouteille en verre
- un bout de tissu

Mode d’emploi :

Versez dans votre bouteille à l’aide d’un entonnoir d’abord 2/3 de sa capacité d’essence ou d’alcool à brûler, puis, finissez de la remplir avec l’huile. Secouez maintenant délicatement votre bouteille et enfoncez dans le goulot le bout de tissu qui s’imbibera du mélange explosif. Attachez bien vos chaussures (pour les filles, éviter les talons hauts). Allumez le chiffon de préférence avec une allumette et lancez votre Cocktail au plus vite. Maintenant, vous pouvez soit contempler la bouteille se briser, laissant couler le mélange qui prend feu grâce au chiffon enflammé, et voir ainsi le début d’un superbe incendie ; soit vous pouvez courir vite, rentrer chez vous et revenir admirer le travail le lendemain.

Here we are ...

In Bruxells too ...

Happy feast of sept. 11

EUtnika Resistence

27 August 2007 at 17:55  
Anonymous Decision time said...

Two MEP's have said we should be nice to Muslims so that when they become the Majority, they will be nikce to us.
The Popes aid has said that 'Attempts to Islamify the West cannot be denied'
The EU wants us under Sharia LAw as an Extra Layer of Repression, under the dual Jackboot of a False Flag Created
Police state and Sharia Law

This is not the First time, Tyrannical Despots have wanted this for Europe.

Napoleon's vision of a United Europe's constitution based on the Koran and Hitler's admiration for Islam.

Napoleon stated, "I hope the time is not far off when I shall be able to unite all the wise and educated men of all the countries and establish a uniform regime based on the principles of Qur'an which alone are true and which alone can lead men to happiness."
Remember that Napoleon was the architect of the United States of Europe.
Hitler also tried to unify Europe and was a great admirer of Islam, "The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness….”5 (A. Speer, Inside the Third Reich, pp. 142-143) "

Sorry people, the evidence is not undeniable, Westminster wants your children under the dual Jackboot of a False Flag created Police state and Sharia Law.
Westminster wants us under Sharia Law, Decision time people

12 February 2009 at 15:19  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older