Tuesday, December 05, 2006

Merry Isa-mas and a Happy New Niqab

This is how Channel 4’s alternative to Her Majesty’s Christmas speech will appear this year. In a purposely provocative move, C4 has decided that a veiled Muslim woman will deliver the festive speech ‘because religious clothing has dominated the news agenda’.

Cranmer is appalled by such selective recollection. This is a year in which Islam has dominated the news agenda, not mere trivial matters of clothing. So why has C4 not chosen Christians to present programmes about its origins, its theology, its politics, or its prophet? Why does C4 not commission a series of purposely provocative Eid programmes to investigate its claims?

Jesus is one of Islam’s prophets – they call him Isa. He was born of Mary, and worked miracles, but there was no crucifixion, and no resurrection, because he was not Immanuel, not the promised Messiah, not the Son of God, and manifestly not the Saviour of the World. Channel 4 is content with the symbolic blasphemy and insult to the nation’s Christian population, but God forbid that it should ever offend the Muslims.

39 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

do u rmr tht video link of someones blog where they could not eat food in a civilized manner due to their burka's// atlst letz hpe one may hear clearly the muffled blasphemy that comes out of their twat.. o I meant sorry (am just used to the fact that normal women cover their.. you know what.. not the mouth..)

5 December 2006 at 21:43  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Mr Tejus Ramakrishnan,

Do not doubt that His Grace is immeasurably fond of you, but he requests that communication by text-speak is not appropriate on his august blog of intelligence and erudition, if only to facilitate comprehension of His Grace's numerous 'foreign' visitors. Th fst 4 wrds of yr msg r nt ezly cmprhensbl 2 ne1. This is why so many churches no longer use the Authorised Version...

5 December 2006 at 21:54  
Anonymous Colin said...

Strange things happen on the way to the forum. As far as I know, C4 is mainly financed by commercials. I am wondering whether the Saudis payed for this or whether C4 is trying sell burkas.

"twat"

The blogosphere is full of such vulgar language. It neither demonstrates intelligence/erudition nor being born into a respectable family and having good breeding. It is acceptable among teenagers for showing off but not on His Grace august blog. Different situations require different behaviour. This is not a blog for pubertal adolescents who do not know how to behave.

5 December 2006 at 22:18  
Blogger Sir Henry Morgan said...

I am so so pleased that I disposed of my television some twelve years ago and never replaced it.

(I think tejus was trying to make a point about muffled speech behind that ... thing)

5 December 2006 at 22:45  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Elderley clergyman is immeasurably fond of youth
Not a common scenario is it Tejus?

5 December 2006 at 22:54  
Anonymous newmania said...

Well I can`t see any sign of anti newmania feeling here .
I have been misled and will return to the godless world which spawned me.
I am suspicious myself that the current problems we have with islam date back no further than the Iranian Revolution and are actually a sort of displaced nationalism. Perhaps a theological context gives it more credit than it deserves

Either way the sentiments here are unexceptionable .

Happy god bothering all

5 December 2006 at 23:57  
Anonymous newmania said...

It is a problem though isn`t it that "god" cannot be responsible for morality unless he might as easily have picked murder to be good. Perhaps he will tommorow and I will be able to off the many hunman obstacles between myself and my deserved job with impunity.


Wish me luck with my project, should it succeed everyday will henceforth be the first day of Spring.

Bertrand Russel mentioned that problem to ( coincidentally)

6 December 2006 at 00:28  
Anonymous newmania said...

Come to think of it as we are happy with an infinite sequence there is no need for an unmoved mover. Lets see then , no need for god to give us morals , no need to impart motion to the universe. Not seen lately pulling rabbits out of hats. I don’t know he doesn’t seem to have job does he ?
No doubt he maintains a large office at a title nonetheless. A deputy deity perhaps ?

6 December 2006 at 00:37  
Anonymous newmania said...

Another thing that bothers me now I`m thinking is this . Suppose there is no meaning . Suppose just to ask a question does not imply an answer like "What colour is jealousy?” . This means nothing .,Now if we unpack “What is the meaning of everything ?” it reads “What is the explained purpose of everything ?“. This is a question we can only meaningfully ask of one category of things . Those things which had an intentional designer , a hammer, a fork , a watch. So the question ”What is the meaning of life the universe and everything” requires a big mystery inventor to make sense as a question. It is in fact a disguised statement .It may equally be non question and thus this difficulty disappears in a puff of logic.
I `m sure the contributors here are far to clever but , you wont believe this , some people use this piece of linguistic sleight of hand to imply a gap ….. They sometimes imply this gap is “god shaped” . Shameful I know but there it is .

I `m still stuck to find any reason for the bleakest theism so I cannot imagine the bravery of soul to a personal god . Isn’t that unreasonable and we like reasonableness don’t we ?


Just thought I `d share my concerns with you chaps

6 December 2006 at 00:54  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Reds run C4.
Reds love Islam.
Islam must always be shown in a good light
The onlyy ones who want to are C4 reds.
QED "alternative" message at Christmas.

I do wonder what will happen to the gays athiests and liberals if Britain is Islamicised. I assume theyll be the first to convert

6 December 2006 at 01:35  
Blogger Tom Tyler said...

Well, your Grace, as it seems to me that Islam is a religion which appeals fundamentally to the carnal (sinful) nature of man, whereas Christianity is a religion which calls upon man to throw off his carnal nature and to have it replaced by the nature of Christ himself, then it is not at all surprising to me that Islam should be regarded in the mainstream, as the less offensive of the two world religions. There is less offence, less affront to one's pride in following Islam, than there is in any sincere attempt to follow Christ. The latter involves a deeply personal attempt to "throw off" all that one has learned thus far in the course of one's life, and to be renewed by the workings of a Holy Spirit which the world in general can neither see nor know. In short, I do not really blame the boardroom of Channel 4 for this - unless the individual boardmembers receive Christ, how else should they be persuaded to pursue a Christian path?

6 December 2006 at 04:08  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Interesting comment in an article on Putin in today's Guardian

A more confident Mr Putin has disappointed early hopes born of those calculated acts of bonhomie. As Russia's fortunes have risen on a tide of oil and gas, he has become increasingly assertive, even abrasive, in his international dealings. He recently told startled EU leaders their biggest task was not to lecture Russia on democracy, human rights and energy cooperation but to "safeguard Christianity in Europe".

6 December 2006 at 06:58  
Anonymous Voyager said...

but God forbid that it should ever offend the Muslims.

I think it has. Using an aberrant minority Channel 4 has sterotyped ALL Muslims and seems intent on polarising opinion. In actual fact I believe the Media flip-flops on Islam and thereby stirs the pot. What Channel 4 is broadcasting in pictures is exactly what Nick Griffin said in private and which put him in Leeds Crown Court. Both BBC and Channel 4 set out to stir up reaction and will no doubt try to evade responsibility when it comes...........

6 December 2006 at 07:10  
Anonymous Voyager said...

I cannot imagine the bravery of soul to a personal god .

That's very non-Christian - very pagan in fact - a "personal" god is not what Christianity or Judaism [or even Islam] offers for it is in no way tailored to your needs or desires.

6 December 2006 at 07:12  
Anonymous Voyager said...

that "god" cannot be responsible for morality

You have a facile understanding - "Morality" is not something offered by God, but to God.

It is the obligation of the Self to God and not the inverse. Your concept of God is very narcissistic

6 December 2006 at 07:14  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

but God forbid that it should ever offend the Muslims.

I think it has.

Indeed...it has. I as a muslim agree with cranmer in the sense that this is a christian country with no sharia law (or any other religious law)regardless of it being calling a 'multicultured' society with equivilence to all. I don't mind people critically questining my religion (i would respond to their questions if I have the knowledge to do so), but I don't like ignorant people discriminating my religion with no contemplaion upon what they say and why they say it.

6 December 2006 at 09:54  
Anonymous newmania said...

Voyager -You have a facile understanding - "Morality" is not something offered by God, but to God.

Many prominent christian theologians would disagree certainly they have done in the past before the great retreat into obscurity
I share my "facile "understanding with ( as mentioned) Bertrand Russell and , I think , John Stuart Mill who he was quoting. If god did not give us morals then we must have made them for ourselves ..or they were always there. In any case you have accepted the false hood of one of the major struts for Christianity over the centuries.
By the way , always so aggressive voyager ? Cranmer calls me “Moron “ , you call me “facile “ . Tsk tsk , why is it that religious people are always so angry . I cannot turn on the television without seeing the religious element shouting and waving their hands for this or that reason .
The barbarians are at the gate, and our civilised secular society is under threat once more ?Shall I count the seconds before the word "adolescent "is used ...one ...two...three....
( A point CS Lewis would have apreciated , one of yours )


BTW- I was impressed at your compendious knowledge of the economic history of the 20thcentury and would have appreciated your views on current policy, as requested.

6 December 2006 at 10:11  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is a ratings driven publicity stunt. The best response is simply not to watch the programme.
www.protestant-gazette.blogspot.com

6 December 2006 at 10:22  
Anonymous newmania said...

a personal god .-The phrase "personal god " has a well kown meaning which is not the one you ascribe to it. The "person" of god ,as opposed to various vague agnosticisms that gravitate to the "concept " or "supposition"of god

I have no doubt you are well aware of this. You should be .

6 December 2006 at 10:26  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Newmania, why so affronted.........you really are a shrinking violet. "Aggressive".........certainly not, simply very relaxed.

why is it that religious people are always so angry . I cannot turn on the television

Then don't watch............I don't. There are much better things to do with life that watch inane television.

As for Betrand Russell, a man dear to atheists but wrong on so many things when he strayed from his field, Mathematics...........and a man whose propensity to sleep with the wives of his "friends" suggests opportunism rather than morality.

I fear you need to reflect more and watch television much less. As for inviting me to The Croydonian to post again - I thank you for the invitation - when I am passing I shall stop by

6 December 2006 at 10:32  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Your subsequent posting is incomprehensible

6 December 2006 at 10:34  
Blogger Little Black Sambo said...

Nowhere in this blog for off-thread comments, but this is too interesting to miss. It's about Putin's use of the Russian Church abroad to extend his power.
http://www.sundayherald.com/misc/print.php?artid=1042200

(I don't know how to format these comments.)

6 December 2006 at 11:26  
Anonymous newmania said...

I agree with you on the personal morality of Betrand Russell. I am, not a shrinking violet by any means. I will respond as I think fit both to the tone and the content of anything that interests me.No my post is not incomprehesible. You cannot comprehend it ,I gather, which is quite a different thing
Personal God - God-as in personified, as in ,the person of god , not as in "my personal property". Also as opposed to Theist concepts . A god with who one might have a personal relationship.A god as traditionally envisaged by virtually all Christians outside certain philophers and modern apologists .

I assume my other problems are equally incomprehensible( in one sense or another ). Never mind I take an interest in such things and my own views are not entirely what you might expect

6 December 2006 at 11:30  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

cranmer/colin..
I apologise for the language used in the message I posted.. I fear that as sir henry pointed I was indeed trying to make a point regards muffled speech.. however I do not offer that as an excuse for my use of poor language last night.. that was caused by a temporary outburst of anger towards a certain religion.. for they endlessly seem to enjoy making a nuisance of themselves; as opposed to the peace that their violent religion claims to preach... but again, my apologies for the poor language/ rest assured it will not occur again.. also your grace / colin .. thank you for the kind comments in the last post.. much appreciate it and will try to live up to the high expectations you have imposed upon me due to the kind words.. cranmer/colin..
I apologise for the language used in the message I posted.. I fear that as sir henry pointed I was indeed trying to make a point regards muffled speech.. however I do not offer that as an excuse for my use of poor language last night.. that was caused by a temporary outburst of anger towards a certain religion.. for they endlessly seem to enjoy making a nuisance of themselves; as opposed to the peace that their violent religion claims to preach... but again, my apologies for the poor language/ rest assured it will not occur again.. also your grace / colin .. thank you for the kind comments in the last post.. much appreciate it and will try to live up to the expectations you have imposed upon me due to the kind words.. ut nonetheless thank you and am much honoured that you would think so highly of a youth such as myself..

6 December 2006 at 11:30  
Anonymous Voyager said...

(I don't know how to format these comments.)


http://werbach.com/barebones/barebones.html

http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/Web/basictags.html

6 December 2006 at 11:46  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Lina Morgenstern Schule


Story of Jewish girl being systematically bullied in Berlin School by Arab Muslims

6 December 2006 at 14:16  
Anonymous Colin said...

Tejus,

Thank you for your apologies. In light of the religious war going on in India, rest assured that we understand your feelings. Besides the question of taste, I am worried that you are risking your academic career if you put your picture, your real name and political incorrect statements on the net. Fellow students could recognize and report you to the university administration. Think twice what you are posting on the net because it will stay there possibly for decades. The situation is quickly approaching the witch hunt of the McCarthy era with the political incorrects classified as witches. Also nowadays, employers google for the name of the applicants to see what might turn up.

6 December 2006 at 22:22  
Anonymous Colin said...

Voyager,

Thanks for the link to the Story of Jewish girl being systematically bullied in Berlin School by Arab Muslims.

And the end of the article is a link to another article explaining that 50% of the Turkish population living in Berlin is without a job and that 60% of Turkish men directly import their brides from rural Turkey. Obviously, that cannot continue for long without the a complete breakdown of the welfare state resulting in ethnic and religious riots.

Isn't it interesting how always the best utopic intentions for establishing a better world lead to disastrous consequences. The left with its intentions to create an harmonious world without antisemitism, unequality for women etc. is too blind to see that they are producing what they are trying to avoid.

6 December 2006 at 22:45  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Some people seem to be having a sense of humour bypass. Isn't the whole point of the C4 Christmas message to be offensive and irreverent? Ali G did it one year, as did the Simpsons. A niqabbed woman fits in well with the theme of not seeing somebody's true face.

This is an interesting and topical take on things. I expect there will be a slightly ironic slant to this.

6 December 2006 at 23:02  
Anonymous Colin said...

Newmania,

"barbarians are at the gate, and our civilised secular society is under threat once more"

Yes, indeed. It is only about 200 years that the Europe has been rid of religious tyranny. And what did the European intellectuals do next? Worshipping the nation as new deity causing the biggest disaster of humankind by body counts. Liberated from nationalism what are the intellectuals - always dissatisfied with their fellow humans - are doing next? Worshipping cultural marxism/Islam. The consequences are beginning to become visible. Nevertheless, they are pushing full-steam ahead.

I am sorry, Voyager, for not being able to see God's plan at work here but only megalomaniac intellectuals.

6 December 2006 at 23:05  
Anonymous Colin said...

Peter,

Irony can be very distructive, the favorite method of Voltaire BTW for destroying the catholic church in France. That's a legitimate method in a free society. But what about equality in regard to other religions. Do you think that C4's Christmas message is offensive to Islam? Honestly, I don't know because that would require some courage on the part of C4 considering what happened to van Gogh and the Danish cartoonists. Would C4 show a slightly ironic slant at Ramadan?

6 December 2006 at 23:17  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Isn't it interesting how always the best utopic intentions for establishing a better world lead to disastrous consequences

As they say "The Road to Hell is paved with Good Intentions"


Channel 4 would be more convincing if they showed the satirical series Mohammed The Pig Farmer during Ramadan

7 December 2006 at 05:44  
Anonymous Tejus said...

colin.. thank you..

7 December 2006 at 06:52  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Colin,

Given increasing globalisation of culture, the less bright sections of the muslim world need to get used to being offended by things - because there's a lot in the non-Muslim world that they will find offensive and that they are going to see more of.

Channel 4 is a bit edgier than most broadcasters, and I wouldn't be surprised if there's some kind of twist to the idea of a masked woman reading a xmas message. I'd like it if it turned out to be Ricky Gervais doing a strip tease in a burqa.

7 December 2006 at 22:06  
Anonymous Voyager said...

I think you will be very disappointed. Then again Gordon Brown might be nearer his goal of privatising Channel 4 with its peculiar stunts.............whatever happened to the channel Jeremy Isaacs built up ?

8 December 2006 at 09:58  
Blogger Croydonian said...

I was informed yesterday that our veil wearing friend has no intention of watching herself 'live', but will be sitting down to watch the Queen. I do not have the evidence to hnad, but this is what I have been told.

8 December 2006 at 17:55  
Anonymous The jabberwock said...

peter 10:06 PM said...

I'd like it if it turned out to be Ricky Gervais doing a strip tease in a burqa.


If he were unwise enough to do this, I almost guarantee that a fatwa would be issued by a leading Iranian mullah. The life expectancy without 24-hour police protection of Mr Gervais and anyone involved in the making or broadcasting of the programme could be measured in weeks if not days.

8 December 2006 at 18:01  
Anonymous Ayatollah Khomeini said...

Seasonal maledictions and woe unto you Kaffir sons of pigs and monkeys.

May Allah’s vengeance fall upon you worshippers of the winged idol sodomized by the topmost branch of a conifer sapling. The tree-idol is the ultimate in debauchery, for our beloved Prophet even at his horniest never had carnal relationships with vegetation, though you Kaffirs may mock his mufa’khathat of Ayesha with your blasphemous custom of sitting children on Santa's lap.

This practice is an intentionally Islamophobic parody of the hadith in which Mohammad said to Ayesha “Ho! Ho! Ho! Come here little girl and sit on my knee and let’s talk about the first thing that comes up”. And of course ‘Santa’ is an anagram of the true name of the Prophet.


So, may Allah curse your abominable festivities. May your tinsel tarnish and your balloons deflate. May your turkeys catch bird flu and your mistletoe be consumed by aphids. May your elderly relatives give you presents of ill-fitting knitwear and your objectionable in-laws buy drumkits for your children. May your holly scratch you and the wounds turn septic, and may your ivy be of the poisonous variety.


Inshallah soon all of Dar al-Harb will be Muslim, and your corrupted infidel ******mas Carols will be replaced by the genuine halal versions:

Little Bomber Boy
Jingle Belts
Violent Night
While Shepherds Screw Their Flocks
Frosty the Boobytrap
Wreck the Halls
Go Shell Them From the Mountain
Repulsive Jews Below
Oh Come all ye Fanatical
Oh TannenBOOM
No-go Town of Bethlehem
Hijacked Three Ships
Slay Ride

- Ayatollah Khomeini
Dormitory Supervisor and Child Protection Officer
al-Catamite Madrassah
Le Whore
Upper Khyber
Pakistan

13 December 2006 at 22:04  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Mr Khomeini,

His Grace welcomes you to his august blog of intelligence and erudition.

You are the first Mohammedan to enter these cyber walls to manifest a superlative sense of humour, and His Grace is heartily delighted.

Please visit again, and impress upon the lesser Mohammedan, presently known as '...', why the faith is so much more than the two-dimensional, soul-less, humourless personality cult so many believe and perceive it to be.

13 December 2006 at 22:36  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older