Sunday, February 14, 2010

Evangelicals, Roman Catholics and the Conservative Party

Perhaps he asked for this.

When Christians in politics agree to be interviewed by an increasingly secular and occasionally christianophobic if not completely religiophobic media, they can expect to be lampooned, caricatured and misrepresented. Either that or very subtly tarnished with a whiff of sinister motive and conspiracy.

Hundreds of thousands of people will have seen the cover of the Financial Times magazine while barely a few thousand might ever bother to read the article to which it pertains. And so we have the beatific vision of St Timothy of Salisbury, a byzantine-style mosaic icon, complete with halo aura, gazing longingly up to the heavens awaiting the parousia.

But this is light-hearted heresy.

The theological statement is in the scripture:

A Conservative MP was stage-whispering in the leathery, dark Pugin Room of the House of Commons late last year. With a view of the Thames, teacup in hand, he hissed at me: “They’ve campaigned to change the processes so that they can bus in their voters, stuffing the selection meetings with their people. They don’t outnumber us, but they can out-organise us. They’re taking over the party.

As the FT explains, ‘They’ are Evangelical Christians.

(cue 'Phantom of the Opera' theme)

Can you imagine any newspaper printing this about Jews or Muslims?

Or the black, gay or disabled?

Actually, forget the tediously predictable.

Can you imagine a newspaper talking about Roman Catholics in this manner?

The unnamed Conservative MP talks of these Evangelical vermin having to bus in ‘their voters’ and ‘stuffing’ meetings with ‘their people’ with the sinister warning that these awful people have a distinct strategic organisational advantage and are ‘taking over the party’.

God forbid that we might actually have a few convicted Christians in the Conservative Party. In vogue at the moment are the 'exotic' religions and the ‘fairly classic Church of England faith that grows hotter and colder by moments'.

The only thing worse than a newspaper printing such bile about Evangelicals would be finding a Conservative MP who would dare to speak in such terms of Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, Hindus, or the gay, black and Asian.

Or Roman Catholics.

Consider this:

”Still,” the Pugin Room MP continued, “You know, the Catholics send e-mails to one another asking them to pray for them at selection meetings, but the point of the messages is to make sure that they all know who is standing where and when.”

If any Tory ever dared to cast doubt upon the sincerity of Muslims/Sikhs/Hindus at prayer, doubtless (s)he would be dismissed immediately by David Cameron in the fashion of that infamous and disgusting racist Patrick Mercer.

Unless, of course, they were one of the favoured inner circle for whom there appears to be a very great deal of latitude indeed.

The reality is that any MP or candidate (pace Joanne Cash) who dared to utter anything which might be interpreted as a slur upon the religio-political probity of Roman Catholics would also be cast into oblivion.

And yet you would be hard-pressed to put a hair’s breadth between the socio-political objectives of the Evangelicals and those of the Roman Catholics. On poverty, family breakdown, debt, abortion, sexuality, marriage, drug abuse, education, etc., etc., the two would be in complete accord.

Yet the FT avers that ‘some are asking what degree of power a few evangelical Christians – only 3 per cent of the party members, according to one poll – will wield’ in the next Conservative government.

And the black pope or bête noire is Tim Montgomerie.

Not Edward Leigh.

Or David Amess, Tony Baldry, Julian Brazier, Bill Cash, Iain Duncan Smith, Damian Green or Mark Hoban or any one of the other Roman Catholics who will be in Parliament after the next General Election.

Of course, we are never told the identity of these ‘some’. But one has to wonder if it doesn’t include one MP who, according to the FT, ‘credits Montgomerie for his scalp’ (and, certainly, whispering and bitter hissing would be very much his style).

And one also has to wonder to which poll they are referring, and why it is presumed that this ‘influence’ will not also forward the identical agendas of Roman Catholic and Church of England members, and also good many Muslim, Sikh and Hindu members.

Not to mention a few agnostic or atheist socially-conservative members, like David Willetts and Oliver Letwin.

And don't even bother trying to mention the 'P' word. Good grief, Protestants have become the rarest of species on the Conservative benches: the word itself has become synonymous with bigotry, intolerance and divisiveness. And 'Evangelical' is rapidly going the same way.

The reason the Centre for Social Justice can lay claim to having crafted 70 Conservative policies to date is that these policies are consonant with one of the Party’s oldest and most enduring themes, that of Disraeli’s ‘One Nation’ social agenda. With the support of the Christians, David Cameron has shifted public perception of the Conservative Party towards being ‘the party of the poor’: it has, once again, become a ‘broad church’ party.

Christians can, however, expect to be disappointed by a Cameron government.

But only insofar as all special-interest groups will be.

Politics is about diplomacy towards what is possible; it is about policy and compromise, and it would be naive to believe that the Christians will win all their fights with the Party machine.

But the advantage is that the Party now has an Anglican leading it; the first since Margaret Thatcher who has dared to talk about his faith as Party Leader. Of course, the times have changed, as has the media’s knee-jerk response to classify as a ‘nutter’ any politician who dares to ‘do God’. But David Cameron is attuned to postmodern Christianity in quite a remarkably intuitive way. It will not be to everyone’s tastes, but, with the right advisers, in this he can incarnate the ‘change’ he desires for his Party in ways his ethnicity and sexuality cannot.

And a postmodern Conservative Christian will not be averse to tightening the abortion limit any more than he will baulk at recognising civil partnerships in the tax system. But he will also listen to CSJ as much as he will to the CPS: votes on ‘conscience’ issues will be free votes, and we will witness a return to the primacy of the religious conscience over demands for ‘equality’.

And if we do not, the ‘3 per cent’ of Evangelicals will be the least of David Cameron’s worries: he will have his solitary 'convicted Anglican' and his Roman Catholic stalwarts ranged on the benches behind him to confront his wobbly ‘fairly classic Church of England faith that grows hotter and colder by moments’. But the FT won’t be doing an article on them because that would be ‘bigoted’ and ‘anti-Catholic’.

And they don’t have a website or a blog.



Blogger careblogger said...

you could check us out at CARE, your grace, or the blog

14 February 2010 at 11:43  
OpenID Michael said...

Codswollop. Catholics are the number one-target in today's aggressively secular society, primarily because they (by and large) continue to live by traditional Christian teachings, and are unconvinced by the fuzzy via media that provides solace for so many Anglicans intimidated by the secular assault. Indeed, the 'progressive' wing that have such standing in today's cultural landscape are vehement in their opposition to Catholics more than anyone else, and usually take a pop at the established Church as a wimpering afterthought - witness the march taking place in London today, for example (or the advertisement of it, here -

I accept your point that in many senses the term 'evangelical' has become a dirty word, and evangelical Christians receive their fair share of banter, - but to say that Catholics somehow suffer less, or receive an easier ride, really is remarkable.

Then again, paranoia regarding the supposed privilege of Catholics wouldn't be a first in this parish, would it...?

14 February 2010 at 11:46  
Anonymous Trencherbone said...

Meanwhile, a different kind of infiltration is subverting the Scottish National Party.

14 February 2010 at 11:51  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If the religious nuts are truly stuffing Tory meetings with their followers, this is something to be very concerned about.
This should be clarified immediately by Cameron. Those os us who do not believe in any particular superstition, should not be ruled by them. Until then, there will be votes cast in his direction from this household.

14 February 2010 at 11:53  
OpenID Michael said...

@Anonymous - and what of those of us who don't believe in your particular superstition?

14 February 2010 at 11:55  
Blogger John.D said...


It's a shame you had to turn this into some kind of anti Catholic rant. I have been on the CCF website this morning after reading about Sam's victory and Iain Dales comments about the CCF. I found it all very encouraging to be honest, and until I arrived here, I was under the impression that it was somewhat Catholic inclusive in it's purpose. I even contemplated the £2.50 per month membership because it struck me that here, at last, was some kind of potent Christian influence; even if it will upset the pathologically opposed atheists. You really do need to loosen up a bit with your outlook.

Anyways, this video will be of interest; it is a description of the influence that has been given to the recent equality fiasco:

Conservative Lord Bates comments on Equality Bill vote 25/01/10

Cranmer, you need to start looking at the bigger picture and stop throwing everyhing else out of the pram.

14 February 2010 at 12:32  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The only thing worse than a newspaper printing this would be trying to find a Conservative MP who would dare to speak in such terms of Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, Hindus, or the gay, black and Asian."

For a moment there,I thought I was on the BNP site :-)

Which Conservative,Labour or LD politician would dare to berate a "minority"?

14 February 2010 at 12:40  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

Mr John D,

His Grace has no idea what you're talking about.

This is not an anti-Catholic rant (other than for those who manage to find one under every cornflake, of which there are always one or two, though usually at The Telegraph): it is an article highlighting the hypocrisy of some Conservative MPs towards a particular Christian denomination and the inconsistency of treatment by much of the MSM towards Evangelicals which is rarely expressed towards RCs who would share just about all of the Evangelical concerns.

Mr Michael,

Alas, you appear to have taken a word and expanded it into a thesis. No-one who reads this blog regularly could be other than fully persuaded that it is fully cognisant of this Government's persecution of the Roman Catholic Church.

14 February 2010 at 12:44  
Anonymous len said...

Evangelicals under the authority of the Holy Spirit are about the only hope this country( and others) have got of breaking through the shackles and the bondages of religion and revealing the glorious message of salvation through the Lord Jesus Christ.

The catholic church suffering persecution? This would be hilarious except for the irony.

14 February 2010 at 12:53  
Anonymous the recusant said...

What the! For goodness sakes Your Grace have you taken leave of your senses, what are you up too? You know this will only encourage Len, it’s not good for him to get all excited with the persecuted Protestants, corrupt Catholics routine. We are trying to keep him on the happy pill, not least until the Pope has been. Now sir, show a little compassion please, the man is wobbly enough.

Gordon Bennett! You cremate few heretics a couple of hundred years ago and anyone would think you’d ordained women Bishops or something, no wait! Er look Crammer I’ll see you Wednesday, I’ll understand if you’re a bit ashen, we’ll get out heads together, at least I will, could be a bit of your desiccated arse for all I know, well at least you’ll get to point it a Rome again eh!

14 February 2010 at 14:02  
Anonymous len said...

Your post speaks volumes about you Mr Recusant.
Mocking, derisory of the martyrs tortured by your fellow "believers" indifferent to the truth,clinging to your traditions,

You Mr Recusant are the worst 'advert' for catholicism on this site.In fact it was some of your comments that persuaded me to look into and expose the hypocritical religious system called Catholicism!

14 February 2010 at 14:43  
Blogger Mark Blades said...

Mr. Cranmer,
Patrick Mercer, 'that infamous and disgusting racist', as you call him, was treated shamefully by Cameron, in the interest of currying favour from a left-leaning brainwashed media and population, in order to safeguard a Tory election victory.

That treatment from Cameron is in much the same vein as that from Michael Howard in de-selecting YOU as a prospective Tory MP, after an article you wrote that was, hilariously, described as 'Romophobic' by a 'journalist' because of a perceived anti-Catholic bias.

You're quick to jump on the bandwagon in labeling Patrick Mercer a 'racist'- which is a term invented by those on the 'left' to discourage anybody expressing any sort of views about race-yet yours and Mercer's case have striking similarities.

Perhaps you could have another read of Enoch Powell, another man vilified by his own party for expressing the truth, or, at least, his sincerely held version of it.

Geert Wilders is another man labeled and prosecuted for expressing sincerely held beliefs that the Leftist State has deemed unacceptable.

Who knows when 'they' might be knocking on your door, Mr. Cranmer?

14 February 2010 at 15:09  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

Mr Mark Blades,

Are you totally devoid of any sense of irony?

14 February 2010 at 15:13  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

Mr Mark Blades,

Does not even the subsequent line betray the literary device?

14 February 2010 at 15:18  
Blogger Mark Blades said...

Mr Cranmer,
Irony often doesn't convey well in print, and I, personally, don't like it as a literary device unless the intention is absolutely clear. However, it's your blog and readers obviously like your style.

If you were being ironic in labeling Mercer as a 'disgusting racist' then, in this instance, it was completely lost on me, even with the subsequent line you mention.

However, I'm glad that you weren't labeling Mr. Mercer in that derogatory way and I'm happy for myself-and for others?- that you've cleared up any misunderstanding. However, as is often the style with 'Your Grace', it could have been done with a little more grace, rather than with the slightly personal insinuation that I'm 'thick'.

14 February 2010 at 15:41  
Blogger Anabaptist said...

Possibly people are looking across the Atlantic and seeing the well-organised Evangelical 'Christian right' with its woeful ignorance, its apparent support for the harassment of abortionists, its bull-headed, jingoistic cheerleading in the US's war-mongering, its gun-toting support of mass capital punishment, and its visceral hatred of homosexuals and single mothers (etc., etc.).

Maybe they feel the threat of the extremely well run pressure groups, the pulpit denunciations, the cable TV chat shows and the blood-curdling denunciations and threats of telly evangelists and right-wing anchors and chat show hosts.

Perhaps people are a little nervous of the same sort of thing happening here, not realising, perhaps, that 'Evangelical' here doesn't quite signify the same red-in-tooth-and-claw activism as it does across the pond.

After all, they are only politicians and journalists, so we can't expect better of them.

14 February 2010 at 15:48  
Blogger Anabaptist said...

Mr Blades, please give it a rest. The irony was perfectly clear.

As the saying goes, 'When in a hole...'

14 February 2010 at 15:50  
Blogger Greg Callus said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

14 February 2010 at 16:01  
Anonymous Morus said...

Your Grace,

Strangely it is the reverse in the Labour Party - where Catholics are more prevalent, you will hear things said about the RC Church that would never be said about another faith. Evangelicals are treated as harmless lunatics unless they win high office.

Catholics in the Tory Party seem to be treated as a strange group - people approve, but there's no danger of everyone becoming one. Not so, the Evangelicals [I assume is the corollary].

14 February 2010 at 16:02  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

Mr Mark Blades,

His Grace hates to labour the point, but he referred to Patrick Mercer as that 'infamous and disgusting racist', and the very next sentence dealt with the very different treatment which might be meted out upon those who belong to the 'inner circle', of which Mr Mercer is evidently not a member. That juxtaposition alone ought to have alerted your irony detector, though the word 'infamous' is another very strong clue.

And yet there is an interesting irony here. For you allude to His Grace suggesting that you are 'thick', which he never did. And yet you have inferred it from what he neither wrote nor implied.

14 February 2010 at 16:10  
Anonymous the recusant said...

Now YG you see what you've done, he’s all excited and irritated now, twitching and foaming at the mouth like that, it'll take weeks to settle him down again. Where is that valium?

Some spectres! no respect for the living, that’s the trouble with the dead.

14 February 2010 at 16:36  
Blogger Mark Blades said...

Mr. Cranmer,

I don't think there's anything 'ironic' about my observation about your first comment, juxtaposed with my, in your estimation, seeming inability to discern your subtle, yet clear ironical intent.

'Are you totally devoid of any sense of irony?' seems to me to be directly indicating that you think I am deficient in some aspect of discernment. That I think is clear but your statement about Mr. Mercer was not, in my view.

Anyway, I'm sure that more of your loyal readers, like Anabaptist, will be quick to defend you, so I'll just leave it at that.

If you really think I've maligned you unfairly, then I'll be happy to discuss this with you privately. You have my email address and I'm open to being corrected and willing to be public with any retraction, if you think it fitting.

14 February 2010 at 16:49  
Anonymous len said...

“It is what comes out of a person that defiles. For it is from within, from the human heart, that evil intentions come: fornication, theft, murder, adultery, avarice, wickedness, deceit, licentiousness, envy, slander, pride, folly. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.”
Your posts indicate what lies within!
The more you post the more you illustrate my point.

14 February 2010 at 17:06  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


While I do often appreciate the nature of your naive innocence, sometimes I cringe at the lack of scope you seem to have with regards to living in the real world.

Mark Blades,

His Grace is an acquired taste, and His posts, especially this one, will presume an interest in the finer delicacies of Conservative tantrums and squabbles, which not everyone has the palate for. There is in fact a hint of irony about certain people but as is sometimes usual, there is an element of open interpretation.

If/when the Tories do in fact take over the Asylum bus then it is going to be a precarious ride to say the least, but not totally without its hysterical moments.

14 February 2010 at 17:18  
Anonymous len said...

Anon, cringe away!
I take naivety as a compliment!.
It will be interesting to see the responses of some of the more 'wordly wise ' communicants.

14 February 2010 at 17:41  
Anonymous the recusant said...

Len Sweetheart,

I shouldn’t taunt you, you’re not equipped for it, but you do bite so easily. I promise to play nice in future. Are you sure you’re not Presbyterian?

14 February 2010 at 17:44  
Anonymous len said...

You can insult me as much as you like Mr Recusant, your opinion of me is unimportant.
What is important is the gospel (correct version)and the Lordship of Jesus Christ.

I think 'playing nice ' is unsuited to your nature and also your abrasive comments are suited to the furtherance of the Gospel.
Steel sharpens steel!
Bring it on!

In love, of course.

14 February 2010 at 17:54  
Anonymous len said...

I think while we are on the subject of controversy we all owe His Grace a debt of gratitude for bringing to our attention, and allowing us to debate on his blog some serious and sometimes controversial issues.

14 February 2010 at 18:02  
Anonymous no nonny said...

Mark Blades - it never occurred to me to take His Grace's comment as anything other than irony. I wouldn't have thought one even had to be literary to appreciate it - just traditional British.

Certainly, it does appear in our oldest texts - as juxtapostion, too. For example, a tree can appear as a brilliant, perceptive character; but the people associated with it are utterly blind and dead-wood thick. Or else it often shows up in the form of litotes, or understatement, which you may still know of. The texts I mean were used to communicate with English speakers of all types, even it they were illiterate, so it's fair to suggest the literature was geared to their intellectual tastes. I'm not surprised, then, to have experienced irony as regular fare in dialogue among northerners - they're 'dry,' don't you know.

Mind you, if we still used education to maintain our traditions of rhetoric, literature (esp. Shakespeare), and drama, I think the literal-minded would even enjoy expanding their horizons a bit.

As it is, here's just one more stick (literal vs. figurative) our marxist enemy uses to divide and conquer us. Science/Arts; Indigenous/Invaders; hetero/homo-s***al; left/right 'wing' (even when they're all commies anyway); the religious/people without mind-souls. Goodness, even RC/Protestant.

Come to think of it, this franco-german obsession with polarised categories is beginning to reek of 'fragmentation.' The induction of schizoprenia on a national scale, even.

Now if our future 'statesmen' (irony flag) talked about a break from the euSSR, there might be something worth getting excited about.

14 February 2010 at 18:25  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Your Grace

The FT reported that the annonymous Conservative MP said: '"... They don’t outnumber us, but they can out-organise us. They’re taking over the party.”'

Wonderful! As Cromwell said, 'It is not numbers that count but spped and surprise.'

We need more Catholics and Protestants to join the party and get rid of the left-liberal Conservatives who are ensuring that the party sails into a hung parliament.

But on the other-hand it just may be that a hung parliament might be the best event that could happen to the party: we'll get rid of Cameron and the man who is going to rule this counrty with a rod of iron will emerge.

14 February 2010 at 18:28  
Anonymous no nonny said...

PS --> I should have added English/Celtic to my list of polarities. They're very big on that one: devolution's a big step in weakening all things British. The Germans have worked with the Irish for yonks. I even read recently that the IRA was Marxist.

14 February 2010 at 18:32  
Anonymous no nonny said...

Sorry, to post again. More haste less accuracy: but I really do know how to spell 'if' - 'schizophrenia,' as well!

14 February 2010 at 18:37  
Blogger Lord Lavendon said...

Your Grace,

I feel that the following hymn is required to remind us all of the fact we must stand up for Jesus, no matter the cost :

"Stand up, stand up for Jesus, ye soldiers of the cross;
Lift high His royal banner, it must not suffer loss.
From victory unto victory His army shall He lead,
Till every foe is vanquished, and Christ is Lord indeed.

Stand up, stand up for Jesus, the solemn watchword hear;
If while ye sleep He suffers, away with shame and fear;
Where’er ye meet with evil, within you or without,
Charge for the God of battles, and put the foe to rout.

Stand up, stand up for Jesus, the trumpet call obey;
Forth to the mighty conflict, in this His glorious day.
Ye that are brave now serve Him against unnumbered foes;
Let courage rise with danger, and strength to strength oppose.

Stand up, stand up for Jesus, stand in His strength alone;
The arm of flesh will fail you, ye dare not trust your own.
Put on the Gospel armor, each piece put on with prayer;
Where duty calls or danger, be never wanting there.

Stand up, stand up for Jesus, each soldier to his post,
Close up the broken column, and shout through all the host:
Make good the loss so heavy, in those that still remain,
And prove to all around you that death itself is gain.

Stand up, stand up for Jesus, the strife will not be long;
This day the noise of battle, the next the victor’s song.
To those who vanquish evil a crown of life shall be;
They with the King of Glory shall reign eternally."

14 February 2010 at 19:11  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Lord Lavendon: oustanding! Our Battle Hymn!

Mr John.D: thank you for the link to Lord Bates - I would urge you to join the CCF. Join the fight to express our loyalty, loudly and clearly: for God, family and country!

14 February 2010 at 19:17  
Anonymous Billy Evangelical Preacher said...

Amen to Lord Lavendon your Grace! He preaches the gospel as I would!

Yes we have our hymns and we shall unite with our Christian brothers and sisters to once again turn this nation back to the Lord Jesus Christ!

I cannot see how Michael sees his grace's post as an anti-catholic rant! Far from it. We must all unite- Roman Catholic, Anglican, Methodist, Baptist, Eastern Christianity and the other denominations- in order to fight our battle with secularism, communism and national socialism.

Look at Greece, Spain , Portugal, Greece and the UK, what do they have in common? They are all run by SOCIALIST governments! And yet these are the countries which are on the edge of catastrophe.

We must pray that our great nation is delivered from the wretched socialism, that we will turn back to Jesus Christ as our saviour, Lord and King!

Amen! Jesus be praised!

14 February 2010 at 19:30  
Anonymous Catholic Conspiracy said...


I think His Grace is being slightly mischievious with his 'anti Catholic' comments. Perhaps they are there to encourage Catholics to take part in this post and bump up the comments numbers; after all, the previous post on Stephen Fry raked in 280 comments? I think he may be losing the edge of his subtlety..:)

14 February 2010 at 19:37  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh for feck sake! His grace did NOT leave any "anti-catholic" comments! When will you people get this??

14 February 2010 at 19:51  
Anonymous Gore Albert said...

Typical shit from Lord Lavendon. Why don't you just go and count all your money and leave the government of this country to rule by way of socialism ?

14 February 2010 at 19:52  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Christians remember Gideon’s 300: ‘For the Lord and Gideon!’

Remember the 300 Spartans at the ‘Hot-Gates’?

‘Go! Tell the Spartans stranger thou who passest by, that here obedient to their laws we lie.’

Simonides (556 BC - 468 BC)

Remember Cromwell: ‘It is not numbers that count but speed and surprise!’

And one day, our country will honour us - as we look down from the Gates of Heaven at a new generation.

14 February 2010 at 19:56  
Anonymous not a machine said...

Convicted anglican ! under this goverment its persicuted christian theology . One can only wonder if we were to become so dumbed down that we would never raise a theological question again.

But to Tim Montgomerie , he has never hidden his christian beliefs nor taken to being over bearing with them , his conservative home blogg (together with Jonathan Isaby) has more than a listening ear to the wide church of conservatives and new readers of conservative history ,thought and success and failure.

He has developed both depth and message with his blogg as has Ian Dale recently . I may not entirely agree with some articles , but I do not run a blogg myself so I cant crticise too much , but I do know (I hope) when pieces are thoughtfull ,intelliegnt and researched.

Taking a christian article to FT readers is interesting , perhaps there is more to life than second by second market movements , I doubt porsche sales are worried yet.

14 February 2010 at 20:02  
Blogger magog said...

I am new to blogs.

Whether it was current or older I do not know, but tonight I saw a television programme being advertised.

In it Gerry Adams was to be the presenter on Channel 4's "History of the Bible", programme on the awesome topic of Christ!

A loose linkage, I accept, but am I the only one, Cranmer, who feels physically sick at such crass, and cynical editorialism.

What can I do, as a not particularly religious person, to fight such poison?

I have tried casting motes but it doesn't help much.

14 February 2010 at 20:48  
Anonymous Socialism is right for the UK said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

14 February 2010 at 20:55  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You do that and you can't collect taxes to pay for your socialist state.

Gordon - saved capitalism! that is what makes the SWP sweat.

14 February 2010 at 20:58  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Westminster is little more than a
whitewashed pig sty,not fit for
purpose and well beyond its sell by date.The house of secular
debauchery has no importance at all to any person of decency or
honour regardless of their faith or
non belief.

Patience long gone

14 February 2010 at 21:05  
Anonymous Simon said...

In it Gerry Adams was to be the presenter on Channel 4's "History of the Bible", programme on the awesome topic of Christ!

A modern day terrorist (scum) talks about earlier terrorists, slave traders, genital mutilators, rapists & murderers... and your problem is what precisely?

Because if you, as a Christian(?), are seeking to draw differences there, I should look elsewhere. There aren't any.

You are all AS guilty, just ask the apologists for rape in the Church - they consider themselves Christians, you know?

15 February 2010 at 00:21  
Anonymous no nonny said...

Oh my. The dear pinky and perky seem to have got out again. We must do something about those fences! Whatever did we say this time?

Yes, Lord Lavendon. Thank you for that --- just the spirit we need.

15 February 2010 at 02:23  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Patrick Mercer said he had met "a lot" of "idle and useless" ethnic minority soldiers who used racism as a cover. The former officer told the Times that being called a "black bastard" was a normal part of Army life.

After those statements he told BBC Radio 4's PM programme that in his 25-year military career he had only TWICE come across soldiers claiming racism when disciplined for poor performance. To say "a lot" when in fact it was only on two occasions sounds somewhat racist to me!

Lord Taylor, was right Mercer's comments were "insensitive" especially so to the plight of the black and ethnic minority soldiers suffering racism in the British Army.

I think the man is a liar and a complete waste of taxpayers’ money

15 February 2010 at 16:19  
Anonymous no nonny said...

The keyword must be - er 'a body of men who fight.' It's certainly not literacy, thoughtfulness, or erudition.

15 February 2010 at 18:18  
Blogger D. Singh said...

If you enjoy this blog: please donate £5 - to keep it going.

18 February 2010 at 16:48  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older