Wednesday, March 17, 2010

Nigel Farage anointed by the Bishop of Buckingham

Cranmer was not actually there, so he has no secret knowledge that the holy oil was poured out upon the head of the former leader of the UK Independence Party as a blessing upon his quest to take the seat of Buckingham at the forthcoming General Election.

But why else was a parliamentary candidate seeking an Episcopal audience?

Or did His Grace request a meeting with Mr Farage?

To congratulate him upon his rudeness to President Van Rompuy?

That does not sound at all like Bishop Alan.

A 'pastoral visit', perhaps?

But then His Grace would also feel obliged to extend similar invitations to the other Buckingham candidates, especially Speaker Bercow (if only out of Anglican via media ‘neutrality’).

Not to mention every other candidate in the parliamentary constituencies under his suffragan aegis (Chesham & Amersham, Aylesbury, Beaconsfield, Slough, Milton Keynes, and Wycombe – and that’s an awful lot of tea and cake).

But why is Mr Farage trumpeting the meeting abroad on Twitter?

Does he think that touching the hem of the Bishop’s garment might garner a few more votes?

Or heal him of his delusions and nightmares?

Or is it that Mr Farage is genuinely seeking dialogue with the Established Church, ‘in preparation for government’, as it were?

UKIP are making some favourable noises regarding the Christian faith.

They have said, for example, that ‘Christian faith schools must be allowed to teach Christian faith and morals. They must be allowed to do what it says on the tin. The agenda of political correctness should not be shoved down their throats’.

There is a commitment among many members to 'Christian values', and their new leader Lord Pearson has been termed ‘God’s Eurosceptic’.

He is referred to as ‘a man of manic activity (with) the inflexible resolve of an indefatigable, compulsive fighter’. Beneath a kindly humility he is ‘burning with moral fire’. To understand what makes him tick, one has to appreciate that he is inspired not by politics, financial gain or personal ambition, but by an understanding and appreciation of ‘his place and purpose in the universe’: his charity work for the mentally handicapped; his passion for democracy; his anti-corruption stance; his record of helping Soviet and East European dissidents; his remembrance of God and loathing of Socialism all derive from a ‘Manichean vision’ in which ‘evils (are) fighting side by side in (a) cosmic conflict’.

Cranmer does not know the Bishop of Buckingham’s politics any more than he knows Nigel Farage’s faith.

But knowing something of the manifest common sense, insight, discernment and wisdom they each possess, Cranmer would be tempted to bet (if he were so inclined) his withered arm that Bishop Alan might just be as relieved to see the back of John Bercow as Mr Farage would be.

And after witnessing the Speaker’s appalling performance and evident pro-Labour bias in the Chamber yesterday, one cannot help but feel that he is not the right man for that job at this time.

Paul Waugh reports:

John Bercow was struggling to keep order today in a way that I've rarely seen in the Chamber.

As Theresa Villiers got up for the urgent question on the BA strike, she questioned Labour's links to the Unite union.

The Speaker surprised Tories by immediately ruling out any such questions, insisting that this was an issue solely about the strike and the Government's response. It was not a party funding matter, he said.

A chastised Villiers carried on with her point. Several minutes ensued with Tories referring to Unite and Labour (including minister Sadiq Khan) in turn referring to Lord Ashcroft's donations.

An exasperated Bercow then got up to say once again, categorically, that he would only accept questions that did NOT refer to party funding. He then invited Dennis Skinner to speak.

Skinner blatantly defied the Speaker by referring to Lord Ashcroft's alleged failure to pay millions in taxes. Not a peep from Mr B.

Cue Tory backbench protests. Mark Pritchard then pointed out that Unite leaders should be setting an example by curbing their own generous pay packets.

The minister rose to the dispatch box, paused and glanced at the Speaker. The Speaker ruled Mr Pritchard's question out of order. But Pritchard didn't let it lie. Moments later, he got up and said "A moment ago, you rebuked me...A minister appeared to prompt you. I'm sure that is not the case".

In turn the Speaker then became very, very irate.

"Order. The Hon Gentleman will sit and listen to the response and not gesticulate. I saw no sign whatsoever from any member of the Treasury bench. For the Hon Gen. to suggest that I could be prompted to make a comment or response is quite wrong and it is also an unnacceptable observation on the part of the Hon Gentleman.

"Let me suggest to the Hon Gentleman, whose behaviour was untoward, that he would be sensible and rational simply to accept the ruling...and to move on."
(paronising, or what?)

Now, these exchanges were watched with dismay by several MPs - and it has prompted some ominous noises about whether the Speaker will be challenged after the next election.

Some Tories tell me that the private discussions about unseating the Speaker are now becoming matters of open debate in the Tea Room.

"It's a question of when, not if, he is challenged," one says. "I don't wake up wanting to pick a fight with Mr Speaker. But I wonder whether he wakes up in the morning and wonders which Tory MP he wants to pick a fight with."

As for Mr Pritchard, he tells me what infuriated him was the lenience shown to Mr Skinner:

"I'm charged by my constituents and by the taxpayer to ask questions in the House. That doesn't mean I'm going to be abused. I decided to stand up for myself."

Watch this space...

UPDATE: Tory backbenchers are going to the whips tonight to express their displeasure with the Speaker. I hear that one of the delegation is also to go directly to David Cameron himself.

There is, for Cranmer, only one candidate for the next Speakership.

Wise, moral, fearless, independent, Christian, Anglican, genuinely cross-party and greatly respected across the House.

And Cranmer would bet his entire ashes that the most excellent Bishop of Liverpool would hasten to anoint him.


Blogger Gnostic said...

Your Grace, Frank Field would be the common sense choice as speaker. Unfortunately, common sense has had the House doors locked and barred against it for at least 20 years. More recently the doors have been welded shut so thoroughly nothing sensible had been able to gain entry.

We need a battering ram, the likes of which do not seem to exist other than in a vestigial form...

17 March 2010 at 08:26  
Blogger Bishop Alan Wilson said...

For all our years my wife and I have kept, on apostolic grounds, something approximatng to open house — even in the days I was an urban vicar, you'd have found our children's friends around the house, or even a tramp having a cheese sandwich in the kitchen.

Therefore I offer tea, stimulating conversation and a listening ear to all and sundry, including those active in politics. There was once a poor woman of Naples who used to feed the rats because she said "they are, after all, God's creatures.”

Mr Farage is a candidate in what promises to be a very interesting election in the county I serve, and as someone with a long-standing interest in Milton and Burke (two great men with strong Bucks conections) I enjoyed briefly meeting him personally.

As I'm sure I would any other candidate in an election who cared to drop by...

I do not endorse any candidate, as doing so would compromise my ability to offer friendship and a listening ear to any or all the others. It would be worse than advertisng on the BBC.

17 March 2010 at 08:42  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Your Grace

I get the sense that the Christian faith is back in business. The Internet has definitely assisted. Christians no longer say, ‘Am I alone in thinking…?’

Our Catholic co-belligerents voted out a socialist MP in Scotland; the Labour MP Jim Murphy pleads for the cardinals’ support in Scotland. Brown writes an article against euthanasia in the Telegraph; Farage touches the hem of the Bishop of Buckingham; York speaks out often; the Rev. Nazir-Ali writes published letters in our national dailies: we’re back in business!

Come now the pain of recession and awake our country! Come a hung parliament and our man from the Right emerges whose name is written on the door of 10 Downing Street! Here they come; a new generation of Britons upon whose shoulders rests the future of our country! And the battle against the EU to become once more a free people!

And Frank Field as Mr Speaker?

Bring him on!

God bless.

And God-speed!

17 March 2010 at 09:08  
Anonymous Graham Davis said...

Cranmer recommends Frank Field as the next Commons Speaker; he may be surprised that this atheist would not dissent from that choice. Even though Frank believes the Christian fairy tale I have huge respect for his integrity, humanity, his conciliatory instincts as well as his ability to “think the unthinkable”

But surely a probable outcome of the next election is that Bercow will be unseated by Farage, so how about Farage for speaker, what fun that would be.

17 March 2010 at 09:12  
Anonymous Graham Davis said...

Bishop Alan Wilson said...
There was once a poor woman of Naples who used to feed the rats because she said "they are, after all, God's creatures.”

A more likely explanation...
There was once a poor (hungry) woman of Naples who used to feed the rats because she said "when they are fatter there is more flesh on them.”

But there you go, religion feeds the fantasy as well as the rats.

17 March 2010 at 09:20  
Blogger D. Singh said...

It is written:

Whoever corrects a mocker invites insult; whoever rebukes a wicked man incurs abuse. (Prov 9:7)

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you; rebuke a wise man and he will love you. (Prov 9:8)

If you are wise, your wisdom will reward you; if you are a mocker, you alone will suffer. (Prov 9:12)

A wise son heeds his father’s instruction, but a mocker does not listen to rebuke. (Prov 13:1)

The mocker seeks wisdom and finds none, but knowledge comes easily to the discerning. (Prov 14:6)

A mocker resents correction; he will not consult the wise. (Prov 15:12)

The proud and arrogant man—“Mocker” is his name; he behaves with overweening pride. (Prov 21:24)

Drive out the mocker, and out goes strife; quarrels and insults are ended. (Prov 22:10)

17 March 2010 at 09:32  
Blogger English Viking said...

Frank Field for Speaker?

Not Frank - the ID card demanding, Iraq and Afghan slaughter supporting, 90 day (but had to make do with 42 days) detention compelling, Gay adoption loving, anti-investigating (of criminal wars), fox hunt banning, nuclear weapon toting, £140,000 a year expense troughing, can't be bothered to vote 40% of the time, I'm doing very nicely on my Directorships and Journalism when I'm not voting, thank you very much - Field?

Not the same Frank Field that thinks that Harriet Harman would be a better PM than Gordo? (Very hard to be worse, I know, but better?)

Not the same Frank Field who is always banging on about his empathy with the 'common' working man and those in poverty, but was forced to pay back £7000 he illegally over-claimed on his 'gardening' and 'cleaning' expenses, and then refused to co-operate with the Legg enquiry, and became ring-leader in encouraging others to do the same?

Ohh, that one. Yeah, he'd be great.

17 March 2010 at 09:33  
Anonymous It's faith, stupid said...

Mr Davis

"But there you go, religion feeds the fantasy as well as the rats."

The irony is that you are also one of the rats being fed. Perhaps you refuse to eat for fear of being fattened up?

17 March 2010 at 09:36  
Anonymous Graham Davis said...

English Viking said...
Frank Field for Speaker?

Not Frank - the ID card demanding, Iraq and Afghan slaughter.......

Ah, when you put it like that.....!

17 March 2010 at 09:41  
Anonymous Graham Davis said...

It's faith, stupid said...
“The irony is that you are also one of the rats being fed. Perhaps you refuse to eat for fear of being fattened up”

You’re right I am being offered a diet rich in fantasy and delusion but I prefer not to swallow it.

17 March 2010 at 09:43  
Anonymous bluedog said...

Mr Graham Davis @ 0920, will you ever have a constructive comment to make? Your snide stab at Bishop Alan is not even logical. When you feed an animal to fatten it there is a loss of efficiency in what is known as the conversion ratio. Any fool know this. For example, in the case of cattle it takes six pounds of protein in the form of grass to grow one pound of meat on the hoof. So your 'more likely explanation' is completely improbable, or should I say, ignorant fantasy. The old woman of Naples would have had the peasant wisdom to feed herself and to let the rats forage, as they do.

17 March 2010 at 09:47  
Anonymous It's faith, stupid said...

Mr bluedog

I think that Mr Davis shot his bolt too quickly. Probably it was the shock of seeing a comment from a real live Bishop rather than from a cremated one! No offence Your Grace.

17 March 2010 at 09:54  
Anonymous Graham Davis said...

You are right of course. I am impressed by your use of logic and science, a pity it is not applied to the fairy tales as well.

It’s faith stupid
And you are right too! But what I have really set my sights on is a couple of Cardinals or even Ratzzi himself but I am not holding my breath.

17 March 2010 at 10:14  
Blogger AndrewWS said...

What on earth makes you think that the Bishop of Buckingham (in whose episcopal area I reside while worshipping elsewhere) possesses "manifest common sense, insight, discernment and wisdom"? On his blog and elsewhere, he has compared opponents of the ordination of women to advocates of apartheid and deniers of the Holocaust. The man is a complete shit.

17 March 2010 at 10:16  
Anonymous Graham Davis said...

Perhaps I shouldn’t get involved in a dispute between ridiculous beliefs and extremely ridiculous beliefs but a little courtesy would not go amiss.

17 March 2010 at 10:49  
Blogger Jared Gaites said...

Bishop Alan is a good man Your Grace, but I wonder if his rat food would extend to Nick Griffin?

17 March 2010 at 11:32  
Blogger Jared Gaites said...

From Twitter

Nigel_Farage Debate last night with Tory MEP James Elles at Buckingham University, I won the debate when it came to an audience vote! #UKIP
about 1 hours ago via web

17 March 2010 at 11:42  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Surely the fact that we have someone like Nigel Farage, failed Conservative, Opportunist MEP,and dedicated career politician, speculating a return to UL politics via Mr Speaker's chair say more about the paucity of the political gene pool?

When I think back to the tenures of George Thomas and Betty Boothroyd, that were carried with humour and fairness driven by an empassioned belief in upholding the finest traditions of parliamentary debate, there is no one of the current generation fit to assume the mantle.

People like me who have a few miles on the clock, are disillusioned by the entire system that promises so much at election time, but resolutely refuses to act in the interests and wishes of the electorate when ever tough issues arise.

A good Speaker needs to have an ear close to the ground when deciding the agendas of debate if the Mother of all Parliaments is to ever regain credibility with the electorate. My vote if I had one, would be Vince Cable, if only for his dignified manner and wisdom.

Politics and Religion are a volatile mix that need clear lines of definition. YG's suggestion for me is vote looser that would alienate many. The fact that we have Bishops in the other place is undemocratic enough.

Would YG like to see Muslim Clerics afforded similar positions of State - please; please tell me not? - but that is what would come to pass, in this suicidally, multicultural, politically correct world, within a very short time.

17 March 2010 at 12:05  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Typo alert - UK politics - apologies for not checking before posting

17 March 2010 at 12:09  
Blogger Vijay Chakravarthy said...

Great Great Great Blog

Your blog is so excellent. I am your regular reader of your blog.

I follow your blog. I like your way of posting.

Hey i am interesting in adding your
in my blog

I am honored to add it to my Interesting blog list.

Will you add my blog in your blog list.

Thanks for visiting my blog as well!

Please reply dear.

17 March 2010 at 12:31  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Your Grace

I think most people will agree with Mr Dreadnaught’s description of our society as suicidal, multicultural and politically correct.

Most right-thinking people, I am sure, will agree that there has been a proliferation of cultures which has led to increasing social fragmentation and the collapse of a consensus on nationally agreed values; which in turn has encouraged the confidence of different cultures claiming rights.

Upon reflection the cause of the collapse of an agreed set of national values has been precipitated by the rise of militant atheism (atheism is relative as are all other cultures – therefore another culture cannot be barred without risking atheism being barred). It is a virulent atheism that holds that there is no objective standard by which to compare the merits and demerits of one culture against another. And it is that, atheism, which has caused the flourishing of this multi-culture or pluralism and the erosion of a national code of values.

The principal key then to reverse this collapse and arrest societal fragmentation is to pass an Act of Parliament that terminates the employment of atheists in the public sector; weaken employment protection for atheists in the private sector; for local and central government departments to refuse to enter into contracts with companies whose chief executive officers or board level directors are atheists; the Professional Code of Conduct and Standards for Teachers must be revised banning atheists from joining the profession.

Indeed, the axe blow must be applied to the Achilles tendon of atheism. Atheists and their so-called charities must not receive Government funding; religious folk (as taxpayers) outnumber militant atheists and their taxes must go to the deserving and not the undeserving atheist who leeches of the body-politic. Indeed, these atheists should be subjected to a national Identity Card scheme and Scouts and Girl Guides should be able to identify them in their neighbourhoods by demanding to see their identity cards. Where a militant atheist or suspected militant atheist fails to produce an identification card they should be escorted to the nearest police station and their DNA recorded or checked not only against the criminal database but also for any civil law infractions (for example failing to discharge a debt).

Schooling is a very sensitive area for conducting operations against known or suspected militant atheists – children need to be removed from their supervision – the atheist isolated – and extracted.

Initially there may be some resistance by atheists to the Militant Atheist Identity Card registration scheme – but this can be overcome as it will, in the beginning, be on a voluntary basis and until all school children are trained to recognise the behaviours associated with militant atheism. Guard dogs with private security firms could be contracted to sniff out those militant atheists who attempt to conceal themselves and this option will be far cheaper than employing state security services. Also it is more visible and rapidly creates a set of fully functioning social relations where citizens are at a heightened awareness of the militant atheist in the street, neighbourhood, village, town and city.

Of course, there also exists under the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights the right of the state to terminate atheist protestors – which is far cheaper than detection, charge, bail, administration, cost of trials, conviction and imprisonment – not to mention the costs of rehabilitating the militant atheist.

17 March 2010 at 14:57  
Anonymous Graham Davis said...

D Singh
You had me going for a minute!

But I am fully in agreement with your second para – “Most right-thinking people, I am sure, will agree that there has been a proliferation of cultures which has led to increasing social fragmentation and the collapse of a consensus on nationally agreed values; which in turn has encouraged the confidence of different cultures claiming rights”.

I am as much against multiculturalism and political correctness as you are. I am willing to assert the superiority of British or English values over many others. Where we differ is that I maintain that those values are not Christian; informed by the less bigoted brand of Christianity to some extent of course, but part of the British/English character that has been forged by hardship, adversity and war and maintained by a vigorous parliament, an untainted judicial system and exemplified by self deprecation, a strong sense of fairness, a great sense of humour but with a good dose of bloody mindedness.

As regards the termination of atheists, I’m not sure if the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights allows for that (yet) as they foolishly acknowledge that we atheists have rights too. Your best bet may be to extend the Dangerous Blogs Act so that we are muzzled, at least in public.

17 March 2010 at 15:35  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Of course we can shoot atheists:

Article 2 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights – Right to life
1. Everyone has the right to life.
2. No one shall be condemned to the death penalty, or executed.

Source: Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 14 December 2007, Official Journal C 303/1

Explanation on Article 2 – Right to life
1. Paragraph 1 of this Article is based on the first sentence of Article 2(1) of the ECHR, which reads as follows:
‘1. Everyone‘s right to life shall be protected by law (…)’.

2. The second sentence of the provision, which referred to the death penalty, was superseded by the entry into force of Article 1 of Protocol No 6 to the ECHR, which reads as follows:
‘The death penalty shall be abolished. No-one shall be condemned to such penalty or executed.’
Article 2(2) of the Charter is based on that provision.

3. The provisions of Article 2 of the Charter correspond to those of the above Articles of the ECHR and its Protocol. They have the same meaning and the same scope, in accordance with Article 52(3) of the Charter. Therefore, the ‘negative’ definitions appearing in the ECHR must be regarded as also forming part of the Charter:
(a) Article 2(2) of the ECHR:
‘Deprivation of life shall not be regarded as inflicted in contravention of this article when it results from the use of force which is no more than absolutely necessary:
(a) in defence of any person from unlawful violence;
(b) in order to effect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained;
(c) in action lawfully taken for the purpose of quelling a riot or insurrection.’

(b) Article 2 of Protocol No 6 to the ECHR:
‘A State may make provision in its law for the death penalty in respect of acts committed in time of war or of imminent threat of war; such penalty shall be applied only in the instances laid down in the law and in accordance with its provisions (…)’.

17 March 2010 at 15:43  
Anonymous It's faith, stupid said...

Mr Singh

Once the militant atheist has been removed from the school they should also be recorded in the child offenders register. This should help prevent this sort of child abuse in the future.

17 March 2010 at 15:45  
Blogger Gnostic said...

It has little to do with atheism, militant or otherwise. Rampant stupidity, greed and unbridled hubris is what got us into this mess. And since atheists and secularists do not have monopolies on those squalid commodities then I think the net of finger pointing should be cast further afield.

17 March 2010 at 15:46  
Anonymous Graham Davis said...

D. Singh said...
“Of course we can shoot atheists”

But do you want to? Surely revising the ban on Hunting with Dogs so that an exemption could be made for hunting atheists would turn the whole enterprise into a social occasion and give the hounds some exercise. Any of us that survived the tearing apart could be burnt at the stake.

17 March 2010 at 15:59  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Mr Singh said (again diverting the OP)

.....pass an Act of Parliament that terminates the employment of atheists.....

Obviously he is some kind of crypto-fascist with Nazi tendencies; he may appreciate these words:-

"THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

THEN THEY CAME for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

THEN THEY CAME for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant.

and by that time no one was left to speak up."

Pastor Neimuller

17 March 2010 at 16:28  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Mr Dreadnaught

I feel you are getting too sensitive over this vitally imporatnt isue of trying atheists.

Besides the registration scheme has built in safe guards:

1. It is voluntary;
2. It is not for atheists per se; and
3. It is for militant atheists.

It will be safe, cost-effective and obviously being voluntary - with little protest.

17 March 2010 at 16:53  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Mr Faith

I am much encouraged by your zeal for Queen and Country; but I do feel that such ideas need to be considered later.

Please file them under the heading: 'Evolving Future'.

On a related point I do wish Mr Dreadnaught would stop being so excitable by capatalizing letters that ought to be in the lower case.

If you should cathc him later on in the evening please advise him that atheists who register early for the PIK project (Personal Identification Kit scheme) are likely to be in line for discount vouchers at Waitrose and Debenhams.

I must say this is a very pleasing idea and I am in gratitude to Mr Dreadnaught's splendid earlier post. He is what the Department classifies as an 'Advanced Thinker.'

My kind regards.

17 March 2010 at 17:25  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Whaever ..... Farage only says what many Tories would like to say, but don't have the guts/balls/or any other vital physical attribute necessary for telling it the way it is.

17 March 2010 at 17:37  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Whatever.......Farage only says what many Tories believe; but don't have the guts/balls/or other vital physical attributes necessary for telling it the way it is.

17 March 2010 at 17:40  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Mr Sing - I fear You are completely Barking and I totally disengage with any of your posts - you need therapy.

17 March 2010 at 17:42  
Anonymous Mikec said...

Shocking, made me laugh - Is that a hate crime yet?

Will anyone not violate my human rights by shooting me while I try to escape?....

17 March 2010 at 18:15  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

Parishioner ethics is whats needed, a return to the age of urban parish inhabitants.

Sojourn dwellings as a distinct juristiction, a primate palatine, the rest can be tazered for giving you the wrong look, that you percieved to be offensive.

Parlaimentarian EU proponents are overdue a Green Bag Inquiry and the Lord High Chancellor as said keeper of HMs Conscience should damned well induce one!

17 March 2010 at 19:14  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Though I would not dissent from the view Your Grace asserts, I do not believe Parliament is able to take a rational course for i believe we are back in the 17th Century having endured the corruption and Placemen of the 18th these past 20 years.

I do not believe British history moves forward but eccentrically leaps backwards, we have traversed 18th Century politics to arrive at the fundamentals of Protestant England inflamed by Scotland.

Parliament is unable to reform itself and we lack that Constitutional Convention necessary to legislate a new Settlement, so I fear like the "Kelvin Grundnorm" Parliament itself must be overthrown and sovereignty restored to the People.

The State has become too mighty and Leviathan has sought to enslave the populace making voters servants of the Hegelian State. It is as much an Enemy as it was in 17th Century England in its Absolutist Pretensions - Protestants Must Arise

17 March 2010 at 19:15  
Anonymous bluedog said...

D Singh @ 14.57, and what coloured patch should the militant atheist voluntarily sew on to his or her clothing?

17 March 2010 at 19:49  
Anonymous not a machine said...

I wouldnt bet your entire ashes your grace , the archbishop of liverpool is Blair fan . However Frank Field as speaker does have some interesting prospects ,in that his long experience , will serve the house and perhaps have a deeper understanding of what is wrong , and has been wrong for some considerable time .

He is a man of integrity I think ,and with the house facing the prospect of many new mps an experienced speaker will act as enabler and tutor and perhaps restore some professionalism and meaning .Perhaps he would champion the constituancy mp as well as the back bencher .

As Labour leader he would no doubt inject inject some common sense back into the party , but I think his party is going to be on fire for some considerable time ,by the time the inglorious riegn of Gordon Brown has ended .

An interesting man whom I would like to listen to.

17 March 2010 at 19:49  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Mr Dreadnaught

Fear not.

You sow. And you reap.

Soon, we shall be in charge.

17 March 2010 at 20:12  
Anonymous It's faith, stupid said...

The dreadnought has totally disengaged.

We can stand down for the moment.

17 March 2010 at 20:41  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Mr Bluedog - work will 'make them free.'

Mr Dreadnaught

Think. Think again.

Your faction has installed the perfect State apparatus for us to register you.

The 'Christian' MP Stephen Timms (Labour) insists that the Goverment will control the Internet.


When we are awarded power - we will trace you.

The very laws that you socialists installed: allow us to ring your door bell.

Mr Dreadnought: think.

17 March 2010 at 21:02  
Anonymous bluedog said...

D Singh, if that's the case you'd better return the sign.

18 March 2010 at 08:00  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Mr Bluedog

Clever remark!

I can assure you I did not steal the sign - and in any event the cuplprits have been caught and the sign has been recovered.

18 March 2010 at 08:43  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Your Grace

Lord Pearson’s religious conversion seems interesting:

‘Lord Pearson’s unorthodox religious convictions were given to him, he believes, directly by God during an excruciating experience on an operating table in 1977. He was having varicose veins removed when he began to regain consciousness. While paralysed by an anaesthetic, and unable to twitch even an eyelid, let alone scream, he could hear the surgeons talking. Worse, he felt their knives slicing into his legs and he felt the doctors ripping out the damaged veins.

‘He believes that during this auto-de-fè, a messenger from God came to him and tested him, demanding that he deny his faith. When he refused, repeatedly, his agonies ended and he “stood before the indescribable, numinous presence. I marvelled at the strength and the justice and the compassion. But soon I became aware of a pervasive sadness, too.”’

I am convinced that he had an encounter with an intelligence.

No messenger from God would ever test a man to deny his faith.

The messenger was from Lucifer.

Thankfully, he has interpreted it in a constructive way.

18 March 2010 at 10:00  
Anonymous TheGlovner said...

Woof Woof!


18 March 2010 at 10:34  
Anonymous bluedog said...

D Singh, I am intrigued by this comment by Mr Graham Davis, "I am willing to assert the superiority of British or English values over many others. Where we differ is that I maintain that those values are not Christian; informed by the less bigoted brand of Christianity to some extent of course, but part of the British/English character that has been forged by hardship, adversity and war and maintained by a vigorous parliament, an untainted judicial system and exemplified by self deprecation, a strong sense of fairness, a great sense of humour but with a good dose of bloody mindedness."

I rather fear we may have stumbled across the first British Shinto. Konichi-wa! And its kippers sushi-style for brekky from now on.

18 March 2010 at 10:40  
Anonymous no nonny said...

Stirling Stuff, Mr. Singh. Well said, as usual.

I keep trying to think of a good fairy tale to post - but bless me, I can't remember any. I believe some were quite nasty, when interpreted through adult eyes; though occasionally they ended 'happily ever after' - in protagonist earth, at least.

Of course, since Christian culture produced most of ours, they do have a hint of parable and they do symbolize realities of life: hence the transformative potential of love, for example. The question remains, though, as to whether that potential ever graduated from to caritas.

Not that we need fairy stories in this vile secular world -modernist or post- . The images emerging from Parliament are increasingly redolent of Alice in Wonderland.

18 March 2010 at 18:23  
Anonymous no nonny said...

sorry - that was from cupiditas to caritas.

18 March 2010 at 18:27  
Blogger D. Singh said...

no nonny

Brilliant post!

One day my reading, its breadth and depth, will match yours. And like you I too shall teach a new generation.

God bless you,

All my love, D.

18 March 2010 at 18:59  
Blogger adrian said...

You can check out your MP's voting record at

They Work for you

20 March 2010 at 23:18  
Blogger Arden Forester said...

I'm surprised Farage got on so well with the Bishop of Buckingham. The prelate has his own blog and is very, erm, well not well disposed to traditional values. Your Grace, he doesn't much care for your Prayer Book. I just can't believe he bit his tongue and smiled sweetly at the Squeaker bater.

Bishop Alan's Blog

24 March 2010 at 12:20  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older