Thursday, November 04, 2010

High Court judge calls for more Christians in Parliament

At the sentencing of Roshonara Choudhry, the trainee teacher who attempted to murder Stephen Timms MP, the public gallery erupted with cries of 'Allahu akbar' ('God is great'), 'British go to hell' and 'Curse the judge'.

Quite why they were not immediately arrested for contempt of court is unknown.

Praising their God in a court of law?

Just about acceptable.

Passing opinion on the limited soteriological options of the British?

Well, it might be ‘racist’, but we’ll call it ‘freedom of expression’.

But ‘Curse the judge’?

How did that pass without immediate intervention by the Judge?

Miss Choudhry appeared by video-link because she 'refused to accept the jurisdiction of the court'.

Why was this permitted? Are all ‘citizens’ of the UK granted this option? Are we not all subjects of Her Majesty, and therefore all subject to the Crown in Court, on whose behalf the Judge presides and dispenses the Queen’s Justice for the maintenance of the Queen's Peace?

As Miss Choudhry was sent down ‘for life’, with a minimum term of 15 years, the Prophet’s loyal rent-a-crowd faithfully protested outside the Old Bailey with their usual offensive placards, hurling their usual inflammatory insults, which included 'Death to Timms’, presumably with the hope or expectation that he might join Margaret Thatcher in hell.

Why were they not immediately arrested for incitement to murder or, at the very least, the public order offence of causing alarm and distress?

If the police do not treat everyone equally under the law, irrespective of race or religion, they give the impression that ‘devout’ Muslims may indeed incite their co-religionists to murder Members of Parliament, and that they may do so with impunity.

But in passing sentence, Mr Justice Cooke observed something very interesting about Stephen Timms. He said:

“I understand that he brings to bear his own faith, which upholds very different values to those which appear to have driven this defendant.

“Those values are those upon which the common law of this country was founded and include respect and love for one's neighbour, for the foreigner in the land, and for those who consider themselves enemies, all as part of one's love of God.

“These values were the basis of our system of law and justice and I trust that they will remain so as well as motivating those, like Mr Timms, who hold public office.”
This is really quite a significant theological intervention by a High Court judge into the religious constitution of Parliament.

Mr Justice Cooke referred throughout his judgment to Miss Choudhry’s ‘Islamic duties’ and the ‘Islamic teaching’ which encouraged her to pursue Jihad in order to become a martyr because ‘to fight and die for your religion is the highest honour’.

Whether or not he has interpreted the essence of Islam correctly, he has no doubt that Miss Choudhry’s interpretation of it espouses values which are antithetical to those of Christianity and liberal democracy.

And he is clear in his view that Christian values, which underpin the British foundations of law and justice, can only be sustained as long as there are Christians like Mr Timms in Parliament.

And that is the sort of Christian whose faith informs his politics; who does not hide his light under a seat in the Cabinet and is unafraid to associate with groups like ‘Christians in Parliament’, which prioritises prayer and Bible study.

But there is something in the comments of Mr Justice Cooke which chimes with largely unreported comments made by Baroness Warsi on the eve of the General Election. Speaking at a dinner in Rotherham in response to a previous speaker who had called on more Muslims to enter politics, she said:

"[He] says that we need more Muslims MPs, that we need more Muslims in the House of Lords. I would actually disagree with that because I think one of the lessons we have learnt in the last five years in politics is that not all Muslims that go to into politics have asool."
‘Asool’ is Urdu for ‘moral principles’.

Clearly, the Baroness was not saying that all Muslims who go into politics lack moral principles any more than Mr Justice Cooke was saying that all the values of Islam are antithetical to those of Christianity. And yet it is clear that what both are saying is undoubtedly true: there are values in the strident Sunni-Wahhabi expression of Islam which are antithetical to the common law of this country, and not every Muslim in politics is there for the right reasons or with the right motives.

Of course, the same can be said of professing Christians Jews, Sikhs, Hindus, Buddhists and atheists (pace, of course, Dr Evan Harris, whose motives are always as pure as the driven snow). But ‘devout’ adherents of these faiths are not generally inciting murder, insulting our armed forces, subverting justice or attempting to assassinate Members of Parliament.

All of which amounts to treason.

Baroness Warsi specifically opposes more Muslims in Parliament.

Mr Justice Cooke specifically wants more Christians in Parliament.

And the reason?

Both the Baroness and the Judge are concerned with values, moral principles, the common law, the love of God and love for one's neighbour.

These are indeed the bedrock of a constitution of which the Christian Monarch is the Chief Cornerstone just as Christ is to His Church.

Remove that, and the whole edifice will come crumbling down.

44 Comments:

Blogger Alcuin said...

Thank you for bringing this to our attention, your Grace, because we can be sure that the BBC, from whom most of us get our daily news, would never have done so.

4 November 2010 at 10:31  
Blogger Phil Taylor said...

I seem to remember somewhere that the representation of Muslims in parliament is higher than their presence in the country. Is this not another aspect that should be highlighted in support of Baroness Warsi's comments?

4 November 2010 at 10:42  
Blogger Rebel Saint said...

Likewise, thank you for bringing this to our attention. These not insignificant details seem to have somehow been overlooked by the BBC (as did the fact that this lady was a Muslim, right until the verdict).

The strongest evidence against letting Islam infiltrate our legislative or judicial systems is the evidence of our own eyes. Can anyone point me to an Islamic state where people would choose to live. Even many Muslims seem keen to escape them!

4 November 2010 at 10:46  
Blogger oldmaid said...

Alcuin and Rebel Saint are right.

I initially went outside the country for the facts, but it is good to at least one forum is also providing this detail.

What I find interesting is that it is only now one of their own has been stabbed by this mob they want suitable justice to be metered out to this person.

A damning indictment that they don't appear to care that this and worse has already happened and on numerous occasions to indigenous 'joe public'.

One would think we are immune to pain!

Finally, no doubt the politicians personal protection will be 'upped' and with all these austerity measures I wonder where they will find the funding for this...

4 November 2010 at 10:51  
Blogger Gnostic said...

I am of the opinion that, while Christian ethics underpin our laws (which I don't have a problem with), we should keep religion out of both politics and the law. Choudhry should have been forced into court to hear her sentancing, as would any other convicted criminal. Who gives a flying frig what she thinks about jurisdiction? She lives here, she is subject to our laws. End of!

Morality and religion are not mutually inseparable. Being a good Christian/Jew/Hindu/Sikh etc requires at least a modicum of morality. Being a moral person does not require religious faith. Politics and law does not require religion, only morality. It seems that we currently have too much of one and not enough of the other.

At the end of the day Timms, no matter how devout, voted for an illegal war.

4 November 2010 at 10:54  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Surely you must know that ‘hate crime’ (which is PC, Cultural Marxism or newspeak for speech and thought ‘crime’) and ‘racism’ can only be committed by the indigenous people of this country whenever they should seek to discuss and, God forbid, object to their own genocide. The ‘religion of peace’ is in no way able to perpetrate such vile acts of ‘hate crime’, let alone engage in acts of terror in the air and on public transport. All followers of the ‘religion of peace’ must be treated with the utmost respect at all times and afforded the most generous jizya by kafir judges, police and politicians that rule the country until full sharia law is introduced as hailed by the Archdhimmi of Canterbury. “Wake up a smell the coffee” as one ‘moderate’ Moslem said to one of many Labour Home Secretaries.

4 November 2010 at 11:08  
Blogger Graham Davis said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

4 November 2010 at 11:16  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Your Grace

Mr Justice Cooke said:

“Those [Christian] values are those upon which the common law of this country was founded…’

And:

“These [Christian] values were the basis of our system of law and justice…’

Yes: “was” and “were”.

Brick by brick the constitution and common law of this country is being deconstructed by Brussels.

Mr Justice Cooke knows that, the great Lord Denning knew that and Cameron collaborates in that.

It is over.

4 November 2010 at 11:16  
Blogger Graham Davis said...

Cranmer said

Both the Baroness and the Judge are concerned with values, moral principles, the common law, the love of God and love for one's neighbour.

These are indeed the bedrock of a constitution of which the Christian Monarch is the Chief Cornerstone just as Christ is to His Church.

Remove that, and the whole edifice will come crumbling down.

We live in a liberal democracy where many values are shared by most people. I agree that the teaching and practice of Islam is antithetical to many of those values. The origin of our shared values derives from our history and Christianity was a significant part of that (for good or ill). However in the society in which we live today Christianity has been marginalised. There are numerous reasons for this but one of them is that many people simply don’t believe in god or are at least agnostic and you will agree that this is a fairly important component of Christianity.

Contrary to the doom merchants who post here the absence of Christianity in most peoples lives has not resulted in wholesale immorality. Society has changed enormously since the war, much of it driven by economic pressures. Many communities have been broken up by changes to industry and commerce, the extended family has become much more extended, welfare changes have allowed those with no economic means to start families, the material well-being of most has risen enormously, drugs have become widely available, the class divide has become much reduced, the media has driven aspirations of many to an unrealisable level and add to this our current economic woes.

The negative consequences of these and other changes has resulted in a society that is “uncertain and afraid” (to quote Auden) as none of us know what the future holds. Gone are the days when son followed father and could expect a life-times employment with a single firm. But despite all this most people get on with their lives and the whole edifice has not come crumbling down. Unlike many here, most people live happily and morally without need of “god’s love”, and see religion as part of the problem and not the solution.

We don’t need more Christians or indeed atheists in parliament; we simply need people who seek the greater good. They will disagree about the means but the important thing is their intent.

4 November 2010 at 11:22  
Blogger AncientBriton said...

An odd conclusion Gnostic. Are you implying that Mr Timms and others who voted as they, rather than you, saw fit deserve to be stabbed?

Be that as it may, on the general question of representation, Islam carries the seeds of our destruction as a Christian nation. The BBC, formerly the voice of Britain, has a Muslim Head of Religious Broadcasting on the grounds that 'he was the best man for the job'. Are those who appointed him aware that in Islam Christians and other non-Muslims are regarded as second class and that any means are legitimate to make every nation including Great Britain a Muslim country?

There are many reports of Christians are being killed and driven out of Islamic countries yet in Britain we allow Muslims to build Mosques and encourage their involvement in public affairs never knowing whether it is for the good of our country or for Islam.

Sooner or later this issue must be addressed. The longer it is left the greater the danger.

4 November 2010 at 11:27  
Blogger Alcuin said...

How much our laws depend on 1200 years of Christian culture is very difficult to establish, as said culture is so ingrained in all of us, whether we are aware of it or not. That what we think of as "decency" is not shared by other cultures is made abundantly clear by the Cairo declaration - essentially stripping the UDHR of all items that are incompatible with Sharia, i.e. most of them. It is therefore taking many of us a great deal of soul searching to figure out where "decency" comes from. Attributing our values to those who do not share them is a recipe for disaster, as Sun Tzu well understood.

By the way, the Iraq war was not illegal. The Attorney General rules on such things, not the UN and not you, regardless of the maxim of Lenin and Goebbels that endless repetition makes a lie true. You may well think it immoral, but then you did not see the full horrors of Saddam's regime, while Ann Clwyd and others did. Such experience can dramatically change superficial theories of ethics.

For more Iraq myths, see John Rentoul.

4 November 2010 at 11:31  
Blogger Maturecheese said...

Here I go again, a bit knee jerk but after seeing the pictures of those filth and what they are saying, I felt compelled to get it off my chest.

If they had tried this at some point in the past, they would probably have received the beating they most definitely deserve. The fact that these vermin are allowed to express their hatred for all things British and Western, totally disregarding behaviour protocols that the rest of us adhere to, shows us how far down the toilet we have gone.

4 November 2010 at 11:32  
Blogger Gnostic said...

AncientBriton, I was merely using Timms as an example that being religious is not necessarily the same as being moral. Cameron confesses to attending church and Blair now does "God" on a highly lucrative basis. I would trust neither of the buggers with a fart in a paper bag because morality is an alien concept to such people.

I hope that has cleared up the misunderstanding.

4 November 2010 at 11:39  
Blogger Gnostic said...

Alcuin, the reason for war was manufactured. We went to war on a false prospective. That makes the war illegal no matter what the Attorney General claimed.

4 November 2010 at 11:45  
Blogger AncientBriton said...

Point taken Gnostic - but it doesn't follow that I share your conclusion!

4 November 2010 at 11:46  
Blogger Gnostic said...

AncientBriton, I am delighted to hear it. It would be a truly awful place if we were all homogenised drones. :)

4 November 2010 at 11:49  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Mr Davis

'But despite all this most people get on with their lives and the whole edifice has not come crumbling down.'

'They' do not want society to collapse. The method is to take one brick away at a time and replace it with another.

Parliament will still look like Parliament in 2017.

4 November 2010 at 12:08  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Attendance at the Crown Court Theatre makes one wonder what exactly merits "Contempt of Court" ? It seems as if only The Lord Chancellor can authorise a Crown Court Judge to invoke it as I have seen bizarre behaviour go unpunished by our bewigged friends.

I think it is just another theatrical device from a bygone era....judges are little more than Civil Servants paid on The Consolidated Fund

4 November 2010 at 12:41  
Blogger The Lizard King said...

Your Grace,

Thank you,a wise and thought provoking post as per usual,the bearded chaps in the photos make my cold blood boil,not that I have any beef with facial hair,I`ve sported a full beard myself in the past,no your grace its the furious hatred of Britain,its culture and Christian peoples.

I ask myself,if they detest us so much why are they here?,why do they not jump on a Ryan Air flight and live in a Muslim country of their choice? and how many of these hateful men/women are among us.

Increasingly I find answering my own question thus,they see themselves as holy warriors,here to convert our country to Islam,by fair means of foul,their faith binds them all as one force,a bind far stronger than their sense of "Britishness".

I know many others hold this view,and would say I`m late to the party,yes I confess I`ve resisted the temptation to believe the worst.

Maybe I`ve resisted the relentless propaganda of the fear mongers for too long...perhaps there is something to fear for Christians,my Kingdom and society as a whole...the march of Islam.

4 November 2010 at 12:48  
Blogger starcourse said...

A great post, but I think you mean "rather as" not "just as". Much as we revere and admire Her Majesty she is not (literally) divine, etc..

4 November 2010 at 14:01  
Anonymous Gerard Tibercross said...

Alcuin

You misunderstand the workings of international law. International law is not determined by the Attorney General, nor even by the United Nations, but by the consent of the nations of the world. What that means is that the law relating to the high seas became established, and fixed, during the 19th century. It was what the Royal Navy said it was. Similarly, the rules about going to war, and never mind Aquinas, were established during the latter part of the 20th century. They are what the Pentagon say they are.

Have I made myself clear, crystal clear?

Gerard Tibercross

4 November 2010 at 14:41  
Blogger Manfarang said...

Double standards as usual.
Robert Ashman kills a councillor with a samurai sword.Sent to Broadmoor.Let out after 10 years.

4 November 2010 at 14:43  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

At last - pictures of the Filthistan Trio!

4 November 2010 at 14:46  
Blogger Bryan D said...

Lessons from the last century are clear: appeasement does not work. It's time for those who insist on their faith over and against the rule of law to be punished by that rule of law.

4 November 2010 at 15:43  
Anonymous Trencherbone said...

I have no sympathy with Timms.
Those who import rabid dogs must expect to get bitten.

4 November 2010 at 15:48  
Blogger steve said...

Your Grace,

I am believe I am a Crown Subject and not a citizen.

A minor technicality, but an important one.

4 November 2010 at 15:57  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Only when our politicians identify Islam as as a political construct with global ambitions will we begin to defend ourselves without hands tied behind our backs. We should not shed another single drop of our serving soldiers blood chasing shadows in Afghanistan. Islam and its vile literature should be defined as unwelcome in our culture and borders; it is incompatible by it's own writ, purpose and meaning.

Anjem Choudry, hate him or double hate him, is the only attention grabbing Muslim who actually tells it as it is.

4 November 2010 at 17:17  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

Both the Baroness and the Judge are concerned with values, moral principles, the common law, the love of God and love for one's neighbour.

A Christian’s love for his neighbour encompasses, or should encompass, all his neighbours. A Muslim’s neighbourly love extends only to other Muslims: ‘Let believers not make friends with infidels in preference to the faithful—he that does this has nothing to hope for from Allah—except in self-defence.’ (Qur’an 3:28)

If I were in a cynical mood, I would argue that Warsi’s prevarication over Muslim MPs comes under the heading of ‘self-defence’—she is doing her bit to lull the kuffar into a false sense of security.

@ The Lizard King (12:48)—I ask myself, if they detest us so much why are they here?

Muslims choose to remain here to bring an heretical nation to Islam.

4 November 2010 at 18:04  
Anonymous Oswin said...

These muslims may well be sneaky, sly, underhand, and seditious; but thank God, they are also as stupid as hell!

They just cannot hold it together, no matter what sleight of hand they employ, they always bog-it-up!

You'd almost believe that the BNP had handed them their silly little sheets of paper to wave about in front of the media: ''Come see how stupid we are!''

''We are YOUR enemies!''

Notwithstanding our own stupidity in allowing these medieval numb-nuts from contaminating our country, we can at least be assured that we are fast approaching the point of 'critical mass' whereby all such Islamic numpties will be swept away in a tidal wave of total rejection!

4 November 2010 at 18:12  
Anonymous len said...

You only have to look at the life of Mohammed to see the reason his followers act as they do.

4 November 2010 at 18:27  
Anonymous not a machine said...

Points well articulated your grace . I peprhaps share a little of the pessimism in the breakdown of British law and values , that once had such a common understanding .
We must also not forget the liberal socialist elite minds that have believed that mass immigration would lead to some sort of inescapable fabian eurotopia. It is precisly this foolishness that led to Mr Timms recieving one his voters opinons so directly.
The sad sight of Ms Choudrys suporters , shouting contempt and britsh go to hell , rather than the more christian view or remorse or repentence , also shows some differing views on the soul and the Brtish foundation of a godly life and civility .
As for death to Mr Timms , the irony of that ,seems to have beaten the many years of spin that it was a talking cure and fault was with the mean spirited people who objected to the cultural changes and its certain opression of indigenous culture and values .

For many years , I assumed it was all tolerable and we would live with the differneces , but when labour considered the down grading of Christmas and the response was so weak , I thought we were heading for the abyss, a culture without meaning other than socialist. A video from sweden showing the change in one its towns and its unhappy cultural exchange showed that resentment was becoming more than what I thought were a few crackpot voices who had only ever read mien kampf.

This trial shows a number of things , let us hope we dont lose our faith in what may be a time when we are undone by an insoluable imposed competition , to live in Christian country as freely as we once did.

4 November 2010 at 18:30  
Blogger Terry White said...

I do not always agree with everything Cranmer writes but in the case of this article, 'High Court judge calls for more Christians in Parliament', and others below it, I concur wholeheartedly. We had better wake up and see clearly what is happening to our customs, our own home-grown laws, and of our own long-held religious traditions - regardless of whether or not one feels strongly affiliated with them.

They are what have made us who we are, for better or worse, and we allow them to be undermined from out with our country at our peril. I have travelled widely and know of no country I have visited where the disrespect for and undermining of the traditional customs and religion of the nation would be tolerated as they have been in Britain for far too long already. It emboldens those that do not adhere to our way of life and accept our laws as their own. They would rule over us according to laws foreign to us. They would be both the arbiters of those laws and would apply them too, no doubt with fervent relish. This for example could presumably mean that thousands of women could face the possibility of being stoned to death.

Show me one Muslim country that passively sits back and allows such abuse of its population, its courts, its politicians, its armed forces, its customs and its age-old religious traditions. You cannot. It is not possible for it would not be countenanced, and what is more, rightly so. Neither should it be here in Britain. The longer we keep trying to accommodate the demands of those that will not accept our ways and the more we allow people to rule over us and undermine our society's legal and cultural mores from abroad, the greater will be the long-term damage and potentially the internal strife that will result when the people of these islands, by which I mean both those that view themselves as historically British and those that willingly accept their place in this country according to its laws, finally lose patience once and for all.

Politicians, clerics, beware. It is a noble thing to try to find common ground and understanding with different cultures and religions. I support this. Between like minds there is plenty of it. But understand that when others play by a very different and undemocratic set of rules, when they speak of peace yet act differently, when they actively promulgate values alien to this nation and its people and you keep bending ever-further backwards in order to try to find common ground and placate their increasingly strident demands, you will eventually find yourself prostrate. At that point your opponents will advance, upright and strong. They will walk across you as if you were a welcome mat, wipe their shoes on you and like-as-not throw your bodies into the sea.

Where there is common ground and genuine reciprocity all well and good but this is not always the case. Do not overestimate your capabilities nor dwell in the conceit that we are, or should be, the light that all peoples of the world should guide their ships by. I am thinking of the undemocratic and unaccountable governments of China and of the European Union, and of those extreme elements within Islam that would not just refuse to convert to Christianity of their own volition and/or assimilate themselves within our culture but would force everyone here, in their adopted homeland (be they first, second or third generation immigrants) to accept the religious laws and customs of their original cultures given half a chance.

When reciprocity, mutual respect and forbearance are absent it is your duty - social, moral, religious, political and patriotic duty - to stand firm and ensure that those that seek to undermine us understand that we will not allow it. One can only practise appeasement so far. The peoples of this island nation are beginning to cry out for it and just like any other people elsewhere in the world they deserve nothing less.

4 November 2010 at 20:20  
Blogger AncientBriton said...

So what is to be done about it? Where is the next Churchill?

4 November 2010 at 21:02  
OpenID markoffaith said...

Thank you your Grace for a fairly balanced article - in an area where so often balance seems to be lacking, on both sides of the argument.

And it is wonderful to read those words from the judge - Islam has yet to produce a liberal democracy with care for one's neighbours and enemies, and atheism has failed to give any basis, according to its own standards, for any morality. The Christian principles of love, mercy, but also justice, are the very bedrock of liberal democratic law.

4 November 2010 at 21:18  
Blogger Surreptitious Evil said...

@steve,

You may still be a subject of Her Majesty but, since the passing by Her of the "British Nationality Act 1981", you are, I am afraid (and, I admit, assuming) a British Citizen.

Apols for bringing bad news et al.

4 November 2010 at 22:44  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

BBC World Service Flash

Muslim suicide bombers in Britain are set to begin a three-day strike on Monday in a dispute over the number of virgins they are entitled to in the afterlife. Emergency talks with Al Qaeda have so far failed to produce an agreement

The unrest began last Tuesday when Al Qaeda announced that the number of virgins a suicide bomber would receive after his death will be cut by 25% this February from 72 to only 54. The rationale for the cut was the increase in recent years of the number of suicide bombings and a subsequent shortage of virgins in the afterlife.

The suicide bombers' union, the British Organization of Occupational Martyrs ( or B.O.O.M. ) responded with a statement that this was unacceptable to its members and immediately balloted for strike action.

General Secretary Abdullah Amir told the press, "Our members are literally working themselves to death in the cause of Jihad. We don't ask for much in return but to be treated like this is like a kick in the teeth".

Speaking from his shed in Tipton in the West Midlands in which he currently resides, Al Qaeda chief executive Osama bin Laden explained, "We sympathize with our workers concerns but Al Qaeda is simply not in a position to meet their demands. They are simply not accepting the realities of modern-day Jihad in a competitive marketplace. Thanks to Western depravity, there is now a chronic shortage of virgins in the afterlife. It's a straight choice between reducing expenditure and laying people off. I don't like cutting wages but I'd hate to have to tell 3000 of my staff that they won't be able to blow themselves up."

Spokespersons for the unions in the North East of England, Ireland, Wales and the entire Australian continent stated that the strike would not affect their operations as "There are no virgins in their areas anyway".

Apparently the drop in the number of suicide bombings has been put down to the emergence of that Scottish singing star, Susan Boyle - now that Muslims know what a virgin looks like that they are not so keen on going to paradise.
***
(copied this in verbatim but apologies for the last sentence and to Susan Boyle as it is a bit gratuitous)

5 November 2010 at 01:00  
Blogger Gnostic said...

ROFL!

5 November 2010 at 06:26  
Anonymous Voyager said...

A Christian’s love for his neighbour encompasses, or should encompass, all his neighbours.

Since most "Christian" values are actually Jewish and to be found in Leviticus, it is important to see what Torah-observant Jesus meant in context rather than in the secularised form of "Christianity" marketed through our lax religious prism of 20th Century Apostasy

5 November 2010 at 07:55  
Blogger Caedmon's Cat said...

Cranmer said:

Whether or not he has interpreted the essence of Islam correctly, he has no doubt that Miss Choudhry’s interpretation of it espouses values which are antithetical to those of Christianity and liberal democracy.

I would further suggest that the murderous actions of this individual are not only antithetical to the principle of Christianity and liberal democracy - they are actually antithetical to basic human decency. There's no limit on man's capacity to commit evil, especially when egged on by a debased theology - be it Islamic or any other. (And that includes Marxism and national socialism.)

5 November 2010 at 09:01  
Blogger Maturecheese said...

Manfarang said...

Double standards as usual.
Robert Ashman kills a councillor with a samurai sword.Sent to Broadmoor.Let out after 10 years.

4 November 2010 14:43

If you want to see double standards at work compare The odious Lord Ham Heads treatment to Philippa Curtis's. I still struggle to get to grips with that one.

5 November 2010 at 09:28  
Anonymous bluedog said...

An excellent post, Your Grace. Mr Justice Cooke is a man of courage and must be congratulated for his un-PC defence of Christianity. Please let us know if you hear that he has been recommended for counselling. One can only speculate on what the Islamo-nutters are saying about the judge on the web and in their prayer-rooms.

5 November 2010 at 09:46  
Blogger Graham Davis said...

5 November 2010 01:00

Very amusing Anon, why don't you give yourself a name?

5 November 2010 at 11:33  
Blogger Terry White said...

ABU HAMZA

He of the hooked hands brought about by attempting to let off bombs in his original country of Egypt and from which he was subsequently banished and had his passport revoked, has enjoyed a great victory over the British government in it's attempts to do likewise for similarly trying to provoke similar outrages within these shores now that it is harder for him to actually light the fuse and blow innocents to pieces himself.

His appeal against extradition and the cancellation of his passport was upheld, no doubts to triumphal whoops from him and his supporters who gleefully use the vaguaries and accomodating nature of the British courts against us even as they plot to overturn those same rules and impose harsh foreign rules upon the people of this country.

*See my comment of yesterday in which I stated that you would find not one Muslim country willing to put up with such nonesense, and can you blame them. They act. They say what they mean and mean what they say and good luck to them. But where on earth does it leave the beleagured people of Britain?!

5 November 2010 at 14:31  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Terry White .... it is, or rather it should be, beyond belief. Yet another feeble, wet, white-liberal judgement that will serve to push Britain toward future civil unrest/armed conflict ... it will surely end in tears...

6 November 2010 at 16:40  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older