Wednesday, April 06, 2011

David Cameron “...as with so many of the world’s problems, we are responsible for the issue in the first place”


These were the words of the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland on a visit to Pakistan yesterday.

It is one thing to seek to strengthen diplomatic relations or to forge trade deals with foreign nations in pursuit of the national interest. But it is quite another to denigrate or defame one’s own country and detract from its historic achievements in order to bolster those diplomatic and trade objectives.

This story is covered by The Daily Mail and by The Daily Telegraph. It may appear elsewhere, but it is not worth seeking out. The Mail is typically myopic and histrionic, denouncing a package worth £650million for the education of young Pakistanis as though it were a total waste of money. Pakistan faces an existential threat: it is sliding inexorably towards civil war with a growing internal Islamist threat. It is widely known that Pakistan exports its terrorist cells to the UK, and there is no better antidote to this than a good education. Ergo, the package is in the British national interest.

But the Prime Minister disparages the memory of many greater men than he when he denounces the whole history of British foreign policy by condensing it into one trite sound-bite. Whilst His Grace is by no means naive when it comes to the folly of some past colonial pursuits, the good considerably outweighs the bad. Yet perhaps that is not what is taught by the history masters at Eton College or the university dons of Oxford.

What irks His Grace the most is the use of ‘many’: had the Prime Minister said ‘some’, it would have been an unspecified small number and undeniably accurate. But ‘many’ is great in number and moves nearer to ‘most’: indeed, it connotes something of a majority, which merits a little scrutiny. Just what are these ‘many’ problems in the world for which England or the United Kingdom is ‘responsible’?

The Kashmir conflict?

The demands for partition were driven by Mohammad Ali Jinnah: his fervent (and unswerving) desire as India moved towards independence was for a Muslim state, independent of the prevailing Hindu/Sikh majority. Britain’s Viscount Radcliffe certainly drew up the borders, but they were not imposed upon either side: there was consensus and agreement, diplomatically guided by Viscount Mountbatten. What should we have done otherwise? Deny Jinnah his independent Islamic state? Would that not have caused India to descend into a bloody civil war, with thousands if not millions slaughtered? Was not partition the lesser evil?

Perhaps the Prime Minister refers also to the ‘troubles’ in Northern Ireland?

This chronic religio-political conflict is murky and complex (as are all these 'issues'). But what alternative was there to partition? Should we have placed the Protestant-Unionist minority of Ireland at the mercy of the Catholic-Nationalist majority in a united Catholic state, for the potato famine and the slaughter of Smerwick to be perpetually re-enacted with roles reversed? Was not partition the lesser evil?

The creation of Iraq?

Certainly, the UK administered the demise of the Ottoman Empire, but so did France and Italy. The decision was taken to impose a Hashimite monarchy upon disparate ethnic and religious groups. While TE Lawrence may have protested, the alternative would have been to have left the region to decades of internecine conflict between Sunni, Shi’a and Kurd, in which, again, millions would have died. The settlement was not perfect, and ultimately, of course, it led to the rise of Saddam Hussein. But hindsight is a wonderful thing.

The creation of the state of Israel?

Israel has been in and out of occupation since the 6th century BC, when the dispersal of Jews beyond their nation’s borders first began. By the sack of Jerusalem in AD 70, the number forcibly dispersed exceeded those who lived in Israel. Out of World War II, in which it is estimated that some six million Jews were systematically tortured, murdered and incinerated, Lord Balfour’s declaration of 1917 which led to the creation of the state of Israel gave the Diaspora their much longed-for homeland. The mandate to do so was handed to Great Britain by the League of Nations. What otherwise should we have done? Leave the Jews weeping by the rivers of Babylon, dreaming of Zion? Was not the creation of Israel the lesser evil?

There are doubtless many other 'world problems' for which Britain is ‘responsible’, and the thread below is open for informed and educated debate on these matters. But one thing is certain to His Grace: England and more recently the United Kingdom have been an undoubted force for good in the world. No patriotic prime minister would be so careless as to give the impression to a foreign people in foreign lands that our history is shameful, our Empire a cause of regret, or that our foreign policy has been an unmitigated disaster.

109 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ann Coulter was right: 'We should invade these countreis, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.'

6 April 2011 at 10:28  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

Does the Prime Minister really believe the things he said, or were they just spoken for effect? Either way, it was an enormously ignorant comment.

My major concern though is with the £650,000,000. Who oversees the money and how it will be spent? The foundations of the UK are crumbling, and yet he throws money at other countries with gay abandon. But if this country is to re-establish itself it needs the foundations being built solidly, and then look to helping others. After all which is better, to give ourselves the medicine to help ourselves, then making us stronger and more able to help those in need? Or give the medicine to others, making ourselves worse than before and far less likely to be able to help anyone else in the future?

6 April 2011 at 10:37  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You were lading Dave as a statesman not long ago, for attacking Libya.

6 April 2011 at 10:40  
Blogger Robin said...

It is a matter of deep regret that the grit and dedication of so many British people in building the Empire and creating the basis for subsequent sovereign states is today so denigrated. Those who went out to West Africa around a 100 years ago had a life expectancy of a few years. Yet still they went. India may not be perfect but it has a tradition of civil service that has kept it running.

It is a pity that we have so accepted partisan critiscism of what was created and those who achieved it, that we no longer have any pride in our Imperial past.

6 April 2011 at 10:42  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good to see our treacherous rulers putting my increased taxes to good use. Clearly our own education system can no longer cope with indoctrinating millions of children from all over the globe so it makes sense to build new schools and pay for teachers in other countries, especially if they are Asian and Islamic. This will go a long way to ensuring that the pool of ‘highly skilled’ immigrant cooks, bottle washers and Lib/Lab/Con voters will never be exhausted and British citizenship can be thrown with ever increasing gay abandon to all who graduate and wish to settle here and assist in the replacement of the native British peoples in the fastest possible time.

6 April 2011 at 10:47  
Blogger Graham Davis said...

I don’t think that any current leader (or anybody else) should feel the need to apologise for the sins of their predecessors. An apology is only worthwhile if it is made by a person who seeks to atone for their own wrongdoing.

Having said that Great Britain has been implicated in many of the conflicts that still bedevil the world. Let’s not kid ourselves that our past involvement was made out of a desire to help other nations. Our Empire and Colonial past was driven by one thing – greed. We plundered their natural resources often enslaving their populace and if we have left anything that could be regarded as a positive legacy it was purely incidental.

6 April 2011 at 10:57  
Anonymous martin sewell said...

A Spectator correspondent recently wrote in on this subject quoting one of his teachers.

" There is no better advertisement for Colonial Government than post-Colonial Government."

Like like all generalisations, an over simplification - but one not without truth either.

6 April 2011 at 11:01  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Driven by greed alone, Mr Davis? Along with the settlers/traders hungry for land and resources, there were also the civilising force of the Christian missionaries.

One has only to look at the history of New Zealand and the missionaries' role in bringing about a treaty with the indigenous people and the British Crown, to see how humanitarian concerns could also be factored into the colonial endeavour.

6 April 2011 at 11:05  
Blogger Ariadne said...

The Balfour Declaration of 1917 was of use in bringing USA into World War One.

Although the British Empire did give to the areas it ruled it also did things that caused and still cause immense damage and bloodshed.

78% was carved out of the Mandate for Palestine, given to the Hashemites and excluded from being part of the Jewish national home and indeed Jews are still forbidden to live there. Despite the law enshrined in the San Remo Treaty and later documents.

Legal Rights and Title of Sovereignty of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel and Palestine under International Law
Howard Grief

And now that the notorious Goldstone report has been repudiated by Goldstone himself the Foreign and Commonwealth Office is still going to treat it as before: Holy Writ - of Human Rights Watch and its promoted terrorists.

6 April 2011 at 11:05  
Blogger Ernst, Tiddles and the case of the Traitorous PM said...

Your Grace

Many thanks.for your educated and balanced comment.

"But one thing is certain to His Grace: England and more recently the United Kingdom have been an undoubted force for good in the world. No patriotic prime minister would be so careless as to give the impression to a foreign land that our history is shameful, our Empire a cause of regret, or that our foreign policy has been an unmitigated disaster."

All the good things the British Empire has left are completely ignored such as Cricket, which has given their nations the love of a sport they have excelled at in the recent world Cup and brought joy to their nations...or education, roads, energy infrastructure, law, abolishment of slavery, etc.

Have other Empires such as France, Belgium and Italy given their's up with such good natured goodwill and with continuing concern via a commonwealth as we have.

There is much to be proud of in our past but it appears they are never taught this at places like Oxford or Cambridge.

A calmer Old Ernst

Ernst has a much clearer idea of how he will place his moniker X on May 5th.

"Let’s not kid ourselves that our past involvement was made out of a desire to help other nations. Our Empire and Colonial past was driven by one thing – greed. We plundered their natural resources often enslaving their populace and if we have left anything that could be regarded as a positive legacy it was purely incidental." A Concise history of the British Empire in a single paragraph?..only more throwaway comments from you, my lad.

6 April 2011 at 11:06  
Blogger Rebel Saint said...

I concur with most of what you have written Cranmer and bow to your superior knowledge on most of the subjects. Except on the point of justifying giving Pakistan £650,000,000 for 'education'.

There are many many parts of the world where education is more lacking, more desired, greater appreciated & would reap bigger dividends. But it is not our role to finance the education of the world. Furthermore, the threat from Pakistan will not be reduced by educating them. We will then simply have educated mad men. Many of the the suicide bombers are not uneducated (the Glasgow bomber was a doctor; the 7/7 bombers were graduates). If they wanted education more than nuclear weapons or bomb belts then they have the means & resources to supply it themselves.

PS - regret hastily calling Dave a "statesman" yet?

6 April 2011 at 11:09  
Blogger Rebel Saint said...

@Ernst ... Cricket is undoubtedly the greatest evil we have inflicted upon many of these poor nations. Had Dave mentioned Cricket in his speech then his statement would be far more justifiable.

It would have been more charitable to teach the natives the far more interesting sport of "Watching Paint Dry"; or even "Watching Dry Paint"

6 April 2011 at 11:13  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

Well there is more than one country in the world! Get rid of him he’s a liability first the Libya issue that we had no business interfering in but can’t seem to maneuver out of and now this. He comes across as a groveling embarrassment. What is it with these bloody apologists that we have in government these days; I thought that was a Labour thing.
Pakistan really could fund it’s own schools so what’s to say that money wont be used for the purpose it’s given.

I suggest that we transport back all those who have come here after they have had their free education and get them to work in the schools in Pakistan.

6 April 2011 at 11:13  
Blogger Graham Davis said...

civilising force of the Christian missionaries.

I knew it wouldn’t be long before that old chestnut appeared.

What breathtaking arrogance! You assume that your supernatural belief system is better than those of indigenous people. The missionaries that followed on the coattails of the conquerors destroyed everything that they didn’t understand and imposed their own ghastly myths on those who were too impoverished and ignorant to understand what they were signing up to.

6 April 2011 at 11:18  
Blogger Ernst, Tiddles and the case of the Traitorous PM said...

Rebel Saint 6 April 2011 11:13

"@Ernst ... Cricket is undoubtedly the greatest evil we have inflicted upon many of these poor nations."

Dear boy, it is the most wonderful of British sports created by us and yet serves a purpose in linking a people with the Almighty.

Should a nation be suffering from a drought, all that needs to be done is plant 6 stumps in a field, have 23 men stand around or in its perimeter and watch what happens.

The Almighty presumes it is a request for rain and opens up the floodgates for us or have you never played cricket.

Our special link with the Almighty as a nation!

Ernst

6 April 2011 at 11:25  
Blogger Rebel Saint said...

@ Graham Davis ..."You assume that your supernatural belief system is better than those of indigenous people. "

I wondered how long it would be before that old chestnut of yours appeared.

Of course we assume our "supernatural belief system" is better than theirs. Otherwise they wouldn't be missionaries would they.

Of course, may I presume that teaching them your "naturalistic belief system" would not be breathtaking arrogance since your belief system is true?

6 April 2011 at 11:28  
Blogger Ernst, Tiddles and the case of the Traitorous PM said...

Ariadne wisely said 6 April 2011 11:05

Ernst fully agrees with what you state, to our shame as a nation.

Ernst

6 April 2011 at 11:28  
Blogger Rebel Saint said...

@Ernst ... thank you for explaining the true nature of cricket. It makes a lot more sense now. Being a native of Manchester I have never needed such an invocation for rain.

6 April 2011 at 11:32  
Blogger WitteringsfromWitney said...

"The Mail is typically myopic and histrionic, denouncing a package worth £650million for the education of young Pakistanis as though it were a total waste of money."

Sorry YG, but when the Coalition can prove that the elderly and vulnerable in this country receive all the funding they should, when our own children are educated to a good standard, when our country has the personnel and equipment to defend itself............. then we can start donating money to help others.

When a country is about to spend £1bn on military hardware with China, perhaps they should spend £0.5bn on the hardware and the remainder on their education policies.

6 April 2011 at 11:35  
Blogger Graham Davis said...

Rebel Saint

I don’t have a belief system, natural or otherwise.

I don’t believe in anything at all. I am content with the idea that when the evidence suggests that something is so, I provisionally accept it, until that is a better explanation comes along. Over time some things gather such overwhelming evidence that we tend to rely on an explanation, gravity for example, but as I say it will always be provisional. Certainty about anything is greatest threat to human understanding since it limits our horizons to that which is “known”.

6 April 2011 at 11:48  
Blogger Rebel Saint said...

@Graham Davis ... "I don’t have a belief system, natural or otherwise."

Utter BS. Your lack of self-awareness truly is breath-taking.

6 April 2011 at 11:51  
Anonymous Dreadnaught said...

A very good post YG and difficult to explore in only one direction.

However, on this performance I think that Cameron is less of a statesman and more of snake oil salesman; and dare I say, has a long way to if he wants to be a true-blue Tory. Giving taxpayers money to foreign governments while executing swingeing cuts at home is not what I call fair, reasonable or patriotic

Any country that can afford to have nuclear armaments can afford to educate its own people.

This was an opportunity lost; the aid instead of nuclear weapons bargaining chip could have been used by Cameron to stabilise not only the Indian sub-continent but serve to put such weapons beyond the reach of the Islamists that threaten the West.

With India now officially the most populous country, they too could have safeguarded their people and burgeoning economic world status by engaging in nuclear disarmament along side Pakistan.

Britain was virtually bankrupt by 1947 and could no longer afford to hold the Empire together. Neither Mountbatten or Ghandi was in favour of partition but Jinnah forced everyone's hand by virtual declaration of sectarian civil war unless he got his way. Even when he did West Pakistan was soon involved in a bloody war with East Pakistan.

Pakistan is a basket case while India is an economic power house both shared the same legacy of Empire but one holds religious obligations at arms length from politics.

I strike me as an extreme waste of money why we still fund an organisation like the British Commonwealth of Nations yet never seem to use it for other purpose than obscenely engorged jollies for Heads of State who can't even talk to each other?

6 April 2011 at 11:59  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Your Grace

I have wondered where the real story of the British Empire began. How come a small island people who inhabit a cold rainy part off the north-west shore of continental Europe arose to make three-quarters of the world blush under the pink of the pax Britannica?

As Shakespeare once put it:

This royal throne of kings, this sceptred isle,
This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars,
This other Eden, demi-paradise,
This fortress built by Nature for herself
Against infection and the hand of war,
This happy breed of men, this little world,
This precious stone set in the silver sea,
Which serves it in the office of a wall
Or as a moat defensive to a house,
Against the envy of less happier lands,--
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.

William Shakespeare (1564 - 1616) King Richard II, Act 2 scene 1

Why do the phrases, rhythms and cadences of Archbishop Thomas Crammer’s Book of Common Prayer resonate in the plays of Shakespeare?

Why are India's 'untouchables' to build a temple to 'Goddess of the English language'?

An imperial power of such magnitude and endowed with such blessing upon which the sun never set; as there was always a British colony orbiting the sun.

But that is to wonder where power comes from.

Behold, the nations are as a drop of a bucket, and are counted as the small dust of the balance: behold, he taketh up the isles as a very little thing.
And Lebanon is not sufficient to burn, nor the beasts thereof sufficient for a burnt offering.
All nations before him are as nothing; and they are counted to him less than nothing, and vanity.

Isaiah 40: 15-17 (KJV)

It is written ‘In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God’.

And the Word came to these islands via: Jerusalem, Athens, Rome, Wittenberg, and Canterbury.

And Judaeo-Christian scientists began their work to think God’s thoughts after Him (pace Sir Isaac Newton).

And the industrial revolution started.

And just like with the Roman Empire God permitted roads to be built so that the Word could spread – so He permitted (beginning with Cromwell) the sea lanes of the world to be opened for the sake of His Word.

6 April 2011 at 12:22  
Anonymous MrJ said...

LobotomySpoon82 (10:37) "My major concern though is with the £650,000,000. Who oversees the money and how it will be spent?" and Rebel Saint (11:09)_

It is common knowledge, of course, that such political payments/promises are made for the benefit of certain political parties and/or as a cover for benefits to other such parties. Mr Cameron must believe or have been led to believe that there is a benefit in it for some party in which he has an interest. Anyone know who/which any of these parties are? Or to what extent the people of this country will have any practical benefit at all?

6 April 2011 at 12:27  
Blogger Graham Davis said...

Mr Singh

Does your sentimentality know no bounds?

6 April 2011 at 12:35  
Blogger Ernst, Tiddles and the case of the Traitorous PM said...

MrJ said 6 April 2011 12:27

"It is common knowledge, of course, that such political payments/promises are made for the benefit of certain political parties and/or as a cover for benefits to other such parties." Forgive old Ernst but I disagree about the £650M.

After last years 'Thinking Out Loud' by Dave, telling the Pakistani's they were two faced, the poor PM had to go with something to offer, so they would listen to his 'opinions' about where they were going wrong.

So he uses an xtra £400M of our money, to smooth his entry into Pakistan.

Imagine us making this mistake at work and getting the company to stump up hundreds of millions because of our guff's. Think I might be handed my coat and shown the door. 'Statesmanship' at our cost. LOL.

When our education system plummets down the world scale, we decide to 'Invest' in other nations rather than our own children... This is MADNESS not charity.


Ernst

6 April 2011 at 12:43  
Anonymous John Wrake said...

Jinnah's demand for partition arose from the broken promise of the Hindu Congress Party to share power with Muslims after the British left, made in 1936. To blame the British for partition or problems over Kashmir is to fly in the face of facts.
Sadly, the current Prime Minister is as ignorant of the history of the British Empire as most of those who denigrate it.

6 April 2011 at 12:46  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Should we have placed the Protestant-Unionist minority of Ireland at the mercy of the Catholic-Nationalist majority in a united Catholic state

Oh Your Grace, you were not around for The Curragh Mutiny in 1914....how fortunate Lloyd George could butcher Carson's Volunteer Force on The Somme

6 April 2011 at 12:50  
Anonymous Oswin said...

I have a few issues with the Normans ... would any care to apologise? How about some 'compo' ?

Mr. Singh @ 12:22:

Way to go Sir! I'm with you all the way!

6 April 2011 at 13:00  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your Grace would know that Ilong ago predicted Cameron would prove to be an awful PM.
He has done nothing to make me change my mind - though I suspect His Graces's enthusiasm for Cameron has dimmed?

It's this wet nelly,self-hating white liberal type of speech which turned me away from the Tories.
The lady from Grantham cannot be impressed.

Never mind leader of the country -Cameron does not even cut the mustard as a decent Englishman.

Regarding the comment "It is widely known that Pakistan exports its terrorist cells to the UK, and there is no better antidote to this than a good education."
I would concur-IF we were dealing with people receptive to such an approach.
But we are not , so I disagree.
There ARE more efficacious antidoates available.

I thank His Grace for regularly stimulating us with his musings and (quite unlike the PM),showing he is a "decent Englishman", by tolerating dissenting opinions.


Marcus Foxall

6 April 2011 at 13:18  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

As David Davies has pointed out, if Pakistan didn't spend their money on subs from China they would have enough for education.

6 April 2011 at 13:53  
Blogger Ernst, Tiddles and the case of the Traitorous PM said...

Marcus Extremus Speculatio Dixit 6 April 2011 13:18

Spot on, Marcus, old boy.

Ernsty

6 April 2011 at 13:56  
Blogger The Gray Monk said...

This current crop of politicians never hesitate to trash the efforts of those who built the wealth they now enjoy, or who created the infrastructures now being destroyed by the tinpot dictators they cosy up to at every opportunity in the great market of political expediency.

I note there is no whisper of protest at the Oxford College whose atheist/humanist dominated Faculty wish to abolish the post of chaplain - presumably so they can subsume the Trust Funds set up by Christian Philanthropists into spreading their deceits and lies further.

6 April 2011 at 14:41  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

It is widely known that Pakistan exports its terrorist cells to the UK, and there is no better antidote to this than a good education.

However much money we throw at Pakistan, or at the Pakistani community in Britain, there will always be some who will take inspiration from the Qur’an to commit acts of terrorism. It is the violent teachings of the Qur’an that lie at the heart of the problem, and there is no wealth on Earth that can alter them. It doesn’t help, either, that a hadith records the Prophet Mohammed saying: ‘I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror [cast in the hearts of the enemy]’.

When Allah and His Prophet ordain violence and terror, taxpayers’ money would be better spent on our defence and security budgets. Islam will not be halted by reason but by strength.

6 April 2011 at 14:59  
Anonymous non mouse said...

Excellent post, Your Grace; thank you. And my responses support those of Oswin, Mr. Singh, and Mr. Blofeld.

Marxist, deconstructionist, and postcolonialist educators have obviously informed the wiring inside skulls like those like those of #1 Traitor. My main issues are with the Romans though. After all, they enslaved us and brought us literacy and all its consequences for education. Still, the Greeks should take their share of the blame too - and the Heb... Oh, well. There we are then.

If it weren't for those migrationary, colonising types, we Celts would never have got into the really advanced mess we're in today!

Oh - and while we're on the blame game: State side news reports are today castigating Terry Jones for causing the UN/Afghanistan massacres. I suppose that chain of, er - mental something or other - could take us back to the Hebrew as well.

Brilliant explication of the true meaning of cricket, Mr. Blofeld!!


wv: knobl That's us, I guess. Well and truly k-nobbled.

6 April 2011 at 15:00  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Rebel Saint @ 11:13 :

Wash out your mouth with soap and water - now!

6 April 2011 at 15:25  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Johnny @ 14:59 :

Spot on, as per usual.

6 April 2011 at 15:30  
Blogger English Viking said...

Your Grace,

You said 'It is widely known that Pakistan exports its terrorist cells to the UK, and there is no better antidote to this than a good education.

I can think of at least one. Instead of throwing cash at enemy states, we could lob a few Cruise missiles instead. The more the merrier.

You said 'No patriotic prime minister (sic) would be so careless as to give the impression to a foreign people in foreign lands that our history is shameful, our Empire a cause of regret, or that our foreign policy has been an unmitigated disaster.'

But you asked us to vote for him. Repeatedly. Despite numerous warnings from cleverer men than me.

Are you sorry now?

6 April 2011 at 16:10  
Blogger Gnostic said...

Is there anyone left in this country still under the illusion that Dhimmi Dave isn't a stupid, dangerous and deeply ignorant c***?

6 April 2011 at 16:15  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Graham Davis should know (though probably doesn't) that the great atheist political experiments (which actively persecuted Christians and other believers) of the 20th century were:

Stalin's Soviet Union
Hitler's Germany
Mao's China

Everyone a blood-soaked disaster for the human race. "Humanists" hate the human race they profess to love.

6 April 2011 at 16:26  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Anonymous:

You forgot the terrors of the Freench Revolution!

6 April 2011 at 16:48  
Anonymous Oswin said...

or even the 'French' one!

6 April 2011 at 16:50  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

Just look at his slick hair do.

Thats what you get from brushing your hair with greasy palms.

6 April 2011 at 17:20  
Blogger Ernst, Tiddles and the case of the Traitorous PM said...

Looks like Dave is being accosted by a Pakistani Big Issue seller.

I like how he is pretending to search for a couple of rupee...
'Nothing on me Mr Wallah, will have a look in the public purse and see what we can do, Warsi, have a butchers'.

What a greasy slimeball.

Ernst

6 April 2011 at 17:34  
Anonymous not a machine said...

Thankyou your grace for putting in some of the salient historic facts , somthing the socialists spinners all too often forget to do.

I perhaps did not get along with the PMs wording ,and I was slightly more interested in his request for the Pakistani government to actually begin taxing its wealthy class to start providing a rudimentary social fund to begin reversing the nations massive illitercay problem.

I am full of questions about where and how previous aid money has been spent if illitercay is still something we are giving aid for.
The country has diastrous floods but it seems unable to commit itself to right sort of politics that stem the corruptions that keep in it a backward and perpetual era of turmoil and trouble , that is then exported .
The civil war with the hardline extremists is fault line entirely due to the sort of politics they have run.
having a jihad against secularism in a country so boiling with all the failures of even basic infrastructure brings the question of why islam has so far, not developed any enlightend way of governing large populations , beyond tribal narratives. You could probebely give them a proper modern country and they would still fall out until it was destroyed because they do not settle there grievences/corruptions for the good of there own country.

In that respect I fail to see why such a wide and vague appology was spoken ,these people are running there own country , and they are in the effect and cause era of there own countrys affairs,and not the cause and effect of the post colonial era.
Partition as you say could have been avoided had the demand for an islamic state not being so ignorant of the beliefs of older religions.
I sometimes wish Adam Smiths wealth of nations ,had been transalted into arabic much earlier , it may at least have posed the question about the causes of continuing failing nation status in Islamic goverments.

If I may add , I was greatly moved by todays funeral of the young Roman Catholic police officer ,my condolences to the Kerr family grieving over such an uncessary and callous act of terrorism ,my graitude to his family for showing us all that god/christ is illuminated when evil is not allowed to take hold in hearts.

6 April 2011 at 17:48  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

The demands for partition were driven by Mohammad Ali Jinnah

Richard Hough’s biography of Lord Mountbatten has this on Jinnah:

❛But the one man who could drive home the bolt and secure the lock of a united India was Jinnah. ‘Jinnah was the Moslem League,’ said Mountbatten. ‘He held the future of India in his hands. I tried the same technique [friendship] with him, but it was almost impossible to warm to him. He had only one dream, and that was a separate Moslem state.’ Jinnah was cold (‘My God, he was cold!’ Mountbatten would exclaim), arrogant, vain, inflexible—all the characteristics that make negotiation virtually impossible.❜

6 April 2011 at 19:05  
Anonymous PJ said...

Is it just me or does the woman on the left look like Baroness Warsi!

6 April 2011 at 19:15  
Anonymous PJ said...

Oh wait...it is!

6 April 2011 at 19:19  
Blogger Maryam K said...

From some of the comments: The Quran does not permit terrorism. Some people seem to think its a tired explanation after 10 years of apparently dealing with terrorism (note, its not called militancy) but the fact has to be stated quite a lot. The Quran states that we should repel evil with superior good, that innocent life cannot be taken. And not all Muslims follow Hadiths, in fact the more I've browsed online the more I've seen this.

And can some of you tell me what you would do if the UK was attacked like Iraq was, or how you would feel if you were in Chechnya?

6 April 2011 at 19:21  
Blogger Maryam K said...

PJ... I was just about to tell, you, yep she's wearing the traditional outfit.

6 April 2011 at 19:22  
Anonymous Hexe said...

Our traitor PM Davegeld.

VW: icancry

6 April 2011 at 19:26  
Blogger Ernst, Tiddles and the case of the Traitorous PM said...

Non Mouse said 6 April 2011 15:00

'Brilliant explication of the true meaning of cricket, Mr. Blofeld!!'

My Dear Non Mouse.

Any grammar school boy knows this is why our country is blessed with luscious green pastures! LOL!

Rebel Saint must be positively barbarian.

If you have never hurled a piece of leather as fast as a car or tried to avoid it wedging your gooly box up your throat, you have never lived. Talk about concentration.

Ernst's favourite participation sport but now much too old to join in with the young un's. *sigh*

Ernsty

6 April 2011 at 19:29  
Anonymous Dreadnaught said...

Good posts JR.

Big trouble is if the current PM is so lacking in his knowledge of world history - there's not much hope for 'ordinary' kids who now are not taught the subject past the age of fourteen.

Is it me - or has dumbing down become a new national source of social ambition?

6 April 2011 at 19:31  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ Maryam K (19:21)—The Quran does not permit terrorism.

This page of Qur’anic verses may not include the word ‘terrorism’ (I haven’t checked it all) but there are, nonetheless, many exhortations to violence.

I know Muslims like to argue that jihad is a spiritual battle but Qur’an 4:95 says: ‘The believers who stay at home—apart from those that suffer from a grave impediment—are not equal to those who fight for the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons.’ That suggests something more than spiritual warfare.

@ Oswin and Dreadnaught—Thanks.

6 April 2011 at 19:56  
Anonymous Dreadnaught said...

And can some of you tell me what you would do if the UK was attacked like Iraq was, or how you would feel if you were in Chechnya? She says...

The Bush/Blair war in Iraq was a mistake - we should have finished Saddam's rotten regieme off when we ran them out of Kuwait.

Even so,there were very many in that country who initially supported this action.

In gratitude,the Shia took advantage of the confusion and kicked off a civil war to advance their own agenda. Subsequently many innocent people were video'd being blown to bits or beheaded by devout Muslims acting in line with the literal teaching of the Koran.

True to character - didn't the Chechens deliberately single out and murder 300 kids on their first day at school at Beslan?and how about a couple more dozen Russians in a Moscow theatre and on the underground for good measure.

I reckon we made a grave mistake in sorting out the Christian Serbs for the Muslims of Bosnia; there were atrocities committed by all sides. And don't forget Madam, it was the Bosnians whose grandfathers joined the Nazi SS to fight against us in WW2 and to hunt Jewish civilians on behalf of Hitler and his ragheaded pal the Mufti of Jerusalem.

If we were attacked or invaded? - Muslims would be the last people on the planet I would want to come to our aid - treacherous cowardly bastards all of them.

6 April 2011 at 20:21  
Anonymous Byrnsweord said...

"It is widely known that Pakistan exports its terrorist cells to the UK, and there is no better antidote to this than a good education. Ergo, the package is in the British national interest."

Your Grace, I must disagree. Stopping the seemingly endless stream of immigration of unskilled workers from the Indian subcontinent would be a better idea. As would educating young British Muslims in this country to a higher standard.

6 April 2011 at 20:38  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Codswallop. The west has no need to apologize for itslef. While not perfect, the good has definitely outweighed the bad.

6 April 2011 at 20:45  
Blogger Lakester91 said...

I thought the 7/7 bombers were university graduates? Islamists are far from stupid, they tend to be very academically intelligent; just they are also brainwashed into insanity. No amount of education or persuasion will release them from their madness as they are trained to dismiss those who oppose them as liars and deceivers.

We cannot hope to defeat radical Islam with our own Western brainwashing (state education) as it is inferior to the Islamic clerics' version.

The only way to defeat hatred is with love. We must look to our society and see where it is failing. We must understand where there are genuine grievances (promiscuity, apathy, indifference) and address them, understanding that, although it will not cure those already ill, it will stop new infections. Most importantly, we need to focus on our competing ideology; if there is none, then we have no answer to radicalism.

We need to concentrate on Christianity in our society; rather than attempting to relax our morals to broaden our congregation, we need to focus it: quality not quantity. Once they see us practising what we preach, then they will flock to us. The attractiveness of Islam is that they are true to their morality and the same must be true of us. We need an answer to secular nihilism.

To see the PM abroad denigrating our nation kind of disgusts me. It is discouraging to those who want to improve it, and encourages those who would see its destruction.

6 April 2011 at 21:54  
Anonymous bluedog said...

Good post Your Grace.

By way of post-graduate studies for Dave I shall purchase a copy of Peter Clarke's excellent book 'The Last 1000 days of the British Empire' and send it to him.

Dave really does have no idea of the situation that the United Kingdom faced as its power was eclipsed and destroyed by both its allies (principally the United States and the Soviet Union) and its enemy, Germany. The United States deserves special mention. Throughout the Presidency of FDR it was US policy to maintain a representative or consul in New Delhi in order to influence the development of the Quit India movement of which the Congress Party was the principal expression. This hardly helped the Allied war effort, but certainly expedited the US goal of displacing the European empires globally.

Mr Graham Davis @ 11.18 said 'What breathtaking arrogance! You assume that your supernatural belief system is better than those of indigenous people. The missionaries that followed on the coattails of the conquerors destroyed everything that they didn’t understand and imposed their own ghastly myths on those who were too impoverished and ignorant to understand what they were signing up to.'

To which one can only reply that your ignorance and insularity are matched only by that of David Cameron. You really need to get out more and learn something of the world beyond the Cambridge Secular Society cubby house. The work done by Christian missionaries was invaluable in changing the value systems of many primitive societies so that something approaching modern democratic states could arise.

And I agree entirely with Anne Coulter. That is the solution to Islam.

6 April 2011 at 21:54  
Anonymous Ronald said...

His Grace is wrong to say that partition was the lesser of 2 evils. There was a defacto civil war and at least 1 million died in partition. The fault lies primarily with Ghandi and Jinnah. Although Mountbatten rushed it at the bequest of Attlee. What really should have happened is that India should have been granted dominion status at the end of the War. That what the Secretary of state for India, Leo Amery, suggested. But as usual Churchill refused to discuss India at all.

6 April 2011 at 21:54  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Why would Churchill discuss Dominion status when he had blocked Home Rule in 1935 in a campaign so virulent that he had candidates standing against Conservatives on this issue and antagonised Baldwin so intensely he would not have him back in Government.......ever wonder why Churchill was a Backbencher 1931-1940 ?

It was because he was not trusted and that was largely Indian Home Rule which he sabotaged

6 April 2011 at 22:06  
Anonymous Dreadnaught said...

"The work done by Christian missionaries was invaluable in changing the value systems of many primitive societies so that something approaching modern democratic states could arise"

Oh come off it Bluedog, this really is preposterous - that was not what the Christian missionaries were about at all; they went as adjuncts to conquerors. Christianity and most religions were first and foremost a control tools. As for missionaries being creators of embryonic democracies - perhaps you would like to provide an example where this was a stated objective; where attempted or achieved without abject failure and destroying lives and cultures in the process.

I offer this little snippet for your consideration.

“Thus Cortes and his men entered the city, not only as guests, but also as gods coming home. It was the first direct encounter between one of the most extraordinary pre-Columbian cultures and the strangers who would eventually destroy it.”

http://ambergriscaye.com/pages/mayan/aztec.html

To state that the likes of the Aztecs were simple'primitives' really is ‘breathtaking arrogance' and quite frankly in addition to that historically ignorant and that's putting it mildly.

6 April 2011 at 23:49  
Anonymous bluedog said...

M/s Dreadnaught, His Grace's post relates to the British Empire, not the Spanish Empire. Having said that I quite agree that missionaries were primarily adjuncts to conquerors, although there were exceptions, such as the South Pacific islands, which is what I rather had in mind. These Imperial outposts were aquired accidentally in the modern era.

As a general observation, your statement 'where attempted or achieved without abject failure and destroying lives and cultures in the process.' is profoundly wrong. It is the benefits of European civilisation as transmitted through the historic empires that have enabled the global population to reach six billion today.

In the context of the Iberian empires in the Americas it seems necessary to point out to you that they were established in the late Middle Ages when democracy was unknown anywhere in Europe. The British Empire reached its height fully 400 years later, after both the Reformation and the Enlightenment and carried with it completely different values to those of bold Cortes.

If you actually read my post you will see that I never stated that the Aztecs were simple primitives. Sociologically speaking that is certainly my view. I take their practice of human sacrifice (ripping the hearts from living victims) as evidence.

Once again, may I suggest a journey beyond the curtilage of the Cambridge Secular Society cubby/wendy house.

7 April 2011 at 00:28  
Anonymous non mouse said...

Bravo, Mr. Bluedog. Well said.

7 April 2011 at 00:38  
Blogger Lakester91 said...

These people are not uneducated

Some peddlers of hate have educational honours

7 April 2011 at 01:08  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Maryam K @19:21 :

I'm sure someone will be along shortly to quote for you all you need to know, and clearly, as yet, you do not.

May I remind you that you muslims have been at it for a damned sight longer than the war in Iraq ... indeed, when were you not???

7 April 2011 at 01:16  
Blogger Ernst, Tiddles and the case of the Traitorous PM said...

Your Grace

Ernst has just had a brainstorm whilst having a cup of coffee.

Forget AV.

How about AC..Alternative Candidate.

Parties are obliged by electoral law to put up two Prospective Parliamentary Candidates, one left wing, one right wing, both with defined manifesto's from their perspective.

That means Old Ernsty can choose if he prefers Frank Field to Frank Skinner or Ken Clarke to Douglas Carswell... Lib Dems and Greens may still have only one candidate as a choice would only confuse the heck out of them.

It keeps the parties on their toes, making sure they offer what we want rather than us pinning the rosette on whatever donkey they present to us. How's about that then.
Ernst has fixed it for us! OOOHOHOOH

Might have to go back into hiding in the crater now as I will be 'Persona Non Grata' with the political elite for coming up with this perfectly reasonable alternative.

Ernst the party pooper! Hurrah.

7 April 2011 at 01:23  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

All this presupposes that Britain and India are in the same power relationship that obtained more than 60 years ago. Times have changed. The Britain that could draw the boundary of Iraq as Churchill and Gertrude Bell did riding camels, or the McMahon Line with pencil is long gone. As for the Partition I thank Almighty God as an Indian Christian, that the 'cunning of history' has seen to it that we Indian are spared the comapny of hordes of Muslims now confined to the two ears of the Indian subcontinent. With 30,000 troops Britain was in no position to decide the issue of the deep seated hostility between Muslims and Hindus as existed in 1947. If anything it has only gotten worse, in large measure due the activities of the Muslims. However Gandhi in going the extra mile, ensured that India would wind up as a secular state. I speak for most Indians when I say that we do not care for Pakistanis for love or money. Coming back to Cameron, I have to agree with the commentators who describe him as a royal c**t. When he was in India, he blamed Pakistan for most of the problems. This man makes the inverterate liar Blair look good in comparison.

Ivan

7 April 2011 at 06:15  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

His Grace: "There are doubtless many other 'world problems' for which Britain is ‘responsible’, and the thread below is open for informed and educated debate on these matters."

An unintended consequence perhaps but weren't the British responsible for installing the Sauds in power which provided a seat for Wahhabism? Wahhabism to my mind is the cause of much of the current Islamist problems across the world.

7 April 2011 at 06:16  
Anonymous bluedog said...

Mr DanJO @ 0616, agree completely. There are two serious threats to the prosperity and social harmony of the West, the Chinese Communist Party and the Saudi monarchy. Both nations depend on Western markets for their own prosperity.

The CCP is an economic threat because China continues to try and overturn Western positions in every continent to their own benefit. Seeing the Chinese scuttle out of Libya was a clear Western success.

If the Saudi monarchy fell there would possibly be great economic turmoil. Saudi Arabia supplies about 12% of global oil production which if lost would cause market chaos. We have now reached a stage where the cost is worth it.

The subversion of Western society by Wahhabist Islam cannot be allowed to continue, or the West will fall. Presumably that is exactly what our Saudi friends want.

7 April 2011 at 07:24  
Blogger Willie said...

I wonder what the trial about abuse during the Mau Mau uprising in Kenya will bring from the mouth our our great leader?
Without doubt it will not be a robust rejection of the charge.
It was pretty small beer anyway in comparison to the huge loss of life brought about by the precipitate flight from colonialism after the UDHR. The real apology for the subsequent sentencing of Africa to at least 50 years of rule by despot and associated misery should be Eleanor Roosevelt and her miserable feminist cohort.
But a camel might be more likely to pass through the eye of a needle.....

7 April 2011 at 08:47  
Anonymous Dreadenaught said...

Bluedog - So Christianity varies is not a global religion. By you definition it all depends from which county the missionaries came, which says how weak and fractured the Christian doctrine was/is. European commerce and all things connected has less to do with religion and more to do with the secular power struggle for dominance between the European States.

These (South Pacific) Imperial outposts were aquired accidentally in the modern era This is such a hilarious proposition - again give up some testable evidence for this.

How do you 'accidently acquire' a populated island or for that matter populate an uninhabited island if that is the case? - see where I'm going here?

7 April 2011 at 09:17  
Anonymous Indigo said...

Cameron is not wrong, though. We haven't always been the good guys.

African slavery, cutting off the hands of Bengali weavers to remove competition to weavers in England, human rights violations during the Mau Mau rebellion. And, latterly, helping the US invade a sovereign country that was no threat to the West and trashing what was a working society: under Saddam there was tolerance of Christians, women could wear Western clothes; and there were no car bombs, and if you ask Iraqis, they will tell you that Saddam was a psychopath but the "line" to avoid crossing to stay safely away from him was known and clear.

7 April 2011 at 09:50  
Anonymous Dreadnaught said...

but weren't the British responsible for installing the Sauds in power which provided a seat for Wahhabism?

I suggest DanJo is in danger of falling into the Cameron school of history as studied through the eyes of national self flagellation.

No on the first part-

The First Saudi State was founded in 1744. This period was marked by conquest of neighboring areas and by religious zeal. At its height, the First Saudi State included most of the territory of modern-day Saudi Arabia, and raids by Al Saud's allies and followers reached into Yemen, Oman, Syria, and Iraq.

And no to the second part as well-

[Wahabism] is a reform movement that began 200 years ago to rid Islamic societies of cultural practices and interpretation that had been acquired over the centuries. The followers of Abdul Wahab (1703-1792) began as a movement to cleanse the Arab bedouin from the influence of Sufism.

I think he would agree that these situations were in place before any real degree of British influence was established.

The third and final part of the assertion I agree, is valid.

7 April 2011 at 10:04  
Anonymous B Karrl of Croydon said...

@ Ernst 7 April 2011 01:23

Love the idea of two candidates from the same party slugging it out for the public's vote.

Conference would be a joy to behold.

Are they up to the challenge, old chap.

7 April 2011 at 10:30  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"I think he would agree that these situations were in place before any real degree of British influence was established"

I'm not sure what all that really has to do with what I said.

The British helped install and maintain the House of Saud, which continues to this day, during and after the first world war and this has been a seat of power for Wahhabism. Does spelling it out a bit more help at all?

Saudi money is propagating Wahhabism all over the place much to the detriment of us all I suggest. Wahhabism may even have effectively died out without that seat of power.

7 April 2011 at 10:39  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"I suggest DanJo is in danger of falling into the Cameron school of history as studied through the eyes of national self flagellation."

I enjoy being British and I enjoy having Britain as a home/base. However, I don't have a particularly rosy view of Britain in the past and its historic intentions. In fact, I expect I would shudder at much of the thoughts of the time, whilst understanding they were a product of the time. Nor am I particularly patriotic. We are where we are now and we should attempt to understand and learn from our past with the best of intentions.

7 April 2011 at 10:49  
Blogger Ernst, Tiddles and the case of the Traitorous PM said...

Mr KarlOff croydon

The concept will ensure that the right part of a party, that has the majority of seats, controls policy and implimentation of that manifesto mandate if elevted into office.

Gone are the days of the majority of voters casting their vote for a Field but getting a Skinner party or leader.

Would sort out the debacle currently of Conservatives where the majority had voted for Tory Government but got ConDem government and leader instead.

Wonderful what you can think up over a nice cup of coffee and a lit cafe creme.

Cheers old chap, back at you. How's the weather in that part of the country.

Ernst

7 April 2011 at 11:28  
Anonymous Dreadnaught said...

DanJo - my last and parting comment was slightly tongue in cheek - but I think still relevant to the OP.

And of course we British, post WW1 did, and to date still do, prop up the al-Saudi mafia family. The point I obviously failed to make, was that both the House of al-Saud and Wahabbism existed long before then.

If the British are guilty of anything, it has to be of a form of characteristically imperial arrogance. Then as now, our foreign policy exhibits an abject neglect of Arab tribal history and culture, or an awareness of the potency of the cement of the cult of Islam.

7 April 2011 at 11:36  
Anonymous B Karrl of Croydon said...

A lovely sunny day here in segregated Croydon.

It's the home of immigration here, The One Stop Asylum shop.

It has all changed now, used to be a lovely place but become a labour living project on immigration.

Somedays it looks like you could be walking through a middle-east country. Even the council and social service have no photos of white people on display in their public areas..don't know if thats an insult to us or a compliment?

You spelt my name wrong..not Boris, thanks. witty though.

7 April 2011 at 11:57  
Anonymous Gordo said...

Danegeld.

7 April 2011 at 12:28  
Anonymous bluedog said...

M/s Dreadenaught @ 0917 said, 'How do you 'accidently acquire' a populated island or for that matter populate an uninhabited island if that is the case? -'

Try NZ, Fiji, Tonga and see link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missionaries

Hilarious!

7 April 2011 at 12:29  
Anonymous Nigel said...

Rhinegeld

7 April 2011 at 13:02  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missionaries"

Wikipedia :O :O :O

"Typically, all Witnesses are moved to spend time every week "witnessing" in their area."

Sadly, I can personally verify that is true.

7 April 2011 at 13:17  
Anonymous Voyager said...

And of course we British, post WW1 did, and to date still do, prop up the al-Saudi mafia family.

MY your history is really out of date.

On board USS Quincy (CA-71) afloat in the Great Bitter Lake.El Ismalia, Egypt, 14th Fenruary, 1945, is when FDR promised undying love for King Ibn-Saud and his descendants forever and a day to defend them from any beasties or imperialists now that the clapped-out old Churchillian rust-bucket was beached on the sands of insolvency just waiting for a drip feed of sustenance from the Us Treasury to go away and dismantle its Sterling Area.

Some people have no idea that Britain has a broken back and has been crippled since 1916.

7 April 2011 at 13:30  
Blogger Maryam K said...

Well, I didn't expect any pro-Islam reaction tbh. And I'm not pointing the Iraq war as the starting point for anything, it was a point about reflection. But who needs reflection when we can have the momentary fleeting existence we have now. There is an excellent lecture on youtube by Dr Sam Richards. I'd link but I'm not sure you're interested.

No problem though, each to their own.

7 April 2011 at 14:18  
Blogger Maryam K said...

@Oswin

Oh and I've "been at" nothing. Most people have "been at" nothing. We aren't our governments, you'd be the first to point that out. Otherwise terrorism could be justified, which it can't.

(some think atomic bombs can)

Ciao.

7 April 2011 at 14:23  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

DanJ0 said: "Typically, all Witnesses are moved to spend time every week "witnessing" in their area."

Sadly, I can personally verify that is true


I share your pain. Mormons can be just as bad. Last year I was on the bus with my daughter, two Mormons got on, and when the bus had reached a point giving approximately a mile between bus stops proceeded to parade up and down the bus trying to convert everyone. Unfortunately I lost my temper :s but it had the desired effect, lol.

(And yes, I did notice your emoticons, lol, and found them funny.)

7 April 2011 at 15:09  
Anonymous Dreadnaught said...

To Voyager who said - 'MY your history is really out of date'

Please expand on this as I am curious and will always stand to be corrected if proved to the contrary.

And while you're at it and allowing for the metaphorical syntax of course, back up the following statement with some testable evidence if you would be so kind.

"Some people have no idea that Britain has a broken back and has been crippled since 1916"

Does it purport to be an historical statemnent of fact? If so, I can't see any redeeming factors in it.

Britain's national resilience, especially in the 20th century, in surmounting the complexities imposed by globally driven and changing fortunes, is one of the reasons why so many countries, people and institutions around the world unlike yourself, still have a rational believe in the integrity of this country.

The UK,is still a leading trading power and financial centre and the third largest economy in Europe after Germany and France - this is hardly symptomatic of a country having as was said a 'broken back'.

The comment Voyager makes is further discredited by the fact that this position is from a working population ranked 19th numerically in the world.

Hardly qualifies him/her to make comment of others' credibility when his/her own is so clearly suspect.

7 April 2011 at 15:13  
Anonymous Dreadnaught said...

Maryam K said rather sadly-

I'd link but I'm not sure you're interested.

Not so Ms K, but unlike the situation in so many Islam dominated countries we can openly agree to disagree. :-)

7 April 2011 at 15:17  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obama should thank God someone else is stepping up to take credit for what will surely rank as one of the most misguided, inept and disastrous moves of all time. Once the Islamists consolidate their hold on the entire middle east and we have to go to war to stave off hordes of medieval barbarians, no one will want to touch this one with a 10-foot pole.

Of course, it doesn't necessarily look like a disaster for the western world now--but it will. It will.

7 April 2011 at 15:23  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Maryam K :

Well, someone has been at something right enough ... ever since that old bandit, murderer, extorionist and worse, that you call a 'prophet', got the itch to conquer, subdue and subsume.

Please, no tired old arguments about nasty Christians; we may well be so, but OUR Lord and Prophet was not! Whereas old Mo was just a bloody thug*! Yet, despite ALL the evidence, you will say otherwise.

I am forever amazed at the capacity of muslims to deny the bleedin' obvious.

Those of all other faiths, as well as agnostics, atheists, and whatever other categories remain, appear to see what you cannot. Why is that?

*Correction: Mohammed was not ''just a bloody thug'' - he was a clever, and persevering thug. Credit where it is due...

7 April 2011 at 15:36  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Please forgive the typo's x

7 April 2011 at 15:39  
Anonymous MrJ said...

In connection with "On board USS Quincy (CA-71) afloat in the Great Bitter Lake" ._Voyager (7 April 13:30)

See also:
1) Letter from President Roosevelt to King Ibn Saud, Apr. 5, 1945. "Your Majesty will also doubtless recall that during our recent conversation I assured you that I would take no action, in my capacity as Chief of the Executive Branch of this Government, which might prove hostile to the Arab people." http://cojs.org/cojswiki/Attitude_of_American_Government_Toward_Palestine:_Letter_from_President_Roosevelt_to_King_Ibn_Saud%2C_Apr._5%2C_1945.

2) "FDR MEETS IBN SAUD" by William A. Eddy (who was there) NB p42. http://www.ameu.org/uploads/FDR_IBNSAUD_2005.pdf

7 April 2011 at 15:54  
Anonymous Voyager said...

The UK,is still a leading trading power and financial centre and the third largest economy in Europe after Germany and France

The size of the economy within the EU is irrelevant - are you using PPP ? It frankly means nothing since it has the second biggest population and is destined to have the biggest.

As a trading nation it runs huge trade deficits - the biggest globally after the USA.

It has a huge surplus of containers bringing goods from Asia but little to send in return.

Britain had the largest overseas asset base in the world 1912 but blew it in two world wars. By 1918 Britain was a major debtor and saddled with the consequences until it could get the US to finance another war in return for British assets in the USA and gold.

Lloyd George was so aghast at Haig's wastage of manpower he wondered if after the war Britain would have enough men to function as an economy.

Britain as a financial centre is a joke. It is not British savings that are being recycled in The City - it is liabilities to foreigners. When HBOS loaned to Australia it was wholesale money not British deposits. That means London retains liability when the asset defaults. Just as when Russia and France defaulted on US loans in WWI which had passed through London...London still owed the US

7 April 2011 at 16:35  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Why do you think RBS has a balance sheet bigger than the British economy ? That would be impossible if it was recycling British savings as in C19th.

Merrill Lynch parked its global losses in London before going bankrupt.

If you have an offshore financial zone you invoice business through it leaving assets elsewhere but parking liabilities in island jurisdictions like Dublin or London so when default comes it is picked up by a sovereign authority outside your home base.

You will probably find most bankers keep their personal assets in the British Virgin Islands or Hong Kong for just the same reason - always park your liabilities with a lax monetary and oversight regime, and guard your assets wisely

7 April 2011 at 16:40  
Anonymous Dreadnaught said...

You seem exceptionally fiscally savvy Mr/s V - I bow to your superior grasp of global financial matters but hope you are wrong and that our back may be scarred but not broken.

7 April 2011 at 17:49  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Dreadnaught, I wish I knew I was wrong. I cannot get over the fact that election of a Liberal Government in 1906 in a landslide set forth a chain of events which destroyed the world's richest nation and reduced it within a generation to an impoverished satrapy of the United States.

For whatever reason Britain's enemies seem to have recovered far more masterfully than Britain itself as if the whole interventionist obsession was but a short delaying tactic on our part.

I think of how much is wasted in petulant displays of vanity and how hard it was to build each time i look at sawn-off railings on a wall that Victorians proudly built and Latter-day Georgians melted down never to be replaced. Private property seized by a careless Government and not reinstated

7 April 2011 at 18:00  
Anonymous MrJ said...

Sombre backlook indeed (from 1906 and all that) Voyager, but is it not always the case that the way for such events has been paved in the years before, by most (but not all) unnoticed? Cold comfort for today, maybe, that many had forebodings then, and some were struggling to find a way forward: result 1906 and the rest... This blog is one of many showing the difficulties of forming policies for civil government and overseas affairs where opinion is so disparate and, sometimes, actively misguided.

7 April 2011 at 20:18  
Blogger Ernst, Tiddles and the case of the Traitorous PM said...

Oh dear Ernsty.

Looks like your alternative candidate suggestion is about as welcome as a BNP candidate touting for votes at Birmingham Central mosque.

I had hoped to get a ground swell of support from fellow communicants. What a fickle, lowbrow bunch you lot are.

Looks like its going to be a vote on AV then.

Ernst

7 April 2011 at 21:32  
Anonymous bluedog said...

"where opinion is so disparate and, sometimes, actively misguided." Well said, MrJ.

As His Grace has so brilliantly commented in his piece on cultural cohesion, its all about autonomy,equality and rights today. There is clearly a large body of opinion in the UK, see any comment by Dreadnaught and G Davis, that is profoundly ignorant and misinformed with little understanding of how the world actually works and has worked.

The key is therefore education, and to this end the plans to redraft the school curriculum will be critical. The problem is that education is a generational cycle, and the electoral cycle is not.

Thus the next band of ill-informed naifs to emerge from the Left can always condemn the nation to ignorance again. To say nothing of the delusional views emerging from the EU. Much depends on the good sense and values of the old White British, passing on wisdom to their children, without the intercession of the modern state.

7 April 2011 at 21:50  
Anonymous bluedog said...

Herr Blofeld @ 21.32, your views are not ignored, certainly not in this kennel. The idea of running Primaries for candidate selection has much to commend it, if that's what you mean.

7 April 2011 at 21:54  
Anonymous Roy J of Pontypool said...

Dear Ernst

AV will not work as I have suggested pweviously.

I thought it was Bwilliant and wowth a shot at bwaking up the thwee party headlock on the electowate.

Best Wegards

woy.

7 April 2011 at 21:59  
Blogger Ernst, Tiddles and the case of the Traitorous PM said...

Ernst's favourite coloured hound said 7 April 2011 21:54

Ernst goes beyond primaries by suggesting that 2 distinct candidates be put forward by said parties.

In 2010, Conservatives put forward a manifesto to the right of Labour and LibDems but ended up left of Labour by the kind of candidates it put forward , ensuring support of a liberal Tory agenda by elected candidates. Sneaky or what??

Ernst wants both wings of a party to fight for his vote at the ballot box, when it matters, at a General Election.

Ernst wants choice not what a party wants to get away with by suggesting anything/anyone is Tory or Labour because they pin a rosette on a candidate!

Bit radical but so what?

Ernsty, my lad.

Ps

Cheers Woy. LOL!

7 April 2011 at 22:12  
Anonymous bluedog said...

Liebe Ernst

I have considered your proposal and don't think it will work.

Here's a suggestion; join a left-wing faction in a right wing political party and you can still have an each way bet. If that does not appeal, join a right wing faction in a left wing party. Do try to avoid right-right and left-left combinations. The company is somewhat intense.

8 April 2011 at 08:08  
Blogger Ernst, Tiddles and the case of the Traitorous PM said...

danke meinem blauen Hund bei 8 April 2011 08:08

"The company is somewhat intense."

wie mein Kaffee.

Kommandant Ernst Von Blofeld..Ja

8 April 2011 at 08:40  
Anonymous H-Bomb said...

The British spread/enforced worldwide "all are equal under the law" however flawed the outcome. If you worked or did business with the British you complied with this.
During the 1870's the Cuban governor executed 2 Cuban’s who worked for British companies on trumped up charges.
A British naval gunboat then shelled the governors’ palace. Not complying with accepted laws had consequences!!!

8 April 2011 at 10:55  
Blogger Ernst, Tiddles and the case of the Traitorous PM said...

danke meinem blauen Hund bei 8 April 2011 08:08

"To try to avoid right-right and left-left combinations."

Unt it reeks havoc wid Marching Orders..Orders, which must be obeyed at all times.Ja!

Kommandant Ernst Von Blofeld. Bitte.

8 April 2011 at 12:22  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So forcing the Catholics to decades of terror and discrimination at the hands of Protestants was a lesser evil than subjecting those Protestants to the conditions that pertained to their co religionists in the Republic was the lesser of two evils? Give me an break.

12 April 2011 at 17:01  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older