Thursday, June 30, 2011

BBC makes The Life of Muhammad ‘in line with Islamic tradition’

Apparently, the Iranian culture minister has already objected to the BBC’s forthcoming documentary series on the life of Mohammed (or ‘small p’ prophet Muhammad, as The Guardian pointedly refers to him). So offensive is this documentary which no-one has yet seen that Iran has already pledged to ‘take serious action’ because it will 'ruin Muslims' sanctity'.

Muslims’ sanctity?

It is difficult to see how a documentary made ‘in line with Islamic tradition’, commissioned by Aaqil Ahmed (a Muslim), directed by Faris Kermani (a Muslim) and presented by Rageh Omaar (a Muslim) could possibly offend ‘Muslims’ sanctity’. It’s a bit like Goebbels commissioning ‘The Life of Hitler’ and asking Himmler to direct and Göring to present it - such a documentary could hardly offend any Nazis. And is that Sunni Muslim sanctity or Shi’a Muslim sanctity (not to mention Amadhi, Yazidi, Alawai, Druze, Qadiani and Sufi)? The BBC tends to bend over backwards not to offend Muslim sensibilities, and so this documentary will tell the history of Mohammed – from his birth in Mecca, through his quranic revelations, the Hijra to Medina, the rise and spread of Islam through war and conquest, and the return to Mecca – all without depicting any images of the face of Muhammad or featuring dramatic reconstructions of his life (the BBC assures us).

So it’s in line with the iconoclastic Sunni Islamic tradition, then.

And the BBC just can’t resist an anti-Israeli slant by filming on location in Saudi Arabia, Syria, Jordan and Jerusalem, when Mohammed never set foot in Israel’s capital city. Sure, he dreamed he did, hence the Al Masjid al Aksa mosque. But that hardly justifies the expense of on-location filming (courtesy of the licence-fee payer). It has a whiff of hagiography about it; a hint of prophetic authentication, historical affirmation and religio-political validation.

Iranian culture minister, Mohammad Hosseini (a Shi’a, who obviously has not seen the programme) has already written a review for the Tehran Times Daily: “What the enemy is trying to do in ruining the Muslims' sanctity is definitely much more than causing us to react and unfortunately, some Islamic countries are not taking this issue seriously. One way to show objections is to express condemnation of the West over their despicable actions."

The reality is that, since Salman Rushdie’s The Satanic Verses led to riots and civil unrest in 1988, just about anything staged, published or screened now tends to be ‘in line with the Islamic tradition’. Despite historic evidence from Islam's own texts, there is not likely to be any objective analysis of Mohammed the warmonger, who tortured, murdered, raped and pillaged. There is not likely to be mention of Mohammed’s betrothal to six-year-old Aisha, for that would provoke the masses to shouts of ‘paedophile’ and doubtless incite religious hatred.

No, the BBC will not question the central tenets and foundational claims of Islam, or cast doubt upon the honour and integrity of Mohammed or impugn his character in any way. For to do so would bring the distant threats of the Iranian culture minister a little closer to home. His Grace will be watching this documentary with interest. It is, he believes, a very good thing that such a programme is being made: the character and era do need a little de-sanctifying, and that must begin somewhere. And if any Muslims don’t like it, they can always switch off or complain through the usual channels.

But what irks His Grace ever so slightly is that he has spent decades watching his fellow Christians, the Holy Bible, the beloved Church, the holiness of God and the Lord Jesus being ridiculed, despised, trashed and spat upon by the BBC, while Allah, Mohammed, Muslims and the Qur’an are ' treated differently’, just as the Corporation's Director General insists they ought to be and somehow merit.

115 Comments:

Anonymous Sov_Res said...

I wonder if the BBC film will include Muhammad's personal supervision of the decapitation of the 600 male members of the Banu Qurayza tribe, before sending their children into slavery and their wives into concubinage?

And that after having done so, he renamed this tribe's settlement of Yathrib, to Medina?

No. Didn't think so.

30 June 2011 at 11:47  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Your Grace

A most excellent post and Ernst is certain that all your concerns will come to fruition.
Let is see if the BBC have the courage of their convictions in declaraing the historical truth regarding this sinful man (that's all he was)and his apostate religion.

We are living in very interesting times.

Bless you for standing firm on our behalf.

E S Blofeld, your humble communicant.

30 June 2011 at 11:52  
OpenID Matthew Ling said...

If the programme is aimed at the vast majority of BBC viewers who, like me, know very little of Islamic history then it seems entirely appropriate to use such a conservative approach so that viewers may understand the story as understood by the majority of Muslims.

And as to your statement "it's a little bit like..." - well yes, but a very little bit!

30 June 2011 at 12:03  
Blogger English Viking said...

test

30 June 2011 at 12:16  
Blogger Dodo the Dude said...

A documentary of the times will be interesting, The tribe of Fihr and Mohammed's emergence to power concluding with the conquest of all Arabia should be historically facinating. His early and somewhat troubled childhood experiences followed by his first marriage and death of five of his six children, with only Fatima surviving, will no doubt receive sensitive treatment.

According to Catholic histories Mohamed was a man of retiring disposition, addicting to praying and was subject to epiletic fits and hullucinations. Others see him as a paranoid schizphreic. How the BBC handle this and the account of his visit from the 'Angel Gabriel' and his assumption of the titles 'prophet' and 'apostle of Arabia' will be interesting.

Scholars are divided on Mohammed.
The accounts I think carry most weight argue that Mohammed was at first sincere, but later, carried away by success, he practised deception wherever it would gain his end. The key to the first period of Mohammed's life is seen to lie in Khadija, his first wife, after whose death and the loss of five of their children, he became a prey to his evil passions. His alleged revelations can, it is claimed, be attributable to epileptic fits, or to a paroxysm of cataleptic insanity.

Luther looked upon Mohammed as "a devil and first-born child of Satan". Maracci, a Catholic priest who translated the Quran into Latin, held that Mohammed and Islam were not very dissimilar to Luther and Protestantism.

Should be interesting witnessing how the BBC navigates it way through this one!

30 June 2011 at 12:20  
Blogger English Viking said...

Ok,

Did leave a comment, but it got zapped.

The Beeb won't tell the truth about the pædophile 'prophet' because it would cause uproar. People like Matthew Ling would be dragged from their liberal ignorance, an ignorance he openly admits he does not wish to be released from. He prefers the 'conservative' approach to the moon-worshippers.

Islam is a terrorist DISorganisation. When it gets itself correctly organised, Game Over life, liberty and the pursuit of freedom.

30 June 2011 at 12:20  
Anonymous Dreadnaught said...

So we can rest assured that the multi-culti BBC will screen Wilder's 'Fitna' and Hirsi-Ali's 'Submission' - just for balance - Ha!

Interestingly I noticed, Omaar (the thinking woman's Muslim,)once a BBC 'reporter' now works for Al-Jazeera English.

30 June 2011 at 12:25  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Matthew Ling said.

"If the programme is aimed at the vast majority of BBC viewers who, like me, know very little of Islamic history then it seems entirely appropriate to use such a conservative (?) approach so that viewers may understand the story as understood by the majority of Muslims."
It is supposed to be a 'documentary' and therefore must be based on factual history and should not be edited for the sensitivities of it's adherents or how will you know (as one unaware of Islam) the true history of Islam and its creator?

"And as to your statement "it's a little bit like..." - well yes, but a very little bit!"

You know what a little bit of leaven means?

Jesus spoke to those in secular careers and He said, “Beware of the leaven of Herod.” In the eyes of God there is no difference between the secular and the sacred. The person who has chosen a secular career is just as responsible before God to do the right thing as someone who has entered the clergy or a ministry. There is something that can corrupt the secular that Jesus called the leaven of Herod. Herod became ambitious. Herod desired to please man more than to please God. Herod’s priority was this life. Beware of the leaven of Herod. There are many in the business world and in politics who have compromised themselves because they have chosen a selfish and an ambitious way. If they do not choose to please God first of all, they will have been taken over by the leaven of the Pharisees.

God bless those secularists at the BIased Broadcasting Corporation who know how to be 'a little bit like...'

Ernsty, my lad

30 June 2011 at 12:29  
Anonymous Dreadnaught said...

Dodo The DUD

Mohammed and Islam were not very dissimilar to Luther and Protestantism.

Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha- Dodo-Doddo-Doddo - stoppit your'e killing me!!

30 June 2011 at 12:30  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Your Grace

"Mohammed and Islam were not very dissimilar to Luther and Protestantism." Squawk!

It appears that our old duffer of a bird got out of the wrong side of the nest this morning.

Probably all those dreams about Dante's Inferno coming home to roost(pardon the pun).Aaaah Bless.

E S Blofeld

30 June 2011 at 12:37  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

Mr Dreadnaugt, Mr E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles,

It does appear that Mr Dodo has gratuitously included a swipe at Luther and Protestants in a post where neither were mentioned. But God forbid that he might be accused of anti-Protestant bias. Good grief, no.

30 June 2011 at 12:41  
Blogger English Viking said...

Dodo,

and you dare call me a troll?

So Luther was a Pædo and Protestantism is the routine cause of You-Tube beheadings?

Muppet.

PS Internet problems, so no more from me for a while.

30 June 2011 at 12:42  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The thing is that searching the internet provides a great deal of information on islam, so why does the bbc need to fund this show at all?

30 June 2011 at 12:44  
Blogger Lord Lavendon said...

"Mohammed and Islam were not very dissimilar to Luther and Protestantism."

What the blazes is this madness?

30 June 2011 at 12:47  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

LCD

May I remind you of your comment last night.

"Me I have given an undertaking to the blogmaster to be more considered in my responses to others.

I would be failing in this if I made rash judgements leading to misguided comments, whether wilful or otherwise. One can only rely on the benefit of the doubt for so long.

So polite and considered replies from now on. The substance will not be changing, only the presentation style.

30 June 2011 02:01"

Dear Dickie Bird.

Do as you say!

Ernsty

30 June 2011 at 12:51  
Blogger Dodo the Dude said...

With all due respect Mr Cranmer I was simply citing a 17th century scholar's perpective. At no stage did I infer or imply support for the view expressed. Similarly I offered no opinion on the mental state of Mohammed and what may have precipitated any mental disturbance he may have suffered.

The points made were simply intended to demonstrate the difficulties the BBC will face in avoiding offence to Muslims and to Christians.

How on earth does this leave me open to an accusation of anti-Anglican bias?

30 June 2011 at 12:57  
Blogger AncientBriton said...

Matthew Ling said
"viewers who, like me, know very little of Islamic history..."
You could start here Matthew:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-871902797772997781#
It will be interesting to see how the programme compares.

30 June 2011 at 13:14  
Anonymous extra ecclesiam nulla salus said...

The Most Holy Roman Church, founded by the word of our Lord and Savior firmly believes, professes and preaches that no persons living outside the Catholic Church – not only pagans but also Jews, heretics and schismatics – can come to share in eternal life, but will go into the eternal fire unless they are aggregated to her before the end of their life.

30 June 2011 at 13:15  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Dickie Bird

"The points made were simply intended to demonstrate the difficulties the BBC will face in avoiding offence to Muslims and to 'Christians' (?)."

Disingenuous at best.

As William Turner said in 1545 in The Rescuing of Romish Fox:
"Byrdes of on kynde and color flok and flye allwayes together."

Ernsty, you naughty fowl of the earth.

30 June 2011 at 13:18  
Blogger I am Stan said...

Your Grace,

Bearing in mind the consequences of past media portrayals of the Prophet, riots, murder etc the Beeb would perform a small miracle to air this doc without causing outrage and mayhem.

Forgive me, but anything that "offends" Mohammad Hosseini and his vicious barbaric pals brings me a brief moment of pleasure.

30 June 2011 at 13:27  
Blogger Dodo the Dude said...

extra ecclesiam nulla salus said...
" ..... "

"Outside the Church there is no salvation."

This term was first used by St Cyprian in the 3rd century AD.

More recently the doctrine has been clarified:

"Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it" (Second Vatican Council, Lumen Gentium).

And:

"Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience — those too may achieve eternal salvation" (Second Vatican Council, Lumen Gentium).

And:

"... all who have been justified by faith in Baptism are members of Christ's body, and have a right to be called Christian, and so are correctly accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church. Moreover, some and even very many of the significant elements and endowments which together go to build up and give life to the Church itself, can exist outside the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church: the written word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, and visible elements too. All of these, which come from Christ and lead back to Christ, belong by right to the one Church of Christ. The brethren divided from us also use many liturgical actions of the Christian religion. These most certainly can truly engender a life of grace in ways that vary according to the condition of each Church or Community ... It follows that the separated Churches and Communities as such, though we believe them to be deficient in some respects, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation."

You may not agree but it is not as simple as you contend!

30 June 2011 at 13:32  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If the BBC cannot show the prophet or parts of his life, why not save Licence Fee payers money and make a radio documentary.

Isn't making a TV documentary about the prophet equivalent to Shirk? Are the BBC teaching the British public that the Mohammed is more important than Allah?

Also will the BBC censor the Satanic Verses episode in the life of the prophet?

Personally I think the BBC is being very courageous in showing this documentary. It doesn't take much to set them off. I hope their foreign correspondents are well protected.

30 June 2011 at 13:33  
Blogger Dodo the Dude said...

Mr E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said ...

"Disingenuous at best."

You really must not attribute motives and intent to others without first being sure you're not engaged in projection.

30 June 2011 at 13:37  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

LCD said

""Outside the Church there is no salvation." This term was first used by St Cyprian in the 3rd century AD. "

Would be more inclined to believe it if it came from the inspired mouth or writings of an apostle.

Our difficulty in taking your dogma seriously but why let a little thing like the 'inspired Word of God to his body of believers' get in the way.

Ernst.

30 June 2011 at 13:41  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Dodo the talking DooDoo

Let me correct you and St Cyprian.

"LCD should have said

""Outside CHRIST there is no salvation."

Now doesn't that look and sound better but guess what ? It's biblical too, unlike St Cyprian and Tiber theology, even coming directly from Our Lord's blessed mouth.

Here endeth the lesson.

Ernst, my flightless fowl

30 June 2011 at 13:50  
Blogger Dodo the Dude said...

Except, as you know my little friend, in early Christian theology there was no such distinction drawn as Baptism joined one to Christ and to His pilgrim Church - do read St Paul!

30 June 2011 at 14:01  
Anonymous Sydneysider said...

Those who are guided by grace and the dictates of their own conscience will receive eternal salvation.This simply means a good person will go to heaven. Cardinal Pell once made a statement that he thought that there would be very few people in hell, which I found surprising and gratifying.

30 June 2011 at 14:24  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Dear Dickie Bird.

Justification is the work of God where the righteousness of Jesus is reckoned to the sinner so the sinner is declared by God as being righteous under the Law (Rom. 4:3; 5:1,9; Gal. 2:16; 3:11). This righteousness is not earned or retained by any effort of the saved. Justification is an instantaneous occurrence with the result being eternal life. It is based completely and solely upon Jesus' sacrifice on the cross (1 Pet. 2:24) and is received by faith alone (Eph. 2:8-9). No works are necessary whatsoever to obtain justification. Otherwise, it is not a gift (Rom. 6:23). Therefore, we are justified by faith (Romans 5:1).

The body of believers have no power in themselves but are attached to the Head who is the cornerstone and author of salvation for all mankind who believe and it's judge for the unbelievers who refuse this grace.

"do read St Paul!" I do, old bird but he is not the patron St of your corrupt theology, poor St Peter is blamed, unfairly.

Ernst.

30 June 2011 at 14:28  
Blogger Dodo the Dude said...

Why are you trying to provoke yet another dispute about Roman Catholicism and Protestantism? Wasn't last night enough?

I'm no expert on the Church of England but believe they accept Baptism is necessary to join the Church of Christ. And, as posted last night:

"Therefore he who would find Christ must first find the Church. ... And he who would know anything of Christ must not trust himself nor build a bridge to
heaven by his own reason; but he must go to the Church."(Martin Luther)

30 June 2011 at 14:56  
Anonymous Avi Barzel said...

How different UK's nature and economy would have been had it done the honorable thing and invited in its subject Hong Kong residents...industrious, ambitious, peaceful and loyal people...instead of jumping on the EU-led Eurabia project and palestinianism bandwagon. Was it a racist's spectre of busy Chinatowns, the fear of "overly-ambitious" and "above-their-station" students doing such frightful things like "occupying" university libraries until closing time and raising grade avarages, the din of Cantonese in the streets? All this looks pretty silly in retrospect, doesn't it?

30 June 2011 at 15:05  
Anonymous Dreadnaught said...

I take your point Cranny, but its a bit disconcerting, barely credible even, that when two pairs of eyes clearly view Mount Everest one pair only sees a hill.

30 June 2011 at 15:07  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Dodo the Young Dude

"Why are you trying to provoke yet another dispute about Roman Catholicism and Protestantism? Wasn't last night enough?" You ask questions or make statements but do not like the answers.

""Therefore he who would find Christ must first find the Church. ... And he who would know anything of Christ must not trust himself nor build a bridge to
heaven by his own reason; but he must go to the Church."(Martin Luther)"
Now which epistle did Martin Luther write under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

I take him as a redeemed sinner/christian and nothing else. He needed Christ as I do and did not claim to be empowered by the Holy Spirit. I read him but compare his words to scripture, if he is in error, I cast his ideas away, as I would with Cranmer(apologies to His Grace), CS Lewis, Ryle etc. They are NOT inspired authors.

Baptism saves NO MAN, it is symbolic only in recognition of being buried and risen with Christ!

You provoke yourself but you appear to be shocked to find protestant sentiment on an anglican blog and not RCC Dogma. Do get out more, old chap, the world is a wonderful place with more than your sole opinion.

Ernst.

30 June 2011 at 15:11  
Anonymous Pastor Jim Bucker III said...

My position is simple. If a Roman Catholic believes in the official Roman Catholic teaching on salvation, then he is not a Christian since the official RCC position is contrary to scripture.

Therefore, as a whole, Roman Catholics need to be evangelized. They need to hear the true Gospel. They need to hear that they are not made right before God by being in a church, or by being baptized, but by receiving Christ (John 1:12), believing that Jesus has risen from the dead (Rom. 10:9), and that justification is by faith (Rom. 5:1) and not by our deeds (Rom. 4:5). It is only true faith that results in true works (James 2), not the other way around.

Roman Catholics, like anyone else, need to trust in Jesus alone for the forgiveness of their sins and not the Catholic sacraments, not the words of the priest, not the pope, not Mary, not the saints, not penance, not indulgences, not the rosary, etc. Jesus alone is the way, the truth, and the life (John 14:6).

Finally, I believe that there are truly regenerate Christians in the Roman Catholic church. But, they are truly Christians in spite of official RCC theology and in spite of the ritualistic offerings of this ancient church which has had too many hands meddling in it through the centuries, gradually moving it away from orthodoxy and into apostasy. Yes apostasy. The Roman Catholic Church is no longer representing true Christianity.

Jesus alone saves. Jesus alone is Lord. Only Jesus' sacrifice can cleanse us. Only by faith are we made right before God. Justification is by faith, not by anything we do.

30 June 2011 at 15:21  
Anonymous Gay Anglican said...

How come we are discussing the RCC/Protestantism when Cranmer's post is about islam?

30 June 2011 at 15:24  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Such a violent religion-the religion of peace !!

30 June 2011 at 15:26  
Anonymous extra ecclesiam nulla salus said...

There is one faith, one lord, one baptism and ONE HOLY CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC CHURCH! Which is why the likes of "Pastor" Bucker simply won't be saved.Our Lord created the Catholic church when he made Peter its Rock, thus there can only be salvation through the Church- and by that I mean the Holy Roman Catholic Church.

30 June 2011 at 15:28  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who is Mohammed? A heavy weight boxer?

30 June 2011 at 15:28  
Blogger Dodo the Dude said...

extra ecclesiam nulla salus said...

Yeah, yeah ... whoever you are. I suspect a protestant rabble rouser.

30 June 2011 at 15:30  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Gay Anglican said.30 June 2011 15:24

Dodo the Dude said
Luther looked upon Mohammed as "a devil and first-born child of Satan". Maracci, a Catholic priest who translated the Quran into Latin, held that Mohammed and Islam were not very dissimilar to Luther and Protestantism.

Should be interesting witnessing how the BBC navigates it way through this one!

30 June 2011 12:20

Your answer, sweetie, hence divergence off topic.

Ernsty.

30 June 2011 at 15:33  
Anonymous Anwar Sadat said...

Muslims believe that the Holy Qur'an (Recitation) are the words of God, and that it was revealed to Muhammad by the archangel Jibril (Gabriel). This was originally in oral and written form. It was later assembled together into a single book, the Qur'an.

Its name is often spelled "Koran" in English. This is not recommended, as some Muslims find the word to be offensive.

30 June 2011 at 15:36  
Anonymous Mohammed Sharif said...

Believers, take neither the Jews nor the Christians for your friends. They are friends with one another. Whoever of you seeks their friendship shall become one of their number. God does not guide the wrong-doers.

Quran 5:51

30 June 2011 at 15:47  
Anonymous extra ecclesiam nulla salus said...

The Dodo dares to call me a protestant rebel rouser? This is not true- I believe in the one true faith and Church.

30 June 2011 at 15:49  
Anonymous Dreadnaught said...

Anwar Sadat was a decent Muslim - so they killed him - now that's offensive.

I Qur'ap on their Koran.

30 June 2011 at 15:50  
Anonymous Avi Barzel said...

"Muslims believe that the Holy Qur'an (Recitation) are the words of God...Its name is often spelled 'Koran' in English. This is not recommended, as some Muslims find the word to be offensive." (Anwar Sadat)

Explains why President Obama strains his vocal cords and the public's patience by trying to sound like a muezzin whenever he pronounces the name of that unfortunate tract in the Islamist-approved manner.

Seeing that the Koran is liberally strewn with blood-curdling calls for the enslavemnt or destruction of Jews, Christians and Pagans, I would think its peaceful proponents would allow a little wiggle-room on this issue of spelling and pronunciation. No?

30 June 2011 at 15:52  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

Muhammed only dreamt of being in Jerusalem, there is a lesson in that for us all.

We are born into a version of reality dreamt up by politicians and bankers, for politicians and bankers.

Next time the Authorities tell us something we don't want to hear, we should become the Authors of our own story and make our dreams the new reality.

30 June 2011 at 15:57  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

BITB said 30 June 2011 15:57

"Next time the Authorities tell us something we don't want to hear, we should become the Authors of our own story and make our dreams the new reality."

Dear boy, you sound like Simon Cowell.

Does BITB have the X Factor?

Ernsty

30 June 2011 at 16:08  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Anwar Sadat said...30 June 2011 15:36

Its name is often spelled "Koran" in English. This is not recommended, as some Muslims find the word to be offensive.

Many thanks for the warning and advice, those poor sensitive souls.

Well then, 'KORAN' it is.

Ernsty, my deceased former president of Egypt.

30 June 2011 at 16:14  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

I have a pencil with a rubber on the end, incase of errors.

And a wicked imagination!

Do you want to be in my story Ernie, you could be the hero.

30 June 2011 at 16:14  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

BITB said 30 June 2011 16:14

"I have a pencil with a rubber on the end, incase of errors.

And a wicked imagination!"

Errr, think I'll give you a rain check on that, dear boy.

"Do you want to be in my story Ernie, you could be the hero."
LOL, 007 would be green with envy, bless you.
Who would you suggest who could play old ernsty as charles gray is no longer an option, if your story became hot hollywood property.

Ernsty, my XXX communicant.

30 June 2011 at 16:21  
Blogger AncientBriton said...

More complaints about Islamophobia, this time from "HMS President in the heart of the English capital".

The old ship is still 'sniffing out the enemy' but what would those who gave their lives for freedom think of us being the enemy now? Some profit in it for someone though! Hurrah for British enterprise :(
http://www.presstv.com/detail/186796.html

30 June 2011 at 16:25  
Anonymous Gay Anglican said...

Is Bred in the bone a gay?

30 June 2011 at 17:07  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

You would play yourself Ernie, what other hero would be appropriate?

No lookalikes will do!

30 June 2011 at 17:08  
Anonymous Oswin said...

It is a beginning.

Whatever 'sponge-cake' approach the BBC will employ, it begins the self-same process of scrutiny that Christianity has endured for many years, if not for centuries.

The cat being out of the bag, will, like Violet Elizabeth Bott: ''thcream and thcream and thcream until I'm thick!''

The dissection WILL begin, and the autopsy will reveal rather more than a skinned cat (a plethora of metaphor/simile notwithstanding).

Avi Barzel @ 15:05 :

Indeed! What price now our fear of the 'Triad' now that we are swamped by lunatic numpties hell-bent on our destruction?!?

30 June 2011 at 17:15  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

BITB 30 June 2011 17:08

You smooth talking northener.LOL.

Ernie, you cheeky boy

ps
Gay Anglican said...

Is Bred in the bone a gay?

NUMPTY.

30 June 2011 at 17:17  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

Imagine that?

Better lick my nib and start again :-D

30 June 2011 at 17:25  
Anonymous Jack Flash said...

Phew! it's hot in here today.
All this about Baptism. If you accept the view of some religous folk here.
Either the Lord got it wrong, or was he just being comforting to a dying man by a little white lie, when he made a promise of paradise to a dying repentant thief suffering beside him? No mention of get baptised first as I recall.
Doubtless many explanations will follow this submission.
Ya can't have it both ways lads!.


Jack.

30 June 2011 at 17:41  
Anonymous Avi Barzel said...

Mr Oswin,

Indeed; "Triadophobia" cost dearly. Hard to undo the resulting unsightly mess now, unfortunately.

Given my understanding of Britain's arbitrary defamation laws, crowned with the now-famous dictum that "the truth is not a defense," I fear that any examination in the UK of the special status faith in question will come to a grinding halt well before even polite, cap-in-hand humming and hawing can take place.

At the same time, lest anyone think that I'm unfairly harsh on your Fair Albion, our Human Rights Boards here in Canada, which were set up to cleverly circumvent our bothersome free speach traditions and Charter of Rights principles, are certainly not much better. Fortunately for us, though, the bureaucratic ciphers who run them are under constant attack in our media and our new, majority Conservative government with its incredible Prime Minister, will most likely review them with a jaundiced eye.

30 June 2011 at 17:47  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Avi, don't worry unduly, 'blood will out' as they say, and it ain't going to be ours! Well, perhaps just enough of it to get us warmed-up a tad.

30 June 2011 at 17:51  
Anonymous Atlas shrugged said...

The thing to remember is this.

The Establishment gave us this problem, from the promotion of mass immigration, to wars in the middle east, and all others in between.

The Establishments BBC and mass media will present the problem, define the parameters of the debate, then present us with a set of contrived alternative answers.

The Establishment will then select those answers which most closely fit their original plan, and then enact their Final Solution, whether we like it or not.

Democracy, or the will of the people, may be permitted to appear to have had a role to play, however our true reality is that neither democracy, nor the will of the people, will have had absolutely nothing to do with how this apparent 'Muslim Problem' will ultimately play out.

30 June 2011 at 17:56  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Atlas shrugged: the ''will of the people'' might surface beyond the confines of the ballot-box.

I would have it otherwise, but in the place of nothing else, it is I believe inevitable. There will be tears before bedtime ...

30 June 2011 at 18:07  
Anonymous Avi Barzel said...

Oswin,

I pray that blood will never become part of the equasion. England's ancient soil has already been sufficiently watered by such. In the worst case scenario an admittedly painful and contentious, but more humane alternative may be to improve immigration screening and to significantly cut social assistance for all, while offering free one-way out-bound first class fares and generous resettlement money to anyone seeking greener pastures, familiar surroundings and sunnier climes.

30 June 2011 at 18:12  
Anonymous Gay Anglican said...

Well Bred in the bone, if I wasn't gay, I would fancy you, you plain speaking northerner!

30 June 2011 at 18:22  
Blogger Lord Lavendon said...

"I pray that blood will never become part of the equasion. England's ancient soil has already been sufficiently watered by such. In the worst case scenario an admittedly painful and contentious, but more humane alternative may be to improve immigration screening and to significantly cut social assistance for all, while offering free one-way out-bound first class fares and generous resettlement money to anyone seeking greener pastures, familiar surroundings and sunnier climes."

I couldn't have put it better than our good colonial friend from the Queen's Dominion of Canada. Hope those Frenchies with the chip (or eight) on their shoulder don't cause the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge too much trouble... but then when I was over in that Dominion all the Canadians were very protective of their Royal Family.

30 June 2011 at 18:26  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

BITB

"Imagine that?

Better lick my nib and start again :-D"

The NUMPTY was aimed at the plonker, not you.

WRITE,WRITE. I could be famous again,BITB with your help.lol

Ernst ;-)

30 June 2011 at 18:28  
Blogger Lord Lavendon said...

extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

That's latin isn't it? Anyone knows what it means? I skipped latin at Eton (too busy on the scrumping spree- which along with Rugby makes more a man out of you than some God awful language which no-one speaks, except to make themselves look clever).

Tally Ho! Who is you for a grouse shoot tomrrow?

30 June 2011 at 18:32  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Lord L

Outside the Church there is no salvation.

Ernsty

30 June 2011 at 18:38  
Anonymous Avi Barzel said...

Alas, dear Lord Lavendon, enfortunately we are no longer a colony, nor even a dominion...in fact neither I or any one else I know seems to have a clue what we are anymore. Other than a giant welcome mat with a smiley face, that is.

Her Majesty is still our official head of government, although her portrait has disappeared from the proposed new paper currency...and article after article in the media kvetching about minor aesthetics regarding placement of maple leaf vignettes never even noticed the Case of the Curious Disappearance of Our Queen. But, I'm in the minority with my views; most here think it is terribly racist and classist to speak of royalty; my child's school principal was shocked into awkward speechlessness when I offered to provide, free of charge, portraits of our head of official government.

30 June 2011 at 18:39  
Anonymous Gay Anglican said...

Ernsty, I have always wanted to meet your Tiddles.

30 June 2011 at 18:42  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

We in the UK ought to have a National Draw Mohammed Day to force the issue of free speech. I don't blame individual writers and broadcasters being worried by threats but we ought to stand up as a nation together.

30 June 2011 at 18:45  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Gay Anglican Person 30 June 2011 18:42

"Ernsty, I have always wanted to meet your Tiddles."

Want away, it ain't happening, sweetie. Try DanJo, ducks.

Ernst and 'Straight' Tiddles, my strange thing.

LOL and as if by magic! 30 June 2011 18:45

30 June 2011 at 18:50  
Blogger len said...

So the Iranian culture minister fears that the 'sanctity' of Islam might be compromised by a BBC documentary.Perhaps he fears that Islam will get the same treatment as Christianity?

Is the sanctity of Islam 'compromised' by terrorists, suicide bombers, calls for the annihilation of Israel? if so condemn these actions, if not, why not?.

30 June 2011 at 19:03  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

"Want away, it ain't happening, sweetie. Try DanJo, ducks."

No interest here either. Try the BNP / EDL / extreme rightwing bunch, I bet quite a lot of them are conflicted bisexual people. ;)

30 June 2011 at 19:04  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

"WRITE,WRITE. I could be famous again,BITB with your help.lol

Ernst ;-)"

Well the story goes like this, three wise men from Rochdale, or there abouts, were following a Star.

They Hero Worshiped this Star from afar, Ernie was his name and they wanted his autograph.

They caught up with their Star Ernie Hero, giving a sermon to his fans, at Paramount.

Ernie spoke in parables to his fans and said "This 21st Century Fox"

His fans all agreed!

"But what can we do about it" they asked their Hero.

Then Ernie Hero let them in on a secret about his Nativity.

I was born into this World crying, shiting, peeing and feeling a teet.

We have spent our lives crying, shiting, peeing and feeling a teet.

We shall go to our graves crying, shiting, peeing and feeling a teet.

The only damn thing that makes a difference will be what you do with your creative nature. Dare to dream!

Ernie Hero went on to dance upon the waters as the leading Man in Swan Lake (Baal)et.

And his fans drank Ambrosia Nectar.

In the (Baal

30 June 2011 at 19:45  
Blogger Dodo the Dude said...

Still think it will be interesting how the BBC deal with the life and times of Mohammed, his early life, marriage and children etc.

Most non-Islamic scholars describe a division in Mohammed's writing ascribing his latter years to a disturbance of mind. Certainly the later writings are the ones filled with violence and the suppression of other faith groups.

Always good to consider the roots and origins of the belief systems of others and to explore the tensions within them. Far better than some of the mindless comments that get passed about all Muslims being such and such.

30 June 2011 at 19:49  
Anonymous Jewish Bag Lady (in Space, defending the Hebrew race) said...

Lord Lavy, this is 2011 and not 1911.

30 June 2011 at 20:12  
Anonymous Gay Anglican said...

Danjo is male isn't he? Well I am female and gay so he isn't my type. Neither is Ernsty, you see, in a bit of naive thinking I thought Tiddles was a cat and I like cats.

30 June 2011 at 20:16  
Blogger len said...

Apparently when Mohammed had his 'revelations' he was thrown to the ground with violence and had what seems to be fits.
Even Mohammed himself questioned where these revelations came from . After Muhammad's first few experiences with this' spirit', he was convinced he was possessed by an evil spirit, or jinn, and extremely fearful. He told his wife, Khadijah that he was afraid something would happen to him (Bukhari hadith 3). It is only after Khadijah, and her cousin, Waraqah ibn Nawfal, himself an Ebionite, tell him that they believe he is meant to be a prophet that Muhammad begins to think that maybe the spirit is not evil and is instead divine. It is also Waraqah who suggests the spirit must be Gabriel, an archangel of God, which Muhammad eventually comes to believe.

This is the revelation that Islam is built upon.

30 June 2011 at 20:42  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

BITB 30 June 2011 19:45

Umm,Err,Hmm.
Not quite what Ernst had in mind, my boy..not exactly Diamonds are Forever, more Lucy in Sky with Diamonds.

Thanks for the kind offer but staying in retirement is possibly the best choice and I feel confident that justin lee collins chap will track ernst down for supervillain reunion sometime in the future.

Seems more like a role for johnny depp and considering the content of the script, you must be a big fan of the movie bowfinger.

Ernsty, my boy.

ps

Gay Anglican said..30 June 2011 20:16
.
Danjo is male isn't he? Well I am female and gay so he isn't my type. Neither is Ernsty, you see, in a bit of naive thinking I thought Tiddles was a cat and I like cats.

Young lady, 'lezzie anglican' as a moniker would have saved any confusion..btw, tiddles is a cat but a christian cat, who knows what the Lord allows and condemns and therefore obeys Him, unlike yourself.

Ernsty, my feminist, greenham common chapess.

30 June 2011 at 20:45  
Anonymous Nasser said...

The unbelievers among the People of the Book [Bible] and the pagans shall burn for ever in the fire of Hell. They are the vilest of all creatures.

Quran 98:6

30 June 2011 at 21:05  
Anonymous Gay Anglican said...

Ernsty,I have to say that if I wasn't gay, I'd say you were a bit dishy, with that silver hair and ciggie holder.

'lezzie anglican' doesn't quite have the same ring as 'gay anglican' does it and besides which it confuses the shit out of people, which serves you all right! Assuming I'm a man! Hah, hah!

Anyway I've leave Ernsty to his tiddles...

30 June 2011 at 21:10  
Anonymous Pastor Jim Bucker III said...

Islam is based upon falsehoods and is not the true word of God. As Len suggests, the spirit which took hold of Mohammed was not the Holy Spirit. Which is why we must pray for those good Christians who have to read that detestable book, in order to refute it, so that they might not become convinced of its content.

30 June 2011 at 21:13  
Blogger Span Ows said...

The BBC tends to bend over backwards not to offend Muslim sensibilities, and so this documentary will tell the history of Mohammed – from his birth in Mecca, through his quranic revelations...

That would be the bit after he lived alone in a cave for a bit, right? Imagine the picture today...a bearded (presumably but not necessarily dirty and smelly) emerges with stories of God having spoken to him (and he replying?)...now, really, how would he be treated? And would the BBC listen? FFS!

30 June 2011 at 21:16  
Blogger Roger Pearse said...

Well said.

Not that I would object to them making a reasonably objective biographical documentary of Mohammed which took the Moslem line on his life, by and large -- except that they will not do the same when it comes to Jesus and the early Church. As you rightly say, your grace, we have all witnessed decades of the BBC pissing on the Christians.

Of course the reason they flatter the Moslems is the same reason the foolish Mrs Ferrars and Mrs John Dashwood praised the cunning adventuress Lucy Steele in "Sense and Sensibility" -- to give pain to the legitimate claimant. I think we all know that the BBC clique care nothing about Islam as such.

Even the language they use is dishonest. When Moslems attack Christians abroad, the BBC always refers to "clashes between Christians and Moslems" in that order, to create a fake equivalence. You can see that, right now, this week, in BBC articles mentioning the attacks on Copts in Egypt by Islamic extremists.

What we need is reform. If David Cameron is prepared to leave the broadcast media in the hands of those who hate us and him and everything decent and honest, he is a fool. Goebbels knew the power of that organ (and isn't it curious that the BBC never run programmes on his methods and achievements!), advertisers know it, lefties know it. We desperately need some balance.

30 June 2011 at 21:20  
Anonymous Gay Anglican said...

Danjo said

"No interest here either. Try the BNP / EDL / extreme rightwing bunch, I bet quite a lot of them are conflicted bisexual people"

Nah, the right right wing doesn't interest me really, plus they only have 'butch' women who are not my type, and in any case I need to meet some-one of my own faith (C OF E).

30 June 2011 at 21:31  
Anonymous Ambassador of the Imperial Alpha Draconian Empire (HAVE A NICE DAY!) said...

The Jewess said to Lord Lavendon "this is 2011 and not 1911".

Of course! Lavendon... Lavendon an amagram for Laffarden... one of the oldest and most powerful races in the whole galaxy, who come from the Large Mangellic Cloud. But why is he here claiming to be some lord of a pathetic little cockroach of an island on a primitive savage world?

Is it to monitor this Islamic religion? I know that some of the other races have treaties to prevent this(even the spineless Alpha Centuarians) as they have predicted that if this religion conquers the earth and gains the knowledge of intersellar travel, no-one will be safe.

But it is the calculation of the space- time factors and plasma gravity which is important.

Tell me Jewess what year do you think it is this in earthling terms?

30 June 2011 at 21:43  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The split between the Sunnis and the Shias goes very deep in the history of Islam; and in commissioning Somali Sunni, Rageh Omaar, of Islamic broadcaster, Al Jazeera, to front yet another BBC TV propaganda series for Islam (Sunni version), the BBC will next spend British people's licence money on more Islamic propaganda for the Iranian version, Shia version, 12th imam included.

30 June 2011 at 21:52  
Blogger Span Ows said...

Gay Anglican said...

How come we are discussing the RCC/Protestantism when Cranmer's post is about islam?


dodo the troll.

30 June 2011 at 21:54  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

An analysis of Muhammad which BBC will not dare show:

"The Truth about Muhammad"

(by Robert Spencer)

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1596980281/102-9197660-0482563?ie=UTF8&tag=robertspencer-20&linkCode=xm2&camp=1789&creativeASIN=1596980281#reader_1596980281

30 June 2011 at 22:08  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What I never liked about the Arabs is their religions & the extreme brainwashing power those religions once had. Especially the effect it had on Europe. Their 3 prophets Jesus/Moses/Mohammed...they still fight over that shit like little children it's SO pathetic!~ Do they ever stop to think once upon a time people believed in like 20 different gods!?? & people once thought the world was flat... not round?.. I think their religions are all a crock of shit-Jihad/ the chosen ones pff!

30 June 2011 at 22:11  
Anonymous not a machine said...

It will be interesting to see how the program explains sharia ,or for that matter dhimmin, or what one is told to do to certain spoken faiths .
If its similar to channel 4 on christianity , it will be the PC version making no reference to the root.

"I am with you unto the end of ages" let us hope so for it may seem like an eternity considering what this program is trying to do.

30 June 2011 at 22:26  
Anonymous Sibyl said...

Gentlemen, Here is the very best way to deal with the problems created by Mohammed:
http://www.bpnews.net/BPFirstPerson.asp?ID=35659

30 June 2011 at 23:01  
Anonymous Lumen Gentium said...

'extra ecclesiam nulla salus'
You really need to stop
misrepresenting the Roman Catholic position on these matters. Update yourself.

'E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles'
Your 'theology' is not consistent with St Paul's teaching on the role of the church in salvation and the way God determines the distribution of the gifts of the Spirit.
Isn't it inconsistent with the views of Anglicanism too?

1 July 2011 at 00:39  
Blogger Gnostic said...

Oh noes! The Iranians have entered an early runner in the Megalodon Steeplechase. So much for the Blustering Bullsh*t Corp's intentional televisual winkle suck-uppery, eh?

Will this project see transmission or be fatwa'd into the depths of film vault oblivion? Pass the popcorn someone...

1 July 2011 at 05:56  
Blogger len said...

Lumen Gentium,(00:39)
The Apostle Paul certainly did not mince his words when defining religion.
He called it a crock of **** compared with knowing Christ.

1 July 2011 at 08:15  
Blogger hellosnackbar said...

I'm disappointed by the format of this life of Moped program.
What I want to see is a Life of Moped film of similar stock
to Monty Pythons Life of Brian.
John Cleese as Allah and Rowan Atkinson as Mo would be
a good start.
Surely there's someone in the world with the money and
the will to provide us with a good laugh parodying the religion of peace?

1 July 2011 at 09:26  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just another example of the bigotry and cowardice of the anti-Christian and anti-Jewish BBC. Remember folks, if it's on the BBC or made by the BBC, it ain't worth a thing! Switch off or over, and stop funding these lefties by paying your licence fee.

1 July 2011 at 09:45  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The BBC should let Horrible Histories do this documentary. They could even add in a Mel Brooks style musical number about the beheading of the Qurayza Jews.

"Don't be a dummy, be a smarty, come and join the Muhammad party!"

1 July 2011 at 10:44  
OpenID Matthew Ling said...

Interesting comments, all. Though I think it clarifies that actually the greater issue for most people here is the BBC's allegiences rather than Islam: they'll all in be Salford soon - that'll learn 'um.

1 July 2011 at 11:10  
Anonymous John Thomas said...

I think Dodo was merely reporting an RC priest as saying "Luther/Protestantism = Modhammed/Islam", not saying it himself (herself?). Yet many people immediately took it to be Dodo's own view. I myself am very very wary of reporting peoples' views in case they are immediately taken to be my own; now I (we all) see exactly why.

1 July 2011 at 14:58  
Anonymous non mouse said...

Let the aliens pay for it then. Don't use it.

2 July 2011 at 04:04  
Blogger Dodo the Dude said...

Archbishop Cranmer said...

"It does appear that Mr Dodo has gratuitously included a swipe at Luther and Protestants in a post where neither were mentioned."

John Thomas said...

"I think Dodo was merely reporting an RC priest as saying "Luther/Protestantism = Modhammed/Islam", not saying it himself (herself?). Yet many people immediately took it to be Dodo's own view."

Quite right Mr JT and thank you for for pointing this out.

Mr Cranmer - an apology due, perhaps?

2 July 2011 at 22:37  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

Mr Dodo,

No apology due at all, unless you can explain to His Grace (who is by no means obtuse) the relevance to this post of the opinions of an obscure RC priest on Protestants and Protestantism.

2 July 2011 at 22:47  
Blogger Dodo the Dude said...

Mr Cranmer I was
merely demonstrating that a lack of understanding and comprehension, based on hostility and an absence of willingness to listen to the theology of others, no matter how 'offensive', leads to rancour, bitterness and bloodshed. It has happened within the Church of Christ. Do we want it to continue to happen between different faith groups?

My own view is that the Christian message is so demonstably true that if bridges can be build we other faiths its message of love will win through. Naive? Possibly, but not bigotry against more aggressive approaches.

There was no gratuitous swipe intended at Protestantism but I can understand how it might be misconstrued. Indeed, I see a great deal of strenght within Anglicanism and agree with much of the critique of Roman Catholicism at the time of the Reformation.

3 July 2011 at 13:39  
Anonymous Toby the Jug said...

It takes courage and humility to apologise. Will one be forthcoming?

4 July 2011 at 17:53  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Dodo the Duffer Bird sqawked 3 July 2011 13:39

"Mr Cranmer I was
merely demonstrating that a lack of understanding and comprehension, based on hostility and an absence of willingness to listen to the theology of others,(such as on 21st of March 1556),I am taking a wild guess here)"


disingenuous
1.not straightforward; not candid or frank; insincere
2.slyly deceptive or misleading, typically by means of a pretense of ignorance or unawareness!!!!!!

"There was no gratuitous swipe intended at Protestantism (*Choking sound*) but I can understand how it might be misconstrued (Can you, dear bird). Indeed, I see a great deal of strenght within Anglicanism and agree with much of the critique of Roman Catholicism at the time of the Reformation."

Truly Machiavellian mischief with a large dollop of Uriah Heep, tossed in for good measure.

Your umble servant, sir!

Stop it, your killing me. Go back to thy "umble abode" Uriah Cheep Cheep.

Ernst.

ps

"Toby the Jug said 4 July 2011 17:53

"It takes courage and humility to apologise. Will one be forthcoming?"

Nearly choked on my tuna bagette. HEHEHE.

5 July 2011 at 01:45  
Anonymous Toby the Jug said...

E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles

You are a nasty, smug little man. Go play with your 'tiddles' and mind your own business.

5 July 2011 at 16:51  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Joby the Tug said 5 July 2011 16:51

"E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles

You are a nasty, smug little man (Translation:I have neither the wit nor intellect you possess Mr Blofeld). Go play with your 'tiddles' and mind your own business."

Cheers Big Ears

Ernsty.

5 July 2011 at 17:40  
Blogger Dodo the Dude said...

To oneself in such high regard! An ability to understand what other people are really saying! And so well read too.

You should go into academia where "making love to one's ego" is so prized.

5 July 2011 at 22:00  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Dodo the Duffer Bird trilled 5 July 2011 22:00

"To oneself in such high regard! An ability to understand what other people are really saying! And so well read too."

It's called being a father and grandad, who knows when his children are being stupid and facetious, KNOWINGLY. It's a life skill, my old peewit (a nickname for a bird)!

"You should go into academia where "making love to one's ego" is so prized."

Ea te corroborant, quæ non interficiunt.(Roughly translated: That which does not kill you, only makes you stronger).

Ernsty, my fine tiber fudge duck.

5 July 2011 at 23:21  
Blogger Dodo the Dude said...

E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles

Nah, you just enjoy putting people down by your brilliance. Admit it, you're a smart arse.

6 July 2011 at 00:15  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Dodo the Dude said 6 July 2011 00:15

"E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles

Nah, you just enjoy putting people down by your brilliance. Admit it, you're a smart arse."

Dear communicant, 'brilliance' would be referring to His Grace (oops, a bit Uriah Heepish too).

Ernst is a jovial chap, blessed from The Almighty with a sharp wit and a love of the classics, who excelled at debating by using only these rather than bludgeoning fellow debaters with endless facts and quotes.
A pointed quip, delivered with a twinkle in the eye, sticks in the mind longer than any diatribes.

Ernst, my fine feathered flightless Raphus Cucullatus.

6 July 2011 at 00:51  
Anonymous Toby the Jug said...

E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

"Ernst is a jovial chap, blessed from The Almighty with a sharp wit and a love of the classics, who excelled at debating by using only these ..."

I remain unconvinced. This 'explanation' is window dressing. Use your gifts more wisely if this be the case. Personal insults and put downs are unlikely to persuade.

On the street where I grew up you'd have received a firm punch on the nose!

6 July 2011 at 14:14  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

JOby the Tug whimpered.6 July 2011 14:14

"On the street where I grew up you'd have received a firm punch on the nose!"

My Sweet Fillpot
On the streets where Ernst is from, the Rottweillers and Dobermans walked around in gangs for their own safety!

Were you aware the slang term jug can also be used describe the breast of a woman(TIT).
How enlightening.

Ernsty

ps
"Personal insults and put downs are unlikely to persuade." As if your ilk could be persuaded.LOL

7 July 2011 at 11:54  
Anonymous Toby the Jug said...

Earnest Tiddles

'Tiddle' has other meanings too.

Besides, I never trust a man who brags about his pussy. Hope you stroke it gently.

8 July 2011 at 12:50  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think the problem is, a lot of boys and men get a 'testosterone buzz' from feeling strong hatred, and believing themselves to be on a crusade gives their pointless lives some meaning. It gives them a 'hit', an energy that they then become addicted to.

So seeing the prophet as some kind of 'bad gansta' is appealing to a lot of young muslims (like the ones filmed in Rusholme, Manchester) who are so desperate to be taken seriously and "respected" (i.e. feared like black 'yardi' gangsters 'n' sh1t).

It's a shame they don't recognize this testosterone high as the devil's seduction into barbaric madness and the opposite of what Mohammed wanted.

26 July 2011 at 16:40  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older