Wednesday, September 19, 2012

Please stop talking of Eurosceptics as the media talk of Muslims

His Grace has long been irritated by the propensity of the mainstream media and many commentators to talk of the 'Muslim World' or the 'Islamic World', as though there were some unified and coherent cohabitation going on between the globally-dispersed followers of the professing prophet Mohammed. There simply isn’t.

There is no more social cohesion, unity of doctrine or meeting of minds among the disparate expressions of Islam as there are between the myriad of denominations, factions and cults which purport to constitute Christendom. There is Sunni, Shi'a, Sufi, of which everyone has heard. But there are the lesser-known sects like inter alia the Ahmadiyya, Ibadi, Quranists, Yazdânism, Karaite-Karaism and the Nation of Islam. The ‘Muslim world’ is simply a patronisingly convenient classification of 'the West' (which is another one) to lump them all together for terminological convenience. It is as sociologically simplistic and theologically ignorant as ‘Hindu’, which entered the theo-political vernacular and has become an enduring legacy of the British Empire.

The ‘Muslim world’ is meaningless because it implies a geographic entity unified by a monolithic faith – a caliphate. But the ‘Muslim world’ has no universal understanding of this, and so the concept of a ‘Muslim world’ is as meaningless to Muslims as it is to those of other faiths and none. Some Muslims, we know, want to worship and live peaceably with their neighbours; some want to wage 'Jihad' (another misunderstood and much-abused term) and blow us all to kingdom come; still others want to blow themselves to Jannah, in the hope of an eternity of wine and virgins. The term 'Muslim World' is as vacuous and meaningless as 'Sikh World' or 'atheist world': it is non-existent.

Which brings His Grace (in a roundabout kind of way) to 'Euroscpetics'. No, there isn't a faction of them threatening violence or murder or global revolution if they don't get their way on political European integration (yet..). But when the media refer to 'Eurosceptics', the term appears to embrace everyone on the Eurobarometer from David Cameron to Nick Griffin, with a very broad spectrum of belief ranging from incremental renegotiation and repatriation to 'Out'. As with Islam, trying to identify the 'true' or 'real' Eurosceptics is fraught with theological difficulty, for there is no unified central authority around which the professing denominations and divisions may cohere: there is no Sir James Goldsmith.

But even with a single professing prophet of salvation, the Muslims (like the Christians) still dispute and disagree, so perhaps a 'leader' would not solve the problems. Yet until Euroscepticism speaks with one voice - or at least unifies around a single immediate objective - it cannot lead us to the Promised Land. Not least because, for some, that land is Canaan, while for others it is Palestine, and still others prefer to call it Israel, each with its own historic narrative, unique theology and socio-political expression.

Some Eurosceptics are undoubtedly dangerous, but most are utterly benign. Some think strategically; others just seek the limelight. And His Grace has purposely not hyperlinked to examples (in his judgement) in either category, for to identify one as 'thinking' and another as 'posturing' is to cause further despair and division on a matter of the utmost political significance. The Eurosceptic 'movement' (if it be) is fundamentally a clash of gargantuan egos, none of whom will deign to cooperate or collaborate with their co-Eurosceptics, principally out of a lack of trust, belief or respect.

So, with a referendum on the next EU treaty looming - and, as sure as night follows day, it is coming - please don't expect political coherence or campaigning strategy from the Conservatives, UKIP, The Democracy Movement, The Campaign for United Kingdom Conservatism, Better off Out, Campaign for an Independent Britain, The Freedom Association, or The Liberty League. Frankly, you have more hope of persuading a Wahhabi Sunni to sup with an Ahmadiyyan and plant the cornerstone of a new mosque. If a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand: the referendum may already be lost.


Blogger Naomi King said...

Consider the possibility that all-out regional war is the optimal outcome for American interests. An Israeli strike on Iran that achieved even limited success - a two-year delay in Iran's nuclear weapons development - would arrest America's precipitous decline as a superpower.

Absent an Israeli strike, America faces:
A nuclear-armed Iran;
Iraq's continued drift towards alliance with Iran;
An overtly hostile regime in Egypt, where the Muslim Brotherhood government will lean on jihadist elements to divert attention from the country's economic collapse;
An Egyptian war with Libya for oil and with Sudan for water;
A radical Sunni regime controlling most of Syria, facing off an Iran-allied Alawistan ensconced in the coastal mountains;
A de facto or de jure Muslim Brotherhood takeover of the Kingdom of Jordan;
A campaign of subversion against the Saudi monarchy by Iran through Shi'ites in Eastern Province and by the Muslim Brotherhood internally;
A weakened and perhaps imploding Turkey struggling with its Kurdish population and the emergence of Syrian Kurds as a wild card;
A Taliban-dominated Afghanistan; and
Radicalized Islamic regimes in Libya and Tunisia.

Saudi Arabia is the biggest loser in the emerging Middle East configuration, and Russia is the biggest winner. Europe and Japan have concluded that America has abandoned its long-standing commitment to the security of energy supplies in the Persian Gulf by throwing the Saudi monarchy under the bus, and have quietly shifted their energy planning towards Russia. Little of this line of thinking will appear in the news media, but the reorientation towards Moscow is underway nonetheless.

From Israel's vantage point, the way things are now headed is the worst-case scenario. The economic sanctions are a nuisance for Iran, but not a serious hindrance to its nuclear ambitions. When US Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Martin Dempsey intoned on August 30 that he "did not want to be complicit" in an Israeli strike on Iran, he was stating publicly what the Pentagon has signaled to Tehran for the past six months. The US wants no part of an Israeli strike.

This remonstrance from the Pentagon, along with the State Department's refusal to identify a "red line" past which Iran would provoke American military action, amounts to a green light for Iran to build an atomic bomb, Israeli analysts believe.

What if Israel were to strike Iran? From a technical standpoint, there is no question that Israel could severely damage the Iranian nuclear program. As the respected German military analyst Hans Ruhl wrote earlier this year: There are 25 to 30 installations in Iran that are exclusively or predominately dedicated to the nuclear program. Six of them are targets of the first rank: the uranium enrichment facility at Natanz, the conversion works in Isfahan, the heavy water reactor in Arak, the weapons and munitions production facility in Parchin, the uranium enrichment facility in Fordow, and the Bushehr light water reactor.

The information about Natanzare is solid. The project has been under satellite surveillance from the beginning and been watched by Israeli "tourists". At the moment there are a good 10,000 centrifuges installed, of which 6,500 are producing. Israel's strongest "bunker buster" is the GBU-28 (weight 2.3 tons), which demonstrably can break through seven meters of reinforced concrete and 30 meters of earth. It would suffice to break through the roof at Natanz. In case of doubt, two GBU-28s could be used in sequence; the second bomb would deepen the first bomb's crater and realize the required success.

19 September 2012 at 10:05  
Blogger Naomi King said...

The trick is to put a second bunker-buster directly into the crater left by a previous one. According to Cordesman, the probability of a direct hit with existing smart-bomb technology is 50%. Half a dozen bombs should do for each of the six key sites - assuming that the Israelis don't have something more creative in the works. Israel has had 10 years to plan the operation, and it is a fair assumption that the Israeli Air Force can accomplish the mission.

The deeper question is: what constitutes success?

"When Israel bombed [Iraq's] Osiris [nuclear reactor in 1981]," said an Israeli who took part in the planning, "we expected a three-year setback of Iraq's nuclear program. It was delayed by 10 years. But that wasn't the most important thing. What was most important to us is the ripple effect through the region."

The ripple effects are what America's foreign policy establishment fears the most. The vision shared by the George W Bush and Barack Obama administrations, albeit with some variation, of a Middle East dotted with democratic regimes friendly to the United States would pop like a soap-bubble. What ripples would ensue from a successful Israeli strike on Iran?

Iran probably would attempt to block the Straits of Hormuz, the gateway for a fifth of the world's oil supply, and America would respond by destroying Iranian conventional military capabilities and infrastructure from the air. This would add to Tehran's humiliation, and strengthen the domestic opposition.

Iran's influence in Iraq and Syria would diminish, although Iran's supporters in both countries probably would spill a great deal of blood in the short run.

Hizbollah almost certainly would unleash its missile arsenal at Israel, inflicting a few hundred casualties by Israeli estimates. Israel would invade southern Lebanon and - unlike the 2006 war - fight without fear of Syrian intervention. In 2006, the Olmert government restricted the movements of the IDF out of fear that the Syrian Army would intervene. Syria's army is in no position to intervene today.

There is a possibility, to be sure, that Syria would launch chemical and biological warheads against Israel, but if the Assad government employed weapons of mass destruction, Israel would respond with a nuclear bombardment. In this case deterrence is likely to be effective. Iran's influence in Lebanon would be drastically diminished.

19 September 2012 at 10:06  
Blogger Naomi King said...

Stripped of support from its Iranian sponsor, the Alawite regime would fall, and Syria would become a Saudi-Turkish condominium. Ethnic butchery would go on for some time.

Egypt would be cut off from financial support from the Gulf States as punishment for its opening to Iran. The domestic consequences for Egypt would be ugly. The country is almost out of money; some of its oil suppliers stopped deliveries last August, and Egypt's refineries lack funds to buy oil from the government.

Al-Ahram reported September 12 that Upper Egypt now suffers a 30% shortage of diesel fuel. The newspaper wrote,
Egyptians started feeling another diesel crisis at the end of last week, with amounts available shrinking and prompting lengthy queues at stations. A shortage of liquidity in the Ministry of Petroleum has delayed payments to refineries that provide the crude needed to produce diesel. "The Finance Ministry is late delivering the required funds to the Ministry of Petroleum," Hossam Arafat, head of the division of petroleum industries at Egypt's Chambers of Commerce, explained. The total daily supply of diesel on the Egyptian market has fallen to 33,000 tonnes from 40,000, press reports estimate.
Cairo well might become a radical Islamic state, a North Korea on the Nile, as I wrote in this space last month (see North Korea on the Nile Asia Times Online, August 29, 2012.) But the consequences of such a devolution would be limited. With Iran neutralized , Egypt would be less of a threat to Saudi Arabia. It might become a threat to Libya and Sudan. That is unfortunate, but what have Libya and Sudan done for us lately?

In the absence of an American leadership willing to assert American strategic interests in the region, Israel well might save the United States.

In the long view of things, there is not much cause for optimism about the Muslim world. It contains two kinds of countries: those that can't feed their children, like Egypt, and those that have stopped having children, like Iran, Turkey, Algeria and Tunisia. Muslim nations seem to pass directly from infancy to senescence without stopping at adulthood, from the pre-modern directly to the post-modern, as I wrote in my book Why Civilizations Die (and Why Islam is Dying, Too).

Turks have just 1.5 children per family, like the infecund Europeans, while Turkish Kurds have four or five children. That makes the redrawing of the map of Turkey inevitable sooner or later. In a generation, Iran will have an inverted population pyramid like the aging industrial countries, but without the wealth to support it.

There is no reason to expect most of the Muslim countries to go quietly into irreversible decline. All-out regional war is the likely outcome sooner or later. We might as well get on with it.

19 September 2012 at 10:06  
Blogger bananabrain said...

and the above has what precisely to do with euro-scepticism?

aaaanyway, the following:

"the lesser-known sects like inter alia the Ahmadiyya, Ibadi, Quranists, Yazdânism, Karaite-Karaism and the Nation of Islam."

some clarification:

ahmadiyya is a post-islamic sect based around the teachings of a subsequent prophet called mirza ghulam ahmad. all the other muslims think they're heretics. i find them rather similar to j-witnesses, but with rather better pr advisers.

yazdanism, or yezidi, is a pre-islamic sect that has adapted to survive into modern times.

karaites are in fact a jewish sect, nothing to fo with islam whatsoever. they are even more of a minority than neturei karta and mostly live in israel, not having posed a serious doctrinal challenge since the C10th-11th.

"quranists" are the islamic version of karaites; people who reject the sunnah and hadith etc, going for a "sola scriptura" approach - you might call them the first rumblings of reformation.

the "nation of islam" are, historically and theologically, rather similar to the mormons, in that their beliefs make about as much sense and their founding figures are about as, erm, colourful. how islamic they are is rather questionable; certainly they are heterodox to an extraordinary degree.

just clarifying.



19 September 2012 at 10:35  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

"..karaites are in fact a jewish sect, nothing to fo (sic) with islam.."

Mr/Miss/Mrs/Ms Bananabrain,

His Grace knows where you're coming from, but there is such an Islamic grouping and Karaite-Karaism is antithetical Karaite Judaism. Please see (superficially) here.

19 September 2012 at 10:45  
Blogger Rambling Steve Appleseed said...

Naomi King

where did you copy and paste the above essay from, or is it your own work?

your concluding paragraph (and I copy and paste)

'There is no reason to expect most of the Muslim countries to go quietly into irreversible decline. All-out regional war is the likely outcome sooner or later. We might as well get on with it. '

Would fill me with madness and despair if there was any more room within. Alas, there is none.

the end of the world

19 September 2012 at 10:53  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think that people oppose the EU for different reasons, my own are because I don't think johhny foreigner should be dictating to us what laws we should and shouldn't pass, no taxation without representation etc.

Re Islam - I though that Karaites are Jewish aren't they? The concern for us, are the fundamentalists who want to wage global war and terrorism on us.

19 September 2012 at 10:56  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ah, His Grace has provided us with a helpful link, to help us on our religious-political discussions.

19 September 2012 at 10:58  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Naomi King,

In respect of Iran, it is interesting to note that America and Britain have been amassing a large armada just outside of the gulf. This is being termed as an exercise regarding 'mine sweeping', although as the telegraph has reported, quite what 3 nuclear powered Nimitz class Super Carriers (1 of these ships has more strike craft than the whole of the Iranian airforce) and British Battleships such as the TYPE 45,are doing in such an exercise is beyond me. Plus the French and British carriers hovering outside of the eastern med.

Perhaps Israel will strike any day now; I think that the American-British will be there to make sure that the straits of Hormuz remain open, added complication is that the fanatics and whirling Dervishes have taken over Egypt, so we might also have to contemplate another Suez crisis as well, if the Muslim Brotherhood government try and close the canal- the jugular vein of the Empire as Disraeli used to call it.

19 September 2012 at 11:00  
Blogger Corrigan1 said...

Well...not exactly sure what a putative Israeli attack on Iran has to do with Euroscepticism, but if the Israelis have had years to plan their attack, haven't the Iranians had years to plan their defence?

19 September 2012 at 11:08  
Blogger John Knox's lovechild said...

We should all pray for peace in the Middle East,as the Holy Father urged.

Odd juxtaposition of topics, Islam and Euroscepticism. Is Cranmer saying that the meeja take complex phenomena and trivialise and misrepresent them?

Indeed they do.

19 September 2012 at 12:12  
Blogger Mr Integrity said...

Your Grace,
Politics seem to be driven by collections of similar minded people and parties are collections of various groups.
A cause needs a leader. World War 11 was won by a coalition governmental a by an outstanding leader. The various euro sceptic groups you list need to form a coalition for the purpose of the main agenda, getting out of Europe.
Alternatively they will all take votes from the main parties causing an unintended power shift but failing individually getting anywhere.

19 September 2012 at 12:35  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

The 56 member states of the Organisation of Islamic cooperation use the expression 'Muslim World' quite liberally in its on line literature and exhorts members to target medial outlets on how to promote the image of a global and political Islam.

VII. Cultural and Information Exchange among Member States

1. Call upon TV channels and the mass media to deal with international mass media effectively in order to enable the Muslim world to express its perspective on international developments. Call on the mass media in Member States, including satellite channels, to agree on a Code of Ethics that caters for diversity and pluralism and safeguards the Ummah's values and interests.

19 September 2012 at 12:40  
Blogger John Chater said...


Very interesting and challenging, but who are you and who wrote it?

In the third from last paragraph in your last posting you have:

'Muslim nations seem to pass directly from infancy to senescence without stopping at adulthood, from the pre-modern directly to the post-modern, as I wrote in my book Why Civilizations Die (and Why Islam is Dying, Too)'.

The last line is revealing, as I doubt you are in fact the book's author, David Goldman.

19 September 2012 at 13:44  
Blogger Naomi King said...

John you are quite right the piece comes from yesterday's front page of Asia Times online, here is the link

and the author is Spengler aka David Goldman whose work I have recommended on other occasions on this blog.

19 September 2012 at 14:26  
Blogger Naomi King said...

And for more on the Muslim World in Turmoil ...

One of the world’s most influential Muslims is now calling on the United Nations – in light of the YouTube movie blamed for violent protests across the Mideast – to impose international restrictions on free speech, criminalizing any statement that impugns Islam.

Sheikh Abdullah Bin Bayyah, a professor at King Abdul Aziz University in Saudi Arabia, is a member of several international organizations, including the Centre for Studying the Aims of Sharia in the U.K., as well as serving as the vice chairman of the International Union of Muslim Scholars.

In a public declaration issued to several Islamic bodies, including the All Dulles Area Muslim Society, one of the largest Muslim mosques in the D.C. metro area and the U.S., bin Bayyah called upon “people of reason and understanding” to put a legal stop to statements that would offend Muslims and thereby threaten world peace.The Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Centre ranked bin Bayyah No. 31 on its list of the 500 most influential Muslims in the world for 2011.

“We ask everyone to ponder the ramifications of provoking the feelings of over one billion people by a small party of people who desires not to seek peace nor fraternity between members of humanity,” bin Bayyah wrote. “This poses a threat to world peace with no tangible benefit realized. Is it not necessary in today’s world for the United Nations to issue a resolution criminalizing the impingement of religious symbols? We request all religious and political authorities, as well as people of reason to join us in putting a stop to this futility that benefits no one.”

Bin Bayyah’s statement was titled a “Declaration Regarding the Offensive Video to Muslims,” a clear reference to the YouTube film, “Innocence of Muslims,” which has been widely – if controversially – blamed for inciting riots against embassies in the Middle East and the resulting death of four U.S. diplomats.

The Obama administration had similarly asked Google, the parent company of YouTube, to review whether “Innocence of Muslims” violates its terms-of-use policies.

Thus far, Google has refused to remove the video from YouTube, though it blocked access in some sensitive countries.

Pundits from a wide spectrum of news outlets have agreed the video is protected by free speech rights in the U.S.

19 September 2012 at 14:33  
Blogger Naomi King said...

Bin Bayyah’s statement continued, condemning the embassy attacks in the Middle East: “We implore you not to inflict violence upon anyone, whether foreign delegations or otherwise. You should not destroy property or flout the values and cherished principles that you defend, as attacking innocents, killing foreign diplomats and ambassadors contravenes religious and moral principles before it contravenes political ones.”

Nonetheless, bin Bayyah reiterated the U.S. should make videos like “Innocence of Muslims” illegal, even while he claimed to back “free speech.”

“To our Western neighbors … we are extremely concerned with a small active minority in your countries that seeks to perpetuate a state of conflict and war,” bin Bayyah wrote. “We estimate that such objectives do not serve the general interest. Therefore, it is our hope that you reconsider and criminalize the denigration of religious symbols, as such provocations do not serve the principles of free speech, principles that you and us both seek to uphold.”

In a WND commentary, Diana West discussed other leading Muslims’ attempts to criminalize criticism of Islam.

“Mohamed Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood president of Egypt (who denies that al-Qaida attacked the U.S. on 9/11, by the way), directed the Egyptian Embassy in Washington to ‘take legal action’ against the movie’s producers,” West writes. “Morsi doesn’t seem to understand First Amendment protections.”

West continued, “Egyptian Prime Minister Hisham Qandil asked for similar action ‘within the framework of international charters that criminalize acts that stir strife on the basis of race, color or religion.’ This is a direct appeal to hold Americans accountable to the U.N. blasphemy resolution Hillary Clinton, along with the Islamic bloc, has championed, despite its repressive controls on free speech.”

West was referring a “defamation against religion” resolution the Organization of Islamic Cooperation has been pushing at the U.N. every year since 1999. Last year, Clinton worked with the OIC to pass a revised version, Resolution 16/18, which included both the usual condemnation of defaming speech and a paragraph affirming “the positive role that the exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and expression” plays in “strengthening democracy.”

Critics of the defamation resolutions fear they could be used to outlaw valid and critical scrutiny of Islamic teachings, as some OIC states do through controversial blasphemy laws at home.

The Clinton compromise version, though still roundly criticized, enjoyed more popularity at the U.N. itself and was adopted by consensus.

19 September 2012 at 14:33  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"His Grace has long been irritated by the propensity of the mainstream media and many commentators to talk of the 'Muslim World' or the 'Islamic World', as though there were some unified and coherent cohabitation going on between the globally-dispersed followers of the professing prophet Mohammed. There simply isn’t."

Yes - but the problem is we have a habit of reducing the complex to the simple. You see the same when it comes to the term 'homosexual' 'homosexuals' 'gays' 'gay lifestyle' etc. It is 'as as though there were some unified and coherent cohabitation going on between' homosexuals. There simply isn’t!

The problem with many issues is that there they are seldom reducible to a simple short hand. But it don’t stop some, does it?

19 September 2012 at 15:09  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

I thought homosexuality simply referred to people whose primary sexual desire was oriented towards members of the same gender.

Along what other lines would you like to differentiate? I wasn't aware of major creedal differences in the "gay community" (that term pending correction) - but then I can't claim to be much of an expert there. Is there some sort of implicit grouping along ideological lines the greater public should be aware of?

19 September 2012 at 15:46  
Blogger John Thomas said...

"Some Eurosceptics are undoubtedly dangerous" - maybe, but certainly mostEurophiles are definitely dangerous, or at least all those who want to merge us all into a new USSR-style super state.

19 September 2012 at 15:57  
Blogger IanCad said...

Peter Denshaw @ 15:09

AIB @ 15:46

That didn't take long, did it?

As the relevance of HG's posts to Bum Banditry decreases, so the likelihood of the thread degenerating into a debate on all things homosexual approaches certitude.

19 September 2012 at 16:42  
Blogger bananabrain said...

good gracious, your grace!

i am really quite amazed; this group is actually a complete surprise to me - and that doesn't happen often.

well, well, well.

i wonder what the eurosceptic equivalent would be!



19 September 2012 at 16:44  
Blogger bananabrain said...

and it is mr, by the way,



19 September 2012 at 16:44  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...


One can presume that we will soon have a comment to the effect of pointing out our obsession with the subject?

I was merely engaging with what seemed to me - pending an education in how homosexual people organise themselves ideologically - a rather strange extension of Cranmer's original article, which stresses the importance of not lumping a complex spectrum of what are fundamentally intellectual positions.

19 September 2012 at 17:16  
Blogger John Magee said...

Todays headline: "France Closes Twenty Embassies because of Fear of Cartoon Bascklash".

All hell is about to break out in the Islamic world once again for the second time within two weeks. This time it will be over the cartoon of Mohammed shown naked on the cover o a French magazime

If Muslims don't have basic shared beliefs and values based on the Koran why all the "outrage" and rioting all over the Islamic world from North Africa to Indonesia over the "movie" and now a naked cartoon of Mohammed?

Pray no one is killed by these unhappy disunited Muslims who always seem to instantly unite in their outrage when something we "infidels" do in any way "offend

19 September 2012 at 17:40  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Time will prove the EU to be the real danger, those who doubt that perhaps deserve to suffer it

I do not live in a EU constituancy and therefore do not recognise Nick Griffin or any other MEPs

19 September 2012 at 17:49  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

AIB: "One can presume that we will soon have a comment to the effect of pointing out our obsession with the subject?"

Welcome to the community of online Christians.

19 September 2012 at 17:59  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

I should have capitalised that. But hey.

19 September 2012 at 18:02  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Your Grace. Allow the Inspector to provide some more appropriate terminology.

Eurosceptic – To be confined to expressing doubt about the idea of a Euro currency.
Eu-sceptic – Something or many things need to change in the EU
Eu-negotiator – A better deal for the UK
Eu-quitter – That’s the spirit !

Let’s say we are given a referendum on a basic In / Out. And we vote Out. That won’t be the end of it. Not by a long way. We will then be given a SECOND referendum. Out or Renegotiate. Now, that is more likely to produce a Renegotiate result.


A referendum on In / Out / Renegotiate. Kiss goodbye any hope of a 50+% OUT. And don’t think the powers that be will allow a first past the post result to stand either.

We quitters seem to be stuffed, but what a stink there will be, either way…

The only SURE way to get out and stay out is if every Eu-quitter transfers their national vote to UKIP for all time. There is no alternative. If you are really sure of your quit position, you will do this.

19 September 2012 at 18:33  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...


I meant both myself and Peter Denshaw, who did, after all, raise the subject.

Capitalised community or online?

19 September 2012 at 18:45  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Good list of choices- I'm for out full stop.

19 September 2012 at 19:19  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

Naomi King 14:33

“In a public declaration issued to several Islamic bodies, including the All Dulles Area Muslim Society, one of the largest Muslim mosques in the D.C. metro area and the U.S., bin Bayyah called upon “people of reason and understanding” to put a legal stop to statements that would offend Muslims and thereby threaten world peace.”

This sounds like blackmail to me. Which is about the level I'd expect from a muslim “intellectual”

The Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Centre ranked bin Bayyah No. 31 on its list of the 500 most influential Muslims in the world for 2011”

Well they would wouldn't they, he sounds more like the 31st most menacing muslin in the world.

There must be many great minds that think alike on our position in the EU, that we would be better off out etc... If they could manage to put their egos aside and join together around the goal of extracting ourselves from the EU grip, we would surely make more progress than that of the muslim countries who haven't really managed to come out of the 7th century, mainly because they are so fractious and spend so much time killing each other.

19 September 2012 at 19:19  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Also a vote on :

Asking the other Europeans if they wish to come into a proper fair trade area, which doesn't see Germany dictating to the rest of Europe and treating proud countries such as Greece and Ireland (which could reunite with the UK) like debt ridden Untermensch!

19 September 2012 at 19:21  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

On the subject of the Euro, have you all seen the marvellous new Bristol Pound?

How heartening that whilst our Continental brethren move ever closer to fiscal union, the folks over here are coming up with local currency. It's almost like we're at two completely different ends of the ideological spectrum...

19 September 2012 at 19:58  
Blogger John Magee said...


How about EUSSR =

European Union of Suicidal
Socialist Radicals.

19 September 2012 at 21:01  
Blogger Naomi King said...

Tens of thousands of Israeli troops in surprise Golan drill. Khamenei: No bending to the West
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report September 19, 2012, 11:47 AM (GMT+02:00)Tags: IDF Israel Golan Ayatollah Ali Khamenei Strait of Hormuz

IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz
Reservists drafted at no notice, Air Force, Central Command and other IDF units were flown to Israel’s northern Golan border early Wednesday, Sept. 19, for a surprise exercise called by Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz under the codename “National Asset.”

The official IDF announcement tried to downplay its importance, describing it as a “planned, routine event.” However, DEBKAfile’s military sources say the war game is the biggest the IDF has conducted in the eight years since the second Lebanon war on Hizballah in 2006, with tens of thousands of soldiers and senior officers, including the artillery and the air force taking part.

Over the last weekend, witnesses reported heavy traffic of convoys of tank and APC carriers and military vehicles with emergency store markings heading north, just days after the IDF completed a large-scale war game on Israel’s Syrian and Lebanese borders simulating a Hizballah attack.
Since early September, therefore, the Israeli Defense Forces have been in the midst of preparations which have the appearance of readiness for a real war rather than an exercise. Those preparations peaked Wednesday under a codename which signified its goal: the defense of national assets.

Another sign of an impending conflict was provided by US diplomats who Monday began destroying classified documents and sensitive equipment at the Beirut embassy. As Islamist anti-US violence raged across Arab and Muslim countries, the State Department said this was a precautionary measure, without naming any specific threat. The trashing of embassy documents usually signifies preparations to evacuate an US embassy at short notice. It would be imperative in a war situation to keep them out of Hizballah hands.

The official IDF announcement described the exercise as focusing on fire power under the command of chief Artillery Commander, Brig. Gen. Ro’i Riftin and due to end Wednesday night. The rapid deployment of military strength on this scale for a live-fire drill is required practice for an army facing the onset of war aggression.

In the Persian Gulf, the US is leading 25 West European and Arab nations in a gigantic 12-day war game in the Straits of Hormuz which began Sunday, Sept 16. It includes a large-scale minesweeping drill to simulate the breaching of the Strait of Hormuz against Iranian efforts to block oil passage through the strategic waterway. The exercise - entirely by simulated measures - will also drill operations for destroying Iranian naval, air and missile bases in the Persian Gulf area and countering Iranian speedboats aiming to sabotage naval vessels and oil tankers.
Among the participants are the UK, France, Saudi Arabia and the UAE. The United States has deployed three aircraft carriers with aerial strike forces. Military sources estimate that when the war game ends on Sept 27, these forces will not disperse but stay on hand in the event of Israel attacking Iran’s nuclear program.

As the exhibition of colossal Western might got underway opposite Iranian shores, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was quoted on his official website as saying: Iran will never bend to Western pressure The Islamic Republic, he told a military audience, "makes its decisions solely based on the interests of its people and the country, even if all of the world's powers get angry at its decisions."
It "does not accept the demands of any superpower," he added.

The Ayatollah also accused "Western and Zionist media" of fabricating reports on the biting effects of economic sanctions, hinting that the Iranian economy was not suffering.

19 September 2012 at 22:52  
Blogger John Magee said...

The Swiss wisely rejected the concept of a united Europe for decades. Now they can now smile with confidence they were right all along. The conservative Swiss today look out over Europe from their mountains at the mess the EU is in with the knowledge that they were correct for not joining the EU. They have seen it all before. Over and over during their nearly 200 years being a neutral island in the midst of a European sea of wars, revolutions, and several brief periods of peace the Swiss have witnessed Europe do its best to self destruct. The Swiss are thinking to themselves once again with justified pride, "we told you so", and they are correct.

20 September 2012 at 04:11  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Your Grace

There is a good reason why Christians do not riot or threaten violence when things come before our attention regarding our Wonderful Saviour

"Archbishop Cranmer ‏@His_Grace

@DavidAllenGreen Ah, the blood, the blood: there is forgiveness in the blood: if Jesus Jnr shared that blood, he too would be divine.

Cathy Cathy ‏@cathyby

@His_Grace Don't really see why divinity would be hereditary :) @DavidAllenGreen

David Allen Green David Allen Green ‏@DavidAllenGreen

@cathyby Agree, still cannot see what @His_Grace fears from a Jesus Jnr. Perhaps he will blog? "

1. This nonsense is fiction dressed as historical bunkum that was refuted by Irenaeus during the 2nd century that there were only 4 gospels and all others were gnostic lies (Irenaeus in Adversus Haereses), which was verified after the discovery of the Gnostic library near Nag Hammadi in Egypt in the 1940s.

Just because something is even old (paper, ink etc dated to an historic period) does not make it true...Just because a document was found dated 1550's, stating Cranmer was a staunch RC and really believed in transubstantiation, this would not make the assertion true as we have historical eyewitness accounts that this is false!!

As Christians we have seen it all before but it just gets repackaged for the gullible, those that despise truth...Dawkins etc and those that love a conspiracy.

E S Blofeld


Any child of Jesus' would be born into sin allowing that woman during that period were still daughters of Eve and it would need another virgin birth to produce a sinless woman in a womb to marry (He was GOD in the flesh from His eternal state), else He would have died on the cross for the sins of His children also.
So His children would have had to have been part of the Godhead to avoid this and so need to have been eternal?? This is nowhere stated in Scripture.
Has history revealed anybody with the miraculous qualities that Jesus had since....not that we have noticed!!!
He has a wife in Eternity..Its called The Bride of Christ!

20 September 2012 at 10:05  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...


Welcome back. I hope you've made a full recovery and left your sleuthing behind you.

(I agree with these comment but you've posted on the wrong thread.)

20 September 2012 at 23:15  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...


Thank you, not made a full recovery from ill health but getting there...recently discovered kidney cysts caused me pains in my back something terrible. "but you've posted on the wrong thread"..I know but me failing eyesight is letting me down. I am a physical wreck!


21 September 2012 at 09:33  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Bless you, Ernsty. Sorry to hear about your health problems. Take your time and you'll get there.


21 September 2012 at 12:19  
Blogger Avi Barzel said...

Mr Blofeld,

Sorry to hear you have been ill; I noticed you've been missing roll-call for a while, but thought that like many of us here, you were taking a well-deserved leave from the battles for a little R&R in one of the more comfy bases away from the shell-pocked front lines. But a good soldier you are, Mr B, to return, even on the wrong thread, and to start blasting...well you didn't blow away any of our sorry arses with "friendly fire," so all's well.

So, may your recovevery be swift and complete, בעזרת השם‎, with Almighty's help!

Regarding the "Wife Gospels," we deal with these kinds of tempests in a tea cup in Hebraic source from time to time as well. I read some preliminary notes on the fragment sent by a friend at Hebrew U and yes, the papyrus and ink, the language and Coptic script are all genuine, that is to say, consistent with Gnostic examples. But so what. Just a confirmation that yes, by the 4th century, there was a variety of contradicttory versions floating about, or as you say, "just because something is even old (paper, ink etc dated to an historic period) does not make it true..." Even the lead researchers aknowledge that and bemoan the fact that they arbitrarily called the fragment a "Gospel." But that's enough to feed imaginations for the next decade...and probably a goodly amount of lucrative, poorly-written Dan Brown-type of fiction, or bubemeise in Yiddish, to satisfy the romantically inclined and historiographically ignorant.

21 September 2012 at 12:24  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

God bless Ernsty - get well soon.

Subdued and respectful chortles :)

21 September 2012 at 13:29  
Blogger IanCad said...

Chin-Up Ernesty

My God speed your recovery.

21 September 2012 at 14:41  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Dodo, Avi, AIB and IanCad

Thanks for your kind words of concern, old age just gets the better of us all at some stage...oh to be 20 years younger again *sighs*. Onwards and Upwards always.

Old Ernsty

21 September 2012 at 15:05  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...


"Even the lead researchers aknowledge that and bemoan the fact that they arbitrarily called the fragment a "Gospel." But that's enough to feed imaginations for the next decade...and probably a goodly amount of lucrative, poorly-written Dan Brown-type of fiction, or bubemeise in Yiddish, to satisfy the romantically inclined and historiographically ignorant."
The clue as to whether these gnostic pieces of rubbish were true was defined by whether the early church throughout the world quoted from them...They NEVER did, only the 4 gospels as stated by Irenaeus.

The reason we know that the last verses of Marks gospel is true rather than the imagination of scribes later is that Irenaeus and others quoted them in letters, sermons and commentaries preserved from the early unless they were psychic, how on earth would they write about things to be added a few centuries later in supposedly corrupt translations. As with copies of the oldest transcripts in Alexandria, oldest does not meant 'True' as Irenaeus showed by the mutilation of the gospels and false gospels and epistles being circulated by the Gnostics!!!

Ernst ;-)

21 September 2012 at 15:20  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Felicitations Blofeld. Rather splendid to see you back, posting in your own modest and frequently unintelligible way. Nature can't keep an old dog down, what !

Toodle pip !

21 September 2012 at 18:22  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Office of Inspector General

'Salute' as they say in Pompeii.

Ernst ;-)

21 September 2012 at 20:01  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ernst and tiddles

Welcome back!.

May the Lord bless you and keep you.
May the Lord make his face to shine upon you,
and be gracious to you.
May the Lord lift up his countenance upon you,
and give you peace.

22 September 2012 at 10:11  
Blogger John Magee said...

In Pakistan on September 21, 2012 these raging lunatics in the name of their "prophet" Mohammed had their typical anti- USA mob party. This time over a stupid movie made in the USA by a private citizen (his right )which had the temerity to insult Mohammed (YIPPIE!). The usual stuff barbaric things happened at these hate the USA parties in Pakistan. American flags burned and stomped on, the mobs chanted the death to America, and while they rioted killed 18 of their own people.

The Israeli flag was also burned of course and a few French ones too over the cartoons in a French magazine last week which showed a semi nude cartoon of the "prophet" Mohammed.

Yet these Paki's love American foreign aid and come to the USA by the jet load every day to have a better life or collect welfare.

Islam is a mass psychosis and a mental illness!

22 September 2012 at 15:04  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...


Many thanks for your kind words. Tiddles says 'Hi'. ;-)


22 September 2012 at 16:58  
Blogger John Magee said...

Welcome back Blofeld.

22 September 2012 at 23:32  
Blogger John Magee said...


Exactly. As if the teachings of the Gospels and Christ's reason to exist, His death on the Cross, Resurrection, and Ascension and the history of the Church since Pentecost depends upon and will be destroyed by a tiny fragment of papyrus of doubtful origins.

I don't think so.

22 September 2012 at 23:41  
Blogger happyuk said...

Yes, I agree 'Muslim World' is yet another meaningless cliche peddled by the mass media.

The Western press, in line with the intent of the military-industrial complex (MIC) that still wields control over it, still represent Muslims as primitive, unrestrained mobs.

Their plan was/is to create "enemies" which would allow them to take progressively more control of society by having on hand an endless supply of supposed "threats".

The first threat was "commies". Then came "terrorists," then rogue nations, and so on.Muslims have fallen into the terrorist category as well as the rogue nations. And this is the way they have been portrayed by Western media for well over a decade, unfairly so in my opinion.

Every country has its own rednecks and fanatics. Gawker Magazine recently posted a superb article on Muslim 'rage', offering thirteen shots that depicted it. The article offers a corrective to the biased coverage of the mainstream press. It simply shows that the vast majority of Muslims the world over are just like us, ordinary poeple:

22 September 2012 at 23:57  
Blogger Avi Barzel said...

And good point on the secondary literature, the letters, sermons and commentaries, Mr Blofeld. Shows you're fit for the field, so you best gird-up and clang your visor down, as Gnosticism has made yet another come-back. Sources in my sprawling extended family tell me that the re-popularization of the Gospel of Thomas, The DaVinci Code, and now this fragment have re-ignited passions and fantasies and along with pacifism, feminism-lite and recycling, Jesus' alleged marriage is a major tea topic among well-to-do ageing liberal church ladies in pseudo-dyke haircuts. Now, that's a group to test your mettle with. Better you than me, Mr B.

23 September 2012 at 14:19  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Dear Avi

" Gnosticism has made yet another come-back." It never left, my boy. It is for those with itchy ears and who have a love of such nonsense as making God in their image such as eternity is having a lot of time rather than the complete absence of it, universalism and the like.

The study of history and knowing something useful about a subject at hand are completely lost on modern mankind, who must have their opinions given to them by others.


Ask anyone on the street if our problem is ignorance or apathy and they will respond that "they don't know and don't care"!!! ;-)


24 September 2012 at 08:53  
Blogger Avi Barzel said...

Ha ha ha! So good and true your parting line, Mr B! Don't mind if I steal it from time time.

28 September 2012 at 07:46  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older