Saturday, November 02, 2013

Farage: “We need a much more muscular defence of our Judaeo-Christian heritage"


The excellent Cristina Odone has a nugget of an interview with Nigel Farage in the Telegraph, in which the Ukip leader says:
“We need a much more muscular defence of our Judaeo-Christian heritage. Yes, we’re open to different cultures but we have to defend our values. That’s the message I want to hear from the Archbishop of Canterbury and from our politicians. Anything less is appeasement of the worst kind.”
Ms Odone continues:
Yet he speaks not as a defender of the faith — he ventures to church only four or five times a year — but of “our identity”.

This is the joker’s trump card, and he plays it ably, voice throbbing as he speaks of “the working classes who bear the brunt of excessive immigration”. It is not just the number of immigrants. Their “calibre” matters too. Who doesn’t meet his standards? “Criminals. There are 9,000 eastern Europeans in British prisons. I don’t think they should be here.”

Later, I can’t find evidence for that statistic anywhere. Nigel apologises, he thought he’d said foreign nationals, not east Europeans. In fact, the real figure is 10,786 foreign nationals in prison.

His list of those who will have no place in a Ukip Britain also includes Muslims who speak no English and wear the veil. “It makes people feel deeply uncomfortable. We go on about equality but under our noses, female genital mutilation has been going on in this country. Tens of thousands of women a year, but is anyone talking about it? It’s brushed under the carpet.” This slick eliding of veiling and mutilation is a typical Farage-ism.

“We have,” he says, “some very mixed values”. These include the “betrayal” of the family. “This has been the most anti-family government we have ever seen. The very fact that they pushed for gay marriage, and thought that it was important at a time when not even Stonewall was campaigning for it, shows you their twisted sense of priorities.” He is “100 per cent” supportive of stay-at-home mothers.
There are votes here. Thousands upon thousands upon thousands of them. Very many Christians across the denominations feel betrayed by the main political parties: their "identity" is being systematically assaulted, and the occasional invitation to No10 for prominent vicars, bishops and leading Christian commentators no longer quite cuts it.

The sheer numbers of those now immigrating threaten the creation of ‘ghettos’, as Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali has termed them, and others are finding.  The desire of some groups to maintain a distinct cultural and religious identity which is antithetical to British culture creates resentment which causes social disturbances.

The consensus of all the main political parties is that modern Britain has been enriched by ethnic pluralism and enlightened by theological ecumenism and European political union. But these developments have caused something of an identity crisis in the nation, spawning numerous books and articles which seek to define what is meant by ‘Britishness’. These have tended to evidence a lack of confidence in national identity or express diminishing trust in the foundations of the Christian heritage of the United Kingdom. The reasons have been attributed to a variety of causes, including relativism and multiculturalism, both of which have been exacerbated by the political process of devolution.

British culture cannot be cohesive when there is diversity of language, laws, traditions, customs and religion. Of course, culture can accommodate diversity, but ultimately the systems of governance and jurisprudence in a liberal democracy cannnot produce unity: they must be the manifest foundation of a pre-existing unity. As far as England is concerned, foreign encroachments have been fiercely resisted since the Reformation, yet the accommodation of Roman Catholics has developed incrementally of necessity to the extent that they agreed to abide by the laws of the state. A logical corollary of this is that Asian immigrants to the UK ought now to adapt their cultural traditions and religious expression to accommodate ‘British toleration’ or conform to those aspects of ‘Britishness’ which make society cohesive. And so a Briton has the right to (say) oppose or support British policy in Iraq and may campaign to that effect, write, agitate and stand for election towards the chosen end. But it is also elementary that he does not have the right to stone adulterers to death, hang homosexuals or blow up the underground or an aircraft.

Religious practices which conflict with traditional British liberties need an urgent focus. While few would defend such abhorrent practices as forced marriages, ‘honour killings’, female genital mutilation or child abuse, there is emerging an increasing tension between the assertion of individuality over the common good, and ‘human rights’ over community cohesion. Since there are no agreed criteria by which conflicting religious claims can be settled, religion is increasingly relegated to the private sphere: morality thereby becomes largely a matter of taste or opinion, and moral error ceases to exist. We are left with autonomy, equality and rights: the creedal values of liberalism that allow each to be whatever he or she chooses. Left unfettered, the assertion of these leads to anarchy, so a values system has to be imposed for society to function at all. This is perhaps what Nigel Farage means by the need for a "muscular defence of our Judaeo-Christian heritage".

While religion can play a role in promoting moral conduct, there is no longer agreement on which institutions are morally capable of implementing the rules of justice. Some secularising "modernisers" repudiate the idea that the Christian religion can any longer be a unifying force for Britain, but it must be observed that it has bequeathed to us our system of laws, administration of justice and our understanding of liberty. Only Ukip seems to understand and appreciate this.

Carry on, Nigel. You're doing God's work.

141 Comments:

Blogger David Hussell said...

Your Grace,

This is uncanny, but thank you. My last post on the previous thread was, following on from an excellent point raised by Marie, to alert everyone to this very article from The Telegraph, which now appears here, excellent !
Now I can depart to a family celebration in Norfolk with a smile on my aging face !

2 November 2013 at 10:43  
Blogger DannyEastVillage said...

Any student of history and culture knows that immigrations have always been part of life and of societies. I've always believed that mixing of blood-lines strengthens them. I very much doubt that the domestic lethargy around the so-called Judeo-Christian heritage is something that can be blamed on people coming from other traditions. And I certainly don't think learning from and how to live with those different from ourselves is an unhappy turn of fortune.

Farage's concern about "an increasing tension between the assertion of individuality over the common good, and 'human rights' over community cohesion" is a false dichotomy, a false choice. This is nothing but bad old fashioned bigotry choosing to blame newcomers for the lousy choices made for decades--for centuries--by the power that was in the position to be imperialist. How, I wonder, does Farage think people in India felt when they saw the British come, steal all that was of value and even go so far at some points as to make the traditional way of life in India "illegal"? Let me hear Farage's analysis of colonialism's outcomes for those who were made into colonies. Then we can dialogue about his ugly, half-baked bigotry.


2 November 2013 at 10:48  
Blogger Mark In Mayenne said...

I'm with Farange on this.

We don't have to be Christians to recognise that many things that make Britain an attractive place to live stem from its Christian heritage. If Britain is to remain an attractive place to live, this heritage needs to be defended.

2 November 2013 at 11:06  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

I'm not with this at all.

What the article tells us is that Farage is, essentially, not a practicing Christian. If he's not a Christian, why on earth should I presume that the "Judeo-Christian values" are true to Christ? It's another by-word for culture - and whilst I am not hostile to my own culture, nor dismissive of what I regard as its genuine merits, I do not elevate to the position accorded to faith in Jesus Christ.

Liberals say stuff like this all the time, and are constantly lambasted for it (including by me). "If only Christianity reflected my (non-religious) opinion" is what it boils down to. They too, very often, have a sense of heritage, and they too think that Christianity should kowtow to it. Where Farage invokes Christianity for its influence on the nation's traditions and past social fabric, you equally find Progressives invoking the idea that Christianity ought to reflect tolerance, diversity, etc.

Both have (in my view) a point - and even though I am inclined to be instinctively more sympathetic to Farage's interpretation, it still isn't Christianity.

So no, I don't want the Archbishop of Canterbury to be piping to the tune of UKIP with a "muscular defence", any more than I want him to capitulate to the daily and often-petulant demands that he confront Big Money. He should defend Christianity, and he should confront financial sin - and he should answer only to one Master: Jesus.

2 November 2013 at 11:25  
Blogger John Wrake said...

Reply to Danny EastVillage at 10.48:

Your comment on the universality of immigration, the mixing of blood-lines and learning to live with those different from ourselves is unexceptional and many, including me, will agree with you.

However, the comment about domestic lethargy being caused by other traditions is a red herring. Mr. Farage would seem to point the finger at our own institutions for the wishy-washy defence of our Christian heritage.

Your question about his thoughts on the British role in India and colonialism indicates a profound ignorance of British and Indian history and an unthinking assimilation of the teachings of the Fabian Society, which continues the attack on the Christian values on which this nation has been built.

The British in India did indeed make illegal, traditional Indian practices like the burning alive of widows and the exposure of girl babies. Nowadays in this country, so-called liberal thinking permits wholesale abortions and a Government Minister refuses to act over the abortion of babies on grounds of their female sex.

If Danny EastVillage had spent any time in countries built on the philosophies which went to make up India before the British Raj, he would be less quick in his condemnations.

See how easy it is for Christians to live freely in the Middle East and the Far East countries where acceptance of those who are different hasn't quite connected yet.

John Wrake

2 November 2013 at 11:31  
Blogger David B said...

When one considers that for many of the centuries when Christianity of one sect or another had real power in Britain, and looks at institutions like slavery which thrived under, it, perhaps a further look at the role of the Judeo-Christian role in our heritage might be called for, even allowing for the role of some Christians - mainly non-conformists of some brand or other?) in reforming the worst of the evils within that heritage, often with senior religious figures kicking and screaming against them.

Freedom of publication for instance - look the treatment of people from Tyndale, through to D G Lawrence and Donald McGill, including Tom Paine, G W Foote and others.

The attacks on freedom of religion, including the persecution of people like George Fox and the Wesley Brothers.

The treatment of women, regarded as chattels of their husbands with minimal rights, and subjected until comparatively recently to marital rape - something defended by many religious figures IIRC. Women not too long ago were not allowed to earn a living once married- women teachers in particular.

The treatment of the working man, and deprived of the vote and the right to form unions.

The treatment of criminals, despite lip service to forgiveness and turning the other cheek.

Under the height of Christian power, Catholic and Protestant alike, there was the stake and the rack, hanging drawing and quartering, the execution or transportation of many people including children for minor crimes, like taking a rabbit from the Lord's lands when hungry.

The Hell with our Judeo-Christian heritage - except insofar as some, largely non-conformist, religious people along with people with Enlightenment values were instrumental in gradually mitigating its excesses and bringing about a society of which we can be relatively proud.

But, looking at history, that is in spite of rather than because of our Judeo-Christian heritage.

For the vast bulk of British history, that was pretty evil, when you look at it.

David





2 November 2013 at 12:02  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

AnonymousInBelfast said...

I largely agree with your posting my fine fellow.

However even only a cursory glance at the troubles in NI shows that strictest interpretations can led to terrible atrocities coming from both sides..And Ernst ain't no RC!!!

Christ told us not to pray for persecution and Ernst wholeheartedly agrees. Tis better to let those who hold views (such as RC's) live their lives until they and we must meet Our Maker, then we shall see who was true and who truly believed that salvation comes by Grace ALONE!!!

Some Christians only hate nominal christian culture as they cannot get the truth across to the masses of the lost but whose failing is this?. We have all the subject matter to access them but vacuous diatribes are flung at those nominalists...You have many openings from our history and culture, USE THEM!!

" and he should answer only to one Master: Jesus." Well said that chap.

Blofeld the God-Botherer, at your service, sir.

Aaah. David B. You are indeed a bloke who keeps to his many threats. Was hoping for a nice quiet weekend but...

You seem to forget that Atheism has killed more people since it's short existence than all the religious types you despise. What a bunch of lying, self deluded hypocrites atheists are.

Blofeld He speak to Confucius and He Says: It take many nails to build David B baby crib but only one sad screw to fill it. We soo velly solly!!!

2 November 2013 at 12:23  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

Yes, we’re open to different cultures but we have to defend our values

Nigel’s next big idea: we can have our cake and eat it. Subject a liberal democracy to an influx of alien cultures on the scale the West is experiencing and the host culture and its values will be weakened and, ultimately, destroyed. The more authoritarian the state the better placed it would be to defend its values but, in the face of a high alien birth rate, even authoritarianism would be no more than a holding operation. The currently unresolved conflict between welcoming alien races and cultures and defending our native race and culture puts me in mind of G K Chesterton:

‘The modern world is not evil; in some ways the modern world is far too good. It is full of wild and wasted virtues. When a religious scheme is shattered (as Christianity was shattered at the Reformation), it is not merely the vices that are let loose. The vices are, indeed, let loose, and they wander and do damage. But the virtues are let loose also; and the virtues wander more wildly, and the virtues do more terrible damage. The modern world is full of the old Christian virtues gone mad. The virtues have gone mad because they have been isolated from each other and are wandering alone.’

2 November 2013 at 12:27  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Article: "While few would defend such abhorrent practices as forced marriages, ‘honour killings’, female genital mutilation or child abuse, there is emerging an increasing tension between the assertion of individuality over the common good, and ‘human rights’ over community cohesion."

I dare say that tension follows from our human nature. We're a self-aware and gregarious species whose minds are partly socially constructed and partly the product of our person set of DNA. People often desire person freedom when social constraint is high, and social constraint (on others) when individual freedom is high. As a liberal, I favour making the common good an aspirational thing but giving people the freedom to pursue their own interests too.

2 November 2013 at 12:31  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Blofeld: "You seem to forget that Atheism has killed more people since it's short existence than all the religious types you despise. What a bunch of lying, self deluded hypocrites atheists are."

Note the capitalisation of atheism in order to reify it before eliding it with various differing totalitarian political philosophies for self-serving reasons. Behold the smoke and mirrors. All Blofeld needs is a Debbie McGee to prance around in a spangly leotard to distract the eye.

2 November 2013 at 12:37  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Johnny

Nice to see you, as old Brucie might say..

"G K Chesterton..Could he e RC, y any chance...Just a wild guess because..

‘The modern world is not evil (Oh how I wish it was back to the good old Papal days when we were in control and people were made to know it'); in some ways the modern world is far too good (How so, Chessie my fellow). It is full of wild and wasted virtues (Oh how I wish it was back to the good old Papal days when we were in control and people were made to know it'). When a religious scheme is shattered (as Christianity was shattered at the Reformation {Christianity is NOT Roman Catholicism hence the word ROMAN CATHOLICISM), it is not merely the vices that are let loose. The vices are, indeed, let loose, and they wander and do damage( Oh how I wish it was back to the good old Papal days when we were in control and people were made to know it'). But the virtues are let loose also; and the virtues wander more wildly, and the virtues do more terrible damage. The modern world is full of the old Christian virtues gone mad (Oh how I wish it was back to the good old Papal days when we were in control and people were made to know it'). The virtues have gone mad because they have been isolated from each other and are wandering alone.(Oh how I wish it was back to the good old Papal days when we were in control and people were made to know it')’"

Ta, I think I've got it!!!!

2 November 2013 at 12:39  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Mark: "We don't have to be Christians to recognise that many things that make Britain an attractive place to live stem from its Christian heritage."

Indeed. We have some lovely historical buildings and art to look at and maintain, and our current political system and related freedom has arisen from the violent internecine religious struggles of the past. There's two things.

2 November 2013 at 12:43  
Blogger graham wood said...

Johnny Rottenborough.
"Christianity shattered at the Reformation"?

Where on earth did you get that from? Above all else the Reformers re-discovered the great Biblical truth that we are only saved by grace, through faith in Christ alone plus nothing.
You would profit from reading Paul's letters to the Romans and Galatians churches for confirmation.
Graham

2 November 2013 at 12:44  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Happy Jack thinks David B lives in the past and only sees what he wants to see there. Jack wonders if he is a "shadow person" who wants to make people miserable. Jack thinks him saying: "The Hell with our Judeo-Christian heritage" was very bad.

Good morning Mr Blowers and the man in Belfast. Happy Jack is also puzzled when people say we should live like Christians but want to keep Jesus out of it when some of what he said doesn't suit them.

2 November 2013 at 12:49  
Blogger graham wood said...

Danjo. I quite agree about the high value of our Christian. Heritage.
Someone mentioned. On the last thread that of one of the most valuable of these which England passed on to the whole English speaking world, namely, our priceless Common Law.
Basically all things said and done are permissible under CL, as long as these do not offer violence or harm to another perso.
This was long before the artificial concept of "rights"came along !

2 November 2013 at 12:52  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

DanJo

"Note the capitalisation of atheism in order to 'deify' it before eliding it with various differing totalitarian political philosophies for self-serving reasons (Ta, So what I said was indeed the truth..Atheism naturally leads to only totalitarian political philosophies and the many millions of deaths of it's OWN citizens from a simple 'innocently' stated declaration 'THERE IS NO GOD! Always nice to hear from a priest of another religion. *sniggering wholeheartedly*

Behold the smoke and mirrors (Blodini the Manificent, I'll have you know). All Blofeld needs is a Debbie McGee to prance around in a spangly leotard to distract the eye. (Abracadabra and *PUFF*..so to speak. Offering are you? Surely you have the said leotard in a closet and room for other such charming attire now you are no longer wedged in it, sweet Boy"

2 November 2013 at 12:53  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

It's quite clear what the Judeo-christian heritage means - women being able to walk down the street without a bin bag on their heads, and without fear of being stoned. Having access to a real court, not a local sharia court run by imams. Villages and neighbourhoods still having a pub. People being able to buy Rioja, Farage's favourite drink. Pork being sold in supermarkets. Animals being humanely stunned before they are killed instead of being slowly bled to death. All these are political issues. Christians have been joining UKIP en masse in the past twelve months and if they go on doing so they will be able to influence the direction it goes in.

2 November 2013 at 12:56  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Happy Jack

"Good morning Mr Blowers and the man in Belfast."
Good Morning to you, my fine lad.

"Happy Jack is also puzzled when people say we should live like Christians but want to keep Jesus out of it when some of what he said doesn't suit them." It's called bare faced hypocritical cheek!

Blofeld, My Young Skywalker *Chortles*

2 November 2013 at 12:58  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

graham wood said...

Ernst does so like your explicit or emphatic statements on here and Evangelicals Now. Keep up the good work.

Blowers

2 November 2013 at 13:06  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Good morning Danjo. When you wrote this, Happy Jack thought about it and wondered if God was a liberal: "As a liberal, I favour making the common good an aspirational thing but giving people the freedom to pursue their own interests too."

Happy Jack thinks God would not agree with the very last word. It would be "instead" and not "too". The "common good" means certain "own interests" cannot be allowed. How do you judge this "common good" and then chose which "own interests" to allow?

2 November 2013 at 13:08  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Julia Gasper said...

"It's quite clear what the Judeo-christian heritage means - women being able to walk down the street without a bin bag on their heads.."Indeed Julia.
There is nothing more scary than walking down London Rd in Croydon on a night and naturally arriving at the conclusion there is a meeting of the dark sith lords nearby and I bloom'n forgot to me bring me light sabre out with me. Some Jedi I am?

Blofeld

2 November 2013 at 13:11  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Grasper: "Animals being humanely stunned before they are killed instead of being slowly bled to death."

That'll be Judaism as well as the implied Islam. That bit was dropped in the construction of our Judeo-Christian heritage.

[*] The death in both cases ought to be humane given that both arteries and the throat are cut in a single stroke. Time to loss of consciousness ought to be between a few and some tens of seconds, and if it is done in a particular way it ought not to be painful or distressing for the animal.

2 November 2013 at 13:12  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

DanJ0 said...

"Grasper: "Animals being humanely stunned before they are killed instead of being slowly bled to death."
Reverend DanJo said "That'll be Judaism as well as the implied Islam. That bit was dropped in the construction of our Judeo-Christian heritage."
Nothing quite like the sweet whiff of desperation in a comment on the blog, is there..and so reoccurring too?! Atheistic BO? (Biased Opinion)

*Guffaws and Pinches Nose*

2 November 2013 at 13:20  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Jack: "The "common good" means certain "own interests" cannot be allowed. How do you judge this "common good" and then chose which "own interests" to allow?"

How do you think the blog owner is using the term in his article and on what basis does he judge that? For a liberal like me, the common good maximises individual freedom whilst protecting the core rights of individuals.

I recall that for one or two of our resident or formerly resident Roman Catholics, the common good meant following the Roman Catholic Church's interpretation of what their god intends for everyone, and then using temporal power to constrain or restrain the malefactors, which include the religious non-conformers, so that we goats don't lead their sheep astray.

For some Muslims, I expect they have a somewhat similar view to those Roman Catholics. And why not? Afterall, they're all as certain as each other that their own god is the creator and maintainer of the universe and sets the criteria for what is good and bad, and for what is in our best interest whether we like it or not.

2 November 2013 at 13:23  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Blofeld: "Nothing quite like the sweet whiff of desperation in a comment on the blog, is there..and so reoccurring too?! Atheistic BO? (Biased Opinion)"

Note the lack of actual content there.

2 November 2013 at 13:25  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Reverand Danjo sermonised

"Note the lack of actual content there."

'Here endeth the pungent aroma'..hardly. Do continue, Ernst has just got a peg off the washing line so he can now type with BOTH hands again!!!

Blodini the ambidextrous.

2 November 2013 at 13:29  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Danjo thank you for your answer. Happy Jack is not a Roman Catholic or a Jew or a Muslim and he does not agree with killing or locking people up because they have different ideas about what is right or wrong.

Happy Jack still does not understand what this "common good" is that you seek. How do you know this freedom makes people happy? And what are these core rights of individuals that will not harm other people? And, anyway, once you've decided all this, you still have to find ways to: "constrain or restrain the malefactors" who did not agree with you.

2 November 2013 at 13:54  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ ESB + T (12:39)—To see you nice; I hope your gums are coping manfully. Chesterton’s words long predate his ferry ‘cross the Tiber. Contemporary Christianity’s encouragement of Third World immigration and its trusting attitude towards Islam are good examples of Christian virtues gone mad.

@ graham wood (12:44)—Not I. G K Chesterton in Orthodoxy.

2 November 2013 at 13:57  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ ESB + T (12:39)—To see you nice *Sniggers*; I hope your gums are coping manfully (Indeed...merely took a whole WEEK!! They never mentioned THAT when they said 'While your here and we have just extracted 5, lets take out the remaining 5, shall we?). Chesterton’s words long predate his ferry ‘cross the Tiber.

Contemporary Christianity’s encouragement of Third World immigration (Don't think 'WE' encouraged or agreed to that. It was our delightful politicians that 'done the dirty', to use a pirates phrase, so to speak!) and its trusting attitude (It is IGNORANCE rather than trust regarding Islam/Muslims that is the issue?!)towards Islam are good examples of Christian virtues gone mad.

Blofeld. Buh-Buh-Buh...5 Blowie bonus points awarded for your continued fight for the country's Wuh-Wuh-Wuh well being. Now lets have a look at the scores on the doors, DanJO..

2 November 2013 at 14:12  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

It is with hysterical relief that this man looks forward to 2014. From 1st January, a race of people best described as mobile crime units will be flooding over here to, well, rip us off.

They will be encamped everywhere. Every out of town car park will have them. Our prisons will be heaving with their men. Our hospitals awash with their women giving birth, as well as their old and sick. Their children will be picking our pockets and snatching the cash as we withdraw it from cash machines. Everything and anything which isn’t tied down will disappear. Seriously, shops that have their goods on display outside will stop doing that. They will be roaming the streets, eying the houses, wondering if they can get in.

And come the next election the indigenous will have had enough - UKIP will top the vote.

2 November 2013 at 14:24  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Jack: "Happy Jack is not a Roman Catholic or a Jew or a Muslim and he does not agree with killing or locking people up because they have different ideas about what is right or wrong."

It's not different ideas that I was talking about, was it? It's the different actions. That's what malefactor really means. Anyway, how do you think the blog owner is using the term in his article and on what basis does he judge that?

"Happy Jack still does not understand what this "common good" is that you seek. How do you know this freedom makes people happy?"

It's interesting that you've slipped from a notion of common good to happiness. It's up to individuals to pursue what they think is in their best interests or what makes them happy or whatever. When the State starts deciding what is in the best interests of individuals, it's usually called paternalism, especially when the individuals don't necessary agree. Perhaps we differ over what we think is the main purposes of the State. What do you think the purpose of the State is, Happy Jack?

"And, anyway, once you've decided all this, you still have to find ways to: "constrain or restrain the malefactors" who did not agree with you."

I'm happy enough with the ways we already have as it goes. No need to revisit the techniques used when the religious held temporal powers here and linked morality with ethics and law.

2 November 2013 at 14:25  
Blogger Manfarang said...

Extra
I am sure you voted for those delightful politicians.

2 November 2013 at 14:30  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Jack: " And what are these core rights of individuals that will not harm other people?"

I'll pull this one out separately. I actually said: For a liberal like me, the common good maximises individual freedom whilst protecting the core rights of individuals. You've introduced the explicit notion of harm there. That wasn't by accident was it, Happy Jack?

2 November 2013 at 14:30  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Belfast. “Not a practicing Christian”. You do know arrogant contempt is a sin, probably...

2 November 2013 at 14:30  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Have you ever posted here before, Happy Jack? Under a different moniker? I'm not suggesting you're Dodo.

2 November 2013 at 14:34  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Office of Inspector General said...

Strewth. Crimewatch will be devoted exclusively to showing our citizens reconstructions with actors using Bela Legosi accents and compulsory wearing capes...for getting into the role...say after Ernst "I vant ...to suck your blud"...Should be hilarious?!

Ernst blud sukker Blofeld.

2 November 2013 at 14:37  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Danjo, Happy Jack thinks "malefactor" means someone who commits a crime or some other wrong. And during the time you were talking about Jack thought people were killed for thinking and saying things others said they shouldn't.

What is the state for? Now, that is a hard question! Happy Jack thinks the state should keep people safe and help them to be happy. And Jack thinks people are most happy when they understand who they are and what this world is all about. People need to have some meaning in their life. Jack thinks another important thing is for children to grow up in homes where they are loved by their mum and dad and where they learn about treating other people well. The state should help see to this too. He also thinks the state should see to it that people are able to work and to buy and sell things.

What do you think the state is for?

2 November 2013 at 14:47  
Blogger David B said...

Blofeld, who has atheism killed?

Totalitarianism, be it religious or not, has killed many, in the name of ideologies, be they communist, fascist, Islamic, Christian and - read the OT - Jewish.

But to blame atheism for totalitarianism, whether theological or ideological, is disingenuous at best.

Please stop talking such rot, and instead try to answer the points I have made. Are they factually wrong, and if so where?

David

2 November 2013 at 14:49  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Danjo, Happy Jack has never posted on here before.

2 November 2013 at 14:51  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Indeed Blowers. One is particularly looking forward to see how the BBC will report the crime wave.

One objects vociferously to these peoples coming in from Europe, or Asia or Africa, in this free for all manner because it’s HIS country and he really doesn’t want these types around him. Is that so unreasonable ?


2 November 2013 at 14:53  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Jack, that’s DanJ0 talk for saying he’d rather you found another site to post on. Your interesting style is unnerving him...

2 November 2013 at 14:55  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

I have a supplementary question. What's the relationship, if any, between the role/purpose of the State and common good, Happy Jack?

2 November 2013 at 15:01  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Inpector, Happy Jack remembers Avi thinking Jack was this person too. Happy Jack is just Happy Jack.

Danjo, I did not introduce harm into the talk we were having. The opposite of "common good" is "common bad" or "common harm", isn't it?

2 November 2013 at 15:04  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Inspector: "Jack, that’s DanJ0 talk for saying he’d rather you found another site to post on. Your interesting style is unnerving him..."

No, I simply recognised a similarity of underlying style and wondered if he'd grown tired of trying to write a novel ... but perhaps it is just a similarity afterall. The third person thing together with a technique also utilised in the past by Sacha Baron Cohen is a bit, well, retro and wearying but it still seems to work on people like you to quite good effect as you demonstrated a week or two ago.

2 November 2013 at 15:09  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Danjo, Happy Jack has already answered that question. The state should keep people safe and do what it can to help them be happy. So what do you think?

2 November 2013 at 15:09  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Jack: "Danjo, I did not introduce harm into the talk we were having. The opposite of "common good" is "common bad" or "common harm", isn't it?"

Of course it is, Happy Jack, of course it is.

2 November 2013 at 15:09  
Blogger Len said...

I find it somewhat ironic that in Biblical times the Israelites went into Babylon in captivity as a punishment but now Babylon has come to us.Babylon has set up its monetary system ,and a religious system right under our noses.
We are being enslaved without even realising what has happened to us.And now the secularists are telling us that what they have done is for the good of all.
Our masters greatest fear must be that someone will wake up one day and understand the true nature of the deceit that has been fed to us.
God`s truth is not of this World and because of that fact many will not understand or accept it but it is the only Way out of this present World System which is staggering towards a final Judgement.

2 November 2013 at 15:12  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Jack: "Danjo, Happy Jack has already answered that question."

Have you Jack?

"The state should keep people safe and do what it can to help them be happy."

What if what makes people happy, at least some people anyway, is not what makes other people happy? What's the State's role there?

2 November 2013 at 15:16  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

The state, of course, is the embodiment of the people is serves. Note the word serve there. It should not be purely secular in a country where over half identify as Christian. This will come as a disappointment to some on this site, but there you have it. The state is US.

If the people want the immigrants thrown out. Thrown out is what they should be...

2 November 2013 at 15:23  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Happy Jack is pleased Danjo agrees with him that there is a common good and also a common bad.

And that's an easy question Danjo. The state needs to work out what is best for the common good and do what it can to help see this happens. And this brings us right back to where we started. How do we work out what this common good is?

And Happy Jack will not answer any more of your questions until you answer that one.

2 November 2013 at 15:32  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

“Nana is sick. We go to England to make her better. And we pay nothing. We go now”

Breaking News...

“There are now more Nanas in the UK than front line health service staff. NHS direct are advising that any English who need hospital services should stay at home and die. Any that do make the journey will be placed firmly behind Nana in the queue.”


2 November 2013 at 15:36  
Blogger Nick said...

I read the Telegraph article about Farage last night and had a "premonition" that it would be today's blog post. Thank you YG for not disappointing me!

It's not often I find the words of a politician encouraging, but this interview has done just that. I am under no illusions about political parties, but I find something qualitatively different about UKIP because it debates things other parties will not discuss at all. That at least is refreshing.

Britains Judaeo-Christian heritage is something that has been taken for granted and now some want to dismiss it altogether. That heritage has been refined over centuries. Lessons have been learned from its mistakes. Its core beliefs have at times been tainted by the inherent corruptness of human nature. But it is still the basis of the freedom which we have, or at least had up till recently. We dismiss it at our peril.

All man-centric "religions" such as communism, atheism, and liberalism ultimatel fail because they are rooted in nothing more than the same inherently corrupt human nature. Its like planting a tree in sand.

Given the current climate of Christophobia in Britain, it is indeed bold of any politician to speak up for our Christian-based national identity.

2 November 2013 at 15:40  
Blogger seanrobsville said...

"A logical corollary of this is that Asian immigrants to the UK ought now to adapt their cultural traditions and religious expression to accommodate ‘British toleration’ or conform to those aspects of ‘Britishness’ which make society cohesive."

There's the A-word again - the BBC's favourite euphemism for M***ms behaving badly.

I can't say I've noticed many Sikh, Buddhist, Hindu or Confucian pedophile gangs, mutilators,bombers and beheaders around.

2 November 2013 at 15:57  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

“Nana, I’ve brought you something”

“What is it child”

“Someone's wallet”


2 November 2013 at 16:23  
Blogger Dr.D said...

"The consensus of all the main political parties is that modern Britain has been enriched by ethnic pluralism and enlightened by theological ecumenism and European political union."

I really doubt this statement about "consensus." I think multi-culturalism serves the goals of those who would sell out the UK for their own personal gain, but I don't think that the average Brit thinks that being overrun with aliens is any benefit to himself.

Sadly, the sellouts include those at the very top of the CoE, including ++ Welby and the rest of the gang. Why isn't Bp. Nazir Ali the Abp. of Canterbury? The reason is that he is more British than most of the pols in the UK. He speaks the TRUTH, something that the EVIL cannot abide. Traitors abound!

Fr. D+
Anglican Priest

2 November 2013 at 16:34  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Inspector, Happy Jack thinks you should think about getting a hat to wear like Uncle Brian, Avi and me. It's all the rage.

This state business is troubling Happy Jack. The state can't just do what most of the people want all of the time. What makes people happy, this "common good" business, is not always what the majority want. There has to be some agreed ways of behaving and we have to work out what these ways are. And there also has to be a place for people who want to live different lives so long as they do not hurt other people.

2 November 2013 at 16:38  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Happy Jack: "The state needs to work out what is best for the common good and do what it can to help see this happens. And this brings us right back to where we started. How do we work out what this common good is?"

We live together in a society and the common good is, at least to me, a set of conditions and attitudes which allow us to live our lives as we wish as individuals. Its value is essentially extrinsic and might, for example, include things like tolerance and respect. I'm not looking for a list of intrinsic goods to collectively call the common good and make the State responsible for promoting it. I think you are though.

So, I agree that the State should keep people safe because by doing so it enables people to get on with their lives. I find it interesting that you think the State should be helping people be happy. Is that people because most people would agree that happiness, or perhaps contentment if one thinks about it a bit more, has some sort of intrinsic value? That is, it is a moral good of some sort. But what if one person's happiness or contentment comes at the price of someone else's and the State is responsible for managing things like that?

2 November 2013 at 16:39  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Jack, the Inspector doesn’t like the state. He thinks it should be shrunk back and made to mind its own business in so many matters. You see, the Inspector would like to go to the “Mouse and Wheel”, have a pint, read the paper and enjoy a smoke. The state says he can’t do that, even though the landlord would welcome it...

2 November 2013 at 16:47  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Danjo, if Happy Jack knew the answers to all your questions he would stand for Parliament and become Prime Minister.

Happy Jack believes there is a certain basic way for people to live that can bring individual and collective happiness. And if people don't want to live that way that's up to them. They can be unhappy so long as they don't spread their unhappiness to others.

2 November 2013 at 16:52  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Happy Jack: "They can be unhappy so long as they don't spread their unhappiness to others."

Blimey.

2 November 2013 at 17:03  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

One potential issue there is that someone being happy may make someone else unhappy. Or, perhaps more pertinently, a couple may be happy living as they do but that makes someone else with differing beliefs unhappy.

2 November 2013 at 17:05  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Danjo, well then both couples should mind their own business and go quietly about their lives, unless it really is a cause of real nuisance. If one couple were playing loud music all night or having rowdy parties all the time, then that would be bad and should be stopped. Or if one person was being shouted at all the time, or being beaten up or abused, then that should be stopped.

2 November 2013 at 17:30  
Blogger David Hussell said...

Julia Gasper, @ 12.56

Nick, @ 15.40

Dr D, @ 16.34

Well said, I say.

Straight talking from the politicos and those at the top is what we need to bring the real issues to the fore. That's what democracy should be about.

2 November 2013 at 17:31  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Inspector, Happy Jack agrees with you. Jack smokes too. He wished he didn't some times but he does. He buys his roll-up tobacco duty free too and sees nothing wrong with this although he is breaking the law, Bad, bad Happy Jack.

If people want to go a pub for a drink and a smoke it should be up to the owner of the pub whether he wants this and people can come and go as they please.

But what do you think of the idea that special rooms should be provided for heroine users to use their needles and drugs should be made legal and regulated?

2 November 2013 at 17:36  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Jack, in case it isn’t apparent, DanJ0 is once again alluding to his homosexual condition on this thread. Once again, it’s all about him...

Ah yes, special rooms where the addicts can inject themselves. Why not throw in medical supervision. Can’t have the blighters risking their health, can we. Then again, at a fraction of the cost, we can hang those who make a very handsome living from importing drugs and then there wouldn’t be anymore addicts, would there ?

2 November 2013 at 17:54  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

Hello Happy Jack,
You've got a point there about the government banning smoking in pubic establishments (they had already legislated that each establishment install proper extractor fans and air filters to keep the air clean of smoke, and it worked, nowadays one inhales much more secondary smoke from people smoking in the street and in gatherings huddled outside the doorways of public establishments which is worse.) but then wanting to provide places for people to use much more addictive, dangerous and destructive substances including the smoking of heroin which is far worse I think the smoking of normal cigarettes in public establishments should be allowed again with the use of extractors, air filters and air conditioning.

2 November 2013 at 18:08  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Happy Jack thanks you for the tip-off Inspector. Jack did wonder where all the questions were leading and didn't think it was because Danjo might be a naturalist!

2 November 2013 at 18:08  
Blogger James said...

British culture cannot be cohesive when there is diversity of language, laws, traditions, customs and religion.

Yes it can. Scottish Law? Welsh language? The tradition of bent government in the City of London?

2 November 2013 at 18:37  
Blogger John Thomas said...

So, Danny East Village - who will you be voting for? The old LibLabCon con ... again ...? To see them off, I wouldn't worry about looks ...

2 November 2013 at 18:49  
Blogger David Hussell said...

James,

My knowledge of Scotland, which I have liked visiting for walking holidays since my youth,, is limited to well their countryside, so I'll not comment on their legal differences with the UK. However I do not note that they occupy a totally discrete and separate area of land commonly referred to as Scotland, I recall. They are not mixing with the rest of us, in England. So your point puzzles me.

However although of English descent, I was raised in Wales so I do know a little about that culture. Now every time I visit my relatives there and scan the local papers, look around myself generally and what have you , it strikes me that since they secured their silly but resource hungry "Government" , many things provided by their wall to wall Socialism, now without such an effective restraining hand from the Welsh Office, is falling further and further behind England, whichever way you measure it. Things cost more, to the taxpayer, service is lower in hospitals etc and school results fall even behind the lack lustre English results. And still they demand an ever increasing £ subsidy from those wicked folk the other side of Offa's Dyke.
So I would say that an opportunity for greater "diversity" between England and Wales is working against the interests of many of the inhabitants of Wales. Of course the Socialists that dominate their "Assembly" would disagree. However again I note that they occupy a separate , discrete area of land, not mixing with England. Your point puzzles me.

2 November 2013 at 18:58  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

Inspector

“Not a practicing Christian”. You do know arrogant contempt is a sin, probably...

Yes, I do (Matthew 5:22).

I felt that the phrase I used was non-contentious given Farage's own positioning on the subject in the interview. Do you feel that this is unfair or misrepresentative in some way?

2 November 2013 at 19:08  
Blogger Nick said...

"British culture cannot be cohesive when there is diversity of language, laws, traditions, customs and religion.

Yes it can. Scottish Law? Welsh language? The tradition of bent government in the City of London? "

James, those few who speak the Welsh language regulaely, around 10% of the Welsh population I believe, would not consider themselves British. Having worked amongst such people, I know they are little short of contemptuous of the idea of Britishness and would happily kick the English out of Wales and dredge Offa's Dyke to ten times its current width and depth. Thankfully, the remaining 90% are not of the same opinion.

Multi-culturalism is a myth. It was an afterthought by politicians who had already sold out our national identity and were looking for an idea to justify it.

It really means a divided, fractured society and all the social friction that brings. Many foreigners, though not all, do not come here because they want to be British. They come here because they know our politicians do not care if a little more of our national identity gets flushed down the pan and replaced with another alien culture.

2 November 2013 at 19:18  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Inspector: "Jack, in case it isn’t apparent, DanJ0 is once again alluding to his homosexual condition on this thread. Once again, it’s all about him..."

Interesting you should think so as I may be just as pertinently referring to unmarried heterosexual couples with children given that Happy Jack raised the issue of State encouragement of families, and that the sanctity of marriage is a religious theme. I'm thinking you're actually struggling with your Cardinal O'Brien type inclinations again and it's at the forefront of your own mind.

2 November 2013 at 19:18  
Blogger Mr Integrity said...

Your Grace,
There has been many recently who bemoan the onslaught against Christianity in every area. And yet I ask. why? Why should society not dismiss the Judea-Christian heritage as being irrelevant in today's society?
The problem as I see it is that Christians themselves and the Church in particular have failed to maintain an adequate presence and awareness of God and his son Jesus.
Thus the number of true believers has diminished and also the number of nominal believers has dropped. In the census before last, the percentage for Christians was over 70%. The secularists fiddled with the next census to remove those who would have considered themselves Christian but were not regular church goers. This showed that was a large group that would have fit into the Judeo-christian society like Farage but were not committed to the Church. Farage is being brave by standing for what many communicants on this site, including myself, would consider the better way to live.

Churchmen and believers alike should stop complaining but get involved in restoring our Christian Heritage through preaching and evangelism.

2 November 2013 at 19:36  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

How does one practice being a Christian? Is there a sign like when you're learning to drive?

2 November 2013 at 19:36  
Blogger bluedog said...

His Grace comments with regard to Britain's Judeo-Christian heritage, 'Only Ukip seems to understand and appreciate this.'

Your communicant suspects that many MPs of both Conservative and Labour, but not the Lib-Dims, would share the same social attitudes as espoused by UKIP. The key question is how to redraw the British political landscape so that like-minded individuals are working together and not in opposition, as is currently the case. UKIP is clearly building a framework within which such a major re-alignment becomes possible. However a huge cultural shift in terms of voting habits in both the electorate and its leadership is required to reach the next step - that of achieving representation at Westminster. It seems critically important to this communicant that Nigel Farage demonstrates the leadership qualities that can secure senior defections from the parliamentary Conservatives and Labour just before the next election. Given the rapid deterioration in the organisational strength of the Conservatives, this communicant would be confident that defection of a core group of fifty Conservative MPs in early 2015 would constitute an irrecoverable set back to Cameron. If similar defections could be secured from the moderate wing of Labour, UKIP would emerge as the decisive factor in British politics.

It can't happen soon enough, the rest are beyond redemption.

2 November 2013 at 19:38  
Blogger bluedog said...

David B @ 12.22 says, 'when Christianity of one sect or another had real power in Britain, and looks at institutions like slavery which thrived under, it,'

When exactly was the emancipation of the British slaves?

2 November 2013 at 19:42  
Blogger Roy said...

David Hussell said...

Things cost more [in Wales], to the taxpayer, service is lower in hospitals etc and school results fall even behind the lack lustre English results. And still they demand an ever increasing £ subsidy from those wicked folk the other side of Offa's Dyke.

I noticed that in your comments you showed your contempt for the Welsh by putting the word "Assembly" in inverted commas, thus revealing that you do not think the Welsh deserve any control over their own affairs.

I am Welsh but spent over 30 years living in England. What country do you think Stafford Hospital is in? A close member of my family has, in the past few years, had stays in two hospitals in a prosperous area of England and has had three operations in a hospital in one of the most "deprived" areas of Wales. Her treatment in the Welsh hospital was far superior to that in the two English hospitals.

I agree that the performance of Welsh schools in recent years has been, if anything, even worse than that of English ones. Some of the blame for that was the first Welsh governments after the creation of the Assembly, cultivated a far too cosy relationship with the teaching unions but that is changing. Welsh state school education, before the War, was of a high standard, despite the poverty prevalent in the 1930s. I think the abolition of the grammar schools hit damaged education in Wales more than in England but the people responsible for that were public school educated socialists like Shirley Williams, Tony Benn, Anthony Crosland - all of them English.

2 November 2013 at 19:49  
Blogger Uncle Brian said...

bluedog, your expectations about UKIP's power to attract defectors from both major parties sound like a word-for-word echo of Roy Jenkins & co's confident forecasts, thirty-something years ago, about their brand-new Social Democratic Party. In the event they attracted (speaking from memory) about a dozen Labour MPs and one solitary Tory.

2 November 2013 at 19:56  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

Happy Jack

"How does one practice being a Christian? Is there a sign like when you're learning to drive?"

It usually means falling over, but always having Someone to pick you back up and set you aright again.

2 November 2013 at 19:56  
Blogger Roy said...

Nick said...

James, those few who speak the Welsh language regulaely, around 10% of the Welsh population I believe, would not consider themselves British. Having worked amongst such people, I know they are little short of contemptuous of the idea of Britishness and would happily kick the English out of Wales and dredge Offa's Dyke to ten times its current width and depth. Thankfully, the remaining 90% are not of the same opinion.

Actually the proportion of Welsh speakers is just under 20%, and it is a miracle that the language has survived given past attempts to exterminate the language and the Welsh identity. As for not considering themselves British, the Welsh are British and, moreover, we know what "British" means.
In contrast, people like you and David Hussell obviously do not know the difference between English and British, and regard the United Kingdom simply as Greater England.

Neither Nick nor David Hussell would dare express such contempt for blacks as they do for the Welsh. It is amazing that people who worry about the affect of unrestricted immigration on England think that it is wrong for the Welsh to defend their country and culture, or to have the same control over their own affairs that every state in the United States, every state in Australia, every province in Canada, every region in Spain, and every Land in Germany has - but that is English arrogance and ignorance for you!

2 November 2013 at 20:02  
Blogger Mike Stallard said...

Good job you said that and good job that you are against all forms of selective discrimination. See Dan Hannan's blog for the latest EU pronouncement on this very vital subject.

PS Have you any experience of the Roma? Any at all? Have you ever had them live round the corner?

2 November 2013 at 20:07  
Blogger Nick said...

Uncle Brian, as far as I remember, the SDP was born out of the Labour party, the "Gang of Four" simply being disaffected socialists/liberals. They brought nothing new to British politics except a handy new dustbin for protest votes. I don't believe UKIP is like that. UKIP does not carry the poltical baggage of an offshoot party. They are a party that highlights issues which the ConLibLabs will not even touch, yet those issues do exercise the British public.

UKIP is not one of the me-too parties which sells itself to perceived trends and fashions. It tends to swim against the popular political currents and has no truck with the utter falseness of political correctness.

It is not another SDP. That I am certain of.

2 November 2013 at 20:17  
Blogger David Hussell said...

Roy,

You have misunderstood my point by a wide margin.

I have as much respect for the Welsh language and culture as any other, and I fully support the use of Welsh in Wales, as appropriate. I lived amongst those committed to Welsh culture for may years and am entirely comfortable with that. Most of the battles to encourage the preservation and use of the Welsh language were fought and won well before the Blair led separation of powers scheme occurred.

But these long overdue recognitions of the valid cultural differences, of perhaps the most indigenous peoples of the UK, the Welsh, all took place on a separate discrete parcel of land called Wales, not the whole of the UK. If an Englishman was not happy with that difference no one was forcing him to live there, he could return to England ! The two situations, very alien cultures all over, and acceptance of Welsh culture in Wales itself, are not comparable.

My point is that separate systems of Government and law, via the Assembly - a term that many in England on this site are unfamiliar with, hence the " " , is leading not to harmony of standards but to divergence to the disadvantage of the inhabitants that it is meant to serve.

I hope that helps.

2 November 2013 at 20:25  
Blogger Nick said...

Roy

"Neither Nick nor David Hussell would dare express such contempt for blacks as they do for the Welsh"

This is nothing to do with contempt for anyone. I live in Wales, and enjoy living here.

My point is that mulitculturalism divides, not unites people. In fact it is little more than a euphemism for division. It is a contrived concept to paper over the cracks of a divided society.

As to my comment about some of the fervent Welsh nationalists being anti-British, I have worked with them, heard their comments, and so stand by what I said.

2 November 2013 at 20:34  
Blogger Nick said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

2 November 2013 at 20:34  
Blogger Nick said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

2 November 2013 at 20:34  
Blogger Nick said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

2 November 2013 at 20:34  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Belfast, Happy Jack says its best to have fully comprehensive insurance then.

2 November 2013 at 20:41  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

Happy Jack

I'm on the Grace plan myself. About as comprehensive as you can get. :)

2 November 2013 at 20:50  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Happy Jack understands such cover is offered gratis.

2 November 2013 at 20:58  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

DanJ0, I may be just as pertinently referring to unmarried heterosexual couples with children

Well you weren’t, were you. We know this as your trail of posts on this site reveals not the slightest regard for unmarried heterosexual couple's with children. And then alluding to this man being a latent homosexual is your usual, if predictable, wrap.


2 November 2013 at 21:04  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...


Belfast, pronouncing on whether a man is a practicing Christian or not is not an honourable estate.

2 November 2013 at 21:07  
Blogger Uncle Brian said...

Nick

It was bluedog's idea, not mine, that UKIP should seek to (I quote) "secure senior defections from the parliamentary Conservatives and Labour just before the next election."

2 November 2013 at 21:09  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

Inspector

I didn't pronounce, Farage is, as far as I can tell, commendably open about it. It's all about "identity", aka "culture" - which is what I wrote in that post.

I don't suggest that this is mutually exclusive with some form of faith, but experience leads me to suspect that, in most cases, there isn't much when someone insists that their cultural Christianity is more significant than their religious beliefs. Incidentally, that seems to hold true whether the person in question conceives of said cultural identity in liberal or conservative terms.

That's fine and dandy - I'm not out to condemn him, I simply point out that Christianity doesn't work like that. Other religions might work along such lines, discipleship of Christ doesn't - a point which only seems to be controversial to those who want to claim the mantle of Christian without actually committing to its precepts or doctrines.

Farage wants Christians to believe that we're coming from the same place - but the very nature of his argument demonstrates that we're not, however closely many of his policies might be to conservative Christians' political views.

2 November 2013 at 21:41  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Happy Jack did not mention sex or marriage in his comments to Danjo. He thinks his most important point was: "Jack thinks people are most happy when they understand who they are and what this world is all about. People need to have some meaning in their life."

Happy Jack thinks a Judaeo-Christian heritage cannot survive unless people understand what this rests on. Once the foundation goes the whole house starts to subside and cracks appear.

2 November 2013 at 22:06  
Blogger Roy said...

@ Blogger David Hussell

and @ Nick,

OK, I misunderstood your intentions and accept your explanations and apologise for my intemperate response.

I agree with your criticisms of multiculturalism too. It is fine for immigrants to retain an affection for the countries of their birth and their children ought to have an interest in the countries their parents came from. Therefore I have no objection to immigrants wanting to preserve aspects of their own culture as long as they also immerse themselves in British culture.

Furthermore they should not expect the British government, or local government, to go out of its way to promote the cultures of the countries they came from.

It is one thing to encourage cultural links with other countries, and it is fine for immigrants and their descendants to arrange festivals like the Notting Hill Carnival. It is also fine for them to invite the indigenous population to participate. However politicians should encourage those who settle permanently in Britain to feel a loyalty to this country, instead of thinking of themselves as part of a foreign community that simply happens to be located in Britain.

2 November 2013 at 22:06  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

David B said...

"Blofeld, who has atheism killed? So the reverse is and could be argued that theism has killed no man? Correct..It is only when this statement is then given flesh such as 'Is there a God cause I think I see creative powers at work around us'.., 'What could a creative god's attributes be etc, that it then holds water and we see that it could lead to danger. Correct?

How then is atheism different. It starts of with the premise, There is no creator god that I see, Nature did it all, Nature has no attributes or image of what is acceptable to live as a human that we can latch onto, the eact opposite acrtually! ..so how do we live as humanity alone and yet together in the universe. Correct?

Atheism pretends that no ideology naturally follows or defined precepts as to how an atheist lives with his fellow man, what can e agreed from the gleanings of natural selection and survival of the fittest and has a part to play within the social cohesion process, SOCIETY, that produces order and peace. Correct?

Totalitarianism, be it religious or not, has killed many, in the name of ideologies, be they communist (PURE ATHEISM), fascist, Islamic, Christian and - read the OT - Jewish (Why specifically the OT.Please epand your reasonings so a discussion is possible about the Jewish state from Moses onwards and the societies surrounding it and the known world at that time. Let's see if your argument holds water for that time period, shall we?)

But to blame atheism for totalitarianism (Ernst has blamed Atheism solely for Atheistic Totalitarian states and how these have played out on the world stage and the disgusting mass slaughter of it's OWN citiens that followed since Mar gave the world his golden idea..NOT for any others that have been on display throughout history. How are these any different from Popes and Kings that have slaughtered in the name of God and your lot for 'NO GOD', merely because they held power and could as simplistic people foolishly believed all we needed was NO God and all would be well with the world..A simple premise but deadly, seems the obvious reason...DITTO?? Get your facts right lad when you debate old Ernst.), whether theological or ideological, is disingenuous at best.Theism and Atheism start with a basic premise and the rest follows. FACT. Your lot have blood on their hands as much as popes and kings, if not more..They are called monsters for a reason. but when the average believer states they have not done these crimes or their faith made them think it acceptale to do this, you still hold their statement of the basic premise against them, whereas your lot have a much used 'get out of jail card', Communism is not linked in anyway to atheistic statements. A Non Sequitur!

*to follow*.

2 November 2013 at 22:13  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

(Your lot try disingenuous arguments that are laughable such as this beauty of a non sequitur{Being killed by an Atheist is no more being killed in the name of atheism than being killed by a tall person is being killed in the name of tallness. So then being killed by a Theist is no more than being killed in the name of a God than being killed by a tall person is being killed in the name of tallness. }
Atheists kill when in control, not because someone is short or tall, fat or thin but because like the rest of humanity they are wicked to the core with no saving graces that espouse from their basic premise and you will be treated like the accident of nature/evolution that you are.

Atheism is relative to the atheism around it (Thankfully in the UK you are a noisy ut minute minority) and is influenced by it's own paths of political and economic plans. Should plans be put forward that are christian, politically and economically here, you and Danjo would protest..Why, if atheism leads to nothing that naturally follows from it but abstract ideas with no cohesion or logic, should a Theist world view shock you as unlivable for the poor suffering atheist?)

Please stop talking such rot, and instead try to answer the points I have made.(I answer them so many times but because you can't hear/absorb them, in no way does it make my defeat of your premises incorrect. You are morally and factually deaf.) Are they factually wrong (YEP), and if so where ? (See above, again! *Yawns*! )"

Don't worry lad, not anticipating you to do anything cept cut and run!!

blofeld

2 November 2013 at 22:18  
Blogger David Hussell said...

Roy,

Many thanks for that clarification. Apologies accepted.

I think that you have understood the key points. We all need to be British first and foremost, plus whatever else we belong to as well.

2 November 2013 at 22:19  
Blogger Martin said...

His Grace seems to get upset by my muscular Christianity.

2 November 2013 at 22:29  
Blogger bluedog said...

Uncle Brian @ 19.56, Woy never tapped a well-spring of popular discontent. The SDP was a vanity project.

Nick @ 20.34 says, 'My point is that mulitculturalism divides, not unites people.'

It doesn't have to be that way. The problem with Multi-culti as currently practiced is that the hegemonial culture is seen as equal to minority cultures that are clearly deficient, hence the mendicant status of so many of their practitioners. British culture and the way of life implied has delivered spectacular benefits wherever it has taken root. Hence the limitless flood of third-world migrant applicants to English-speaking countries. For reasons that completely mystify this communicant, third world migrants tend to try and re-create the social conditions of their homeland on their physical settlement in the West. It follows that multi-culti needs to be reconfigured to ensure the primacy of British ways. Those who disagree with the primacy of British culture may leave.

This communicant would like to make a point that he believes to be of great significance. One of the great benefits of the current age is of course the spectacular improvement in telecommunications, giving instantaneous connection across the globe by the internet and cable TV. This communicant believes that a study of communications habits by third-world migrants would show a truly astonishing continuing connection in all regards with the former homeland. Figures of up to 65% of all comms traffic are not uncommon. It follows that while physically located in the West, these settlers are emotionally still half a world away.

This disconnect needs to be addressed in the interests of social cohesion, and censorship is not the answer.

2 November 2013 at 22:38  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Inspector: "Well you weren’t, were you. We know this as your trail of posts on this site reveals not the slightest regard for unmarried heterosexual couple's with children."

The context supports my explanation just as easily as yours, if not more so, as I think you well know now you've read back. The leap to homosexuality was yours, betraying the thing closest to your mind I expect.

"And then alluding to this man being a latent homosexual is your usual, if predictable, wrap."

Hey, you're a never married man in his 50s who is obsessed with homosexuality and appears desperate to interact with homosexuals at every opportunity. Heck, you are supposedly so uncomfortable with homosexuality that you used to hang around gay sites on a daily basis, and probably still do on the quiet. You're a living, breathing cliché and no mistake.

2 November 2013 at 22:54  
Blogger Wry Comment said...

Julia Gasper

*Roll Eyes * as she says that Farrage's favorite drink-British patriot in full flow- is Rioja, which is incidentally in no way shape or form Spanish and which is why we see him in the photo op drinking, well, British Beer and not that Dago wine that's for sure....

Your're sure Farrage likes Dago wine? Next you'll be saying his favorite food is Frankfurters...

2 November 2013 at 22:56  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Happy Jack: "Happy Jack did not mention sex or marriage in his comments to Danjo."

Indeed. Here's what you said though:

Jack thinks another important thing is for children to grow up in homes where they are loved by their mum and dad and where they learn about treating other people well. The state should help see to this too.

Supporting marriage through the Marriage Act is one way the State helps. Religious people usually disapprove of sex outside of marriage. One might say it makes them unhappy.

2 November 2013 at 23:08  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Danjo, thank you for agreeing Happy Jack never mentioned sex or marriage or homosexuality. He also never commented on how the state could help people raise children who know how to treat others well.

Happy Jack asks if you are in a disagreeable mood tonight or, and please excuse the expression, just taking the piss?

Happy Jack wouldn't call himself a "religious" person. And Jack has had sex outside of marriage once or twice. He does not believe it made him unhappy. It was a long time ago now but he remembers it as being enjoyable which is not the same thing as happiness.

2 November 2013 at 23:29  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Belfast, one concedes you are making a serious point, but when we have in Farage, a man who is with us, we would do well not to take him to pieces to see how he ticks. You mention other religions approach. You may be right. It could be Christianity is the only religion that grades its adherents according to perceived devotion. Very much a Protestant line of thought – sure you’ll agree on that...

2 November 2013 at 23:38  
Blogger Peter Thomas said...

Ah, far too many liberal academic arguments for me. The point is that the tolerant values, the freedoms and traditions of the people of Britain are being remorselessly trampled underfoot by incoming inferior and downright menacing cultures ably assisted by our Lawmakers. The freedom of the indigenous people to speak freely are being curtailed whilst those of the aggresive incomer are being enhanced. It has taken centuries at the cost of many lives, particularly in the twentieth century, for this and other western nations to develop a relatively free, safe, open and beneficial culture for their citizens and now the fruits of those developments are in danger of being brought crashing down by incomers who want to turn back the clock to medieval times. Those with power and influence, including those in the Church, have dodged, and continue to dodge their responsibilities to the indigenous people of the UK and they do so at their peril. If nothing is done soon, very soon, I fear it will all end in the spilling of blood. Listen carefully to what these incomers are really telling us; their message is clear and we ignore it at our peril.
I'm not an academic but i've expressed how I feel about the situation in this Nation today as best I can - and I'm certainly far from being alone in my views. Peace be with you all.

2 November 2013 at 23:41  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

DanJ0, no desperation to interact with homosexuals per se, but one tells you now it is a fascinating subject to study. However, one can see how you would not appreciate this, being up to your neck in the stuff, if you will...

It exists as a complete subculture, and the internet has provided a medium that unites. It has its own rules and codes of conduct. For those who’ve bought into it, it’s as demanding of them as Islam is to a muslim. Absolutely compelling to learn more...


2 November 2013 at 23:53  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Jack, a fellow is really warming to your style. Your homespun wisdom is rather a breath of fresh air to this site. And there is always the possibility that you will ‘freak out’ our mutual friend, as the Americans would say, having already unnerved him...

2 November 2013 at 23:58  
Blogger Uncle Brian said...

Peter Thomas

Those with power and influence, including those in the Church, have dodged, and continue to dodge their responsibilities

You have reminded me that within 24hours or so of the Tube bombings in 2005 a C of E clergyman -- as I recall, the vicar of a church right there in the Kings Cross-St Pancras area -- said (quoting from memory) "This is not the work of Muslim terrorists." In other words, an Anglican clergyman was proclaiming from his pulpit, in effect, "It is wrong to tell the truth. It is right to lie."

No doubt other communicants will have a clearer recollection than mine of who he was and what his exact words were.

3 November 2013 at 00:08  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

Bluedog
“It follows that multi-culti needs to be reconfigured to ensure the primacy of British ways. Those who disagree with the primacy of British culture may leave.”

I couldn't agree more.
We've been forced to embrace and pander to those who come here from others sometimes faraway countries who are so very different from us in many many ways in the name of being multi-culti, But some people who immigrate here are not really suited for a life in a strange country anywhere let alone one so different from their homeland.

By ensuring the primacy of British ways and preserving and upholding our Christian culture, values and laws we are ensuring only those who can adapt to live here stay as those who can't or wont will emigrate elsewhere more suitable to what they can adapt to or even go back home. This way we will eventually have a smaller and more coherent society that is in-keeping with the amount of land we have to sustain our lives and that sings from the same hymn sheet.

3 November 2013 at 00:17  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Inspector, Happy Jack is off to bed now. Before going he wanted to thank you for your kind words.

Jack says it is always wise to ware a hat. That way you can keep one or two things under it. Jack has been around a lot and seen and heard many things. His advice to you when being provoked by what street folk call "f'ing wind-up merchants" is to stay focussed, be polite, smile nicely back at them and resist the urge to throw the first punch.

Goodnight and sleep well.

3 November 2013 at 00:33  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Uncle Brian said...

"Those with power and influence, including those in the Church, have dodged, and continue to dodge their responsibilities" They barely understand the Holy Bible, surely you could not hope they might know something of a belief system that destroyed anything/one that came across it's path from 6th century AD onwards?

As Ernst has stated earlier, the problem is not an overemphasis on christian virtue by clergy or believers, rather the general ignorance of what Islam states explicitly as it's purpose for the world and unbelievers and what Muslims are commanded to adhere to, despite them not following the allah commanded example of Mohammed in the Qur'an at this moment in time.

Ernst is always reminded of the closing conversations between the main protagonists in Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith

Anakin Skywalker: The traitors have been taken care of, Lord Sidious.

Darth Sidious: Good... Good... you have done well, my apprentice. Now Lord Vader, go and bring peace to the Empire.

Anakin Skywalker: The Separatists have been taken care of, my master.

The Emperor: It is finished then. You have restored peace and justice to the galaxy. Once more, the Sith will rule the galaxy! And... we shall have 'peace'.

Peace and submission are different concepts as stated by Islam
" Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection. " Peace, eh?

blofeld

3 November 2013 at 00:57  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

ps

Quote taken from Translation of the Qur'an, Surah 9: Explicit, is it not? You would have to be a gullible ignoramus to miss it!

blofeld

3 November 2013 at 01:01  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Just spotted on DT.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10423070/Press-row-PM-faces-questions-over-link-to-charity.html

Cameron a patron of Common Purpose!!!Why, oh why am I not surprised.

" However, Mr Cameron failed to declare the post for at least two years despite two opportunities to do so in official registers.

The disclosure comes days after the approval of a controversial cross-party charter introducing a system of Press regulation underpinned by statute and is likely to raise questions about why Mr Cameron did not register the link to a group closely associated with efforts to regulate the Press until last week.

A Downing Street spokesman said the omission in the previous registers of ministers’ interests, published in February and December 2011, was due to an “administrative oversight”. "

Ernst despairs for the dismantling of our nation.

blofeld

3 November 2013 at 01:08  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

Insomnia again Mr Blofeld? Never mind get your head around this from The Slog blog link below.
Cherries are good for inducing sleep, have a glass of juice instead of your whisky night cap.


"This is one of many proposed clauses in the suggested legislation:

“defamatory comments made in public and aimed against a group (…) with a view to (…) slandering the group, holding it to ridicule or subjecting it to the false charges” may be considered group libel and, therefore, may be treated like acts of intolerance — as well as hate crimes.” “


http://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2013/10/29/danger-ahead-eu-pc-lunacy-passes-first-stage/

Of course Mr Camoron is signed up to Common Purpose has been for years it's for leaders and part of the brainwashing process of the EU.

3 November 2013 at 01:55  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

And this,

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4036/eu-intolerant-citizens

3 November 2013 at 02:00  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

"Insomnia again Mr Blofeld? Never mind get your head around this from The Slog blog link below.
Cherries are good for inducing sleep, have a glass of juice instead of your whisky night cap." At least I have me edition of World at War to occupy me during the early hours...Hitler would be flabbergasted that war was not necessary to take over Europe...Politicians with lies and misinformation are doing it rather easily, are they not??

Blofeld

3 November 2013 at 03:24  
Blogger IanCad said...

It seems to me that, as far as this forum is concerned, UKIP is the future Great Fairy Godmother who will return our country to an imagined past of prosperity and justice.

I hold UKIP as a clear and present danger to the liberties of the UK.
It is a Populist party with a (somewhat) charismatic leader who knows which buttons to push.
At the least, UKIP will ensure a future Labour administration.
If it gets traction through the demagoguery of its spokesmen; as is quite likely when directed at a shallow, ill-informed electorate, then the future of the Conservative Party could be in jeopardy.

Why,why ,why?? can we Conservatives not reform our own party by demanding a clearing out of our wretched, incompetent leadership?

The defining principle of our party must be an unswerving commitment to the cause of civil liberties.
There are those in parliament who still cleave to this fundamental doctrine that defines Britishness.

Let's get them in.

3 November 2013 at 10:48  
Blogger David B said...

@ESB&T who said -

"{Being killed by an Atheist is no more being killed in the name of atheism than being killed by a tall person is being killed in the name of tallness. So then being killed by a Theist is no more than being killed in the name of a God than being killed by a tall person is being killed in the name of tallness. } "

Correct me if I am wrong, but did not the suicide bombers at 9-11 and elsewhere kill in the name of Islam.

Did not Crusaders kill in the name of Christianity, along with other various 'Holy' wars, some of them between various sects of Christianity, others not?

That is killing in the name of God, whichever god or conception of God it may be.

OTOH, killing in the name of Lenin or Pol Pot, Killing in the name of Fascism or Communism is not killing in the name of atheism.

Can you not tell, and acknowledge, a rather substantial difference there?

David

3 November 2013 at 11:12  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

IanCad. Courage man !

Think of UKIP as a catalyst for change. Think of UKIP as a coalition partner with the Conservatives, replacing the Lib Dems who, from what one reads, is now a party without the support they went into the last election with. How do you think that crowd managed to get to power, if it was not a populist party cherry picking which buttons to press, shamelessly looking for policies that would tick all the right boxes that would appeal to a shallow, ill-informed electorate,

3 November 2013 at 11:51  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

David B. You sir, are a dangerous obsessive, sir !

Of the worst kind. An intolerant.

And intolerant dangerous obsessives kill, god or not, don't you know...


3 November 2013 at 11:58  
Blogger bluedog said...

David B @ 11.12 says, 'Did not Crusaders kill in the name of Christianity,'. Your ignorance of history is letting you down, badly.

Or does it go like this?

Frustrated minor brigand Mahommed feels that his business of raiding camel caravans is being thwarted by the patriarchal society of Jews and Christians who dominate his neighbourhood. These establishment figures hire uneducated and tattooed security guards who protect the camel caravans and deny Mahommed the opportunity to provide for his wives and children. The injustice of this situation causes Mahommed to take matters into his own hands and after a meeting in the local shisha bar with some compadres, they decide to shake the place down. Caught by surprise, the capitalist Christian and Jewish pigs are slaughtered in their beds, their plump and squealing women are carried off for some proper sex, while their sons are castrated and employed as slaves. This idea catches on and business is brisk. Before too long Mahommed's protection racket has spread over much of the Arabian peninsular and up into the Sinai towards Jerusalem. But all good things come to an end and Mahommed dies in 623AD, where upon he ascends to heaven from Jerusalem, despite never going there while alive. A regular polymath, during his lifetime Mahommed rattles off pages and pages of a book of instructions for his followers which is still in print today. That Mahommed was illiterate is not a problem as being the final prophet of the word of allah gives all kinds of exemptions and privileges.

Fast forward to October 19th, 1009. In Jerusalem, near where Mahommed ascended into paradise lies the Christian Church of the Holy Sepulchre. A bunch of blouses from Constantinople run the district and its time to show them whose boss. So the local leader of Mahommed's continuing protection racket leaves no stone standing upon another. Instant gratification and popular applause. Relying on the fact that news travels slowly because the Christians and Jews haven't invented facebook yet, so that the Arabs can network with each other, nothing happens for quite some time. Anyway, after further vandalism and tagging of their properties, the Greek dudes in Constantinople have had enough. BTW, the Turks didn't help either by wiping out a Greek gang at Manzikert in 1071, but then the Turks have always done things differently and don't respect the Arabs either. So the Greeks con the other Christians into beating up the rightful rulers of Jerusalem, now called Muslims, just so that Christian 'tourists' can go there without feeling threatened.

Of course, the Muslims never did nothing wrong, and once again it is the Christians who over-reacted in a culturally insensitive way.

3 November 2013 at 12:12  
Blogger IanCad said...

But Inspector!

We do not want another coalition.

The courage we need is for the Conservatives to dump Cameron, fire Hague and most of the cabinet, and to put someone like Davis in charge.

3 November 2013 at 12:17  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

IanCad. My dear chap, the only dumping that will be done will be by the MPs, and they are astonishingly loyal to Cameron. Talk of any successor at this stage is purely inventive. That means the MPs want him as leader. That means the MPs together have re-defined what a Conservative is. Half of them voted for SSM. Does one need to say more ?



3 November 2013 at 12:30  
Blogger David Hussell said...

Inspector,

Courage Man !

Well said !

IanCad,

It would have been ideal if about 20 years ago the Conservatives had seen the error of their leaders, starting with traitorous Heath, and made it clear that we want a trading agreement only, and that it was that or out ! But successive leaders have continued the policy of half-truths and deception, maintaining a front of business as usual, "we're in charge", whilst continuously ceding powers away. Now 75% of our laws emanate from the unelected bureaucrats of Brussels. Because of these indisputable facts UKIP was born , to do a job, get us out and keep us out !

Now being a conservative is valuing the past but also about being realists. Realism tells me, and many others, that the proportion of the Conservative Party that can be relied upon to get us into a genuine non-political trading arrangement with the EU, or get us out, which will be necessary, because the ideologists of the EU project will not compromise their "ever closer" religion; that trustworthy patriotic proportion is about one third of the parliamentary party. So trusting to the Conservative Party will not cut the mustard. Many of them are now conservatives in name only. They are now posh Liberals at best.
UKIP is a very necessary tool for doing a job. It is not perfect, but what is ? It is our best door to a better future.

3 November 2013 at 12:38  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

One thinks he recalls from somewhere that half of all Conservative MPs were imposed on the constituencies by Central Office.

Half of Conservative MPs voted for SSM

Is there a correlation here. Is this where the party has gone so disastrously wrong. Have the Conservatives become corrupted by London metropolitan types who jumped on the list.


3 November 2013 at 12:58  
Blogger IanCad said...

David Hussell,

I have no problem with your first paragraph. I do, however dispute your assertion that only a minority of Conservatives desire a non-political arrangement with the EU.
Again, it comes down to leadership and the centralizing tendencies of CCHQ.

As I have stated before, I fear that UKIP is going to be a destabilizing or even a subversive influence upon our governance. Certainly, it will assure a Labour victory the next time around.

Populist movements usually degenerate into a rabble where the tail eventually wags the dog.
I see no evidence that UKIP will not follow the same path.

3 November 2013 at 13:14  
Blogger IanCad said...

Sorry Inspector, but I didn't see your last post.
We agree at least on the CCHQ problem.

3 November 2013 at 13:17  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

David B said...

Let’s have a look at those statements, shall we?

"Correct me if I am wrong, but did not the suicide bombers at 9-11 and elsewhere kill in the name of Islam.(Correct. Allah demands it in His Qur'an)

Did not Crusaders kill in the name of Christianity, along with other various 'Holy' wars, some of them between various sects of Christianity, others not?(Correct but Christ never or asks/asked for this, He actually condemns it!!!. Please show me otherwise. The law says it is wrong to murder. You murder. Where did the law say it was correct to do so to you. It is therefore your PERSONAL ACTION IN CONTRADICTION OF WHAT IS STATED. Correct?)

That is killing in the name of God, whichever god or conception of God it may be (Depends on what the specific god says, does it not? The killer is therefore killing by state in a name that the God does not recognise. IT IS NOT HIS!!).

OTOH (Non Sequitur!!!), killing in the name of Lenin or Pol Pot (Who shouted 'Death in the name of Lenin and Pol Pot' to those massacred?. They were killed by the state on behalf of the state which declared itself of NO GOD or His declarations to man!), Killing in the name of Fascism or Communism is not killing in the name of atheism (It is and is the marriage of an absolutist ideology with the use of absolute power delivered through an Atheistic State...It is no different that a state claiming Christian/Islamic principles. It's (Atheistic) natural consequence is called democide {premeditated killing} and meant in practice violent bloody terrorism, deadly purges against their OWN citizens, deadly gulags with lethal forced labour, fatal deportations to places of extreme starvation and cold with the natural consequences, man-made famines, extrajudicial executions and show trials (no due process!!) , and genocide. It is also accepted, without criticism, that as a result of this, tens of millions of innocent people have been murdered in cold blood in the name of atheism principles enforced by a state).

3 November 2013 at 15:08  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

They, atheists, believed that they knew through Marxism, the atheist ideology from that basic principle NO GOD, what would bring about the greatest human welfare and happiness. And they believed that power, the dictatorship of the proletariat, must be used to tear down the old feudal or capitalist order and rebuild society and culture to realize this brave new utopia. Nothing must stand in the way of its achievement. Government “the Communist Party” was thus above any law. All institutions, cultural norms, traditions, and sentiments were expendable/non existent. And the people were as though lumber and bricks and mortar, to be used in building this god free new world.
These adventurous atheists could not be wrong, could they. After all, their knowledge was scientific, based on historical materialism, an understanding of the dialectical process in nature and human society, and a materialist (and thus realistic) view of nature and man’s role in it.

What made this atheistic driven secular religion so utterly lethal was its seizure of all the state's instrument of force and coercion and their immediate use to ruthlessly destroy or control all independent sources of power, such as the church, the professions, private businesses, schools, and, of course, the bedrock of any society, the nuclear family.

Can you not tell, and acknowledge, a rather substantial difference there (There is none as to what Ernst has stated previously. That is why we would fight to hold back the tidal wide of secular atheism tooth and nail, to stop this nonsense coming onto our shore so as to take control by stealth. Your lot are hardly much different than those Muslims who seem tolerant at the moment but just wait until they are in the ascendancy. Strange birds of a feather you both are.
You just don’t want to be tarred and feathered for the wrongdoing of your professed ‘non belief’ into a controlled society and its dire consequences played out before history.

Communism has been the greatest social engineering experiment we have ever seen on this planet. It failed utterly and in doing so it killed over 100 million men, women, and children, not to mention the near 30 million of its subjects that died in its aggressive wars and the rebellions it provoked leaving them in a worse position before it started.
The lesson to be learned from this horror of the last century to the whim of a belief or non belief is that is that no one can be trusted with power, especially not atheists!!!!!!!!!.
You, sir, are a chancer!!!

David"

3 November 2013 at 15:09  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Good attempt Blowers but one doubts your man will develop his argument beyond the schoolboy logic of man kills, sometimes he says he kills for a god, so then all religion must be evil.

It’s almost as if the fellow gets some perverse relief each time he sends it in...

3 November 2013 at 16:11  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Office of Inspector General said...

"Good attempt Blowers but one doubts your man will develop his argument beyond the schoolboy logic of man kills, sometimes he says he kills for a god, so then all religion must be evil."

Ernst answers said nonsense for the benefit of those taken in by a non sequitur.

Blowers

3 November 2013 at 17:06  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Office of Inspector General said.

Do you see what i stated earlier.

David B's arguments are fallacious and deserving of dismantling yet never an apology for spreading such nonsense, that Atheism has no religious hold over it's believers and disingenuous arguments must e laid out to delude those ignorant, even of their own beliefs. Allah DEMANDS death, destruction and subjection of those that disagree whereas Christ asks NOTHING that agrees with Allah/Mohammed's demands to kill and conquer.

As Ernst said "Depends on what the specific god says, does it not?"

The sillish*te will soon forget that his prattle is nonsense and will start all over again tomorrow with the same nonsense, with all the memory retention of a goldfish.

'Clean Slate Syndrome' derives from the imaginary evolutionary defense mechanism of the Atheistic Goldfish, in order to stave off insanity due to the sheer pointlessness of it's own accidental existence:

Atheist Goldfish : Hey, I'm telling you, there ain't no god!
Theistic Goldfish : What makes you say that. Of course there's a God? What's your alternative?
Atheist Goldfish : I don't know, why d'you ask?
Theistic Goldfish : Ask what?
Atheist Goldfish : Hey, I'm telling you, there ain't no god!

Blowers

4 November 2013 at 02:38  
Blogger Len said...

A epic attempt to reveal the truth Ernst but it sometime seems as if some people (atheists and some religionists ) wear a sort of 'force field' of deception around their head which deflects truth and only the wearer can switch this off.
Jesus stands at' the door' and knocks politely requesting entrance but it is up to those inside to open the door (the handle is on the inside)

NOW is the time of deliverance before Jesus walks(regretfully) away to seek others.

Hopefully some will receive the 'good seed ' of the Word even if others cannot 'grasp the moment'.

4 November 2013 at 10:41  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Len
" A epic attempt (It can never be shown from a one line statement that the basis of a false premise is silly. It must be shown at the start of the premise..all that's in between ...and the devastating conclusion..IT IS A LIE!!) to reveal the truth Ernst but it sometime seems as if some people (atheists and some religionists ) wear a sort of 'force field' of deception around their head which deflects truth and only the wearer can switch this off(Freedom of choice to be an ignoramus and continue as one should they please to be. Tragic self deluding arguments that take them down the road way to perdition).
Jesus stands at' the door' and knocks politely requesting entrance but it is up to those inside to open the door (the handle is on the inside)

NOW is the time of deliverance before Jesus walks(regretfully) away to seek others.

Hopefully some will receive the 'good seed ' of the Word even if others cannot 'grasp the moment'." Well said that man...and why Ernst has a special soft spot for you, my fine fellow.

Ernsty

4 November 2013 at 13:04  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

@ Wry Comment
When I went to the Rioja region the inhabitants were certainly under the impression that it was in Spain. Maybe you should go there and tell them they are all wrong?
Nigel Farage (whose name has only one r) has said he loves Rioja more often that he's said we should leave the EU. People have watched him drink whole bottles of it. Disagreeing with federalism has got nothing to do with disliking wine or any other continental product.

5 November 2013 at 00:04  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

Quick Wry Comment -tell this tour company that they've got it all wrong.
http://uk.riojawine.com/en/242-wine-tours-in-rioja.html

5 November 2013 at 00:07  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

Opinion of scientists quoted in respected "centrist" newspaper is that halal slaughter is cruel and should be illegal:-
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/end-cruel-religious-slaughter-say-scientists-1712241.html

5 November 2013 at 13:40  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

^halal and> kosher, it says.

6 November 2013 at 18:32  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older