Saturday, March 15, 2014

Disremembering Syria

WARNING: This article contains graphic images. 


The media have moved on.

Ukraine got invaded; Bob Crow died; Cheryl Cole was re-hired for the X-Factor; Tony Benn died; and Nigel Farage had an affair - allegedly.

We are now three years into Syria's civil war: some 150,000 are estimated to have died, with millions destitute and homeless, encamped in squalor somewhere we don't particularly care about. Whole cities and towns have been destroyed, historical treasures looted and churches bombed and burned to the ground.

Bishop Antoine Audo, the Chaldean Bishop of Aleppo, wrote in the Telegraph last week: in Syria, where St Paul found his faith, many churches stand empty, targets for bombardment and desecration. Aleppo, where I have been bishop for 25 years, is devastated. We have become accustomed to the daily dose of death and destruction, but living in such uncertainty and fear exhausts the body and the mind.

We hear the thunder of bombs and the rattle of gunfire, but we don’t always know what is happening. It’s hard to describe how chaotic, terrifying and psychologically difficult it is when you have no idea what will happen next, or where the next rocket will fall. Many Christians cope with the tension by being fatalistic: that whatever happens is God’s will.

..our faith is under mortal threat, in danger of being driven into extinction, the same pattern we have seen in neighbouring Iraq.

..Most people here are now unemployed, and – without work – daily life lacks a purpose. People have no way to wash and their clothes are ragged. We have almost no electricity, and depression reigns at night. But when the darkness comes, I take courage from the fact that it was not always like this.
And he ended with an exhortation and plea:
St Paul’s virtues of faith, hope and love have rarely been in greater need, or under greater pressure, as we face the fourth year of this war. But I have faith in God’s protection, hope for our future, and my love of this country and all its peoples will outlast this war. I must believe that, and I pray that you in Britain will stand with us as long as our struggles endure.
Christians are being systematically slaughtered and "cleansed" from Syria and vast swathes of the Middle East, and no one gives a damn. Some 2.5 million Syrians are queuing to register for refugee status in neighbouring countries, and in excess of 6.5 million people are displaced within. It is a sea of unimaginable suffering.

In case you missed it the first time:
WARNING: This article contains graphic images. 


Seriously: you have been warned.

It's easy to turn off: honestly, who can be bothered to make sense of the labyrinthine religio-political morass? There's Al-Qaeda and the Al-Nusra Front, not to mention Fatah al-Islam, Jund al-Sham, the Syria Free Army and the Abdullah Azzam Brigade. And let's throw in Jund al-Aqsa, the Syrian Martyrs' Brigade, Idlib Martyrs' Brigade, Ajnad al-Sham Islamic Union, Ahfad al-Rasul Brigade, Army of Mujahedeen, Ghuraba al-Sham, Hizb ut-Tahrir and the Muslim Brotherhood of Syria.

And it doesn't stop there. God alone knows who fights for the true cause of Allah.

And for the first time in many decades, Muslims are extracting Jizya from Christians - a per capita tax imposed upon dhimmis on pain of conversion or death. Haaretz reports:
..the Christians will commit to pay a twice-yearly poll tax of “four gold dinars” – which at today’s rate, comes to about $500 per person – with the exception that members of the middle class will pay half this amount, and the poor will pay a quarter of it, on condition they do not conceal their true financial situation. The agreement permits the Christians to follow their religious practices, but they are prohibited from building new churches or rebuilding destroyed ones.

..In return, the Christians are to be granted protection of life and property, but should they violate the terms presented, this protection is revoked.
WARNING: This article contains graphic images. 


That's the third warning you've received, so please don't complain.

What happens to those Christians who refuse to kiss the Qur'an, embrace Mohammed or voluntarily exile themselves from the land?

They are imprisoned, tortured and raped, or forced to kneel, with their hands and feet bound, in a public ceremony of beheading. Some Muslims are even reported to wash their hands in the blood.

Then there's this young girl:

It looks like a ghoulish scene from The Exorcist. Apparently she was bound, raped, and tortured with flesh being cut from her breast. A crucifix was then rammed down her throat.

One instinctively inclines to believe this picture to be a photoshopped fake, and it may very well be: it certainly appears to have been doing the rounds for a while, but no one has managed to establish the original source.

But don't waste too much of your time questioning or querying its veracity: that would be a cynical deflection. The point is that this sort of appalling savagery and barbarity is being inflicted on our brothers and sisters in Syria right now, today. If they refuse or are unable to pay the Jizya, they must convert or die. Persecution and martyrdom are the price they pay for witnessing to the Way, the Truth and the Life. We in the West can only glimpse an image of their horror. The least we can do is pray for them, and, as Bishop Antoine pleads, stand with them for as long as their struggles endure.

UPDATE: 17 March 2014

Quite incredibly, despite the politest of requests not to be deflected from the reality of the plight of Syria's Christians, His Grace has been besieged with emails and tweets informing him that the image above is, as he suspected and, indeed, clearly stated, a fake

Well, this one isn't:

And if you're not satisfied with the veracity of that, here's a video of the public beheading of three men, one of whom was a Roman Catholic priest.

WARNING: The video includes extremely graphic content


Blogger William Lewis said...

Can anyone doubt the depravity of Man?

Only God can save us from this.

Come Lord Jesus, come.

15 March 2014 at 10:33  
Blogger Lucy Mullen said...

William Hague claims to be a Christian but he is turning a blind eye to Christians en masse persecuted and bleeding to death and even apparently supporting their persecutors.

How so?

We deserve an answer.

15 March 2014 at 11:14  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Bold and Brave post Cranmer.

Think this barbarity couldn't happen here? We were never shown what they actually did to Drummer Lee Rigby and now MI5 are 'monitoring' at least 250 returning Syrian-Jihad-Jolly, British passport holders, no doubt wishing to impress their moderate mates with their tales of derring-do.

I think we've turned into a society of craven cowards. I hope that doesn't offend.

Actually, I hope it does offend, quite a lot actually because, you see, I can still remember the shock of the Rushdie affair 25 years ago. The very idea that anybody could be killed for writing a book was surreal and horrific. Now we take it for granted that if you say the wrong thing about the religion of peace you'll get death threats and you might actually be killed, so you keep your mouth shut if you know what's good for you. All for the sake of tolerance and diversity, of course.

TV and newspapers routinely censor themselves now in a way that would have been unthinkable a few decades ago, not because they want to be 'sensitive', as they always claim, but because they're afraid of Muslim violence. Not only are they afraid of it, they're afraid even to admit they're afraid of it, in case it offends."
Pat Condell

15 March 2014 at 11:22  
Blogger 45minutewarning said...

I'm sorry that pictures like this don't get into the MSM. After all, post-WW2 the public were shown shocking images from the Nazi death camps. But of course, even then there it was not just a humanitarian matter, but a political one too.

The current political orthodoxy in the West is to treat Muslims as victims, hence the tendency to cover up their crimes.

15 March 2014 at 11:26  
Blogger Len said...

It is truly sickening what people will do in the name of their god.
Total depravity just doesn`t cover what man is capable of.
This is satanic evil displayed for all to see its name on this occasion is 'Islam.'

15 March 2014 at 13:44  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

The prophet rages against the darkness of the night, and his rage is understandable. But what does the prophet command be done?

Does he desire intervention in force in Syria? Should the country be occupied to end the civil war and provide protection? But there is no will to do that. Neither is there will to impose the level of violence that would be required to achieve control. Western soldiers would not be greeted as liberators but as crusaders. The whole nation would need to be suppressed and that would require the imposition of terror. But it is terror that we seek to stop.

So if Syria is beyond our reach, should look close to home? Should we learn the lesson of Syria and turn our eyes upon our own fellow citizens and say "Let us do to them before they are strong enough to do to us.". Should we burn their mosques, and kill their leaders, and demand they recant? Should we expel them from their homes and suggest they return to the land of their ancestors? Do we become what we condemn? There is presently no will to do that, but we all should fear the emergence of such a collective will.

Well, then let's reexamine the problem in Syria. Immigration? Logistically impossible. Refugee camps? Who secures them? Where would they be located? And how does this solve the over arching problem? A new homeland carved off of Syria for its Christian population? Mediation? A UN resolution?

What then? It's easy to write a piece that says "Terrible things are happening, and they make me angry." But what must be done about it? It's not enough to say "No one gives a damn." It must be followed with "If you give a damn then here is what you should do.". Otherwise it becomes nothing but a platform on which to display our righteous indignation.


15 March 2014 at 14:02  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

As an aside, this is why the Israelis can never lose a war.


15 March 2014 at 14:04  
Blogger Len said...

This sort of atrocity has already happened on the streets of London to lee Rigby when he was hacked to death by two Muslims.They told passers-by that they had killed a soldier to avenge the killing of Muslims by the British armed forces.

And recently another two Muslims, recorded and uploaded three videos shortly after Lee Rigby's murder
Shocking videos which glorified the Fusilier's killing in Woolwich, London, last May
In one Barnes is seen laughing at tributes left to murdered soldier
In another Dawson rants at how British troops in London would be killed.
British Politicians need to wake up and take notice to what is happening..

15 March 2014 at 14:16  
Blogger Rambling Steve Appleseed said...

The Grand Illusion is that there is some civilised administrative action that our secular and religious leaders could take that will make everything all right.

My feeling is that humanity is now commencing our final descent. As Jesus predicted. See Matthew chapter 24.

Save yourself from this wicked generation.

15 March 2014 at 14:26  
Blogger 45minutewarning said...

A lot of questions Carl, but do you have any answers? Are you suggesting that Cranmer should not have written this post?

15 March 2014 at 14:37  
Blogger Uncle Brian said...

carl jacobs

A new homeland carved off of Syria for its Christian population?

They tried that once before, seventy years ago. It's called Lebanon.

15 March 2014 at 15:16  
Blogger carl jacobs said...


I am saying that you don't accuse people of callous indifference unless you can say what it is the should be doing to prove they aren't callously indifferent.

If you think there is something to be done about Syria, then say what it is. If you think is some lesson to be applied because of Syria, then say what it is


15 March 2014 at 15:45  
Blogger Uncle Brian said...

Sadly, Your Grace, I fear that the three years of scarcely imaginable suffering that have already been inflicted on the people of Syria, both Christian and Muslim, are still only the beginning.

The flare-up in Syria was first lit by a spark from the Arab Spring that began in Tunisia. Then Iran stepped in, to avert the danger that the ruling Alawite-Shia minority might be overwhelmed by the Sunni majority. Saudi Arabia responded accordingly, so that for the last two years, at least, what is still sometimes called the Syrian civil war has been, in reality, a proxy war for regional supremacy between Saudi Arabia and Iran. The war is simultaneously about geopolitics (OPEC and the Persian Gulf) and about religion (Sunni v. Shia), which is probably what makes it so singularly nasty.

The proxies are doing the murdering and torturing so graphically depicted in Your Grace’s post. They are the front-line troops, but the war they are fighting is not their own. Iran and Saudi Arabia are the duellists, with Russia and the United States acting (for the time being) as their seconds. Once the duel is over, but not before, the seconds will be free to pack up and go home.

Russia obviously wouldn’t want to see Iran defeated and humiliated by the Saudis, and conversely Washington will seek to prevent Saudi Arabia from meeting a similar fate at the hands of the ayatollahs. At the same time, I don’t suppose America would be altogether happy to see Iran crushed and the Saudis triumphant, while conversely (again) a Middle East wholly dominated by Iran can hardly be the ideal outcome from the Kremlin’s viewpoint.

So it looks as though Russia and the United States are both playing for a draw, which is the outcome that would suit both parties’ national interest. That explains why Obama’s apparent capitulation, when he dropped his “red line” threats and washed his hands of Syria, leaving Putin in charge, can now be seen with hindsight as a shrewd move. Obama, it can now be said, was in fact acting rationally and in America’s national interest.

Playing for a draw can be a long, slow business, which is why I fear that the first three years of the war for Syria are probably still only the beginning. As far as any outside observer can tell, the war may not even have reached the end of the beginning.

15 March 2014 at 15:48  
Blogger DOGS IN SPACE said...

Europe has been captured by usurious mobsters
The evil-doers have defeated the Generals
It took three World Wars, thousands of millions of casualties and around 100 years for the Americans to conquer Europe
The gang’s nesting lies in today’s Nazi Germany

15 March 2014 at 15:57  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Editors Note about the Link provided by Dogs in Space...

It is a long rambling article the subject of which is "the Jews." Especially Jewish Bankers. It amazes how often the phrase "the Jews" is used. But you will have to scroll a ways to discover this. Did I mention the post is long?

Reviewing nonsense so you don't have to

15 March 2014 at 16:28  
Blogger Lucy Mullen said...

@ Carl

HG writes that "the least we can do is pray for them", and stand with them. For most of us are not working at the F.O. or the U.N. (who are bothered but bizarrely their focus seems primarily re Christian art, artefacts and architecture, if reported correctly.

As an encouragement to prayer with a Lenten focus I would like if HG permits it to post a link to a sermon from a church I visit if in that area, entitled "History belongs to the Intercessor".

It encouraged me and reminded me that it is too early to lose hope and become fatalistic and desparing, and of how the seeming mustard seed of our prayers can yet become the large tree of the kingdom of God, or as HG reminds us, "a little leaven leavens the whole lump."

15 March 2014 at 17:04  
Blogger Rambling Steve Appleseed said...

Thanks Carl. The price of free speech is eternal bull***t

I sent some £££s to Medecins Sans Frontieres for Syria don't know what else to do except sorrow and perhaps learn.

We can't stop what's happening

15 March 2014 at 17:06  
Blogger Integrity said...

Your Grace,
This war seems to be between Muslims with Christians caught up in the middle. A great tragedy.
What does history tell us about this sort of situation? To get involved would inevitably lead to both sides turning on us like the Egyptians did to Moses when he tried to intervene.
It is not surprising in some ways that the crusades occurred when you see the pattern of history repeat itself.

15 March 2014 at 17:21  
Blogger Phil Roberts said...


What needs to be done is really quite simple.

Assad needs to be supported militarily, economically and politically by the West.


15 March 2014 at 17:49  
Blogger jsampson1945 said...

There are technical problems with the Church Stretton sermon.

15 March 2014 at 18:31  
Blogger IanCad said...

Dear Lord; Come Soon!

When, when, when will we understand that Muslim countries need stong, undemocratic leaders?

Like it or not, Saddam was better than what we have now.
Mubarek could at least hold back most of the factional strife.
And, I'm sorry, Assad should be supported.

Indulge me with another link YG.

This is what we are up against:

15 March 2014 at 19:59  
Blogger IanCad said...

Didn't read your post Phil.

Yes! Yes! Yes!

15 March 2014 at 20:03  
Blogger Lucy Mullen said...

@ jsampson 1945

Just checked and it is still working for me so it is just possible that it is your computer one way or another.

15 March 2014 at 20:36  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

The bishop prays that ‘Britain will stand with us as long as our struggles endure’ but, far from standing with the Christians of Syria, Britain and the United States came within a whisker of aiding and abetting the Muslims who are slaughtering the bishop’s flock, and are best friends with the two countries that have done so much to bring chaos to Syria: Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

At the Mandela memorial service in Westminster Abbey, Prince Harry was accompanied to his seat by two protection officers, something I have never seen before and an indication of how worried the authorities must be about Islamic terrorism. Having served in Afghanistan, the Prince will be a prime target for Allah’s barmy army.

15 March 2014 at 20:50  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Even a religion of peace can get a little carried away at times.

15 March 2014 at 21:20  
Blogger bluedog said...

Carl @ 14.02 asks, 'Should we burn their mosques, and kill their leaders, and demand they recant? Should we expel them from their homes and suggest they return to the land of their ancestors? Do we become what we condemn? There is presently no will to do that, but we all should fear the emergence of such a collective will.'

Morning in America and at last the end of moral certainty and superiority. The mere posing of these questions is tacit recognition of the validity of the solution they outline. As this communicant has said many times before, dealing with the threat of Islam will require Islamic methods. Where those of us who try to profess the Christian faith are different to Muslims is that we do know a better way and seek to regain our piety after the bloodshed. We also know that turning the other cheek to Islam is a recipe for our own bloody suppression and defeat. It has been that way since 632 AD, although we periodically forget but are reminded by the great time-line of our forefathers’ achievements and their defeats. As you say in your post of 14.04, '...the Israelis can never lose a war.'- they live on a knife edge at the frontier. At least in Europe we still have strategic depth, but as the Muslim enclaves expand and become in effect, defensive perimeters, so the risk to the host society increases. A war such as that in Syria, with an estimated 30,000 foreign Salafi mujahideen, will lead to an explosion of weapon making and military skills amongst the western nations from which so many of these Muslim fighters a drawn. These skills are learned in the lands of these fighters’ ancestors and they have already voluntarily left their homes and seized their own right of return. But what if they subsequently return to their parents’ homes in Bradford, Rochdale, Luton, Rotterdam, Paris or Brussels? Or even, let it be said, Detroit? Will the mujahideen quietly report for work again one Monday morning? Or will they sit at home drawing benefits, surfing Islamic websites and working up plans for terror attacks within the decadent West?

There is something deeply evil in the thinking of the young jihadi Muslim male. We saw it in the Kenyan shopping centre where unspeakable outrages were inflicted on the non-Muslim women; it is surely only a matter of time before that incident is repeated in a European city. We see it again in Syria with the horrific cruelty inflicted on the beautiful Christian girl in His Grace’s post. We owe it to our own daughters to protect them from the fate of the dead Syrian girl. Perhaps the death of that girl will shock us into recognizing the risk we now face, so that our own daughters need not live in fear of Islam.

As the father of daughters, would you not agree?

15 March 2014 at 21:28  
Blogger carl jacobs said...


To ask those questions is to deny the legitimacy of the proffered solutions. How can you condemn them for doing what you yourself would choose to do?

Where those of us who try to profess the Christian faith are different to Muslims is that we do know a better way and seek to regain our piety after the bloodshed.

So we may kill the innocent, but because afterwards we might seek to regain our piety, we will be justified? Have you never read the Poznan Speech? These sentiments are not original.

There is something deeply evil in the thinking of the young jihadi Muslim male.

And your solution is to follow their thinking. You are advocating a religious war without regard to guilt or innocence of the dead. You must assert a Muslim is guilty by definition and must be killed. Or imprisoned. Or deported. But practically speaking, he must be killed.

No, I do not agree - daughters not withstanding.


15 March 2014 at 22:25  
Blogger Che Yeoh said...

Well, if I were Obama right now, I would probably go for the Croatia solution, where the US would send in people to train and arm those opposing the dissidents and also help the Christian minority to escape from the jihadists. In fact, they may be already doing that, but by its nature it isn't something you advertise.

15 March 2014 at 23:07  
Blogger Inspector General in Ordinary said...

Let this mark an end to talk of 'Arab Springs' and instead an increased support for the dictators that rule these wretched people. BBC, that means you too, you damn fools...

15 March 2014 at 23:10  
Blogger Hornswoggler said...

Heads up that this photo may be a fake. See�&m=1

16 March 2014 at 08:39  
Blogger Len said...

Whether this photo is a fake or not the massacre of Christians by Muslims is a reality ...
'The Christian-populated towns, Damour and Jiyeh, were massacred after a week of siege and intensive shelling on January 20, 1976 by a combined force of leftwing militia fighters, Palestinian terrorists and PLA forces (2,000 Palestine Liberation Army had entered Lebanon from Syria in Late December 1975).
(Some pictures show mutilated bodies)

16 March 2014 at 10:18  
Blogger 45minutewarning said...


Even if the photo were a fake, there is much about this conflict that is genuine, such as the empty towns, desecrated churches, eyewitness accounts of brutality, torture and murder, etc... All of which is tacitly supported by the British Government.

So even if it were a fake it would not change my opinion of the jihadists among the opposition one iota.

I suspect our Government will soon be supporting similar atrocities in Ukraine under the guise of "freedom".

16 March 2014 at 10:19  
Blogger Ivan said...

All one has to do for the Christians in Syria is to let Assad win decisively, as Phil wrote. But this does not suit the interests of either the Saudis or the Israelis, and thus that of their lachrymose patron, the allegedly Christian nation of the USA.

16 March 2014 at 10:20  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Despite all the media assurance and reassurance about Islam as a religion of tolerance and peace, I cannot help sustaining private doubts.

16 March 2014 at 10:28  
Blogger Ivan said...

Islam is merely the current vehicle for the malcontents who intend to proceed with exceptional cruelty and violence. There is no reason to be believe that as a vehicle for terrorism it is uniquely depraved. In the recent past we had the examples of the Tamil Tigers and the Cendero Luminoso as contrary indicators. It appears that wars with racial undercurrents are the ones most given to horrific barbarities.

16 March 2014 at 11:02  
Blogger bluedog said...

Wind the clock back to October 27th 2013, when Carl said, ‘The secular West is struggling to find some way to cope with a religion that is at root antithetical to the West. We have by and large made religion extraneous. We expect everyone else to do the same. At the same time however we expect them to adopt all of our cultural understandings that ultimately have their root in Christianity. But what if they say 'No.' What if they say 'I will use my freedom to create an Islamic culture.' How does the West defend itself from the malignant exercise of its own freedom?’

And again, ‘Religious freedom in the West came with the tacit assumption that the dominant Western religion would remain Christianity. That way the cultural assumptions of the West would not be challenged. That assumption has proven false. And we see the result.’

We do indeed. The malignant exercise of freedom is what now concerns us in so far as Islam is concerned. The Muslim demographic that so spectacularly failed to dent Western hegemony when it was an external threat has become an existential threat to society from within the West.

From time to time a Western politician declares that a problem will be solved by the moral equivalent of war, invoking somewhat subliminally the Augustinian definition of the just war. Is it time to deal with Islam on the basis of the moral equivalent of war? One senses that Western non-Muslim populations are edging towards that position. And we are not alone, both those principal opponents of the West, Russia and China are severely rattled by Islam. At least we have some common ground with them.

We know that our Islamic opponents have declared war on our society because they have told us. The problem is the point you raise above on cultural assumptions, we, or in this case you, apparently cannot believe that the Muslims mean what they say. For our part, not only have we made religion extraneous, we have also succeeded in making violence extraneous. We have done this by largely granting a monopoly on violence to the police for internal threats and to the military for external threats. With the exponential growth of Muslim populations, along came sharia, jihad and immans who urge termination with extreme prejudice of the infidel as an everyday duty of the faithful. A bomb, a meat cleaver, an aircraft, anything to hand does the job. Western, or at least European, populations have been disarmed and don’t even think about defending themselves with firearms or of keeping a firearm at home. Unless of course, they are Swiss.


16 March 2014 at 11:15  
Blogger bluedog said...


But the US is a very recent state, just 238 years old and apart from the Indian wars or the Civil War has remained internally peaceful. In the context of the US, your statement, ‘Religious freedom in the West came with the tacit assumption that the dominant Western religion would remain Christianity’ is particularly apposite and surely summarises the belief of the Founding Fathers. Make that Protestant Trinitarian Christianity too. US society with its lingering frontier ethos is far more self-reliant than most European societies, something especially true in the Red States. But that’s not going to immunize the US from Islam as your own Muslim population grows faster than other demographics. The central question remains unanswered in your post @ 14.02; what to do? You merely observe that some things can’t or shouldn’t be done; cultural assumptions again. A lot of things have already been done in the US, consider civil liberties before and after your Patriot Act. When it’s a matter of life and death, the mind gets wonderfully concentrated.

You ask, ‘Should we burn their mosques, and kill their leaders, and demand they recant?’ We don’t necessarily need to do the burning and killing, but some urgent recanting from Immans who preach killing the kuffar would not go astray.

Time and again Islam proves itself to be a murderously violent religion. The prime duty of every government is the protection of its citizens from internal and external threats. If Islam and Islamic populations in the West continue on their current path, electorates will demand elimination of the threat they rightly perceive.

Understand that this is a reaction and not an action, the Muslims will have brought it on themselves.

The Poznan speech was made in an entirely different context and to quote it as you do is just as irrelevant and intellectually lazy as your earlier quote in full of the Horst Wessel Lied.

Preussens Gloria is a much better tune, as military bands seem to be your thing.

16 March 2014 at 11:18  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Ivan : 11:02

Cendero Luminoso was horrific.

But not even the BBC would have claimed it was peace loving.

16 March 2014 at 11:20  
Blogger Mrs Proudie of Barchester said...

I fear this is a clash of civilisations. I fear for all our futures.

16 March 2014 at 11:49  
Blogger bluedog said...

Chin up, Mrs Proudie, but you may need to acquaint yourself with croissants and baklava for the duration. Keep enough bombazine on hand for the burqa, too.

16 March 2014 at 12:07  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ IGiO (23:10)—Dictatorship would certainly appear to be the least worst option. In The Arab predicament: Arab political thought and practice since 1967, Fouad Ajami writes: ‘It has been hard for the Arabs to escape from a deep historical dilemma: prison or anarchy.’

@ bluedog (11:15 et seq)—Very well said. The first step is to rid ourselves of the élites who opened our borders to Islam and who, in the words of an English MEP speaking in the European Parliament on the 12th March, are bringing about ‘the final solution to the Christian European problem.’ He went on to say: ‘This crime demands a new set of Nuremberg trials, and you people will be in the dock.’

@ Mrs Proudie (11:49)—Time to give this quote from George Walden (the former government minister) an airing:

‘I’d be so alarmed by the situation that I’d do everything possible to suggest it was under control. It’s up to politicians to play mood music in a crisis, and up to the people to understand that there’s little else governments can do. The last thing they can say is that we face a threat to which we can see no end because it’s based on a fundamental clash of cultures. On the IRA we told the truth; on the Islamic problem, we lie.’

16 March 2014 at 12:10  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

It's easy to write a piece that says "Terrible things are happening, and they make me angry." But what must be done about it?

Nature is violent: but humans have a capacity for violence unsurpassed by anything in the natural world but also the ability for the most part, to contain it.

What must be done is to restore the foundation of Western Democracy – Freedom of Expression. I and millions of other voiceless Europeans know that our politicians have connived to introduce the thought-crime reality of Orwell’s ‘1984’. Atheists, Jews, Christians, Hindus and even Muslims are denied the human right to hold Islam responsible for 90% of all terrorist atrocities in the world today. This is professional terrorism on an industrial scale left unchallenged by the political West’s Nelson’s Eye approach to short-term self-interest and global economics.
We are in the middle of a revived Religious war that politicians and religious leaders refuse to recognise.

Archbishops and Popes and world leaders have buckled, before condemning the corrosive nonsense that is the Islamic Myth. Religions demand belief in the unbelievable – and here in lies the real issue. To condemn one they condemn themselves.

Political philosophies and ideologies can be changed by the human will; religions will not. They claim an historic ability of their 'founders' to deny the laws of physics and deliver their pronouncements from self-elevated positions as sole (if not soul), keepers of the ultimate ‘truth’of everything.

The only testable truth is that throughout history, they have made many men and their dynasties rich and powerful. I say that religions exist to preserve their their own existence: this is why Islam, with its Koranic exhortations to extreme violence to get its way, is the current cancer that can’t be treated by logic and reason alone.

16 March 2014 at 12:52  
Blogger 4thwatch said...

If you are dealing with a rational opponent you can sometimes convert their thinking. There is however no chance with radical Islam, etc. None whatsoever. Therefore look about and see the future.
Israel has brought itself security by the construction of walls. The same brought security in Northern Ireland. In Iraq it worked to until they took them down.
Wait a moment isn't this what the English Channel and secure borders is all about?
Its broader than that and we read in the Telegraph of Muslim extremism by infiltration and stealth of the state education system in Birmingham. Christmas and Christian worship denied.

16 March 2014 at 13:53  
Blogger Integrity said...

Your Grace,
Che Yeoh said @23;07...Well, if I were Obama right now, I would probably go for the Croatia solution.
Forgive me if I am wrong but was not the wests intervention in Croatia about helping the Muslims against the 'Christians'?

16 March 2014 at 14:08  
Blogger Uncle Brian said...


I confess I have difficulty in remembering who was on which side in which bit of ex-Yugoslavia, but I don't think it can have been as simple as Christians v. Muslims. There were the Albanian-speaking Muslims in the south, who had little or nothing to do with the Muslims of Bosnia-Herzegovina, who were the descendants of either Serbians or Croatians who had accepted conversion to Islam undet the Ottoman empire.

And the Christians were divided into Catholics (Croatians) and Orthodox (Serbians), who, if possible, hated one another even more than they hated Muslims.

And then there were the Hungarian-speaking minority who had their own "autonomous region" within Serbia.

And yet again, there was a Christian minority among the predomininantly Muslim Albanian-speaking population in the south. Mother Teresa of Calcutta came from this Christian community.

I was told once that, in Tito's era, to be an officer in the Yugoslav army, one of the requirements was that you had to pass an oral exam in six languages, which would enable you to speak to your troops in their own language.

16 March 2014 at 15:10  
Blogger Ivan said...

Explorer, I have to agree with you. I simply don't understand the obsequiousness before a religion and a people who can't feed themselves, whose countries largely do not have functioning sewage systems, and who would not be able to support current levels of population without the advances in medicine and food production towards which they contributed absolutely nothing; there is nothing about them that inspires fear in me.

16 March 2014 at 15:15  
Blogger carl jacobs said...


The Poznan speech was made in an entirely different context...

And what was that different context? The Jews weren't really a threat to Germany but the Muslims are a threat to Britain? A threat so massive it justifies extermination?

... and to quote it as you do is just as irrelevant and intellectually lazy...

Here is the specific and quite relevant quote from Himmler's speech:

Most of you know what it means to see a hundred corpses lying together, five hundred, or a thousand. To have gone through this and yet – apart from a few exceptions, examples of human weakness – to have remained decent fellows, this is what has made us hard.

Now maybe you see a dime's worth of difference between what you said about piety and what he said about decency. But I sure don't.

... as your earlier quote in full of the Horst Wessel Lied

I quoted that song to illustrate the practical reality of what you are advocating. There is a disturbing degree of distance between what you advocate and the practical reality of actually doing it. There aren't faceless entities or national organizations that pull triggers and dig graves and drop Zyklon B into sealed rooms. Individual people have to do those things. Abstract notions do not drag people from houses, and smash Windows, and beat people senseless on the street, and herd toddlers into cattle cars. Individual people have to do those things. You never actually address those specific details of who must do what. You stay in the abstract world that is somewhat sterile.

Well, your typical average man is going to become quickly sated with those activities. He isn't used to killing and certainly not like this. He will have to be hardened. He will have to be taught and prepared for the task. This won't be like sending a division to Normandy. So if you are really serious about this, you better start assembling those SA battalions. Because there is a lot of work to be done before the blood can be spilled.

If the West is threatened by Islam, it is because the West is weak and hedonistic and materialistic and self-absorbed and degenerate. I don't see a justification in that list for applying collective guilt to an entire group of people and marking them for extermination. And make no mistake, that is what your equivalent of war will demand.

Do you know why we consign internal security to the Police? Because citizens have rights. These people whom you have declared enemies are citizens. It is the responsibility of the Gov't to protect them. If they are a threat, then they must be accorded due process. It's not for you to strip them naked because you are afraid of your own weakness. Become strong and you will no longer be afraid.

Yes, I identified the problem that the West faces with Islam. But the solution to that problem cannot be mass murder. If that is what the West must do to survive, then there isn't anything in the West worth preserving.


16 March 2014 at 15:32  
Blogger carl jacobs said...


I say that religions exist to preserve their their own existence

In cold dead universe you inhabit, everything exists only to preserve itself. And even that is futile. You can't even explain why a burst from an AK47 is not a perfectly acceptable form of free speech.


16 March 2014 at 15:55  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Dreadnaught @ 12:52 makes an interesting point. "Religions demand belief in the unbelievable - and here lies the real issue. To condemn one they condemn themselves."

Secularism is keen to lump all religions together: defend one and you must defend the lot. I reject this.

On 'The Big Questions' today: Does religion make us happy?

Religion? Which religion? Agamemnon sacrificed his daughter (or thought he had) to get a fair wind for Troy. Was that religion? Yes. Did it make him happy? No. Do I feel compelled to defend him? No.

AS a Christian, I feel no compulsion to defend Hindu reincarnation, Buddhist renunciation, or the impassable God of Islam.

Here's two ten-pond notes. One is a forgery; therefore, the other must be as well. But why can't the other one be the real thing?

Four religions disagree; therefore, they must all be false. Agreed, they can't ALL be true where they conflict with one another. But why can't some be partly true, and one completely so?

16 March 2014 at 16:08  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Grey is a depressing colour.

Red is a colour.

Therefore, red is depressing.

16 March 2014 at 16:13  
Blogger Len said...

"Religions demand belief in the unbelievable"

"Evolution is the religion of those gullible enough to believe in an unprovable theory"

Just as valid a statement.

Biblical Prophesy validates Biblical Christianity.

'Other religions' based on the word of man rely on the gullibility of those who choose to put their belief in them.

Biblical Christianity is provable to anyone interested enough to look up all the Bible Prophesies and to calculate the probabilities of them being correct.You cannot do this with ANY other religion including Darwin`s theory.

16 March 2014 at 16:58  
Blogger Rambling Steve Appleseed said...

Islam is bad news

Islam is a religion

Therefore religion is bad news.

Dreadnaught is parrotting Dawkins' 'Religion's misguided missiles' post 9/11rant that launched the 'New' atheist movement. What the 'New'atheists can't admit is that the Judaeo Christian tradition was extremely good for us and that our wilful rejection of it is costing a high price. They cannot come to terms with the fact that driving out good religion leads not to a rationalist Utopia but to hedonism, anarchy and collapse-and into that void moves Islam.

BTW Dreaders, the Creator of the laws of physics can by definition overule them at will. Basic category error/philosphical assumption of materialism alert.

PS anyone seen Andrew Neather lately? Someone ought to rub his face in it.

PPS of course we musn't brutalise Muslims living here. But we surely needn't allow any more to come especially arranged overseas brides/husbands. Oh dear, we'd have to leave the EU to ensure that. What a pity.

16 March 2014 at 17:39  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

16 March 2014 at 17:46  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

My point is that to the 'believers', their religions are never wrong, because they can neither be proved or disproved when they are essentially focused on the principle of a 'life' after death. I reject this.

The Communists tried and failed to ban the religion. Putin is now the new Czar and sees the Christian Orthodoxy as a convenient public pacifier.

He in no small part oversaw the resurrection of the Russian Orthodox Church, including the reconstruction of some 23,000 churches that had been destroyed or fallen into disuse. So glad of him are they, that many in the church credit him with being inspired from above: Behold the new messiah - President/Prime Minister/President/ex-KGB spymaster-colonel and all-round good-egg Vladimir Putin.

According to one apparently high-profile priest “There are no conflicts between the church and the state,” Father Alexey Kulberg, “The President’s ideology for developing Russia coincides with the direction of the Russian Orthodox Church.”

It strikes me as very convenient for him this new awakening of his and a very useful cover story for the folks back home, for his deals with Assad. Now packaged by RT as being in exchange for Assad's 'protection for Christians’ in Syria. How fortuitous that it also enables him to maintain a viable anti-Western presence in Middle-eastern affairs - well who'd a thought it?

While as far as I am aware, the ROC doesn’t quite go on the record as officially recognising that Putin has been chosen by God, non the less, it seems quite happy with the job he’s doing. Both the Kremlin and the church have benefited from resuming their centuries-old alliance.

No surprise then to find out that the Moscow Patriarchate is now the largest landowner in Russia and who knows how much Putin and his cronies are actually worth.

Putin has learned from the Islamists how to further consolidate his grip on power by a mutually beneficial Kremlin-church alliance. He speaks of Russia as a civilization distinct from the West and accuses the West of sponsoring the unrest in Ukraine.

With the Christian Church’s guaranteed silence over the civilian deaths and injustices at the sticky hands of his rejected puppet, he knows the West won’t intervene if he does re-nationalise Crimea.

He holds all the aces for now, namely (1) – he has his hand is on the gas energy tap to the West and (2) - he now has ‘God’ on his side - Full House!

16 March 2014 at 18:08  
Blogger The Explorer said...


"Behold the new Messiah".

For Christians, there is only one Messiah, and he has already come.

If there is a new Messiah, then whatever the religion is, it isn't Christianity.

16 March 2014 at 18:24  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Steve: "PPS of course we musn't brutalise Muslims living here. But we surely needn't allow any more to come especially arranged overseas brides/husbands. Oh dear, we'd have to leave the EU to ensure that. What a pity."

Yes. Well, arranged overseas brides/husbands from any ethnicity/religion as merely being Muslim is hardly sufficient to discriminate against them given that most Muslims seem to be decent enough people. What we want, I'd say, is to discriminate in the general against refreshing the local culture year on year with that of the rural and very conservative Pakistani culture found in the Mirpur District of Pakistan. On tap of that, we need to stop money and religious influence coming from the Wahhabis of Saudi Arabia, with their ultra-conservative interpretations of Islam.

16 March 2014 at 18:32  
Blogger The Explorer said...


"They (religions: we're still lumping them together)are essentially focused on the principle of a 'life' after death."

Materialism asserts that there is no life after death. It has faith that this is so. It doesn't know for certain. You can't ask a corpse if its essence still survives in another form: it won't answer you.

The only way of knowing is if someone were to come back from "the undiscover'd country from whose bourne no traveller returns".

Christianity makes exactly this claim, and it stands or falls on the truth of the Resurrection as an historical event.

We may say that all historical events are unverifiable; but that is another matter.

16 March 2014 at 18:39  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Blimey, I've just read that Fred Phelps is on his 'death bed'. Well, if it's true that he's one of the Elect then that'll be an interesting meeting shortly.

16 March 2014 at 18:42  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...


Of all I have posted and that's all you can find to rebut? I call that a result.

16 March 2014 at 18:42  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Explorer: "Materialism asserts that there is no life after death. It has faith that this is so. It doesn't know for certain. You can't ask a corpse if its essence still survives in another form: it won't answer you."

It's a natural enough assumption though. We're made up of body and mind, with the mind seemingly dependent on the brain. Fundamentally just like many other animals. The body and brain dies, we cease to exist as a conscious thing.

16 March 2014 at 18:46  
Blogger The Explorer said...

DanJ0 @ 18:32

Those are both pertinent suggestions. How do we implement them, though?

1. Are we going to say who people born in this country are to be allowed to marry?

2. We sell weapons to Saudi Arabia. Cut their influence, and they might decide to cut their purchases.

16 March 2014 at 18:48  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Of course, being self-aware makes us different to almost all other animals because we have to live with the knowledge of our death before it happens. People understandably struggle to deal with that and so they chase the idea of extending life or achieving immortality, either physically in terms our existing bodies or mentally by holding on to a convenient religious belief ... almost always the one from their local culture.

16 March 2014 at 18:51  
Blogger The Explorer said...

DanJ0 @ 18:46

You're ignoring my point about the Resurrection.

Without that, perfectly fair point.

16 March 2014 at 18:52  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Dreadnaught @ 18:42

Are you referring to 16:08, 16:13, 18:24, or all three?

16 March 2014 at 18:55  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Explorer: "Those are both pertinent suggestions. How do we implement them, though?"

As a liberal, they make me pretty uncomfortable but perhaps they're worth it. For sure, people in the UK can marry who they want under the law. However, if they marry someone without British citizenship then they need to apply for the citizenship of their spouse in order to live with them unless their spouse is someone our country needs.

16 March 2014 at 18:57  
Blogger Rambling Steve Appleseed said...

DanJo - agreed most Muslims, certainly of my aquaintance, are ordinary decent people. However Islam is not an ordinary decent religion. I'm not saying that as the Evangelical Christian I freely admit to being but as a citizen gifted with the ability to read and do simple arithmetic.

It is a matter of dispassionately reviewing the available geopolitical and historical evidence concering Islam. The use of immigration as a tool of conquest is a long tradition. It seems to me that this evidence points to the Islamifisationnof Europe as being a huge threat to our way of life. It also seems to me that our rulers' visceral hatred of Christianity blinds them to this set of information.

Importing brides and grooms has 2 principal effects, increasing numbers and preventing integration. Given voting patterns and electoral boundaries, we could reach a tipping point within 20 years beyond which dhimmitude becomes inevitable. How long ago was sheik George bin Galloway's by election victory?

I am actually concerned that I might be interviewed by the police for saying that Islamic immigration should be halted immediately. I choose to run that risk. When its too late, its too late. .

16 March 2014 at 19:03  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

16 March 2014 at 19:06  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Explorer: "You're ignoring my point about the Resurrection. We may say that all historical events are unverifiable; but that is another matter."

I expect the Mormons says similar stuff about Joseph Smith, his golden plates, and his magic stone and hat. We also have a phenomenon like the Buddha Boy and the response of the credible to take into account. In Palestine, we ought to take account of the political and religious context too.

16 March 2014 at 19:06  
Blogger Rambling Steve Appleseed said...

Explorer. Let folks marry whom they will. But if they choose to marry a foreigner they can both live happily ever after overseas. Just because Nick Griffin says ' The country's full' doesn't mean its not true.

What DanJo posted at 18.57. Agreed.

16 March 2014 at 19:23  
Blogger The Explorer said...

DanJ0 @ 19:06

Don't know enough about the Buddah Boy to comment.

Joseph Smith was lynched. No one claims he returned to life after the experience.

He did claim to be a prophet and to have received a final revelation. That's an issue of divine inspiration, which is different.

When you say Palestine, do you mean AD/CE 33? if so, NT Wright has examined the place,time and mood exhaustively in 'The Resurrection of the Son of God'.

16 March 2014 at 19:35  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Explorer: "He did claim to be a prophet and to have received a final revelation. That's an issue of divine inspiration, which is different."

He claims certain phenomena happened which, from the future, we are unable to verify and other people have built a religion on the back of it. That's the essence of it. Perhaps it happened. Who knows? Obviously, it seems pretty unlikely to me ... to the point of my disregarding the religion ... but then being executed and quietly coming back to life a few days later before disappearing again is impossible as far as we know.

16 March 2014 at 19:45  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Steve @ 19:23

Marry a foreigner, live overseas.

Irrelevant if the foreigner is an EU member: he she has the right of residence in the UK anyway.

Marry an American and you have to live in America?

16 March 2014 at 19:47  
Blogger The Explorer said...

DAnJ0 @ 19:45

Agreed. Unless you are God.

16 March 2014 at 19:48  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Explorer: "Marry an American and you have to live in America?"

Why not? They have plenty of land and they seem quite keen to be able to extract our citizens against their will.

16 March 2014 at 19:51  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Explorer: "Agreed. Unless you are God."

Well, yes. It could have sent an angel, whatever one of those is, to our reality with the plates and stuff if it wanted to because that's how we have defined it.

16 March 2014 at 19:52  
Blogger The Explorer said...

DanJ0 @ 19:52

Sorry we're at cross purposes. I was talking about the Resurrection and Ascension of Christ.

Joseph Smith's plates, as I said, are another issue.

16 March 2014 at 19:57  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...


Are you referring to 16:08, 16:13, 18:24, or all three?

All three I reckon. Where have you said anything remotely related to my extrapolations on the Islam sponsored atrocities in Syria as contained the OP, other than defend you own religion?

16 March 2014 at 20:02  
Blogger The Explorer said...

DanJ0 @ 19:51

Absolutely fine: provided it's universally applied.

Marry a New Zealander: move to New Zealand. Marry an Australian. move to Australia. Marry a Thai, move to Thailand.
But nether of you can live in the UK.

16 March 2014 at 20:04  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Explorer: "Sorry we're at cross purposes. I was talking about the Resurrection and Ascension of Christ."

I know. British irony.

16 March 2014 at 20:10  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Explorer: "Absolutely fine: provided it's universally applied."

That's what was being suggested, at least by me. Of course, we may have use for people based on their individual attributes and offer them citizenship. I expect that's a lot more likely in general for people from Australia than from certain parts of Kashmir.

16 March 2014 at 20:12  
Blogger The Explorer said...

DanJ0 @ 20:12

Where we're at.

If you marry a non-EU foreign national you must emigrate to your partner's country. Unless your partner has particular required skills; in which case you can both stay.

(And hope that the host countries for emigrating Brits don't apply the same criteria.)

16 March 2014 at 20:34  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Explorer: "Where we're at."

Surely it's already clear by now.

16 March 2014 at 20:41  
Blogger Rambling Steve Appleseed said...

Explorer + DanJo

Yes its messy.

FACT ALERT. Britain is seriously overcrowded not least due to the utterly unprecedented mass immigration of the last 2 decades. A particular issue is arranged marriages which in some communities leads to further increases, blocks integration, then there's the first cousin marriage disabled kid issue. I've seen it. Not nice.

Tell you what. Let's just carry on with mass immigration. I'm sure it'll all work out just fine. I'll wait here for the thought police to come and pick me up for even suggesting there might be a problem.

I'm probably never going to be a grandparent anyway so why worry about Islamificationnin 30 or 40 years? Let the strongest meme win.

16 March 2014 at 20:44  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Dreadnaught @ 20:02

I don't know enough about the Syrian situation to comment on it myself, or to analyse anyone else's analysis.

But you did more than analyse Syria. You chose to make generalisations about religion. That is what I focused on. (As did three others.)

"...other than defend your own religion." Are you suggesting that I should defend ALL religion?

That I am not prepared to do so was the whole point of my argument.

Your position, if I understand you, is materialism/naturalism versus religion.

Mine is Christianity versus materialism/naturalism, and also versus other religions.

16 March 2014 at 20:47  
Blogger The Explorer said...

DanJ0 @ 20:41

It was. British irony.

Apart from the bit in brackets. If that happens, who goes where?

Easy solution: it is forbidden for a Briton to marry anyone not born in Britain. (Better keep that on hold until after the Scottish Referendum.)

16 March 2014 at 20:52  
Blogger bluedog said...

Carl @ 15.32, it is disappointing that you seem only able to debate the threat posed by Islam in terms of Nazism. You continue to do this without offering any solution to the problem of a discrete demographic with a religious belief that is, as you admit, antithetical to Christianity, and which seeks to replace the law of the land, violently if need be, with its own utterly alien codex. You should be able to rationalise this situation as an existential threat to the host society, being the UK. Instead you ask, ‘The Jews weren't really a threat to Germany but the Muslims are a threat to Britain? A threat so massive it justifies extermination?’
Exactly where has it been suggested that the Muslims be exterminated? Please give the date and time of the post, or if you cannot, admit that you have descended into debate by slander. If you are able to think constructively outside the frame of the Third Reich, you will recognise that there are profound differences in the way that a Jewish society works vis-à-vis the typical modus operandi of Muslim societies. Consider the success of the state of Israel as a handy reference guide in appreciating this point.
Carl says, ‘If the West is threatened by Islam, it is because the West is weak and hedonistic and materialistic and self-absorbed and degenerate. I don't see a justification in that list for applying collective guilt to an entire group of people and marking them for extermination. And make no mistake, that is what your equivalent of war will demand.’
Does this mean that if members of the West who are not weak, hedonistic, materialistic, self-absorbed and degenerate decide to stand up for their society they are nascent mass murderers? Seems we are damned if we do and damned if we don’t. Perhaps it’s something to do with the joys of predestination.
Based on many precedents elsewhere in Europe and the Middle East, it seems that an Islamic society always builds on a demographic to create a polity, or Emirate. As the Emirate grows it seeks lebensraum (sound familiar?) and that leads to civil war and disintegration of the nation state. Lebanon and former Yugoslavia are cases in point, where in both instances Saudi Arabia was extremely active on the Muslim side. The large Muslim demographic in the UK and elsewhere in Europe offers plenty of opportunity for Saudi, Pakistani or Iranian intervention.
You have previously commented that it was the British government that let the Muslims in. True, but if the decision has proved to be a terrible mistake, who are you to deny the search for a remedy?
You are careful to offer no solution of your own, final or otherwise, possibly out of fear of self-incrimination. Power without responsibility, eh?

16 March 2014 at 20:53  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Explorer: "Easy solution: it is forbidden for a Briton to marry anyone not born in Britain."

I think I'll stick with the easier solution thanks. It's a a-theist thing you see: tending not to complicate matters more than is necessary.

16 March 2014 at 20:56  
Blogger The Explorer said...

DanJ0 @ 20:56

I think we've gone as far as we can go on this one. Thanks for the entertaining discussion.

16 March 2014 at 21:01  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Explorer: "It was. British irony."

Not seeing it myself. Perhaps you can explain. I deliberately misunderstood the direction of your comment to make the point that both things are essentially equivalent as far as verification of historical facts are concerned, and both can be defined into possibility if one is only bound in our reality by one's own imagination.

16 March 2014 at 21:03  
Blogger The Explorer said...

DAnJ0 @ 21:13

Re "essentially equivalent": tell that to N T Wright.

Re irony.

1. I was quoting you.

2. 'British': the issue of national identity dissolving.

3. I was pretending to pursue an argument that I do not myself consider tenable, to see where it led.

Have stuff to do. I'm signing of this thread for tonight.

16 March 2014 at 21:15  
Blogger Che Yeoh said...


Just to explain; in the Yugoslavia war, America didn't want to intervene with land troops and neither did anyone else. So what they did instead was they sent in people to train up a Croatian army (the Croatians are Catholics and the traditional enemies of the Serbs). When they were sufficiently trained and armed, Croatia attacked and pushed the Serbs back into Serbia. After that, the war came to an end. Job done, with someone else's troops.

17 March 2014 at 00:02  
Blogger Manfarang said...

All the usual ignorance spouted here when it comes to immigration.
Immigration has been heavily restricted from non-EU countries.
Just over 30 years ago any women marrying a British citizen would get a British passport.
Today there are financial restrictions on settlement which if applied to native Britons would mean many could not afford to marry.
Immigration authorities in most countries are of the old view that the woman settles in the man's country.
That being said many years ago I knew an English young lady who married an Iranian but was not allowed to live in that country.

17 March 2014 at 04:24  
Blogger Manfarang said...

Che Yeoh
In the former Yugoslavia there were wars rather than a single conflict.The civil war in Lebanon was one of changing patterns.

17 March 2014 at 04:43  
Blogger Ivan said...

Manfarang, those who know how to work the system get in with an acceptable level of difficulty. Many years ago before Portugal's ascension to the EU, there I knew of a wave of Gujaratis applying to settle there. Those fellows must have moved on to the UK or US by now. I had a friend who crossed Checkpoint Charlie a couple of times in the late 80s. Apparently anyone crossing that checkpoint at that time could claim asylum. And what about the Tamil refugees making it all the way to Brisbane and Montreal, but unable to find their way sixty miles across to India from Ceylon, if indeed they are fleeing for their lives? Another one of my friends regularly uses an underground circuit to Paris to find work. The are numerous other anecdotes to relate. The fact is European borders leak like sieves. The difficulties you mention stymie who intend follow the law. For the desperate or otherwise European borders are no impediment. Sitting in Southern Thailand, you must know of the breaking scandals surrounding stolen passports in the wake of MH370. I don't blame anyone seeking a better life, but Nick Griffin has a point as in the nature of things, these generally poor people are coming to displace the working class of Europe, intended or not.

17 March 2014 at 04:56  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Mafarang @ 04:24

Note my comment @ 20:34 about the immigration policies of other countries. The discussion took no account of them.

"The woman settles in the man's country."

Two points:

1. Horrifying thought for equality advocates.

2. Same-sex marriage. How would it apply there? Which one of the partnership is the 'male'? Or not let either of them in: both stay in the country that recognises such relationships?

17 March 2014 at 07:34  
Blogger The Explorer said...


To tell a British-born male that if he marries a Mirpur woman she can't come here he must go there would presumably founder on the basis of racism and sexism.

Applying the principle to everybody - marry a foreigner, and you emigrate - ignores foreign immigration policies. (Your Iran example.)

Your partner can stay if your partner has the skills is probably how it will go: a classist, rather than a racist or sexist, solution. Still intolerable for the race/class/gender lobby.

17 March 2014 at 08:47  
Blogger Uncle Brian said...

Since the thread has gone off topic anyway, allow me to refer back to the free speech question. Here's a curious quote from this morning's Telegraph:

An attempt by the German Green Party to ban Mr Schroeder from speaking in public about Ukraine was narrowly defeated in the European parliament on Thursday.

17 March 2014 at 09:48  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Uncle Brian:

Interesting article on Ukraine by a Russian on today's 'American Thinker' Blog. In essence: restore Russia to its original size, and then expand.

17 March 2014 at 09:57  
Blogger Uncle Brian said...

Thank you, Explorer, but I was thinking mainly of the free speech side of the question. What surprises me most of all is the unspoken assumption* that the European Parliament is constitutionally empowered to make it illegal for one named person to speak in public on a particular subject, while all the other 500 million inhabitants of the EU remain free to say what they like about it.

*If it really is an unspoken assumption. Has a law been passed that would make it quite constitutional for the European Pariament to commit such a gross outrage?

17 March 2014 at 10:13  
Blogger Uncle Brian said...

On the European Parliament's website there is a brief summary of last Thursday's debate on Ukraine, which includes this:

EU action

Parliament stresses the need for the EU and its member states to speak to Russia with one voice and support the right of a united Ukraine to determine its future freely.

But no mention of Gerhard Schroeder (or Schröder, I tried both spellings) by name. "To speak to Russia with one voice"? Did this really mean it would be illegal for Schroeder to disagree?

17 March 2014 at 11:10  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Nothing to be too concerned about DrCranmer - after all its only marginally painful for less than a second according to religious slaughter advocates.

17 March 2014 at 13:17  
Blogger Len said...

Who exactly is the enemy here?.
Someone who tells you that God loves you and that He came to Calvary and died to save you?.

OR someone whose god tells them to slit your throat.
It a no brainer to me.

17 March 2014 at 13:32  
Blogger Uncle Brian said...

Len said...
Who exactly is the enemy here?.
Someone who tells you that God loves you and that He came to Calvary and died to save you?.

OR someone whose god tells them to slit your throat.
It a no brainer to me.

17 March 2014 13:32

Once again, I fully and unreservedly endorse every word of Len's comment.

17 March 2014 at 14:09  
Blogger William Lewis said...

Quite Len. Unfortunately some secularists appear to be so in love with their facile categorisation of the religious and the non-religious that they have become insensible to discrimination. It would be plain sad if it wasn't helping with the islamification of this country. Now it's positively dangerous.

17 March 2014 at 14:19  
Blogger Che Yeoh said...

Hi Manfarang,

I am aware that there was more than one war going on in Yugoslavia. I picked the one between Croatia and Serbia because it illustrated how outside powers can help and influence an outcome without appearing to do so. I would be very surprised if there wasn't some intervention of this type going on in Syria.

17 March 2014 at 15:32  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

William Lewis said…secularists appear to be so in love with their facile categorisation of the religious and the non-religious that they have become insensible to discrimination. It would be plain sad if it wasn't helping with the islamification of this country. Now it's positively dangerous.

On September 12, 2006, while lecturing on "Faith, Reason and the University" at the University of Regensburg, Pope Benedict quoted Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Palaiologos, "Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached".

Oops – double the guard at the Vatican! (which they did)

Then ... Pope Benedict expressed his regret for any offense his words had given: "The Holy Father is very sorry that some passages of his speech may have sounded offensive to the sensibilities of Muslim believers," said Cardinal Secretary of State Tarcisio Bertone.

Benedict went on to add …“does not express my personal view of the Quran, for which I have the respect due to the holy book of a great religion. And later - ‘The Pope also praised Islam as a peaceful faith and expressed support for Turkey's bid to join the EU’

Bukhari (52:260) - "...The Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.'

Qur'an (4:89) - "They wish that you should disbelieve as they disbelieve, and then you would be equal; therefore take not to yourselves friends of them, until they emigrate in the way of God; then, if they turn their backs, take them, and slay them wherever you find them; take not to yourselves any one of them as friend or helper."

Other verses that seem to support the many Hadith demanding death for apostates (and more) are Qur'an verses 2:217, 9:73-74, 88:21, 5:54, and 9:66.

And just for balance William Lewis:

Dr Rowan Williams told BBC Radio 4 on Thursday that he believed the adoption of some Sharia law in the UK seemed "unavoidable". He said adopting parts of Islamic Sharia law could help social cohesion. For example, Muslims could choose to have marital disputes or financial matters dealt with in a Sharia court.

As if Sharia comes in a range of pick-and-mix options just for the Christian palette - Sharia IS Islam and Islam IS Sharia.

17 March 2014 at 16:06  
Blogger Uncle Brian said...

Che Yeoh

I would be very surprised if there wasn't some intervention of this type going on in Syria.

Isn’t the intervention in Syria quite overt? Iran on one side, with boots on the ground, and Putin’s Russia as guarantor? And, on the Sunni side of the street, aren’t there a lot of Arab soldiers in the front line, doing the murdering and torturing of unarmed civilians, with the backing of Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states, and with the Obama White House taking care (at least) of the diplomatic coverage?

17 March 2014 at 16:10  
Blogger Rambling Steve Appleseed said...

Dreadnaught @ 16.06

Agreed. Its a pity the Pope and ABof C have joined in the leftist sellout. Did I mention I'd left the C of E for a Bible believing outfit?

Nevertheless, William Lewis' point is still valid. Liberal secularists have used Islam as a weapon against Christianity. Peter Hitchens has written with insight about this in 'The Rage Against God'.

17 March 2014 at 16:37  
Blogger William Lewis said...


Indeed. One finds this spirit of indiscriminate secularism pops up in all sorts of places!

Pope Benedict retracts on the basis that Islam is a (great) religion.

Dr Rowan Williams backs Sharia (Islam) in the name of social cohesion.

No discrimination to be found here.

17 March 2014 at 17:01  
Blogger Manfarang said...

There are a number of places in the sub-continent called Mirpur.
Asian-British interracial marriage began in Britain from the 17th century, when the British East India Company began bringing over thousands of lascars (mostly Bengali Muslim, but also from Goa and Ratnagiri District in Maharashtra) to Britain, most of whom married and cohabited with local English women and girls.

This later became an issue, as a magistrate of the London Tower Hamlets area in 1817 expressed "disgust" at how the local English women and girls in the area were marrying and cohabiting almost exclusively with foreign Indian lascar seamen. Nevertheless, there were no legal restrictions against 'mixed' marriages in Britain. Families with Indian lascar fathers and English mothers established interracial communities in Britain's dock areas.

This led to a growing number of "mixed race" children being born in the country, which challenged the British elite efforts to "define them using simple dichotomies of British versus Indian, ruler versus ruled." The number of women of colour in Britain were often outnumbered by "half-caste Indian" daughters born from white mothers and Indian fathers.
In India itself the mixed race Anglo-Indians were from marriages of European men to Indian women.

17 March 2014 at 17:20  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

William Lewis

Phew that's ok then!

Steve Appleseed

Liberal secularists have used Islam as a weapon against Christianity

With respect -

The separation of religion and state is the foundation of secularism.

It ensures that religious groups don't interfere in affairs of state, and makes sure the state doesn't interfere in religious affairs.

A person holding secular views may well be of any religion or none. There is no demographic body of representation that exists to promote Liberal Secularism whatever that term is supposed to mean.

17 March 2014 at 17:42  
Blogger Uncle Brian said...

William Lewis

Pope Benedict retracts on the basis that Islam is a (great) religion.

Did he retract? I remember a statement in which he said "mi ha dispiacciuto", an Italian formula for apologising but which means literally only "it has displeased me". I read his statement as being deliberately ambiguous, it could be read either as "I'm sorry I said it" or as "I'm sorry you were too stupid to understand what I was saying."

17 March 2014 at 17:46  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Manfarang @ 17:20

Re Mirpur, see DanJ0 18:32.

17 March 2014 at 18:05  
Blogger William Lewis said...

Uncle Brian

If the Pope chooses to dissemble then don't blame me for calling it a retraction.

My point was that his "clarification" included a declaration that respect was due to the Koran on the grounds that it is the basis of a (great) religion. Though, I agree, he did not say how much respect.

17 March 2014 at 18:21  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Explorer: "Your partner can stay if your partner has the skills is probably how it will go: a classist, rather than a racist or sexist, solution. Still intolerable for the race/class/gender lobby."

Hasn't Australia been running a points system around desired skills and competencies for years? I don't recall hearing a great outcry against it, or any sort of outcry really.

17 March 2014 at 18:36  
Blogger The Explorer said...


Yes. Not sure if it's quite the same thing we were discussing. ie. If you're an Australian and you marry a non-Australian without requisite skills, you have to emigrate to the partner's country. But then Australia, like America, has a lot of space.

A lot of things don't get the outcry they ought to. There are NO women on our road's refuse collection team! I have seen NO women drilling up the roads, or repairing gas and water mains. And yet the feminists keep quiet about this scandal!

17 March 2014 at 18:48  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Explorer: "Not sure if it's quite the same thing we were discussing. ie. If you're an Australian and you marry a non-Australian without requisite skills, you have to emigrate to the partner's country."

You've introduced some sort of 'classist' discrimination notion, and an alleged lobby to go with it. Australia, amongst other countries, uses skills and competencies as a criteria in its immigration policy. Is that actually 'classist', with its own lobby against it? I think you're stretching too far for something or other.

17 March 2014 at 19:03  
Blogger The Explorer said...


Not something I've introduced. Race/class/gender is the triple mantra of the West's equality lobby. The elimination of all three is the basis of modern education.

17 March 2014 at 19:18  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Oh come on, you're equivocating wildly now.

17 March 2014 at 19:20  
Blogger Inspector General in Ordinary said...

Explorer. “Race/class/gender is the triple mantra of the West's equality lobby. The elimination of all three is the basis of modern education”

You have it Sir. The Agenda as put forward by the cultural Marxists. The only mystery is why those who’ve bought into it have done so. The problem as such is why they spout theses truths. we know why DanJ0 is on side – it suits his {AHEM} interesting outlook on humanity. Not for him it’s prime purpose being to keep the strain going...

17 March 2014 at 19:44  
Blogger Lucy Mullen said...

@ Explorer

I think that the gender balance in heavy lifting/ pneumatic drilling is of somewhat underwhelming interest to anyone as so clearly a result of stronger external muscle; women similarly predominate in close work e.g embroidery and stitching, and in internal muscle work e.g childbearing, and in breastfeeding!!

I am still feeling galled by the general lack of sympathy, support, and prayer these poor Syrian Bishops feel that their people have received from their brothers and sisters in Christ in the West. Their pleas to us are harrowing, and whilst there are those who have paused and heard, I feel there has been insufficient of us giving not enough pause amongst the bustle of all those things crowding in for attention, and will pledge to remember them in private and in church prayers. I think one of the things that Francis McNutt's second book on Healing emphasises is that the more prayer by the more people the more heartfelt and the more persistent the more effect it has. Anyone care to compose a really beautifully worded prayer that we could use in the intercessions in worship for these people? I am feeling a bit brain dead so not adequate to compose well.

17 March 2014 at 19:56  
Blogger Che Yeoh said...

Heavenly Father,

Look down on your people in Syria who suffer because they bear the name of Your Son.
On this soil was Your apostle Paul converted and took Your word to the nations. Send them help and quickly and do not let the light of the seven lampstands which has shone in Syria from early times, be extinguished to dust.

17 March 2014 at 21:50  
Blogger Frater minor said...

Amen and amen

Frater minor

17 March 2014 at 22:30  
Blogger Manfarang said...

Che Yeoh
Croatian General Marinko Krešić confirmed that there are between 80 and 100 Croat mercenaries between the ages of 40 and 60 helping the Free Syrian Army.

18 March 2014 at 03:49  
Blogger Len said...

I am all for separating religion from the State .The State has done enough damage to religion.
The state is heading onward towards the inevitable head on crash with the creator of the Universe .I certainly don`r want to be on board when that happens!.

18 March 2014 at 08:56  
Blogger Lucy Mullen said...

@ Che Yeoh

Amen, indeed.

I note that Christian Solidarity Worldwide rejoices, as do we all for the release of 13 Greek Orthodox nuns and their 3 helpers by the Syrian rebels.

However I note with very grave misgivings that this was in exchange for 150 female prisoners held by the Syrian Government.

I cannot see that this makes higher profile Christians safer if each might now be seen as worth 9 prisoners' releases. Has anyone studied Maths or behaviour modification theory before agreeing these soft terms?

I also see that if you google Syrian Christians the second reference to come up is highly disturbing. I would not provide a link to it as some of the pictures are very deeply awful and nightmare material, and also I know nothing of how reputable the site is except that it clearly has many hits, and that doesn't make for automatic reliability! However it is seemingly recent material.

Really our F.O. needs to wake up and stop supporting barbaric slaughter. If they had used basic common sense they would have supported the man with the labradors and the Oxford education rather than the rough-shaven piratical ill educated cutthroats snarling about infidel dogs. No need for loads of briefing papers to recognise that, is there?

The vast majority of the common people of this country recognised that, just as they were unconvinced by the dodgy dossier, Thousands of inaccurate words, no matter how erudite they may seem, are less than useless if a few minutes of basic common sense of the common people turned out to be more accurate, as it most certainly did.

18 March 2014 at 10:21  
Blogger Kosta said...

The same happened in Syria, as Libya, as Iraq, as in Afghanistan and Pakistan; and while the masses in our AngloSphere engage in supposed intellectualism dissecting the ills among those others, we refuse to engage in any significant introspection.
"We", yes "we" have promulgated and perpetuated a long string of nut'ers to suite imperialist ends.

If you don't understand that "our" Queen Elizabeth's (Defender of the Faith) Nana was a smack dealer (see Opium Wars) and can't see a continuation of imperialist/colonialist abuse by our nations, then a good education certainly wasn't wasted on you.

The British invented concentration camps in India, experimenting on people to measure just how few calories a person could survive on before dying. The Eugenics movement started in USA. USA and UK are still a couple of the largest exporters, by value, of war machines and weapons in the world.
Americans even conducted horrific experiments on their own people. (see Tuskegee Syphilis Experiments)
The Brits even kicked out the inhabitants of an entire Commonwealth State, just so they could rent it out to USA as a military base (see Diego Garcia).
Western Imperialism has redrawn entire Nation Borders to suite their own purposes...
And "we" think that the only "gripe" people could possibly have against us is driven by their religion.

Perhaps "His Grace" could take a leaf out of His Lord's Book; fashion a whip from ropes, and start attacking those that place a $ value on life.
You think Jesus merely "lost his cool" or rather acted advisedly when he showed violence against a certain group. Not the dove sellers who he granted the opportunity to collect their goods and leave, or the cattle sellers, but the money changers: the issuers of currency.
It's time that all the Abrahamic faiths showed some rage toward those that seek to cash in ($) on human suffering. That's not just what Jesus would do... it's what he DID.
Otherwise, I dare say, we could stand accused of being little more than "Whited Sepulchres".

18 March 2014 at 13:58  
Blogger Len said...

Jesus condemned those who would corrupt the Word of God for their own gain...
Our British Government denies the Word of God and preaches hardly worth' making a whip' and giving them a good thrashing ?.
There are those who have corrupted the Word of God for the own gain who Jesus does oppose..As he did those who wanted to make a profit out of religion.
Those who have twisted God`s Word and turned it into 'a religion' to promote their own desires for wealth power and control over people, and in some cases to further the ambitions of Satan himself...

These religions are easily identified by their 'fruits'. They will want to gain lands, financial assets,and to' eliminate' all opposition by any means possible, and they will have as much contempt for their followers as for those they oppose.
Getting the picture?.

20 March 2014 at 10:35  
Blogger Rhibeor Taurlhann said...

Awful images, whether they be real or photoshopped.

But - and I quote the apparently reanimated corpse of a long dead archbishop (with my emphasis) ...

"Life was never meant to be easy: suffering and death are intrinsic to the human condition and the whole of creation. To be painlessly happy, and to conquer every form of discomfort and inconvenience, is the dream of modernity. But since it is unattainable in nature, we seek superficial means of anaesthetising and immunising ourselves to suppress our suffering, and by doing so rob ourselves of the deeper purpose of and passion for life."

A very succinct explanation of religion in general and Christianity in particular.

And should Christians be spared suffering just because they're Christians? Should they have to suffer nothing for their beliefs when those very beliefs tell them they're going to have to suffer for the beliefs they hold?

It's very sad to see evidence of such violence and suffering. But I can't see the difference between the plight of Christians martyred for their beliefs or Jews martyred for being Jewish or gays martyred for being gay. Except perhaps that Christians should EXPECT to suffer, because that's what their holy book tells them to expect.

So why do they whine so loudly when their own prophecies come true?

21 March 2014 at 10:00  
Blogger Lucy Mullen said...

@ Rhibeor Taurlhann
"So why do they whine so loudly when their own prophecies come true?"

That rather contradicts your earlier statement that these are awful images.

Those who were killed are not whining about it. They are in no position to, are they? So who are? Are you seriously complaining about our protestations of compassion for those suffering in these horrific images?

No one on this blog has whined. Not one soul. We have raised a matter that has been massively under-reported and expressed our horror and condemnation of barbaric torture and persecution. At this precise historical time the suffering of Syrian Christians is amongst the worst the world knows, but the world is strangely silent. Archbishop Cranmer is not, thank God.

You say "they" and despite your lip -service to the awfulness of these images your sympathies appear to be heavily with other groups and barely if at all with Christians. The suggestion that Christians like to suffer so they should not complain if they are tortured is heartless in the extreme, and close to a taunt. And shows theological ignorance as to the difference between God's permissive and perfect will. "Woe to those who commit these atrocities" is the authentic response of any who follow the God of Love.

Altogether a highly tasteless comment. But it is you who must live with a cold heart, and not those who have shown compassion, mercy, and lovingkindness to their suffering brothers and sisters..

21 March 2014 at 12:29  
Blogger Len said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

28 March 2014 at 19:07  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older