UK Islamists2
Extremism

BBC spins disaffected Muslims to deflect from emerging Islamists

 

The BBC published the results of a ComRes poll yesterday, which they spun in their own inimitable multiculturally-sunny and cloudless way. ‘Most British Muslims “oppose Muhammad cartoons reprisals“‘, they informed us, with verifiable quantitative analysis:

95% of British Muslims feel a loyalty to Britain.

93% say they should obey British laws.

73% said they had no sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.

This isn’t so bad, you might think, until you consider the statistical corollaries:

5% of British Muslims feel no loyalty to Britain.

7% say they should not obey British laws.

27% said they had sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.

Setting aside the 11% who “feel sympathy for people who want to fight against Western interests”, let us consider these percentages in real population terms. According to the 2011 census, there are 2,786,635 professing Muslims in the United Kingdom – that is, 4.4% of the total population who ticked the ‘Muslim’ box: the real number is probably quite a bit higher, but we shall stick with that verified factual statistic simply to avoid conjecture (and any notion of antithetical spin). This means:

139,332 of British Muslims feel no loyalty to Britain.

195,064 say they should not obey British laws.

752,391 said they had sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.

306,530 feel sympathy for people who want to fight against Western interests.

Now, certainly, feelings of sympathy for acts of terrorism is neither procurement nor incitement to do the same. But we are concerned here with hearts and minds; notions of allegiance, identity, fraternity and patriotism. It is probably safe to assume that the 139,332 British Muslims are part of those who do not believe in the Rule of Law and who also have sympathies for the perpetrators of the Charlie Hebdo massacre. Ideological sympathies are of little consequence unless or until they become acts of defiance and rebellion: the mouth speaks what the heart is full of, and limbs tend to do what the mind imagines.

So, potentially, there are around 139,332 British Muslims who, in their hearts and minds, hate everything that Britain represents (except, presumably, the compliant liberalism by which they are accommodated and free to express their views). And then we learn that, when asked if someone they knew from the Muslim community was planning an act of violence, 94% would report them (the BBC statistic), meaning 6% would not. So that’s 167,198 British Muslims who would not report a known planned act of terrorism. Notwithstanding that it only takes one Islamist bomb to cause carnage, presumably the BBC would like us to focus on thanking Allah for the 2,619,437 British Muslims who would be vigilant and sufficiently law-abiding to report a known plot to the police.

And, of course, we do thank God for them. It is among the most urgent of political tasks to address those matters of poverty and grievance which lead to educational alienation and social exclusion. It is an undeniable defilement of enlightened and reasonable Muslims that the peaceable majority are tarnished by the extremist beliefs, betrayal and potential treason of the minority. But this survey (complete data and methodology HERE), establishes beyond doubt that the minority are by no means negligible, and their quest for a British caliphate is not meaningless. For the number of UK Muslims who might seek to do us harm is now greater than the number in the British Army (regular and reserve). Perhaps, by deflecting from this alarming statistic, the BBC is actually doing us a great service of sustaining community cohesion and maintaining the Queen’s Peace.

  • mkey

    Precisely when will we acknowledge and respond to the self-evident fact that the treacherous, self-serving BBC is no longer fit for purpose and constitutes a danger to this country?

    • IanCad

      Allow me to point out Mr/Mrs/Miss/Master Mkey that it was the BBC who brought us these disturbing facts. Surely we can all do enough basic math to deduce that we have a problem. Much of which could be reduced by not acting so pussycat like regarding the Muslims. Good Heavens!! We outnumber the militants by hundreds to one.
      To all the BBC dissers out there: It is a national treasure. Maybe leftish in a superior sort of way; that’s OK, it always has been. I can’t speak to the TV side, but Radio4, Radio3 and the World Service are voices of enlightenment, liberty and hope, for a large part of the globe.

      • Anton

        The BBC WAS a national treasure. No longer. Abolish the license fee! That is something else that was reported on today…

      • mkey

        Like you I would miss the departure of Radio 3&4, but the careless and cynical way in which the BBC has abused its virtual monopoly over the intellectual and cultural life of this country is profoundly dangerous.

  • Pubcrawler

    I see they asked about Charlie Hebdo, but not the kosher supermarket murders. I would be very interested to know what the approval rate for the latter is.

    • Politically__Incorrect

      Considerably higher. Remember too, that many may not be answering honestly either.

      • Dominic Stockford

        Muslims are taught that dishonest answers are good if they further the cause of Islam.

  • Anton

    “It is an undeniable defilement of enlightened and reasonable Muslims that the peaceable majority are tarnished by the extremist beliefs, betrayal and potential treason of the minority.”

    What exactly is an “enlightened and reasonable Muslim”, Your Grace? Is it not the case that what you have in mind are those whom Muhammad called munafiqun – hypocrites? Have you read the Quran and Hadith recently?

    • Coniston

      Someone recently (on this website?) bemoaned the fact that many good people who called themselves Christians did not know much about Christianity, but thanked God that many good people who called themselves Muslims did not know much about Islam.

  • Uncle Brian

    “Isis burns thousands of books and rare manuscripts from Mosul’s libraries,” it says in The Independent.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-burns-thousands-of-rare-books-and-manuscripts-from-mosuls-libraries-10068408.html

    The next ComRes survey might include an additional question for British Muslims: Are you in favour of burning down the British Library?

    • prompteetsincere

      And what Book first among all others?

      • The Explorer

        To be fair to Muslims, probably ‘The God Delusion’. After all, the Bible has some bits that align with the Qur’an, even though it has distorted a lot which Allah needed to put right with the new (or original, if your credulity is boundless) revelation. Christians, after all, are half way to being Muslims, even if they’ve got the wrong God. With atheists, the starting point is further back.
        PS: Metal detector needed when reading this post.

        • prompteetsincere

          For the crucible of secular cynicism?

          • The Explorer

            Irony. Whenever I use it without identifying it, someone takes me for a Muslim apologist. I vary the codes according to my mood: FE, iron filings, ferrous content, metal detector needed.

    • The Explorer

      Between us, I’m sure we could come up with some cracking extra questions. Question 1: If you say you don’t believe in taqiyya, are you lying?

  • Johnny Rottenborough

    the 2,619,437 British Muslims who would be vigilant and sufficiently law-abiding to report a known plot to the police

    The number may be considerably smaller. A year ago, the Chief Inspector of Constabulary said: ‘There are some communities born under other skies who will not involve the police at all. I am reluctant to name the communities in question but there are communities from other cultures who would prefer to police themselves. There are cities in the Midlands where the police never go because they are never called. They don’t know what injustices are being perpetrated. It could be anything from low-level crime right up to murder. [Honour killings] are the most extreme example.’

    Other skies, the Midlands, honour killings… Who else but Muslims?

  • Politically__Incorrect

    It was almost unbelievable. Having just read on the DT that a quarter of British muslims support the CH attackers, I switched to the BBC site and saw the headline that most British muslims opposed them. The beeb is plumbing new depths of political correctness, not to mention Orwellian distortion of the truth. It’s a bit like saying that most people aren’t drug addicts so there is no problem with drug addiction. How can the BBC expect to be taken seriously after such a gross act of truth-twisting?

    • sarky

      Mind you I have seen reports on the number of christians in the uk spun beautifully on this site aswell. People will always cook the books to meet their agendas!!!!

      • Politically__Incorrect

        Except the books haven’t been cooked on this issue. The statistics are there for all to read. The BBC has simply spun the conclusions. I don’t know what kind of idiots they take us for. They seem to think we are as stupid as they are.

      • The Explorer

        Mind you, there’s confusion on censuses about what a Christian is. People tick the box because they know they aren’t Muslim or whatever.
        Those who defined themselves as Jedi knights were lumped in with Christians by the census officials. Strictly speaking, as pantheists, they should probably have been included with their closest equivalent, Hindus

        • Uncle Brian

          I don’t think the Hindus would like that, would they?

          • sarky

            Depends if they are star wars fans!!

          • The Explorer

            Maybe we need a ‘New Age: Pick n’ Mix Your Spirituality’ category.

      • Dominic Stockford

        I’d guess that maybe 2% of the population are in fact Christian, as biblically defined.

        • sarky

          Totally agree. Although some on this site try to justify all sorts of things by using the 50% shown on the census.

        • Dreadnaught

          2%? – ok it’s your guess; but if the question was asked do you want to live in a Christian Country or an Islamic Country, I think the vote for the former may just have a little more than the edge over the latter. It would be my vote without a doubt.

          • Dominic Stockford

            Yes.

        • The Explorer

          Do you think it’s always been about that percentage (as biblically defined) or has it declined?

          • Dominic Stockford

            I think that it has gone up and down over the years – there was [probably an increase after the reformation – but not a massive one, and now I think it is probably as low as it has been for some time. But then, we’re only talking (imho) max 10% ever.

          • CliveM

            Have you any evidence at all for the above? On what basis do you believe that at best only 10% of the population during, say the medieval times or the great Victorian revival, were properly Christian?

            At best this is a guess. For what it’s worth my ‘guess’ is that 90% plus during the medieval times had a living faith. There may have been error, but God help us if we have to be 100% correct in our theology, before we can be considered ‘proper’ Christians.

          • Dominic Stockford

            “Many are called but few are chosen.”
            (Jesus)

            So, not all are even called, and only a minority of those are chosen. I don’t believe Britain has any reason to be different. Especially when the dangerous deceits and heresies of the Church of Rome held sway here.

          • CliveM

            John 14:2 My Fathers House has many rooms
            Matthew 11: 28 – 30 come to me all you who are weary
            John 6:37 him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out

            As I say I don’t know if I am right. I do know that somewhere I will be in error. I just place my faith in Gods saving Grace. I believe that despite all the heresies that all the Churches have spouted, God still saves.

          • Shadrach Fire

            There is only one way to the Father and that is through Jesus Christ

          • The Explorer

            I think the Census is inaccurately high. Beyond that, I have no wish to judge. The danger is that the next step is pronouncements about who’s in Heaven or Hell. (Certain American fundamentalists, for instance, are confident that C S Lewis is in Hell for saying that we don’t actually know the fate of those from other religions and should leave it to God. And for being a Satanist and a Taoist.)
            The Medieval situation is an interesting one. If one looks at ‘The Canterbury Tales’, only the Knight, the Parson and the Ploughman are obvious Christians in the biblical sense.

          • CliveM

            Explorer

            There is little doubt the census figure will include cultural Christians. So I agree.

            For me the problem is exemplified by your CS Lewis example. Some people seem to believe you need to be theologically perfect before you can be a Christian. I think that’s human arrogance. I am not capable of a perfect understanding of the nature of God. I will be in error. The fall makes that inevitable. But actually what I suspect a lot of people really mean is “I disagree. I cannot be wrong, therefore you must be in deliberate error. Therefore you cannot be a Christian”.

            Was CS Lewis in error. Probably, but to be honest I can’t be certain where.

          • The Explorer

            The fundamentalists have got Lewis in Hell for writing about devils (Screwtape) and magic (Narnia) and for saying Plato was “an overwhelming religious genius” and among those pagans (Akenhaten the monotheist another one) whom Lewis hoped to find in Heaven with their errors corrected by the “Father of Lights”. But the real point of contention is Emeth the Calormene in ‘The Last Battle’ who has served Tash only to find he has really been serving Aslan.
            Lewis was an inclusivist, as I am. He thought some might know Christ without

          • CliveM

            I think we will all be surprised by who has been saved.

          • Bones

            I am a Christian and live my life as a Christian (not always successfully) but I do not put my religion or ethnicity on a Census form. Frankly I do not believe the the state needs to know either of these in order to plan and provide health and infrastructure services.
            In another time or place ticking the ‘wrong’ box could have serious repercussions.

          • The Explorer

            Amen to all that. There’s a lot the State doesn’t need to know, but – the more power we give it – the more the State wants to know. I bet the State longs for the day when it can implement the 1984-type telescreen. The technology already exists, but is irritatingly voluntary. Imagine a compulsory Skype set up in every home, monitored by those convinced they know what’s good for those they control, to ensure that nobody is praying, reading a Bible, telling a joke about the State or whatever.

          • The Explorer

            Thank you. IMHO, a much more realistic assessment than the Census.

    • IanCad

      For the life of me PI, I don’ t see what the problem is.
      The Telegraph states that about a quarter of UK Muslims are quite comfortable with the beheading brigade. Let me try hard now— mmmm- let’s see — that means three quarters of them are most likely peaceable types.
      The bad, bad BBC focused on that 75% leaving us to work out how many may be inclined to Jihad. Allowing for the educational shortcomings of this land, most should find no difficulty in figuring simple percentages. Even those who may lack this reasoning power still have the right to vote. Oh Dear!

  • The Explorer

    Auntie’s been at the liquor cabinet again.

  • Doctor Crackles

    The question: “do you agree with Jew shooting” should have been asked. Apart from the expected silence and taqqiya from some, enough could have responded. The mask is slipping, but it must be torn off.

    Your Grace, you are a supporter of Cameron, so in the context of your above piece how can you justify his weasel words here:

    Really tackling Islamophobia means making absolutely sure that no person is held back from living their life or reaching their goals simply because of the faith they follow.

    So yes – we’re delivering on Sharia-compliant student loans, Help to Buy deposits and entrepreneur funds.

    And yes – we aim to be the first country in the West to offer an Islamic bond: a Sukuk and I’m so proud of that.

    And let me make absolutely clear that, while I’m Prime Minister of this country, Halal is safe in Britain.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/prime-ministers-words-at-muslim-news-awards

    • Uncle Brian

      With just ten weeks to go, Our Nige will know how to make good use of that.

      • Doctor Crackles

        Let’s pray so Brian, let’s pray so.

    • Coniston

      And Cameron also says that it is because he is a Conservative that he supports same-sex marriage.

  • Demon Teddy Bear

    How long, O Lord, must we endure these aliens, settled among us by the treachery of our rulers?

    • Doctor Crackles

      From Isaiah 63

      The people of thy holiness have possessed it but a little while: our adversaries have trodden down thy sanctuary.

      We are thine: thou never barest rule over them; they were not called by thy name.

    • bluedog

      delete ‘treachery’, insert ‘staggering naivety’.

  • Albert

    Excellent post – very balanced.

    • Doctor Crackles

      Sadly, our enemies are not bound by notions of balance Albert.

      • Albert

        True, but if we are not balanced, we will make enemies of those who are not our enemies.

        • Doctor Crackles

          I am not saying we must become barbarians to beat barbarity, but we will have to be ruthless.

          • Albert

            The crucial word is that we must be just. If we are not that, then everything we do will be rooted in sin, and the sin will come back to bite us.

          • Doctor Crackles

            Are you saying we should do nothing?

            Regarding you comments, is there not a contradiction?

            Balance implies seeing both sides of an argument. It could mean needing to be seen to consider the opinions of others or the world.

            We are justified when we accept the gift of salvation through Jesus Christ. We reject the world upon the acceptance of this gift.

          • Albert

            I cannot for the life of me see why my point that our response must be just could be contradictory or in any way contrary to justification. Please explain.

  • Phil R

    It may a reluctance to report a crime due to unhelpful police encounters in the past,

    BTW. By my calculations my village should have three policemen if we assume the correct pro rata of ratable income and a cost per constable of £40K. Since I never see even one I would like to propose that we privatise the police and that the three policemen that we pay for and stationed in our village and under our control.

    As for upholding British law? I don’t think that many of us really agree with the vast majority or laws passed in the last few years. They are in the main laws designed to damage the community. That goes for whether they are Labour or Con/Lib. For some reason Con/Lib laws seem more damaging.

    Would we feel more empowered opting out of the law of the land. Setting up our own courts and making our laws locally and in the interests of people who live here? Would local decisions lead to less crime and local decisions on taxes lead to more prosperity?

    200 years ago a nearby village had its own court and jailhouse. I completetly understand how the Muslims feel and I think it may be time that we all call for a bit more autonomy (or a lot more autonomy) over laws, taxes and law enforcement.

    • sarky

      Think you have just given the thumbs up to sharia?????

      luckily most of understand that you cant just pick and choose what laws you can and can’t obey. Can you imagine the chaos there would be. The law is there for the greater good not just your good. I’m also pretty sure there is a bit in the bible about Obeying the laws of the land.

      • Phil R

        Britain functioned perfectly well when local courts enforced local laws.

        The situation we have now is that we have laws that we are expected to obey drafted over 250 miles away by people who’s values are on a different planet to people in our local area.

        • Dreadnaught

          So its ok for Sharia in Bradford then by this wonky logic?
          Local areas still have local by-laws: ‘BY’ being the nordic word for village, from the days of the Danelaw .

          • sarky

            Exactly what I was getting at. Unfortunately for phil, logic doesn’t come into it.

          • Phil R

            Put this in perspective.

            The number of Muslims will soon exceed the population of Wales. It may have already done so.

            Our Government is weak. They will have Sharia that is pretty much accepted if not acknowledged.

          • Dreadnaught

            Better get yourself down the mosqe now then, do you not?Seeing as how you have crystal balls.

          • Phil R

            Keep your head in the sand if you must

          • CliveM

            I bet they make walking difficult…..

  • AncientBriton

    Muslims need to know the truth about Christianity rather than their deluded notion of how to achieve eternal life via Islam. From the Birmingham Mail following the current Archbishop of Canterbury’s recent visit to St Alban’s Acadamy: “Answering a pupil who asked whether he would encourage him to convert from Islam to Christianity, the Archbishop said: ‘I am not going to put pressure on you, and I wouldn’t expect you to put pressure on me’.

    Disappointing to say the least. As one commentator put it in response to my Blog entry on the subject: “He should have said ‘There is no need to try and convert you. Remember that Jesus is a Muslim prophet, and Muslim prophets cannot lie, and Jesus said ‘I am the way the truth and the life’, so if you are a true Muslim, you will convert yourself to being a Christian!’ ” That’s more like it!

  • James60498 .

    The BBC is all about spin. All the time and every issue.

  • Dreadnaught

    As long as we are unable to practice freedom of speech this will for ever be the case.May be the proposed BBC watchdog Public Service Broadcasting Commission will do a better job than BBC trust. If I hear one more whine about three muslim girls going to Syria (over a week now) my foot will go through the screen. They will have radicalised me into a violent person – can I take them to Court?

    • Inspector General

      Dreadnaught, as we both know, we have precious little to agree about, but one’s clock radio is most likely to go soaring towards a bedroom wall if those 3 make the early morning news just one more time. It may have broken the BBC’s heart that they are now and most likely forever more going to be missing out on the wonderful multicultural solidarity in this country, but nobody cares a jot.

      • CliveM

        What I find interesting (about the only thing) about this saga, is how the Police are getting it in the neck. Expect them to be sued soon.

        ( eyes roll heavenwards!!)

        • Dominic Stockford

          Well of course it is their fault. After all, they encouraged him to go off to Syria, and Iraq, and murder people in a manner most horrific – we can all see this is obviously what happened.

          NOT

          • CliveM

            My point is about the airheads who jetted of to Turkey for a shag, not the psychopath commonly known a Jihadi John.

            More on him elsewhere!

          • Dominic Stockford

            EDIT

            Well of course it is their fault. After all, they encouraged them to go off to Syria, and Iraq, and marry people who murder people in a manner most horrific – we can all see this is obviously what happened.

            NOT

          • Inspector General

            One suspects there are pre shag duties to attend to first. Namely FGM. They are most likely looking forward to mid March, when they might bring their legs together…

          • CliveM

            They will be up the duff before the end of the summer. They will already be choosing the ‘suicide nappies’ for the child.

            I shouldn’t be frivolous. These stupid girls will be giving birth before the end of the year to the next generation of psychopaths. People will probably die because of them.

          • Inspector General

            Yes, Clive. They are actually born to the life, and will not feel alienated. They being of good muslim stock…

  • fred m

    You have ignored the issue of taqiyyah – how many answered honestly?

    • IanCad

      Never thought of that.

      • The Explorer

        Really; or are you practising taqiyyah? (Getting in training for the future.)

        FE present.

    • bluedog

      This is an important point. A worrying question occurs to this communicant; if a Muslim goes to court and swears on the Koran to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, does the licence of taqqiya still apply?

      • Doctor Crackles

        My understanding is that a Muslim could be deceptive in the furtherance of or protection of Islam and not be guilty of lying. Lying is forbidden to the Muslim. Taqiyya provides the cover for lying.

        Please see:

        http://www.raymondibrahim.com/islam/taqiyya-about-taqiyya/

      • The Explorer

        And what about a secular humanist who believes in evolutionary ethics? If lying helps survival, go for it. And what book would be sworn on, ‘The God Delusion’? If it’s the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth then the book sworn on would be as dodgy as the witness.

  • Inspector General

    Astonishing figures Cranmer, and this from just 2.8 million of them too. Lord knows what the future will bring, as we peaceful types try living with 5 million or even 10 million.

    The Inspector fears we will eventually drift into a de facto police state in the future. Not of design but by nature, and endure all the restrictions that will go with that. There seems to be no alternative. However the good news is that those of the same ethnicity of our police should be alright. The muslim is easily recognisable by his beard and racial features. It goes without saying that as we do what we must do to protect ourselves against his potential evil deeds, life is going to get a lot harder for these types in the future, the innocent as well as the guilty. We’ve already see an earlier version in the stop and search practice used on young male negroes. A most necessary line of conduct, due to the vast amount of crime associated with young male negroes. It is only of late the ‘human rights’ wallahs are laying off the police for doing this. Perhaps because they are now spending all their time stopping muslim terrorists from being extradited out of here.

    There is however another inevitability involved. The disaffection these people have will in due course be aggravated further by our actions. And the revenge they will promise themselves, all the greater.

    • bluedog

      ‘The Inspector fears we will eventually drift into a de facto police state in the future.’ You can tick that box already.

      The next step is a low level civil war as Islamic communities coalesce in specific locations and take political control of discrete localities for the imposition of Islamic rule including sharia. Just an extension of the principle of devolution, you understand.

      Will the British state tolerate this erosion of its sovereignty? How will it react?

      • Inspector General

        There won’t be jack done by the state until the car bombings start. And the low level civil war needs that to start off too. You see, we live in a free country, which was fine during our homogenous era. Now, the concept is to be used against us. FOR NOW.

      • Merchantman

        The state is running scared and has already embarked on this process. Greater Manchester is to be given 6bn to run its own NHS. watch this space for FGM on demand and other sharia compliant practices. Watch the Islamic birthrate soar.
        More dismemberment and devolved powers are promised.

        • bluedog

          Agreed. The political class simply cannot get their minds around the mentality of the ummah and their intent to use our freedoms maliciously. They will continue to appease until it’s too late. Another likely trend will be a sharp rise in vigilantism as disaffected youth on both sides take matters into their own hands. As the plod become armed as a matter of course, the killing of a Muslim youth could be the catalyst for civil unrest. Cue even more appeasement.

  • Inspector General

    Such disaffection really needs to be dealt with now. We need to encourage those who really have a hard time resisting the urge to kill us infidels to come forward and put themselves up for repatriation to their country of origin, actual or by family descent. It needs to be made attractive too, an ex gratia payment of several thousand pounds sterling to resettle them, on the expressed condition that they never again set foot in the UK for whatever reason whatsoever. It might seem an expensive way of dealing with the situation, but it is the cheaper option compared to a lifetime of surveillance these types will require otherwise.

    Naturally, we will also need a total ban on immigration from Islamic nations. No point doing the first only to find the numbers are not going down because they’re coming in through the back door, now is it?

    A racist policy? Well yes, of course it would be. Would the ordinary Joe in the street have a problem with that? Of course he won’t. He’s just as concerned about reaching a ripe old age as the rest of us. And the human rights meddlers? Well, hopefully by then, the European Court of Justice et al ‘will have no jurisdiction in this land’, so matter it will not what those aforementioned scallywags think of it. There would be nothing they could do other than wail.

  • Inspector General

    Gentlemen – on the question of what to do with the BBC. The BBC is beyond help, but that only goes for current affairs and the news service. Hive those off to independent producers and we will have the BBC as it used to be. Moderate of political voice.

    You might know that many years ago the BBC sold off its publication ‘Radio Times’ but the quality is still there, mostly. It was an opportune time to do that as well, as one has little doubt that had the sale not taken place, and the usual suspect of journalist joined them, the Inspector would have been faced with the unpleasant option of buying a TV listings akin to ‘Marxism today’ and he would not have done so, that’s for sure.

    Consequently, the Inspector is now in a position to announce to all who will listen to him, and beyond, the following…

    ”The BBC cannot continue in its current form. No Sir, it can not! Most are agreed with that, so the ultimate question of all is: Can the BBC take the necessary action regarding its only too obvious political bias, before the thing ceases to exist in any form whatsoever?”

    • Inspector, news from the pagan outreaches of the ‘Twilight Zone’. Jack took the liberty of sending the following message:

      “Andre, dear chap, greetings from Happy Jack. My visit will be brief. Just need to inform you our mutual friend, the Edwardian gentleman, has been barred from this site and all evidence of his presence removed. You are most welcome to visit his regular blog where you will receive a fond and warm welcome.”

      And received the following reply:

      “I sincerely Thank You for this information, kind sir! Barred, indeed? Preposterous! I could certainly think of a few other canditates far more suitable for that dishonour! Appalling news! I am blissful to have received Your redirection, though! Andre’ :)”

      • The Explorer

        Does that mean they realised Lord Charles was another version of the Inspector?

        • Inspector General

          There’s a point. Lord Charles’s fate on PN is not yet known, on account of the character having locked himself in his trunk from the inside and his refusal to come out. Temperamental sod really, which is why he would fit in with the inmates thereof so easily.

          • One imagines … cough … going ‘undercover’ on a site you have been barred from could be fraught with ethical and practical difficulties, Inspector. It is not a course of action recommended by Happy Jack.

      • Inspector General

        You’re a good type Jack. One was somewhat fearful how he would take the dreadful news. He’s keeping his chin up in public, but one has little doubt that thereafter he threw himself to the ground and wept uncontrollably…

        • He’s a bonny chap, Inspector. He’ll pull through.

  • Inspector General

    “And, of course, we do thank God for them. It is among the most urgent of political tasks to address those matters of poverty and grievance which lead to educational
    alienation and social exclusion. “

    No, Cranmer. No. You can’t say that. But it is very western of you, to seek out a reason for their disaffection. You cannot explain away the jihadists so easily, when the reason all along is that they are muslims by blood. To do that you would have to adhere to notions of racial differences. So you won’t.

    • bluedog

      This is pure cr*p, Inspector. To suggest that propensity to accept Islamic belief is predestined (Hello, Carl) by racial origin defies rational belief and historical precedent. What of the many Christians who were forcibly converted to Islam from 632 Anno Domine onwards? What of the Pakistani Christians who continue to hold out against intolerable pressure and mortal threat? What of Michael Nazir Ali? What of the millions of newly converted Chinese Christians who reject Confucianism and Communism to accept Christ? How do they fit in to your model? Come on, old fruit, you can do better than this.

      • Inspector General

        Steady on Bluedog, you’ll even convince yourself of your argument the way you are going on. It’s not a question of accepting Islamic belief, but that of being so inclined by inherent nature to be of such a disposition that Islam is the religion for you. For example, Pakistani hill tribesmen really took it to heart, and we have their descendants with us now.
        Islam has not changed over 1400 years. Ask yourself why. Here’s the answer. Nobody who adhered to it wanted it to change. Now, what does THAT tell you…

        • bluedog

          ‘Now, what does THAT tell you…’ That uneducated hill-tribesmen living a semi-nomadic lifestyle in the Hindu Kush may not be exposed to the enlightenment of His Grace’s blog.

          • Inspector General

            You seem to have knocked your king over, old chap…

          • bluedog

            Err, no.

          • Inspector General

            Get back on all fours, wayward hound. One does not require your unconditional surrender. Just your surrender. Negotiate at will, but do be humble about it….

          • bluedog

            A cursory look at the practices of the Taliban will explain why intellectual adventurism is potentially terminal.

          • carl jacobs

            Great Moments of the Inspector in History:

            General “Inspector” Pakenham after the Battle of New Orleans. January 8,1815

            One does not require your unconditional surrender, General Jackson. Just your surrender. Negotiate at will, but do be humble about it…

      • carl jacobs

        Hello, Dog 🙂

    • The Explorer

      If Jihad John has been correctly identified, his parents own a £1 million house and he has a degree in computing. Poverty and lack of educational opportunity (the traditional Utopian explanations for evil) are not the problem here.

      • Dominic Stockford

        In which case, the story must be that he has been corrupted by terrible influences on him. For the idea that someone could follow an evil religion, and indeed, be evil themselves, is simply not allowed any more. Even the CofE has denied Satan.

        (not that I agree with any of the above)

        • CliveM

          I don’t think you understand, these people are victims of western oppression. They can’t be held responsible for their own actions.

          You fascist reactionary!!

          • Dominic Stockford

            me, smiles, wanly…

          • CliveM

            Personally considering who uses these expressions, I’d be flattered to be called it.

          • Dominic Stockford

            Sadly, I think you are probably right in that.

          • The Explorer

            Metal detector needed here, I think.

          • CliveM

            ??

            Apologies Explorer sometimes (mainly?) I’m a bit slow. Can you explain?

          • The Explorer

            Irony. I saw it this time.

          • CliveM

            And I didn’t!

        • The Explorer

          You mean the BBC doesn’t think Christianity is an evil religion?
          Elements in the C of E have denied God. Denial of Satan follows as a matter of course.

        • Uncle Brian

          We have seem to have acquired an eleventh commandment,
          “Thou shalt not endanger community cohesion.” But since Muslims are not subject to the Ten (or Eleven) Commandments, they’re allowed to endanger it as much as they like.

  • bluedog

    Your Grace, your communicant would like to propose that your blog establishes a new award, replete with gala award dinner and red carpet opportunity for WAGs (and ‘partners’ for those who bowl from the other end) to show off their gowns.
    The announcement by advocacy group CAGE that Jihad John is a regular guy who never pulled the wings off flies or strangled hamsters when at kindergarten takes lunacy to new depths. Surely there is scope for this type of NGO to be subjected to the sort of opprobrium so lovingly offered by the likes of Stonewall.

    • Inspector General

      Magnificent news about the true identity of John being known, what!
      Now that we know who he is, we can kill him. What do think of that, man’s best friend. A fellow is up to his suds in washing up right now, so could you explain what CAGE is…

      • bluedog

        CAGE is all about empowerment and resistance to the oppression of the state through its narrative and other tools including its security services. http://www.cageuk.org/

        • Inspector General

          Thanks for the link, bluedog. So CAGE is an organisation run by brown people in the interests of brown people who were caught doing things inspired by a certain religion. Say no more!

          • Pubcrawler

            The CAGE chap who’s been all over the airwaves just now has what might be called an interesting past:

            http://order-order.com/2015/02/26/cage-spokesman-at-extremist-rally-support-the-jihad-of-our-brothers/

          • Inspector General

            Seems rather racially different to the rest of us. Surely, that cannot matter though…

          • Doctor Crackles

            Shocking, BUT how come he has the position he does and why has he been courted? Why are the authorities promoting him?

          • Pubcrawler

            It’s a narrative thing.

          • CliveM

            Seemingly it’s MI5 fault that this individual gets his jollies by chopping off people’s heads. It would appear they spoke to him!!

            I wonder if we branded a cross onto these peoples foreheads and dropped them off somewhere in Syria, IS would do us all a favour?

  • Shadrach Fire

    There is no such thing as a reasonable Muslim. There are only Muslims who deny large parts of Mohammeds writings.

    • Linus

      And of course all Christians spurn shellfish and mixed fibre clothing, force their wives to cover their hair and shut up in church and never, ever get divorced.

      Only hypocrites criticize others for doing exactly what they do. If you follow only those parts of your religion that suit you, are you any better than any Muslim?

      • sarky

        You forgot stoning adulterers!

        • The Explorer

          We’ll make a Christian of you yet! Think what fun you could have!

          • DanJ0

            Almost none if one ends up at the extreme protestant end, or lots followed by worthless confession if one ends up at the lax Catholic end.

          • The Explorer

            One gets the sense, from the frequent references, that Sarky hankers after the chance to throw stones. (Hell, think what gave the Marquis de Sade his kicks.) I’m giving him the opportunity.

          • CliveM

            Nonsense you’ve clearly never been to a really good bible study……….

          • DanJ0

            Actually, I did well over a year with the Jehovah Witnesses visiting my home. And they know their own version of the bible pretty well. They were not very happy when I refused their invitation to Kingdom Hall at the end, despite my warning them at the start that they had no hope of converting me and that I was only interested in what they were all about.

          • CliveM

            I thought it was the same bible. But they are only allowed to study certain parts of it. So they don’t get confused.

            Maybe wrong however!

          • The Explorer

            Wrong. It’s an amended version. They rely on victims not to have the original to hand for purposes of comparison. Christ is the archangel Michael. Stuff like that.

          • CliveM

            Thank you for clarifying.

        • Linus

          And gays. But as Sad Jack and his cronies do their best to accomplish with words what the Jews did with rubble, stoning is a tradition that Christians have kept very much alive.

          • sarky

            Add in atheists and we can all get stoned together 🙂

          • William Lewis

            Sarky and Linus: rainy day women.

          • The Explorer

            Are you advocating drug legalisation?

          • sarky

            JOKE!!!!!!

      • The Explorer

        De Gaulle is president of France.
        De Gaulle is not president of France.
        In what sense are both statements true? Discuss.

        • Linus

          Rules are rules, except when they become inconvenient and are conveniently forgotten.

          • The Explorer

            So de Gaulle is still running things and people are ignoring the fact? Hollande is de Gaulle with glasses?

          • Linus

            You’re drawing an extremely poor parallel. Men and laws are not comparable. Men live and die. God’s laws are supposed to be eternal. Except the one you want to change, of course.

            If you can change one law, you can change any of them. If shellfish are suddenly acceptable, why not gay marriage?

            Drawing arbitrary distinctions between dietary and moral requirements is just a way of changing what you want to change while leaving the prohibitions you like sacrosanct. But the smallest change of the most insignificant rule means the whole lot is up for grabs.

            God’s word is clearly NOT eternal, just certain parts of it. Who defines those parts, by what authority, and why should the rest of us listen to them?

          • The Explorer

            Below the age of eighteen you can’t buy fireworks, or murder people (Although the law says you can have sex at sixteen and get your explosions that way.)
            After eighteen, you can buy fireworks. (Although you still can’t murder people.) A previous guideline no longer applies. What’s the problem?

          • Linus

            Same-sex marriage is illegal if you’re under the age of 16. After that age, you can marry someone of your own sex provided they’re also over 16. A previous guideline no longer applies. What’s the problem?

          • The Explorer

            By the law of the land, none.

          • Linus

            The law of the land adapts to changing circumstances. The law of God is supposed to be eternal. Except when it’s not, of course…

          • The Explorer

            You’ve conceded the principle that what is forbidden at one age can become permissiblel at another.
            Who says all God’s laws have to be eternal? God doesn’t. “A new law I give unto you.” Take it up with Christ

          • Linus

            And you’ve conceded the principle that God’s laws are not eternal. Any or all of them are negotiable and if enough people want to change them, then clearly the Holy Ghost must be making its will known through them and those who resist are just being Pharisees.

            In other words God changes his mind in line with human wishes. So it isn’t really God’s law. It’s human law.

          • sarky

            Two words ‘women bishops’.

          • The Explorer

            Another two words. The Fall.

          • sarky

            Best drama on bbc 2 for years!!!

          • The Explorer

            Not quite the one I had in mind, which takes its title from T S Eliot.
            But I concede Eliot’s point about the difference between the dream and the reality.
            Think of a school where the kids decide the curriculum and make the rules. Neill’s Summerhill, for example. It starts with council meetings, and ends with savages decapitating rabbits rather than attending lessons.

          • sarky

            Thought they already did? (White coller crime anyway)

          • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

            Not many of those in France…

          • The Explorer

            Not all. Remember, I said murder was not age restricted, Other ongoing prohibitions, too.
            Change by consensus derives from Epicurus, not from Christ.

          • Linus, You wrote, God’s word is clearly NOT eternal, just certain parts of it. Who defines those parts, by what authority, and why should the rest of us listen to them?

            Answer : God the Holy Spirit in the NT clearly defines the OT civil and dietary laws as temporary. The Lord Jesus Christ also plainly reaffirms the OT moral laws as of abiding validity in the Sermon on the Mount, as do the apostles throughout the NT. So the moral law of God is eternal. All will be judged by it.

            On the Day of Judgement the lost will be condemned, not for having eaten shellfish, but for lying, stealing, adultery and harbouring hatred in their hearts.

          • Read Act chapter 10 (Acts of the Apostles, its a book in the Bible) where it is clearly put beyond doubt that Jewish dietary restrictions were ended by God himself. They never applied to Gentiles any more than other Mosaic ritual and ceremonial requirements.

            On the other hand, you may prefer to continue trotting out the ‘shellfish hypocrisy’ meme, and there is something to be said for this. Its a clearly visible marker to identify people who are either completely ignorant of New Testament teaching or whose thinking about God and Christ is so inflamed by hate that facts are irrelevant.

          • Linus

            Ah, another hysterical tantrum thrower who vowed to ignore me forever rises yet again to the bait, I see. And here I was thinking I was anathema … but I see that a certain sort of garrulous and self-important Christian can’t cope with that concept. If they keep on ignoring me, who will they vomit their hatred and bile all over?

            Anyway…

            What is the New Testament if it’s not humans changing the law?

            You say it’s God, but the book didn’t descend from on high in a cloud of holy flame. It was written by humans. For humans. They took an earlier book, at least part of which was claimed to be of divine origin (tablets of stone and all that…) and altered it to suit their new sensibilities.

            So where was God in all of that? Can we see his hand in the work of disparate scribes subsequently modified by a group of old men who came together and decided amongst themselves what was God’s work and what wasn’t and then declared it holy by self-appointed fiat?

            If you believe in the New Testament, you believe in the power of Man to decide that what they say is actually the word of God. So what’s to stop any group getting together and declaring that the Holy Ghost is directing them to give us an Even Newer Testament, one that allows for women priests and bishops, divorce, extra-marital sex and equal marriage.

            If God changed his mind once, why can’t he do it again? Or did he not change his mind because he has no mind to change (given that it’s unlikely he exists and all…) and is the New Testament no

          • The Explorer

            Your first five words: the rage of Caliban seeing his face in the glass.

          • “hysterical tantrum thrower”; “garrulous and self-important”; “vomit their hatred and bile”.

            Track his expressions – they reflect a subtext revealing his perceptions about self, others and reality. Read his comments on ‘Ecumenism of Blood’. They are extremely revealing.

          • CliveM

            Truly HJ I think there is more to pity then despise.

          • Jack despises his views. Linus would prefer to be despised as a person as it serves as a cover for his despair.

          • CliveM

            As I have said, I think he is badly damaged individual. Which is a pity because he has a lot of gifts that could be used for good.

            I think he just doesn’t understand why his comments on the killing of Christians by IS are so objectionable. Damaged.

          • The Explorer

            He will read hysteria into calm and measured statements. No doubt, should he read it, that would be his verdict on this one. At the same time, he has a very agile mind and he can be extremely witty. (I totally agree re ‘Ecumenism’.)

          • It is said Hitler was charming and witty and he had an agile mind too.

          • The Explorer

            I’m sure the same applies to Satan. (except for jokes at his own expense). if you will permit a quotation from Luther, “The devil, that prowde spirit, cannot bear to be mocked.”

          • And it’s one weapon every Christian should have in his armoury. Jack has noticed the ‘progressives’ he’s been fraternising with hate it. One new phrase, learned of late, Jack will be using is:

            Who am I to Fudge?”

          • Anton

            God didn’t change his mind. The point is that ancient Israel was a nation and needed a code of law whereas the church is a voluntary organisation and therefore requires a different constitution. No contradiction.

          • The Explorer

            Linus doesn’t have a Bible or a Qur’an (as he said on an earlier thread), so he is not in a position to refer to either. That doesn’t hinder him from making pronouncements about them.
            Myself, I think it’s useful whn talking about a film to have seen it first.

          • William Lewis

            Linus doesn’t like anything to get in the way of the narrative of his existential angst.

          • The Explorer

            I seem to recall an incident in a Graham Greene novel. A leper colony, and a cure for leprosy found. One of the nuns says, “Isn’t it dreadful, Father.”
            Solutions are no fun. In fact, solutions are a threat.

          • CliveM

            He could still google it.

            But then he might have to admit being in error.

          • The Explorer

            “Ignorance is like a delicate, exotic fruit. Touch it and the bloom is gone.” ‘The Importance of Being Earnest’, and Linus’ strategy for dealing with sacred books. Keep ignorance intact, at all costs: it’s less threatening than the reality.

          • He’s well versed in a version of Catholicism – don’t underestimate this. That’s why he’s so hateful towards Christianity; his conscience can’t quite get over this early awakening. Plus, he’s ‘troubled’.

          • The Explorer

            I don’t discount his knowledge of Catholicism, or his intelligence. Both are formidable.

          • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

            As is his knowledge of the London tube – always gets off two stops beyond Barking…

          • It’s the standard meme of ‘progressive Christians’ – along with: “Who am I to judge?”

        • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

          Neither is true: De Gaulle was president of the French Republic, not France. Would have thought Linus would have spotted that…

          • The Explorer

            He probably did, but was focusing on refuting the chronology.
            In ‘Hamlet’, Claudius says “Do it, England.” (Murder Hamlet). We might argue that this is incorrect, ‘England’ is a king, not a geographical location.

          • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

            Yes, our present queen referred to her grandfather George V as Grandpapa England…

          • The Explorer

            So I was using ‘France’ in a similarly broad way. (And you know how Linus is about monarchy: he doesn’t like being reminded that the French haven’t got any.)

          • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

            Yes I see that…but a president isn’t usually referred to as ‘France’ or ‘Germany’ in a proprietorial sense, only monarchs are. But you raise another point – what does Linus like?

          • The Explorer

            When somebody said, “Nice day,” de Gaulle said, “Thank you.” O f course he was France; he wasn’t the equivalent of a mere monarch.
            What does Linus like.? 1. Brit bashing. 2. God bashing. (Even though God doesn’t exist.) Remind Linus that God is an Englishman, and he’s in Heaven. (Or would be, if Heaven existed for him.)

          • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

            I was being technical…

      • Inspector General

        Do drop the homosexual victimisation Linus. At least you get to live with us around…

      • Courteously, the shell fish and mixed fibre injunctions were civil laws of the Old Testament theocracy which came to a final end in AD 70. The New Testament plainly tells us that these laws, useful in their day, were temporary and have now passed away, and the Old Testament itself anticipated their passing with the Messiah’s coming. The moral law, however, as enshrined in the 10 Commandments, stands for all time. Toxins readily deposit themselves in shellfish and wool and linen never combine well.

        • Dominic Stockford

          Exactly – though dear Linus won’t agree – no matter how logical the facts are.

          • Inspector General

            ‘Dear Linus’ is crawling around for sympathy alms, the blasted beggar…

          • Pubcrawler

            Yup. Casting pearls and all that, I fear.

        • Linus

          Marriage is a civil law. It’s now been amended to include all couples.

          So when is the Church planning on updating its laws to reflect the new civil reality?

          What you’re saying is that only certain parts of the bible – the parts you define – are God’s word. The rest you can change as you like.

          Convenient, no?

          • William Lewis

            Christians profess to follow Christ, they believe His word literally is the word of God, and Christ clearly defines marriage as between one man and one woman.

          • Linus

            Unless you’re an Anglican and you want a divorce…

          • William Lewis

            He speaks of divorce too.

          • Old Blowers

            Proverbs 28:1
            The wicked flee when no one pursues, but the righteous are bold as a lion.

            Think the reason the french libertines find it so hard to grasp the things of God is that they are condemned by their actions, especially during the vigorous white flag waving on 25 June 1940,(The wicked flee when no one pursues,) Whereas there is a reason why there are 3 lions as our national emblem (but the righteous are bold as a lion.) and not a limp Coq!!!!

            Touche mon lâche ami

          • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

            Well they used to have the fleur-de-lys, which was/is a symbol of the Virgin…but then all that changed in 1789

          • Dear Linus, amicably, marriage is an aspect of God’s abiding moral law ordained at the creation. It only becomes part of civil law secondarily. All the Bible is God’s word, but revelation to the time of Christ was progressive. A prophecy is no less God’s word because it has now been fulfilled. We no longer worship at the physical Temple in Jerusalem (which was once God’s law) because Christ, the true temple, has now fulfilled that prophetic symbol. The Old Testament theocracy with its civil laws was always only preparatory to the appearing of Christ. Redefining marriage breaks God’s moral law which is valid for all time.

          • Anton

            We take the view that God outranks the State and we are not planning to recognise gay marriage even if it costs us.

          • Linus

            It won’t cost you unless you decide to break the law.

            Whether you do or not is your choice.

          • Anton

            Agreed!

      • The Explorer

        Linus keeps bringing up this clothing thing, even after it’s been explained to him. I suspect he has a craving to wear wool.
        Try coming back as a sheep in your next existence, Linus. As an added bonus, Peter Singer will probably have prevailed by then, and sex with sheep will be legal.

        • No, no …. Linus wants to be a penguin as they (allegedly) practice same sex ‘pair bonding’ and then hatch the eggs left in abandoned nests.

        • Martin

          It gets so tedious! You’d think they’d actually examine what they are challenging in order to make the best case.

      • Anton

        The Christian religion does not require those things as is made clear in the New Testament. There is more to the difference between Christians and Jews than opinions of Jesus.

      • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

        ‘…are you any better than any Muslim?’
        Yes, dear Linus…

    • Dominic Stockford

      Hmmm, well, hmmm. There’s a whole thesis in there.

      • The Explorer

        Try writing it at Al- Azhar University in Cairo.

        • Dominic Stockford

          It depends how much they want the tourist trade and all the lovely dosh it brings them. They might just let me…

  • Inspector General

    Has anybody else noticed, that apart from the marvellous Mrs Proudie, we are now totally devoid of regular female input on this site. One does miss the mouse woman.

    Could it be that the tabloid disqus is putting them off. How about it Cranmer, can you increase the length of the lines by some magic…

    • There is no limitation. In any case, why should women communicants be unable to communicate succinctly?

      • Inspector General

        Well, it’s not as it was Cranmer. Your last software allowed reassuringly large width of text to appear. More to the academically minded than the ‘Sun’ reader. Sure you’ll agree. It was not a criticism, you know, but a mere observation.

        Anyway, the reason the ladies don’t want to appear is no doubt that they have more important issues to attend to. Phone yapping and housework comes to mind…

        • Or on this occasion, Inspector, two hours of needlework. Unfortunately it was suturing of skin lacerations on a dog, rather than fancy embroidery. Not quite as elegant a pastime as silk-stitched altar cloths 🙂

          • Inspector General

            Blimey. a woman! On this site, of all others…

        • Martin

          IG

          Of course if indenting is used to indicate threading the width of the comment will naturally become narrower. Although I recall in the grand old days the CompuServe software allowed a much greater width than the mere landscape screen we are now tied to. Some good features have been lost with the advance of technology, sadly.

          • CliveM

            Martin

            Makes no difference if all you’ve got is a smart phone!

        • Cressida de Nova

          “Personne n’est plus arrogant envers les femmes, plus aggressif ou meprisant qu’un homme inquiet pour sa virilite.”
          Simone De Beauvoir. This surely applies to your blatant misogyny!

          • Inspector General

            Didn’t understand a damn word there. Not that’s it’s in French, but the high pitched whine it came in is quite beyond a man’s hearing.. Anyway, off you go, your coven awaits your presence…

          • Cressida de Nova

            All educated people speak French…since you’re not, I’ll translate.
            No one is more arrogant towards women ,more aggressive or contemptuous than a man anxious about his virility….spiteful old man !

        • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

          A diocese doesn’t govern itself, dear Inspector…

    • The Explorer

      With the return of Manfarang, I was thinking of who’s still missing. David H, Rambling Steve, Seanrobsville (we’re lacking a Buddhist perspective), and as you say, non mouse. Flossie seems to have changed her name to Gill.

      • CliveM

        Rambling Steve is on under his real name.

        • The Explorer

          Glad to hear it. Don’t tell me, I’ll try to work it out.

          • CliveM

            See above!

          • The Explorer

            Right. There’s a big clue.

          • CliveM

            Sorry for not being clearer. Truth is I couldn’t remember his family name!

        • True. If in doubt, check out my YouTube videos from the orchard, not to be confused with the other Stephen Hayeses one of whom is a martial arts instructed, another a US political commentator.

      • Uncle Brian

        The Roman delegation lost one of its leading lights when Ars Hendrick disappeared. Unless he, too, is still in our midst under a different name?

        • William Lewis

          I always thought he was a thoughtful and compassionate contributor.

          • Pubcrawler

            Likewise Old Jim, someone else we haven’t heard from for a good while.

          • Uncle Brian

            Old Jim is another Roman who hasn’t disappeared altogether but is seen all too rarely.

          • The Explorer

            Except when he told Sidney Deane what he’d do to SIdney’s mother.

          • William Lewis

            I don’t recall and dare not ask.

          • Uncle Brian

            It’s news to me. It must have been on one of my days off. Sidney must have posted something even more gross than usual to get someone as thoughtful and considerate as Ars Hendrick wound up like that. Was it soon after that that Ars dropped out of sight?

          • Uncle Brian

            Sorry, Explorer, my question (below) ought to have been addressed to you. Was it soon after the Sidney Deane incident that Ars Hendrick dropped out of sight?

          • The Explorer

            It was very funny (SIdney didn’t think so, though), but unexpected As I recall it was about mid career for Ars on the old-style blog. There were more run ins with Sidney that I vaguely remember (Sidney came back in high dudgeon), and one with DanJ0, after it.
            I know some people had reservations about the security of Disqus when HG’s new blog was being mooted. Ars may have been one of those, but I really can’t remember. (Whereas his comment about Sidney’s mum was unforgettable.)
            I thought Ars was like David Husselll and Ivan: one of those who had simply not made the transition. Ivan, though, has since commented once or twice on the new-style blog, but Sidney seems to have deserted us.

          • Uncle Brian

            Thanks, Explorer. Can I ask you a favour? For those who of us who missed it on first release, and since you say it is “unforgettable”, would you care to let us in on the secret?

          • The Explorer

            Having said “unforgettable”, I don’t remember the exact wording: my recent life-and-death experiences in and out of hospital having somewhat blurred what happened when..
            But as a loose paraphrase, something about his mum being the town bicycle and needing to be ridden hard, and how he’d have taken a detour on a business trip to give her a good shagging. (Not because she was desirable, but to show his contempt for Sidney.) That sort of thing.

          • Uncle Brian

            OK, thanks, Explorer. I’m sorry I missed it at the time!

          • The Explorer

            Sidney seems to have abandoned us. Pity we can’t contact him with an insult he can’t refuse.
            David H has posted as ‘David’ on the latest thread. As soon as I read his comment I wondered how I could have missed something so obvious. Anyway, thanks for the clarification.

    • Inspector, think outside of the box and do not become a prisoner of ‘binary concepts’. Assume the mantle of a different gender. There are 51 to choose from.

      http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/02/15/the-complete-glossary-of-facebook-s-51-gender-options.html

    • CliveM

      Sister Tiberius makes the occasional appearance.

      • Inspector General

        In this man’s life, lady luck makes the occasional appearance. Oh that she was more regular…

        • CliveM

          Yes it would be good if she visited us all a bit more regularly.

          • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

            Put the kettle on…

      • Tsk, Sister Tiberia hates that misuse of her name, Clive.
        She once took HJ to task over it.

        • CliveM

          Oh dear, thank goodness for the edit button!

          Or I could blame predictive texts?

          • Now I’m wondering just what I was being called before the timely edit button…. 🙂

          • CliveM

            Oh don’t know what HJ is talking about ( looks innocent) :0)

          • You also have to bear in mind, Clive, that whatever HJ called me was probably an attempt to annoy. Also probably succeeded. 🙂

          • How judgemental …….

          • Agreed, HJ. How many decades of the Rosary do you think appropriate on this occasion? 🙂

          • Umm … just one good Hail Mary and an Our Father and please remember Jack in your prayers, Sister.

          • Always, Jack 🙂

          • The Explorer

            You make that sound like a bad thing.

          • CliveM

            HJ is innocent I made a spelling error! He simply pointed it out.

            Poor HJ, always misunderstood.

          • Clive, I was referring to the fact that at the time HJ referred to me as Tiberius first, he was still in his earlier feathered incarnation, not the mild-mannered lemon with a hat we have all grown used to. :). At that time, ‘the bird’ used to rarely get the benefit of the doubt off anyone 🙂

          • CliveM

            Ahh apologies, Doh!

          • DanJ0

            Not all, actually. I still talk to the hand working the puppet. Or, rather, I don’t for the most part.

          • The Explorer

            You’re in great form today, DanJ0!

          • Happy Jack

            You miss Dodo, admit it.

            “Unrequited love is the infinite curse of a lonely heart.”
            (Christina Westover)

          • Happy Jack

            ” …. the mild-mannered lemon with a hat we have all grown used to.”

            Grrrr ………..

          • Who appears to have metamorphosed to a very un-mild mannered blueberry with a hat…

          • Happy Jack occasionally experiences anger and turns blue in the face.

          • CliveM

            I think he prefers being called a Satsuma………….,!

          • William Lewis

            Avi and I thought it was a squashed grapefruit.

          • CliveM

            I suppose it depends on how orange you think he is!

          • William Lewis

            He seems to be going through a blue period at the moment.

          • The Explorer

            Linus misunderstands him dreadfully.

          • CliveM

            I think for all his intelligence, Linus misunderstands a lot of things.

          • The Explorer

            Now, now, no dissension in the Catholic ranks. Leave that to us Protestants.

          • Sister Tiberia, good to hear from you. Clive named you Tiberius. A fowl error, as you may recall.

        • CliveM

          Thanks for the warning.

    • The Explorer

      Marie 1797. Magnolia.

      • CliveM

        Busy mum hasn’t been busy on here for a while?

        • William Lewis

          Perhaps they are all too busy. Now we know how the Ents must have felt 🙁

          • CliveM

            We should have an Ent Moot?

          • The Explorer

            This thread is one, after a fashion. Things just move a bit faster.

          • CliveM

            All to hasty…….

        • The Explorer

          I i9ntended an illustrative list, not a detailed one.

      • And the inimitable Cressida de Nova.

        • Cressida de Nova

          Hi Darling !

    • Hi inspector

      Well you’ve still got me

      • The Explorer

        Hannah, I would have mentioned you to the Inspector; only I thought your presence went without saying, and he would remember in due course. (I think he’s a little preoccupied at the moment by the non-co-operation of Lord Charles, and by being thrown off ‘PInk News’.)

    • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

      I rather like being marvellous…

  • Old Blowers

    I see the BBC has now switched to the suffering of Gaza 6 months on, to take the heat off the poor three ‘radicalised’ muslim teenagers…given as a reason/excuse how the innocence of sweet foreign/birthed in Britain muslim children is taken from them by the satanic Israeli’s and the west’s continued support of this horrid democratic zionist state.

    They really must lose their licence fees…and the sooner the better

    • Pubcrawler

      They’re not getting mine (perfectly legally).

      What bothers me is the proposal to replace it with a universal household levy, whether you have a telly or not.

  • Linus

    All this commie pinko left wing propaganda is just unacceptable! How dare the BBC say that 75% of opinions expressed constitutes a majority! Can’t they count?

    In rabid right wing mathematics 100 minus 75 clearly adds up to a majority, therefore most Muslims in the UK want you all dead.

    As for that minority of 75%, well clearly they and their good will count for nothing. It’s all about the majority of 25% and their murderous propensities, isn’t it?

    Something tells me they’d still be in a majority in your head even if they only constituted 2.5% or even 0.25%. Bogeymen are conspicuous not by their numbers, but rather by their bogeymannishness, aren’t they?

    • Inspector General

      If this man ever hears of a cure for victimhood, you will be seized against your will and the syringe applied via a suitable location. Guess where that will be…

      • This might help you in your quest for a ‘cure’ of said disorder, Inspector.

        http://psychcentral.com/disorders/narcissistic-personality-disorder-symptoms/

        • Inspector General

          “Believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)”

          Stone the crows, It’s the Inspectors deeply held belief about himself, of all things…

          • My good man, one swallow does not a Summer make.

            “Has a very strong sense of entitlement, e.g., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations.”

            “Lacks empathy, e.g., is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others.”

            “Regularly shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes”

          • Linus

            Sad Jack continues to reveal his deepest motivations to us. I wonder why he’s suddenly going in for all this soul-baring. Perhaps he’s been watching too much daytime TV and it’s starting to get mixed up with religious compulsion in that addled old brain of his.

            Spill, Sad Jack! Spill! It’s like car crash TV. Awful and highly unedifying but you just can’t look away…

      • The Explorer

        Careful now, Inspector. You’ll be taking over from Happy Jack as Linus’ pet hate on this blog.

      • DanJ0

        Is syringe a euphemism?

        • The Explorer

          Dream on.

          • DanJ0

            I can readily assure you that I have no such dreams about Linus and the Inspector.

    • Doctor Crackles

      Linus, if the BBC gives you comfort, well you just carry on. Nothing to see here.

      • Old Blowers

        Can they even receive it in Le Frogland…Why are they not contributing to the licence fee?

        • CliveM

          Through the PC I think?

        • The Explorer

          They can’t afford it.

    • Can you read, Linus? You clearly fail maths and comprehension. The OP doesn’t say 25% is a majority, it says that 25% of a very large number is a pretty substantial number, and that’s before we take untruthful responses into account. If Islam wants to swallow Europe, a wiser strategy is to keep quiet about it until the numbers are sufficient. People answering loaded questions may be motivated to give ‘acceptable’ rather than true answers.

      It would be amusing to watch atheists trying to manage their legitimate dread of Islamification by intensifying their attacks on Christians, if it wasn’t so tragic.

      • DanJ0

        “It would be amusing to watch atheists trying to manage their legitimate dread of Islamification by intensifying their attacks on Christians, if it wasn’t so tragic.”
        Attacks on Christians??

        I don’t personally have a dread of Islam in the UK, though I’m no fan of the religion and its values at all. I do think we need to actively promote our values, severely limit certain immigration, and change the way society handles religion in order to steer away from potential danger from Islam in the future. Advocating a secular State and wanting to remove the religious privileges of Christianity is part of that. I think Islam is riding in on the back of those existing privileges and pushes for more, and I think some Christians fighting that are useful idiots for Muslims who want to raise the profile of Islam here.

        • Phil R

          I’m actually trying to save you from yourselves, as well as save the rest of us from you.

          • DanJ0

            We’re a liberal democracy so feel free to try to do your worst. Luckily, you’re from a minority special interest group whose credibility is waning so you don’t have much power even if you still have those legacy special privileges. For now, anyway.

          • Phil R

            You mean we still have some freedoms for now.

            In our “liberal democracy”

            As I have said before you have no intention of being liberal or indeed democratic.

            Meaningless words because your actions speak otherwise.

          • DanJ0

            We all have considerable freedom in the UK, and Christians here enjoy that just like the rest of us. Consider Christians in parts of Iraq and Syria, or most places in the Middle East if you think you’re being put upon as a result of cultural changes over the last 50 years. I’ll stand alongside Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus etc. to defend their religious freedom, including your freedom to whinge and whine. But not necessarily the religious special privileges you currently enjoy. Your minority special interests are exactly that: minority special interests, deserving of some relevant things but not on the basis that you or other religionists claim some sort of god backing for your position.

          • Phil R

            That is really nice to know that you will hold my hand right up to the door of the train taking me to the Gulag or the execution ground to be shot.

            No you are right, we are no there yet. But we can all see it coming. It always happens when a Godless man made authority decides it can do without God. The result is murder and death and in case you are happy with that, it won’t be restricted to Christians. The paranoia will turn you in on yourselves.

          • The murder has been announced of an atheist blogger in Bangladesh. Poor soul.

            Wonder who did it? They need help.

          • DanJ0

            “That is really nice to know that you will hold my hand right up to the door of the train taking me to the Gulag or the execution ground to be shot.”

            More of your usual lies, you damned drama queen.

          • Phil R

            I don’t think that anyone expects how bad things can get and so rapidly when Atheists take control.

            Soviet Russia in 1917 to 20 is the prime example, but there are loads of others. The one thing that is common is that it is far worse than anyone possibly imagined.

          • DanJ0

            “Soviet Russia in 1917 to 20 is the prime example, but there are loads of others.”

            They’ll have been the socialists, as you surely well know. They also took control through revolution, which had its own context in Tsarist Russia.

          • Phil R

            They were Atheists.

            As was the almost every other murderous revolution over the last 200 years.

            Atheists have killed tens if not hundreds of times the numbers killed in all the religious wars over the last 2000 years.

            They are not fussy. They will kill anyone who is the slightest threat. Even fellow Atheists who they previous counted as friends. They would and have happily murder their own mothers to further the imposition of their worldview.

            Snort all you like. It is true.

          • DanJ0

            *Snort* Meanwhile, you’re ignoring this above, and no doubt for the obvious reason too:

            “Meaningless words because your actions speak otherwise.”

            Please provide specific examples, or retract.

          • Martin

            DanJ0

            It is worth remembering that it is Christians who gained free speech in this country for all. You are on very shaky ground when you speak of others ‘minority special interests’.

          • DanJ0

            My ground is not at all shaky there. My last sentence applies to me as much as to you.

          • Martin

            DanJ0

            On the contrary, you proclaim yourself a bigot whilst accusing those who object to your perversion of being bigots.

          • DanJ0

            “Meaningless words because your actions speak otherwise.”

            Please provide specific examples, or retract.

          • Yes, the influence of Christians is waning in Britain. That much is demonstrable fact, although there is still a great deal of influence whether through activism and social engagement or residual effects through our many institutions that were to a great extent shaped by Christian insights.

            But the dechristianisation agenda proceeds steadily on many fronts. Looking around the web, inlcuding many fora where the quality of thought is somewhat lower than we generally find here, many people are saying ‘Look at how evil these Muslims are, religions are all the same, ban the **** lot of them!’

            Where the dechristianisation process will lead, to an Enlightenment Utopia or somewhere much darker, remains to be seen. I am memorising the Bible before it is outlawed.

        • I take the view that mass Islamic immigration was at least in part a deliberate tactic by our rulers to squeeze Christianity’s ‘most favoured religion’ status. A tool in the left’s dechristianisation agenda.

          There are some useful idiots around for sure and I think a lot of them work for the BBC, but some are I fear rather worse than useful idiots. They are the people doing the using.

          Of course everything hinges on whether theism or materialism is the truth, and if the former, then whether Jesus of Nazareth is who he said he was.

          Just listening to Jim Nauchtie on radio 4. , interviewing various ‘experts’, all of them flailing around trying to find some form of words, desperately talking about ‘proper policing of the internet’, desperately seeking some solution, some analysis other than the one to which the facts are pointing. Some Muslims become ‘radicalised’ by seriously following the teaching and example of Muhammed, that is the reality they cannot accept. In the past, Christian Europe recognised this danger. Now we don’t. Thus, Islamification.

          By the way, like Peter Hitchens I no longer think this can be stopped or reversed. Just chronicling the decline.

          • DanJ0

            I’m inclined to agree with your first paragraph but that fact that it happened under Tony Blair’s presidential-style leadership while he was a closet-Catholic grates against that. Of course, I’m not from the left-wing of politics myself; in fact I loathe the politics of Labour, including New labour’s version of communitarianism.

          • Fair enough Danjo. Things and people are nuanced and I constantly fall into the trap of making broad brush generalisations. I am more at home expressing my thoughts in a 1,000 word essay which allows more qualifications and specificity rather than short blog posts, but hey ho, there we go…

            kind regards

          • Anton

            It is perfectly obvious that the Vatican let Tony Blair into their church without asking him to repent of shafting the Catholic adoption agencies months earlier or of his publicly expressed views on abortion and gay rights. A Vatican spokesman even said at the time that the reception into the Catholic church of such an authoritative and respected figure was a matter for joy Frankly I think that Rome and Blair deserve each other, but it would be nice to hear what the regular Catholics here made of it.

          • Uncle Brian

            Any church, political party, NGO, or tiddlywinks club that has Mr and Mrs Blair on its membership list would be well advised to keep quiet about it. Being seen in public in the company of either of them, let alone both together, would tarnish the reputation of a saint.

          • Frankly Anton, the RCC is a pilgrim church whose main evidence to being divinely guided by the Holy Spirit is the fact that after 2000 years of human frailty (and on more than one occasion, human evil), it’s still here. If we survived the Borgia popes, we can probably survive Mr Blair. 🙂

          • Go get him Tibs !
            For that you deserve a plenary indulgence.

          • Anton

            I agree that there isn’t much other evidence Rome is divinely guided by the Holy Spirit.

          • Also, Satan has been around for well over 2,000 years and that is no indication that he is guided by the Holy Spirit!

          • You want a Divine sign, now? Christ had something to say about that too.

          • Anton

            No, just the signs of the Holy Spirit listed by St Paul to the Corinthians.

          • chiaramonti

            The Catholic Church, as Oscar Wilde said, is for saints and sinners alone. No prizes which category TB falls in to!

          • Had a little while to reflect on that phrase ‘proper policing of the internet.’ Nauchtie didn’t challenge it.

            What would ‘proper policing of the internet’ look like?Who would administer it? I suggest the BBC and TUC could work together with Richard Dawkins and Yvette Cooper. Must make sure people don’t become ‘radicalised’ or ‘divide communities’.

          • Uncle Brian

            Here’s a candidate for the first Supreme Commissar of the Internet Policing Authority, about whose political, religious and ethical qualifications for the post there cannot be a shadow of a doubt: Mohammed Emwarzi, aka Jihadi John.

          • Stephen Milroy

            You hit the nail on the head there. Amazing how people who are most afraid of the Islamification of the UK are the first to advocate De-Christianising it (what do they think will take its place? Cause it certainly isn’t humanism…)

      • Linus

        And can you count?

        25% of a tiny percentage is a very small number. Even if every Muslim in the UK is radicalized and decides to wage holy war against the UK, how can a few percent of the population “swallow everything”?

        Such hysterical fear mongering is typical of Christians. Your religion only has power when you can get people to panic and believe the sky is falling. So you manufacture fantastical scenarios of Muslims taking over Europe. Your preferred bogeymen are identifiable by their beards and headscarfs. It’s so much easier to persuade people to hate and fear their neighbours when those neighbours look different to them.

        Seems to me we should be every bit as afraid of the Christians in our midst as by any number of Muslims. They foment hatred and rejection and do their best to drive wedges between various communities in an attempt to divide and rule.

        Should we quarantine them, pass laws against them and eject them from the country as they want us to do to so many other groups? Would a taste of their own medicine do them good?

        • Linus.

          Sorry, I can’t help you.

          • Linus

            You’re sorry about nothing and have no desire to help me. You’ve already made your feelings of contempt and hatred for anyone who doesn’t bow down to you and your idol very clear on any number of posts here. So why pretend that you want to offer help to anyone, or that their refusal to be helped inspires anything in you but feelings of thwarted anger and frustration that you seem incapable of not expressing?

            Christians like you are probably responsible for alienating more people from your faith than any of its fantastical and magical precepts. One look at you and the anger and contempt you so routinely display towards anyone who dares to contradict you is all the warning we need to stay well away.

            By their fruits shall you know them, indeed. If Christianity can do nothing to make better people out of its followers, if on the contrary and despite all the perfecting claims it makes, it merely provides them with one more excuse to deride, attack and hate everyone around them, how convincing can it be as a philosophy.

            They say hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. They’ve obviously never met a fundamentalist Christian whose ambition to be a role model for everyone around him are thwarted by his inability to live out even the most basic tenets of his faith.

          • “You’re sorry about nothing and have no desire to help me.”

            Said the heroin addict to the GP who refused to illicitly give him the drug he craved.

        • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

          Nonsense!

  • So can we now stop calling this psychopathic murderer Jihadi John. His name is MUHAMMED, a very good name for a psychopathic, deranged murderer.

    Listening to BBC takkiyah right now about Muhammed being ‘radicalised by the security services’, makes me bloody sick.

    • CliveM

      Yes I noticed that MI5 were getting the blame. He’ll be assigned a social worker next and a solicitor to sue the UK Govt, paid for by the tax payer.

      • chiaramonti

        Radicalisation is a made up word. It’s just an excuse, an attempted justification and an explanation for barbarism of the worst kind. Even the director of Wolf Hall fell in to the trap of stating that as Islam is 500 years younger than Christianity, it will (eventually) change its ways, as if it were a vintage wine that will improve with age. Nonsense!

  • ExpatDavid

    When push comes to shove they are all Muslims and will side with their own.

    Of course the Biased Broadcasting Corporation will put their leftist multicultural spin on it.

  • Politically__Incorrect

    BBC coverage of the Titanic:

    BREAKING NEWS!
    ALMOST ALL SHIPS DID NOT SINK TODAY. ICEBERGS ARE NOT A THREAT!

  • DanJ0

    I heard Warsi on Radio 4 yesterday morning. She is obviously aware of the alternative reading of the statistics and pointed out a regular attitudes survey that has been discontinued now which surveyed multiple ‘communities’ for comparative purposes. I missed which survey she was talking about. Presumably there are surprising percentages in other religious and ethnic groups on certain questions which she wanted to use as a defence i.e. “look they have some bad attitudes too!” It wasn’t fooling Humphreys.

    • The Explorer

      The acknowledgment that bad attitudes might exist would be a huge step forward. An ostrich pulling its head out of the ground and blinking at what’s revealed.

  • len

    It seems to be dawning on those in power that they have a huge potential problem on their hands and they have no idea how to respond to it.

    The problem is what happens to someone who is brought up in a liberal society with all the benefits of that society to make them want to destroy that selfsame society?

    And those in power have no idea what it takes to make that transition other than blaming it on the influence of’ radical elements’ .

    Of course those who have studied the Word of God(the Bible ) know exactly what it takes to influence people to take extreme violent action “For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers,
    against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and
    against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.”(Ephesians 6:12)

    These are the dark spiritual forces that wish to eliminate Christians in Society and to stifle the Gospel of Jesus Christ and this attack is on a broad front worldwide in fact.

    Liberals in the West by their determination to sideline Christianity have( probably unwittingly)aided those who are using more violent means to eliminate Christians right across the middle East.Unless one understands the spiritual implications of the spiritual as well as the physical war that is raging at the moment one will remain (literally ) in the dark.

    • Thank you Len for rightly highlighting the spiritual implications of all of this. Islam and Christianity are diametrically opposed. Islamic teaching is contrary to the most central tenets of the Christian Faith including our Lord’s death and resurrection. Our profound love for our Muslim neighbour means telling him that entrance into Christ’s spiritual kingdom is what matters, far more than belonging to an earthly caliphate. Muslims, liberal secularists, Hindus, Buddhists and everyone else need the salvation which only Christ can bring.

      • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

        Dear Mr. Simpson, there’s a prebend at Barchester with your name on it…

  • May I commend all and sundry to read this article?http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/
    It is secular and quite long, but it’s the best explanation I’ve come across of the I.S. phenomenon.

    • len

      Thanks for posting the link Martin it gives some of the history and ongoing theology of IS .The West needs to learn (and to learn fast) the intentions of groups such as IS. The West could learn a lot from the Israelis instead of condemning them and stronger links between the West and Israel would be a good and sensible idea!. The West has been totally unprepared for the phenomenon which is IS.The West prepared the ground for IS to grow by displacing the regimes that were in power in the Middle East and have replaced one evil with a far greater evil.

    • Anton

      This backs up a BBC radio programme with a man who penetrated IS for British intelligence and said that they were deeply concerned with Islamic eschatology and were far more interested than alQaeda in building a power base in the Middle East than perpetrating exhibitionist but ultimately dilettante terrorist spectaculars like 9/11.

      • They want to destroy Israel, an aim they share with the left.

        • Anton

          Yes, Muslims do, but building a power base for all their other aims is IS’s business.

      • Pubcrawler

        Yes, I think that the eschatological purpose is not properly understood by the more ‘secularised’ Western commentators inclined to see things only in within a familiar geopolitical framework, and can be all too easily dismissed or overlooked. They are actively engaged in trying to bring about their version of Armageddon and the final victory of Islam. (The same could be said of Iran’s nuclear ambitions.) It’s not just a local tribal conflict, it has an existential dimension with global ramifications.

    • Uncle Brian

      Thank you, Martin. You’re right, we should all read this long article, which
      is full of important and often surprising information. Particularly interesting, I thought, were the two or three paragraphs dealing with the similarities and differences between the Islamic State and Al-Qaeda. They are not, at present, cooperating, according to Graeme Wood: on the contrary, they dislike and distrust one another. But they are engaged only on a war of words, a phony war, not a fighting war. Worryingly, they could quite easily be reconciled, and at one time it looked as though the FBI’s ill-judged attempts to negotiate the release of an American hostage (later murdered) might even have had the unintended effect of pushing Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State into a working alliance, which in strategic terms would have strengthened both of them.

  • “We are divided in the face of a Mohammedan world, divided in every way, and that division cannot be remedied because the cement which once held our civilization together, the Christian cement, has crumbled.”
    (Hilaire Belloc – 1937)

    • Anton

      Authentic Christianity has to be voluntary, which raises a quandary in situations like this. But the gates of Hades (ie, death) will not prevail against the true (ie, voluntary) church. Christ himself has promised us that. Yet we must expect to be persecuted. God has given no “human right” otherwise.

      • Do you really believe you had any real ‘choice’ about faith in Christ? Jack didn’t. It was always there, waiting to be reawakened in him. And we are all subject to the Holy Spirit and the influences and situations God places before us.

        A rousing speech by a politician can touch people’s souls and consciences – for good or for evil. And even people who are not ‘Bible believing Christians’ can be reached. Helping others in need can cause us to reflect on why the world is full of evil – and seek answers. Personal tragedies and suffering can prompt the same response. All who are foreknown to God are called in different ways – at a time and in circumstances known to Him – and given the necessary graces to succeed. For some it will be politics.

        We’re not “persecuted” in the West. Our faith isn’t truly tested. We’re growing soft and comfortable.

        • CliveM

          Only one slight quibble, we HAVE grown soft and comfortable. We only understand persecution from a second hand perspective. We are occasionally inconvenienced for our faith and find that hard enough.

        • Anton

          Come off it Jack, this is not a debate about predestination but about whether Jesus would have approved of Charlemagne giving the Saxons he had conquered the choice of baptism or death. Do we really want to behave like Muslims?

          • Jack didn’t know we were referring to Charlemagne and the Saxons. The choice of baptism or death was part of the terms of peace for a war that was waged for 30+ years – a war started by the Saxons, incidentally. They had to be crushed. Terror as a means of conversion from paganism is hardly Christian.

          • Anton

            A temporal conqueror might offer the swearing of an oath of fealty to him as an alternative to execution, but Jesus does not authorise any man to baptise by threat. Where is the precedent for that in scripture or apostolic church tradition? Apart from lack of respect for the freedom granted by God – which is the point I was using Charlemagne to illustrate -such professions of faith will seldom be sincere and the church will get diluted by the insincere.

          • Did you read what Jack wrote: “Terror as a means of conversion from paganism is hardly Christian.”?
            Do get off your high horse, Anton. It was a political move.

          • Anton

            I’m now confused by whether you think it was or was not OK for Charlemagne to offer them the choice of baptism or death.

          • Depends, doesn’t it. Politically, it worked. Spiritually, who can say?

          • Anton

            It is surely more important not to proselytise coercively for it is not then the gospel as preached by Jesus Christ and St Paul. Politically, Big Charlie might reasonably have given them the choice of fealty to him or death. But we are now going round in circles…

    • Big fan of Belloc, despite his papism.

      • His insights into Islam were prophetic. Great style too. Is Jack correct in recalling you were once a Catholic? If so, like Jack, you may have been raised on a diet of Beloc and Chesterton.

      • Anton

        He could be silly. Read his ridiculous doggerel against the respected historian GG Coulton.

        • Lol …….. they were adversaries and both as bad as each another. Beloc was broad brush, bold and outspoken. Here’s how he regarded Coulton:

          “Coulton does not appreciate the weight of a whole stream of tradition, supported by a parallel stream of documentary evidence. If these combined make for a certain conclusion which no rational man can doubt, he would think it sufficient to bring out against it one isolated exception. Many generations hence there will be a broad stream of tradition and document to show that Englishmen in the nineteenth century did not eat human flesh, but I am sure that if Dr. Coulton were on the other side he would triumphantly quote the shipwrecked mariners of the Mignonette and continue to say that the Victorians were cannibals.”

          The fell out over the issue of whether divorce and remarriage was permitted in the early Church?

          • Anton

            I don’t know about that; re divorce it was a matter for the couple not the authorities back then, and you can’t stop someone moving out. The issue was always remarriage, not divorce, and Fr Henri Crouzel showed pretty clearly that it was not permitted in the early church.

            Belloc and Coulton both liked a fight but I was referring specifically to Belloc’s “remote and ineffectual don” poem as doggerel.

          • Jack thought the poem rather amusing …….

          • Anton

            I actually have some time for Belloc but that poem is, or should have been, an embarrassment to him.

          • Uncle Brian

            Why?

          • Anton

            If that isn’t obvious to you then I can’t make it so.

          • Uncle Brian

            Certainly it’s doggerel and I don’t suppose Belloc himself would dispute that. But there’s good doggerel and bad doggerel, and the best of Belloc’s — including this one, along with several of the Cautionary Verses — ranks among the very best.

    • chiaramonti

      Both Belloc and Chesterton regarded Islam as just another heresy.

      • Not “just another heresy” – a violent, dangerous, malignant heresy with the capability to rise again.

        • Pubcrawler

          That’s about as generous an assessment as I’m prepared to countenance. Though I don’t see it as a single well-thought-out heresy, more a ragbag smorgasbord of half-understood bits of other heresies, mostly Arianism and Docetism, all fundamentally non-Trinitarian. This sums it up nicely:

          http://orthodoxwiki.org/Islam

          Which would be fine if its proponents could be engaged in peaceful, if sometimes heated, debate. But when it brooks no contradiction, seeks world domination, and backs itself up with the sword, that’s where the problem lies.

          Individual Saracens I appraise and treat (but of course not judge) according to their fruits. Sufis I know seem pretty OK, peaceful sorts — whirling Dervishes, liturgical dance, what’s not to like? — but then they’re not widely considered to be ‘proper’ Muslims.

          • Beloc gives a good analysis of the simplicity of Islam’s tenets and its components and why it proved attractive. He also comments: “And there is another point in connection with this power of Islam. Islam is apparently unconvertible.”

            Beloc thought Islam would rise again, probably through economic force and great leadership. What he didn’t foresee was multiculturalism, the abandonment of Christianity and the power it would acquire through liberal, secular democracy.

          • Merchantman

            Why does violent radical Islam so appeal to school boys and girls of a certain persuasion?
            Answers on a postcard Please!

          • Why does Islam appeal to many non-violent, middle class men and women in the West who convert too?

          • Uncle Brian

            Jack, please take a look at the reply to Merchantman that I posted a few moments ago, two or three comments up from this one.

          • Dreadnaught

            A bloody good piss-up and 72 virgins thrown in for good measure if you croak-it slaughtering humanity in the name of Allah.

          • Uncle Brian

            Merchantman and Happy Jack, I’m sure you will both learn a lot, as I did, from this article in The Atlantic (link below), recommended yesterday by Martin Marprelate. The question of why the Islamic State’s ideology of violence appeals to some westerners is addressed in two interviews with converts: Musa Cerantonio, a 30-year-old Australian of Irish and Italian descent who now preaches at a mosque in Melbourne, the city of his birth, and Breton Pocius, 28, who converted 15 years ago after a Polish Catholic upbringing in Chicago and is now an imam with his own mosque in Philadelphia.

            http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

          • Good paper, thank you and to Martin M.

            Beloc’s analysis isn’t too far away from describing the same attractions of Islam, though it is dated and written from a Catholic perspective.

            http://www.ewtn.com/library/HOMELIBR/HERESY4.TXT

  • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

    I have been shocked by the abduction of 200 Assyrian Christians by the Bearded Barbarians, and utterly dismayed by images of said savages smashing the ancient statues and artefacts in the Mosul Museum…such wanted destruction of objects that have survived over three thousand years…such terror inflicted on living souls today. How will it all end? How long before scenes like these are repeated on these shores?

    • Politically__Incorrect

      Mrs Proudies. My understanding is that were it not for the vigilant efforts of our security services, we would have seen this barbarism several times already on our streets. Unfortunately it is only a matter of time before we do see it. Meanwhile, last nights C4 news included the sickening spectacle of Kathy Newman trying to defend “Jihadi John” on the grounds he had been harassed by MI5. Seems to me that MI5 didn’t “harass” him anywhere near enough.

      • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

        Yes, I think you are right, and have reminded me of what we owe to our security chaps…I agree fully with your last sentence…

    • len

      Muslims are also trying to remove all traces of the Temple in Jerusalem and are starting to claim the Temple never existed.
      Its all a matter of ‘ownership’ as Muslims are trying to ‘authenticate’ their religion(which has stolen much from Christianity and Judaism and ‘reinterpreted it’) as being God`s last word.This of course is ridiculous as Jesus Christ had already authenticated all of God`s prophecies regarding the Messiah.
      Islam by its brutal methods and false claims betrays the true nature of its creator.

      • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

        Ah yes, the airbrushing of history…

    • IanCad

      “How long before scenes like these are repeated on these shores?”

      I’m disappointed Mrs P. A little cordial, perhaps, would restore your wonted spunk? Something a bit stronger than Mr. Slope would normally provide.

      This land is England. Shallow and weak we may be. Emasculated and conformist. Followers, and addicted to sport. Don’t like to get hurt and make a huge fuss if we do. Completely pansified and degenerated by the wretched HSE.

      Despite all this we will react when self is threatened.

      Sixty millions of souls. A shy three million of us Muslims, most aspiring to peace and prosperity in this land that has welcomed them, and we quake with fear? Shame!

      Quite how the seed of Alfred the Great, William the Conqueror, Henry 5th, Shakespeare, Milton, Cromwell, Marlborough; Offspring of the Empire builders, and of those who forged the steel and ploughed our fields; could tremble under such a non-threat escapes me.

      Dear Lady, please do not succumb to the vapours; call Mr Slope to bring you a stiff one.

      • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

        Stiffen the sinews, eh? Mmmmm well said, but I fear our leaders do not have the resolve of Alfred the Great, William the Conquerer, Henry V or Cromwell. We are governed by Pooters and Prufrocks…

  • Miles Christianus

    As is Mrs Proudie, and I’m sure are you all, I am dismayed and hurt by the news of actual and potential Christian martyrdom (note: real martyrdom) in Syria, Iraq, Nigeria and Pakistan. I pray for their safety, or failing this, their strength in Christ.