Vicki Kirby Jew-hate
Ethics & Morality

Corbyn's accommodation of Jew-hatred is a betrayal of Labour's morality

 

Jews have “big noses” and “slaughter the oppressed”, and Hitler was a “Zionist God”, according to Vicki Kirby, former Labour parliamentary candidate and now vice-chairman of the party’s Woking branch. Further, she exhorts Islamists to attack Israel: “Apparently you can ask IS/ISIS/ISIL questions on ask.fm,” she tweeted. “Anyone thought of asking them why they’re not attacking the real oppressors #Israel?”

Jew-hate

According to Guido Fawkes (who has been pursuing this matter rather assiduously), she also tweeted: “I will make sure my kids teach their children how evil Israel is!” This belongs on the curriculum of a Daesh madrassa. For Vicki Kirby, Jew-hatred goes hand-in-hand with Israel-loathing. Jews have big noses and oppress people, and so Israel is evil. The response of Jeremy Corbyn to this blatant anti-Semitism has been somewhat muted.

It is ironic, is it not, that as politicians across all parties are hyper-sensitive to the merest whiff of Islamophobia, Her Majesty’s Official Opposition tolerates manifest Jew-hatred. It is an ancient, poisonous syndrome, devoid of morality, reason and compassion, which scapegoats all Jews and demonises Israel. Vicki Kirby’s rhetoric would find no place in the Conservative Party, or even in Ukip. That Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party deems her not merely fit for membership but suitable to hold elected office ought to concern everyone who cares about community cohesion and the national political discourse.

For Jews right across Europe, violence, suffering and persecution are not confined to the Nazi era: they are being driven out of their homes, shot in their schools and bombed in their shops by those who seek to islamise modernity. Vicki Kirby not only condones this; she incites more of it. She not only pitches Islamic-State terrorists against Zionists and political Judaism; she spouts hate against Jews everywhere, for they all are complicit in the Zionist conspiracy by virtue of their big noses.

If a mainstream British political party is prepared to tolerate the sort of jihadi ideology and crusade of hatred espoused by Vicki Kirby, the future for British Jewry will be bleak indeed. If we are to work for a peaceful coexistence, those who foment antagonism against Jews and Jewish civilisation have no place at all in our political culture.

If Vicki Kirby wants to march on the Holy Land, let her seek a warring tribe with whom she can dwell. If she can survive a week without being tortured, raped, sold into slavery or forcibly converted to Islam, good luck to her. Her myopic apprehension of the “Zionist God” Adolf Hitler is the true fault line in the perverted borders of her mind. If the Jews are to have no homeland, and Jeremy Corbyn sees fit to accommodate Vicki Kirby’s intifida, then those in Labour with a grasp of Christian morality have an obligation to rise up and speak out. The future of our civilisation depends on it.

UPDATE: 12.30pm

It is reported that “Vicki Kirby has been suspended from the Labour Party pending an investigation.” For all his faults, Ed Miliband moved swiftly to eradicate anti-Semites from his party. Why does Jeremy Corbyn enjoy their fellowship? Why does he grasp the oppression of every minority except Jews?

  • Anton

    She should be careful what she wishes for.

  • The Explorer

    I suppose if you want the world to be one big country where anyone can go anywhere, the very idea of Israel (and especially its fence) is anathema.

    • Anton

      Thus spake the scriptures!

      • The Explorer

        I think the idea of a World Federation to prevent war probably dates from Kant’s ‘Perpetual Peace’ of 1795, and secular thought has been in love with the idea ever since. Although not derived from ‘Revelation’, it may yet fulfil ‘Revelation’.

  • bluedog

    The whole thing reeks of mediocrity, gullibility and a desperate inadequacy. One wonders about M/s Kirby’s background and education. Has she always felt this way or is she a recent graduate of some state funded BDS induction course, channelled through Corbynite Labour? One reads that British Jews, such as Maureen Lipman, are starting to feel increasingly insecure and thinking of emigrating. Very sad. Very embarrassing.

  • sarky

    Why even talk about her? Deprive her of the oxygen of a platform and hopefully she will just quietly disapear.

    • Dreadnaught

      Its says more about the state of the Labour Party than her.

    • CliveM

      This isn’t about her, it’s about Corbyn and where he stands on anti Semitism.

      It’s not what she said that’s interesting, it’s how he’s responded.

      As he wants to be PM, that IS important and we need to know.

      • sarky

        Corbyn is an irrelevance.

        • CliveM

          I would like to think so, however as the US has shown, you can never be sure.

          • Pubcrawler

            Yes, it’s an assessment that has often come back to bite the holder on the arse. Charles I on Parliament springs to mind.

            So long as Corbyn is Leader of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition, it is right and proper to hold him up to scrutiny.

          • CliveM

            We are only ever one serious scandal or major recession away from a Corbyn Govt. either of which is possible.

          • Pubcrawler

            *hides behind sofa*

          • sarky

            I think in this case we can.

          • CliveM

            I hope you’re right.

        • len

          cannot argue with that..

  • Dreadnaught

    What a dangerous moron. Lock her in Auschwitz for a couple of days with the loop film for company.

  • CliveM

    Well at least the Labour Party can boast that even the terminally stupid can enjoy equal opportunities in Corbyns labour. They probably have quotas that need to be met.

    This must be borderline incitement to violence? Why isn’t she being questioned by the Police?

    • Pubcrawler

      The cops can only investigate if someone makes a complaint. Oh look:

      http://order-order.com/2016/03/15/labour-pcc-candidate-calls-cops-on-vicki-kirby/

      • CliveM

        About time. I wonder if this triggered labour suspending her?

    • Inspector General

      Questioned by the police, Clive? For what? Conspiracy to be deeply unpleasant, perhaps? What you’re asking for is a many bladed weapon – you’ll have the Inspector in chokey yet, you rascal…

      Besides, one is used from monitoring Pink News to find the usual enraged benders calling for the police to investigate anyone who criticises their sad lifestyle and peculiarly alarming ways. You wouldn’t want to have too much in common with THAT crowd, I can tell you…

      • CliveM

        Inspector, if Pink News gets you arrested, I’m willing to be a character witness…………………

        However to the bint in question. My point was more if a Street Preacher can be arrested for quoting some of the less, er , popular parts of the bible, how come this woman, who is urging us to contact IS, in an attempt to focus it’s bloody attention on Israel, is being left unquestioned!

        She won’t be arrested, but it amuses me to think of her being interviewed under caution, by the boy’s in blue.

  • The Explorer

    Hitler was a Zionist God is, on the face of it, an odd comment.

    This, I think, must be the argument. I am not suggesting it is valid: I’m merely trying to understand where it is coming from.

    Hitler oppressed Jews. But Jews oppress Palestinians the way Hitler oppressed them. They do so because their God tells them they are a chosen race. That means they have a Master race concept the same way Hitler had: thus the Jewish God and Hitler are equivalent. Hence, Hitler was a ZIonist God.

    The secular impulse – and the necessity for survival – in the foundation of Israel seems to have been lost; or maybe it just doesn’t fit the narrative.

    • Anton

      I do not agree that “Jews oppress Palestinians the way Hitler oppressed them”. Whereas Jews would love to live in peace with Arabs in the Holy Land, Hitler wanted to kill all Jews. Where are Netanyahu’s gas chambers?

      • The Explorer

        As I said, ” I am not suggesting it is valid.”

        • Anton

          It wasn’t clear to me whether your comment applied only to the paragraph preceding it; thank you for the clarification.

    • Ivan M

      Without Hitler, there would be no modern Israel. The Jewish partisans fought the British and Arabs in Palestine, mainly in order to save the East European Jews. This seems to have been Menahim Begin’s whole purpose in life. When Ben Gurion realised that the European numbers were not there, the Israelis intensified their black operations in Arab lands, to create conditions that would make life intolerable for the Sephardic Jews and start their exodus. So a country seen mainly as a refuge for European Jews, swirled the Middle-Eastern Jews into the vortex. These things surpass human understanding.

  • Uncle Brian

    Meanwhile, back in the West Bank, Netanyahu offered to end Israeli military control of Jericho and Ramallah but the Palestinian Authority said No.

    http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.708946?utm_content=%24sections%2F1.708946&utm_medium=EMAIL&utm_source=SMARTFOCUS&utm_campaign=1390167&utm_term=20160315-11%3A03

  • CliveM

    It seems she was previously suspended from the Labour Party, but re-admitted in 2014 following a warning as to her future behaviour.

    Looking at the dates of the twitter comments above, she wasn’t suspended for long.

  • Gilad Atzmon, the Jew who joined the ranks of the Unchosen, wrote on the 10th March: ‘I’ve been reporting on Jeremy Corbyn’s shameless capitulation to the Jewish Lobby. The long time campaigner for Palestine has, in just a few weeks, been reduced into a sad Zionist puppet whose position on Israel has descended into a copy of a Likud pamphlet.’

    In which case, there is a distinct possibility of Vicki being shown the door, which will secure the ‘future of our civilisation’ and, even more importantly, allow His Grace to begin the process of untwisting his knickers.

    • Anton

      The link you provide ends: “If this is what Corbyn’s Labour is all about, we really don’t need Tories.” Which might be just as well, because we don’t actually have Tories at present.

    • Dreadnaught

      What is that makes you hold the position you do on Jews and Israel?

      • My position on the Jews changed from indifferent to aware when I discovered, from their own writings, their enmity for non-Jews and their particular enmity for Europeans and Christianity. At the extreme, Jews and non-Jews are considered to be different species, with only the Jewish soul ‘[stemming] from holiness.’ [Shahak and Mezvinsky, Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel, pages 59-60]

        ‘the Talmud and the talmudic literature—quite apart from the general anti-Gentile streak that runs through them, which will be discussed in greater detail in Chapter 5—contain very offensive statements and precepts directed specifically against Christianity.’ [Click here for Shahak, Jewish History, Jewish Religion, and scroll down to ‘A Totalitarian History’, part of chapter 2]

        In his PhD thesis American Jewry and United States Immigration Policy, 1881-1953, SM Neuringer writes: ‘In undertaking to sway immigration policy in a liberal direction, Jewish spokespersons and organizations demonstrated a degree of energy unsurpassed by any other interested pressure group.’ [MacDonald, The Culture of Critique, page 259] Taking the above Jewish beliefs into account, even in diluted form, the outpouring of energy on the issue of mass immigration is wholly understandable, albeit severely deleterious to European societies.

        My position on Israel is unchanged: everybody needs a homeland. Whether Israel will survive the massive demographic changes in the United States—brought about by that unsurpassed Jewish energy and which will remove from power the white, Jew-friendly majority—is another story.

        • dannybhoy

          “My position on the Jews changed from indifferent to aware when I discovered, from their own writings, their enmity for non-Jews and their particular enmity for Europeans and Christianity.”
          Huh!
          Whatever individuals may have written, we have to look at the reality that is around us.
          Are Jews trying to destroy our nation?
          Or any other nation?
          No.
          British, American, French, Russian, Polish, German and Italian Jews have fought for their country with the same dedication as non Jewish citizens.
          They pay their taxes, they are involved in their communities, in politics, in social issues and charities.
          Please don’t forget that all those countries above have had their share of (non Jewish) traitors, renegades and rebels.

          I was at an conference recently organised by a Jewish group with Israelis and a few Arabs present. I was treated with kindness and respect. The whole thing was conducted with dignity and courtesy. I greatly enjoyed the day.
          It often seems to me that people who believe in Jewish conspiracies, religious or political, want to believe them…

        • Dreadnaught

          I find it difficult to comprehend why your position of antipathy toward an entire ‘race’ or group that has contributed so much to European development be generated by other peoples opinions.
          So what if some of their number break ranks and turn on their own; it happens all the time in the UK as it should in a democracy which Israel is,; unlike the nations that surround it and whose borders were also laid down after WW1.
          I can’t for the life of me follow your logic.
          There are Christians on this site who literally hate atheists but that’s their problem not mine; I don’t hate Christianity as a result. They don’t hurt me, quite the opposite in fact, it tickles me to see how much passion they have for something not one of them can ever prove exists, but nontheless build their entire mindset around the fantasies they weave for themselves in justification of their beliefs.
          Israelis are surrounded by hostiles yet they still have 25% of the population made up by Arabs.
          No other country in the Middles East is as productive or democratic as Israel. It has to go in hard when its attacked and may be a bit too hard at times but what country hasn’t?
          Jews do not threaten to impose their religion on anyone; they never have as far as I am aware. They don’t threaten the West and never have. They only take up arms in self defence; that historic record speaks for itself.

          • carl jacobs

            There are Christians on this site who literally hate atheists

            To whom would you be referring?

          • William Lewis

            Good question, Carl. Shots fired from the dreadnaught but whither the target?

          • DanJ0

            There have been a good few who hate the sinner as well as the sin when the sin is homosexuality rather than atheism.

          • sarky

            Martin??

          • carl jacobs

            No. Martin can behave badly at times. That’s not the same as hating someone. He isn’t guilty of this charge.

          • sarky

            I think a few of us would disagree.

          • dannybhoy

            Martin’s okay. Just a bit authoritarian and austere.

          • DanJ0

            We’re a target for his trolling at the very least, and there’s a lot of malice in his transactions.

          • Lienus

            Zer is also an atheist oo loiterally ‘ates Christians.

          • carl jacobs

            Linus is in a world of his own. He isn’t reacting from atheism. It’s something else entirely.

          • Allosexuel

            Et is les hémorroïdes.

          • William Lewis

            Nasty. It must make a chap a bit peevish at the best of times.

          • He loathes himself.

          • Allosexuel

            Ee ‘ates loiterally evary one. Et is becos of les hémorroïdes.

          • Lienus

            Je regarde your avatar and je pense que it is you oo is standing like one with the ammeroides.

          • Allosexuel

            Nooty boy. Je suis hemoroid libre. Dat is ma pose attrayante.

          • Lienus

            You are like my local boucherie. You do a lovely mince.

          • Bot of curse. Cela vient naturellement.

          • Dreadnaught

            I have been reading this site for nearly as long as it has been in existence and the have been numerous occasions when atheists have been on the receiving end of hateful responses and held corporately responsible from anything from the birth of socialism to the excesses of Hitler and Stalin. As for the ‘names’, they are so unimportant who in their right mind would bother to remember them; I certainly don’t.

          • @ Dreadnaught—They don’t threaten the West and never have

            ‘An Israeli student finishes high school without ever hearing the name “Genrikh Yagoda”, the greatest Jewish murderer of the 20th Century, the GPU’s deputy commander and the founder and commander of the NKVD. Yagoda diligently implemented Stalin’s collectivization orders and is responsible for the deaths of at least 10 million people. His Jewish deputies established and managed the Gulag system.

            ‘Turns out that Jews too, when they become captivated by messianic ideology, can become great murderers, among the greatest known by modern history.’—Ynetnews

            Nothing so brutal these days for the West, of course. Just mass immigration, Islamization and the general joy of being reduced to minorities in our own countries.

          • Anton

            Yagoda diligently implemented Stalin’s collectivization orders and is responsible for the deaths of at least 10 million people.

            He sounds like a fiend of the first order but you don’t think that Stalin bears ultimate responsibility?

          • dannybhoy

            But no Christian hates atheists or anybody else, Dreaders.

          • Dreadnaught

            Yes Dan/Carl that was a bit intemperate – I withdraw the statement and implication. It stemmed I think from the representations of Hell and Damnation that litter the Bible and more that seem to be applied to atheists.

          • dannybhoy

            Our intellect has to be convinced that one has reasonable grounds for taking the step of faith, and humbling one’s self in surrendering our life to God.
            Until we come to that place we continue to live in integrity.

          • DanJ0

            No true Christian 😉

          • dannybhoy

            :0)
            You takin’ the Michael by any chance?

        • The Explorer

          I can see where you’re coming from. It’s like the point that not all Muslims are terrorists, but nearly all current terrorists are Muslims.

          It is startling, and undeniable, that every single key member of the Frankfurt School was a Jewish atheist. Jews in the States were instrumental in the establishment of multiculturalism: either from motives of revenge, or of perceived security.

          On the other hand, I have Jewish friends who view the Muslim influx into Europe with great alarm, who did nothing to bring it about, and who see all too clearly what it portends for them. They see with equal clarity what the changing American demographic (not so much the increase in Muslims as the decline of sympathetic Christians) portends for Israel.

          • @ The Explorer—If the leaders of the Frankfurt School went astray because of their atheism, how do we explain the hostility towards Christ shown by the authors of the Talmud?

          • The Explorer

            The apparent Biblical answer is given in ‘Romans’ 11: God hardened the hearts of the Jews so that the message would be taken to the Gentiles. “This partial blindness has come upon Israel only until the Gentiles have been admitted in full strength; when that has happened, the whole of Israel will be saved, in agreement with the text of Scripture.” 11:26. ie, when enough Gentiles have been saved (determined either by a set date or a set number of people) then it will be Israel’s turn.

            I find ‘Romans’ 11 deeply unpalatable. Not at the thought that the Jews will be saved, but at the apparent lack of choice in the matter. It seems to turn whole groups – Jewish and Gentile alike – into ciphers, and to make nonsense of human free will. It may be that I have not understood it properly. I hope that is the explanation. But for years it did more than anything else to keep me away from Christianity.

          • It all depends on how you look at predestination.

          • The Explorer

            Yes, indeed. ‘Romans’ 9:21 used to give me even more trouble than ‘Romans’ 11. “Surely the potter can do what he likes with the clay?” Only if the clay is inanimate, and unaware of what is being done to it.

            Suppose a father has two sons. He favours the one financially over the other. That’s the sub plot of ‘King Lear’: and the sense of grievance on the part of the second son is fully justified. The father may tell the second son that without his father the son wouldn’t exist. The son can reply that he didn’t ask to be born. Just because the father has financial power over him does not mean that the father is behaving justly.

            I have to say that with a book as difficult as ‘Romans’ I can fully see the case for a Magisterium. Let a non-expert reader like me loose on it and watch the resultant confusion.

          • The Explorer

            Thanks for these. I have immense respect for Most. A lot of complexity to both of them, so I have saved them to ‘Favourites’ and will revisit at leisure. I realise, of course, that the issues are more complex than they seemed to be in my atheist days. In the course of my Christian development, many things that were once baffling to me have been clarified.

          • Enjoy ….

          • If you enjoy Father Most, have a read of these notes he made and his offered solution to the tension between free will and predestination.

            https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/most/getwork.cfm?worknum=146

          • Anton

            Er, Lear had daughters.

          • Pubcrawler

            Gloucester had sons; sub plot.

          • Anton

            Fair enough; only Explorer knows what was meant. It’s three sons of the king in the marvellous broadly similar film RAN by Akira Kurosawa, set in mediaeval Japan.

          • Pubcrawler

            Well, beyond chipping in with ‘Act 1 Scene 2’, I’ll let Explorer answer for himself.

            Saw RAN. Visually amazing, but it went on a bit, I thought.

          • Anton

            I’d gladly watch it twice consecutively.

          • Pubcrawler

            OK, I’ll add it to my Lovefilm list and give it another go.

          • Anton

            My two favourite films are Napoleon vu par Abel Gance (6 hours; silent although regularly shown with live orchestra) and The Best Intentions (3 hours, Swedish with subtitles, cut down from 5hr TV series), so we have interesting differences. Next fave is Dr Strangelove, though.

          • The Explorer

            Gloucester sub plot.

          • Anton

            I’m not familiar with the Magisterium line on it but what if they get it wrong like many others?

          • The Magisterium has no settled position on freewill, God’s grace and predestination. They just set some parameters around the debate.

          • Anton

            I was thinking more about the Israel stuff in Romans 9-11.

          • That would involve a course in basic Catholic dogmatic theology covering most of the Church’s teachings.

          • The Explorer

            Note I said A Magisterium, not THE Magisterium. I could have said instead a papacy of Protestant professors. My point is that some Biblical books are very difficult, and if one tries to read them without suitable background knowledge, one is liable to go astray. ‘Romans’ – or certainly the later part of it – is a case in point. Even the experts struggle. Replacement theology and Dispensationalism, for instance, do not agree with one another, and, insofar as I understand them, I disagree with both of them.

          • Anton

            I don’t believe that there should be any Magisterium. I believe that Christians should thrash these things out in open discussion and, where they disagree, retain unity in the body of Christ.

          • The Explorer

            Thrash it out in the open by all means, but what role do you see for scholarship.?
            I saw schoolkids in a discussion group on TV years ago. I think it was to explain the then-new GCSE Speaking and Listening for English to the general public. Can’t remember the topic, but it went on for about twenty minutes. There were many factual inaccuracies that floated around unchallenged. The co-ordinating teacher said the experience had been valuable. Was he right? Perhaps it encouraged kids to think. On the other hand, you could argue it was simply ignorance reinforcing itself.

          • Anton

            People should recognise Christian scholars as scholars and trust the Holy Spirit to give their views appropriate weight. As soon as you have a Magisterium telling Christians what to believe on top of the Bible, even if it is only about how to understand it, then you are on very risky ground, for what if the Magisterium is wrong? What if the Magisterium is wrong and dares to claim that it is infallible? At the other end of the spectrum from the people you know I mean, if you separate out the scholars in theology faculties you get apostasy of a different sort, namely rampant liberalism.

          • Martin

            TE

            And what of the Holy Spirit, who leads all believers into truth? Can not the Holy Spirit teach God’s people?

          • The Explorer

            Yes and no. The Sprit, for instance, can’t give me background knowledge I don’t have, But the Sprit can enable me to acquire that knowledge by guiding me towards some commentators, and away from others.

          • Martin

            TE

            I think you underestimate what God can do.

          • The Explorer

            Perhaps, but my experience in the Christian life has been that when I have prayed for understanding I have been directed to a source that will help me. That may not be true for everybody; for instance, in circumstances where sources are not available.

          • dannybhoy

            I think this is referring to mystical Israel, Jews and Gentiles joined together as the Bride of Christ.
            It doesn’t (imo) mean that all Jews will be saved, but that the opportunity is there: just as it is for the Gentiles to be saved -if they respond..
            I base this on the Scriptures where a) Paul says

            ” But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel, 7 nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, “In Isaac your seed shall be called.”[b] 8 That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed.”
            We see this in the Scriptures of the Old Testament also.
            So it seems to me that whilst we may have the privilege of being born into God’s ancient people, it does not mean we will take hold of the promises of God.

          • chiefofsinners

            The Jews have only been hardened. That doesn’t mean they can’t be saved, only that it’s harder for them to be than it otherwise would have been. The advantages they inherited have been lost, that’s all.

          • Anton

            Because by the time Talmud was written Christians were persecuting Jews. Read Chrysostom’s sermons, or Ambrose of Milan on how he got his congregation to torch the local synagogue (Letter 40, addressed to Emperor Theodosius), for instance.

          • @ Anton—Christians were persecuting Jews

            On this page of Jewish History, Jewish Religion, Israel Shahak writes:

            ‘Judaism is imbued with a very deep hatred towards Christianity, combined with ignorance about it. This attitude was clearly aggravated by the Christian persecutions of Jews, but is largely independent of them. In fact, it dates from the time when Christianity was still weak and persecuted (not least by Jews), and it was shared by Jews who had never been persecuted by Christians or who were even helped by them.’

          • Ivan M

            Professor Shahak wrote like a dream.

          • Ivan M

            The Jews were not as weak vis a vis Christians in the days of the Roman Empire or later, as some like to portray. They gave as good as they got. Nothing wrong with that, as they are a tribe like any other.

          • Anton

            This is true in part. The rabbis always resented the success of the Messianic Jewish movement that went global, ie Christianity, because they regarded Jesus as a heretic. As I’m a Christian, I do believe that deliberate rejection of Christ hardens the heart. But relations were massively worsened by persecution of Jews once Christianity became the religion of State of the Roman Empire. (I’d say: once the church betrayed herself with politics.) Before then, there might be banter in the public square. After that, there was fear and furtive glances.

            Thankfully these historic breaches are in process of being healed. Jews are turning to their messiah in the Holy Land in numbers unprecedented in 2000 years – just as some of the prophets said. Not every Old Testament prophecy has been fulfilled yet.

          • dannybhoy

            Sarky and I would agree that these were not the acts of true Christians…. ;0)

          • Anton

            That plugs into the debate about what is a Christian is. But if forced to give a binary reply then I’d agree with you.

          • CliveM

            I really dislike that term. Mistaken Christians perhaps, but I’m uncomfortable with defining a ‘true’ Christian as one who has got it right.

          • dannybhoy

            When I say ‘true Christian’ it’s only to distinguish from “Churchians*”
            or those who believe a perversion of the Gospel Clive. Like ‘the pink and fluffy love and tolerate everything gospel.’
            You would agree that that is a perversion of the Gospel, no?

            Like wise those who believe that ritual is more important than relationship, and that Christ came to be an example to us to follow, so we should try to be better people..

            Sure the heart of the Gospel is to have had some kind of seminal moment in our life where we recognised our sinfulness our wilfulness and our lostness and asked Hime for forgiveness and surrendered our lives to Him.
            That’s nothing to do with denomination, nothing to do with being judgemental of others, and everything to do with recognising Christ as our Saviour and our Lord. Everything else is peripheral and up for discussion.

          • CliveM

            Apologies will try and come back on this, but busy at moment.

          • Manfarang

            Christianity is a false region?

          • Ivan M

            Relying on the mindless support of brain-dead Christian Zionists is not a recipe for long term survival. The Israelis will have to deal with their neighbours as they are. Playing the schoolyard bully, with the knowledge of support from Uncle Sam, skews the reality of their situation and infuriates the Arabs. The Arabs will get their act together sooner or later.

          • carl jacobs

            Muslims are infuriated by the mere existence of Israel. They do not accept it, and will not come to terms with it. The Israelis have a very simple task – dominate or be annihilated.

          • Ivan M

            I have to differ from you. Some Muslims, the Saudis for example have no problem cooperating with the “Zionist entity”. The Egyptians had maintained the peace for over 40 years. Same as the Syrians.

          • Findaráto

            By “the Saudis” you mean the Saudi monarchs. By “the Egyptians” you mean Mubarak. By “the Syrians” you mean al-Assad.

            You cannot compare the Realpolitik of Arab dictators to the visceral anti-semitism of the Arab people. If democracy ever takes hold in the Middle East then Israel will be in the gravest of danger.

            The sooner Western leaders back away from this crazy policy of promoting democracy in a region where tribal and religious allegiances mean everything, and vague and idealistic notions of equality and fraternity mean nothing at all, the safer Israel and the world in general will be.

            In the meantime, Israel will do what it takes to ensure its survival. If I were in their position, I would do the same.

          • Ivan M

            I used to think like you. Things have moved on.

          • Findaráto

            In what way have they moved on? Chaos reigns in every Arab nation where dictators have fallen, and where there’s chaos, Islam rather than democracy has risen to fill the void.

            In the face of radical Islam, Western support for Israel, which has been waning due to liberal concerns with strong-arm Israeli tactics, will rise once more. Israel’s position is stronger than you think. If it’s a choice between Israeli democracy and Arab theocracy, there’s only one side the West can back.

          • Ivan M

            Then you should also know that Sadat, Mubarak and al-Sisi in Egypt, King Hussein in Jordan, the al-Sauds in Arabia were supported by the US largely as they can rely on these “strongmen” to tolerate Israel. The Americans don’t give a damn about Ayrabs as they are. It is a chicken and story. If I were an Arab the story it would seem to me, is that the Americans will move every mountain for Israel but do nothing for the Arabs. Realism and science will solve every problem, including the threat from the Islamists, but for that to prevail, the Israelis should stop stealing Arab lands under the pretext of security or eschatology. They sometimes sound a lot like the Walrus in Lewis Carroll’s story.

          • Anton

            In discussions about land-stealing it is important to distinguish between political hegemony and ownership of land for uses such as farming and residence. I support Jewish political hegemony over the land once called Mandatory Palestine. I deplore the forcible eviction of peaceable Arabs such as from Daher Nassar farm, which they can prove they occupied since the early 20th century. There is a tension between Jewish desire for security (hardly surprising after Auschwitz) and Arab desire for justice. This is a difficult issue.

          • Ivan M

            The POV would depend on which way the cookie crumbles. I agree that the Israelis are in a difficult position, but precisely for that reason, they should soberly assess their options without assuming that the US will always be there for them. This is apart from the feedback loop to religious fundamentalism in Israel, which makes it an increasingly intolerant place.

          • Anton

            The media give us only the political news which is often bad, but there is plenty of reconciliation going on there at a level beneath the media radar. Israel is determined to survive but is not getting notably more Orthodox. It is its neighbours which face the risk of falling to religious fundamentalism.

          • The Explorer

            Within Europe, the West seems to be backing Arab theocracy: at least in relation to itself. It can’t seem to get enough of it.

          • Ivan M

            Seems like Missouri though close has gone to Trump. Now Cruz is in the position of Trump in Iowa and can complain about “stolen elections”.

          • Anton

            Do you consider all Christian Zionists as brain dead or just some?

          • Ivan M

            I consider those who CZs who think that is Israel is some sort of eschatological totem, to be one of the major impediments to any kind of solution short of total war. We will have to see whose god is mightier. If the Americans had followed the policy of say James Baker III, there would at least be quite if not peace.

          • Anton

            I think it is exegetically incontestable that the return of the Jews to the Holy Land as a nation is an event prophesied in scripture, and a big step forward on God’s clock toward the return of Jesus Christ to this earth in power and glory. Details if you dissent. But please note what I do not believe, views which you might be imputing to all Christian Zionists (Yes, I am one): I do not believe that the modern State of Israel can do no wrong (although I think it is far more sinned against than sinner); I do not believe that Jews do not need Jesus Christ for personal salvation (John Hagee’s absurd view); I am not a ‘dispensationalist’ in my theology (that is mainly a North American heresy, even among CZs).

          • Ivan M

            You are one of a kind, Anton. I wish you well. I don’t believe I have managed to convert any one person to Christianity.

          • Anton

            Don’t stop trying and I wish you well too! But I am hardly unique; please see David Pawson’s book “Defending Christian Zionism” for a biblical view that espouses the position I set out. I’ve been in two Christian prayer groups for Israel and wild views are in a small minority in these – about the same proportion as in churches generally, in fact.

          • dannybhoy

            Good post but I don’t agree with Christian Zionism. We are Christians, we recognise the Jews as God’s Chosen people.
            We also accept that Israeli politicians can be as shrewd as any other politicians, that Israel can do daft or wrong things, and that her friends abroad whether Jew, Gentile or Christian have a right to kindly and diplomatically say so.
            We don’t have to espouse Zionism to do that.

          • Anton

            What of the prophecies of a second return to the land Isaiah (11:11-12), or of a permanent return (Amos 9:13-15) which the return from Babylon proved not to be? Also, Zechariah (8:7-8) promises a future return in a prophecy given after the return from Babylon. (Ezra 5:1 & 6:14 state that Zechariah is prophesying in Jerusalem – not from a place of exile – and Zechariah 1:1 tells us that he was speaking after the exile.)

          • dannybhoy

            I believe all of that, but it doesn’t make me a Zionist, only a Christian.
            https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Zionism/zionism.html

          • Anton

            God’s prophesies are sometimes of good events, sometimes of bad ones, but these are portrayed in a positive light. Surely then Christians should share God’s view of the present return?

          • dannybhoy

            But I do, and I don’t need a Zionist tag to do that.

          • Anton

            Then should you not be a Zionist?

          • dannybhoy

            No, I don’t think so, To be a Christian and a supporter of UKIP is surely enough…?

          • Anton

            I’m suggesting that Zionism is a scriptural position today. It does not mean unconditional support of the actions of the Israeli government.

          • dannybhoy

            Give me chapter and verse preferably from Romans, and I’ll sign on the dotted line…
            A Christian Zionist ends up having to justify themselves politically as well as spiritually.
            I lived five years in Eretz Israel
            I shared my faith with lots of people,
            I was invited to become a member of a left wing kibbutz. -a great honour indeed.
            I really don’t think I need to hang a tag of Christian Zionist on myself to show my love and support of the Jews or Israel.

          • Anton

            “A Christian Zionist ends up having to justify themselves politically as well as spiritually.”

            I’m saying only that scripture lends support to the rebirth of the zionist State, and that if God does then those who follow scripture should too. Supporting a State that gets things wrong is part of the tension of the believer who lives in the world. There are plenty of scriptures about this and I’ve a 3000-word summary but I’ve already given three from the OT that were unfulfilled prophecy before 1948, and mentioned one book (by David Pawson, Defending Christian Zionism). There’s also “The rebirth of the State of Israel: Is it of God or of men” by Arthur Kac, a Messianic Jew, written presciently in 1958 and still unsurpassed. But the single strongest argument is the covenant with Abraham and his descendants that runs specifically through Isaac and Jacob and gives (better, reserves) that land for them. Unlike the Mosaic covenant there is no question that this one is still in force; it is as much in force as the covenant with Noah promising no repeat of the Flood.

          • The Explorer

            Mindless or otherwise, Christian Zionists are declining as a percentage of the US population, and my Jewish friends are aware of the changing American situation.

          • Uncle Brian

            The Arabs will get their act together sooner or later.
            Do you really believe that, Ivan?

          • Ivan M

            Yes I do Uncle Brian. I give the Islamists another ten years before they become sclerotic like the Iranian mullahs. I am not that apprehensive about them. And neither are Israelis as the have made clear in regards to Syria. Their game is to let the Arabs to duke it among themselves, slyiy supporting one side or the other to ensure permanent and damaging conflicts. The Arabs will eventually figure this out in greater numbers.

          • Ivan M

            The Frankfort School was some kind of therapy club for neurasthenic Jews. It is no surprise that there were no non-Jews among them. Most Jews in Europe didn’t know of them either. They came into prominence in the US at the New School of Social Research. They brought Marxism into areas where Karl Marx himself would have shied away from. They made Marxism sexy, no longer concerned about the class struggle, but about oppressive structures which in the US mainly means the sexual repression of the patriarchy. As usual the CIA made things worse by hiring some of their acolytes such as Herbert Marcuse.

            https://www.foreignaffairs.com/reviews/review-essay/frankfurt-school-war

          • Anton

            Didn’t Marcuse play for Manchester United?

          • Pubcrawler

            Gah! It’s taken this long for the penny to drop. Very good!

          • The Explorer

            “Most Jews in Europe didn’t know of them either.” That would be the answer to give to Johnny R.

          • Ivan M

            I am sure JR is learning.

  • Pubcrawler
    • Anton

      Quite right too.

      The Punter at 6.30pm on Friday? I’d have that pub map on the table as ID.

      • Pubcrawler

        I happened to be in there last week, for the first time in years. Can’t say I was all that impressed. Could I suggest instead the one up the hill named after a prominent local landmark?

        • Anton

          I understand you and will be there.

          • Pubcrawler

            Marvellous!

          • Lienus

            The Head of the River? Ah weel be watching you…

          • Pubcrawler

            You’ll need a strong spyglass to see me from there.

          • dannybhoy

            Just make sure that you don’t drink too much and bring shame on the whole AC community….

          • Anton

            I have to drive afterwards.

    • CliveM

      It’s mighty strange, and probably coincidental, but every time I google this woman, it goes into meltdown!

      Wonder how long the suspension will last this time.

      • The Explorer

        Keep googling her non-stop, in the hope that it isn’t coincidence.

        • CliveM

          Life’s too short!

          • The Explorer

            Tell Linus she’s going to be on the panel of ‘TGI Monday’, and let him do it.

          • CliveM

            I prefer not to give Linus any encouragement.

          • Findaráto

            Will she be appearing as Disabled Nosering’s guest then?

            DN is just the kind of vicarette whose ACPERV-acquired appreciation of victim status would inspire her to hold regular meetings of antisemitic pressure groups in her parish hall.

            Of course this might create tension among the rest of her TGI Monday colleagues. Hipster Vic in particular would probably object to Ms Kirby’s guest spot given that unquestioning support of all Israeli objectives seems to be de rigueur among conservative evangelicals keen to salve their consciences over the poor record of their religion when it comes to antisemitic persecution.

            While I personally would deplore any public platform given to the likes of Ms Kirby and her visceral and irrational hatred of a people whose only crime down the centuries has been to defy the odds and survive in the face of appalling persecution, I can’t help thinking that her appearance on TGI Monday might be quite useful. The furore it would create as open warfare ensued between the four presenters whose Christian love and and acceptance of each other’s differing viewpoints would be revealed as completely fake and put-on for the cameras would tell us everything we need to know about the farce that is the Anglican Church.

          • The Explorer

            There you are. I said you’d be interested!

          • Findaráto

            Google DN? I did it once to find out whether she was gay because the possibility had been raised on one of these comments threads. But I now know as much – indeed, more – than I need to know about her.

            Christian ACPERV pilots are of limited interest to me unless they’re actively seeking to infect others with their religious sickness, in which case they become legitimate targets. DN’s TGI Monday efforts so far hardly qualify her as an active and aggressive evangeliser, so she’s relatively safe from me.

            I mean, if this week’s performance is anything to go by, we’re hardly going to see any passionate and convincing attempts at conversion from her. This time she’d have been slumped under that table and out for the count if one of her colleagues hadn’t resorted to the simple expedient of screwing a mug of warm and sugary tea into her hands in order to wake her up and get her to contribute something to the conversation. Which she did, near the end, when rising blood sugar had finally brought her out of hibernation. And wasn’t it comical? A direct contradiction of LG’s claim that deadness is better than undeadness! LG’s reaction was priceless! Who knew that “Yeah, helpful!” actually means “shut the f*&k up and stop contradicting me, biatch!” in Christianese?

          • The Explorer

            Don’t be deliberately disingenuous. You know perfectly well that this is a continuation of a conversation with Clive M about the effects of googling Vicki Kirby.

          • CliveM

            “Gasp!” Linus disingenuous!

            I’m shocked, it’s like my whole world has been shaken.

          • Findaráto

            Good. Now perhaps you’ll start thinking clearly instead of relying on ancient myths and legends. Nothing like a good kick up the backside to get you thinking straight. I can recommend some very good books by Richard Dawkins if you’d like some reading material.

          • The Explorer

            “Nothing like a good kick up the backside to get you thinking straight.” If only the answer were that simple for making British youth employable compared with Eastern Europeans.

          • Findaráto

            Subject adroitly changed (well not really … clumsily changed more like, but I’m feeling magnanimous in victory so I can throw you a bone…)

            Agreed. British youths are spotty, fat, ugly and workshy. Bald too. Look at that young Windsor whelp and his inane and smiley blow-dried wife. Skiing down French mountains and slaughtering cuddly rhinos (or whatever it is they kill for pleasure) when they should be out opening hospitals and pretending to be concerned about social ills.

            Get rid of ’em, I say. Eastern Europe has plenty of unemployed royal families who’d do a sterling job for a tenth of the cost of the Windsors. We’ve imported royals before when the home grown variety got too fat and lazy to do the job. We should put them on notice that productivity has to improve, or else!

          • The Explorer

            Subject adroitly changed (well not really … clumsily changed more like, but I’m feeling magnanimous in victory so I can throw you a bone…)
            I was referring to products of the state-school system. They’re the ones in competition with the Eastern Europeans. Royalty and Labour Cabinet Ministers go to private schools.

          • Findaráto

            You made no mention of the state school system. You merely said “British youth”. And I agree. There’s no evidence that the fecklessness of young Britons is limited to the products of comprehensive education. Look at “Made in Chelsea”. Not many of that rabble went to comprehensive schools. Would you employ a single one of them?

            No, as I said, let’s dump ’em all and import an entire new generation from Poland and the Czech Republic. We’ll have to get them to abjure their Catholicism of course, which shouldn’t be too difficult as Eastern European youth is as disgusted with its elders as any other. And they’ll have to change their names, or at least get rid of some of the excess consonants. But on the whole I’m sure we’d do well by the change.

          • The Explorer

            I thought the state-school system went without saying, but clearly not. Some statistics. 7% of British youth attends independent schools. That 7% is not noted for being unemployed when it leaves school because of competition with Eastern Europeans. It IS noted for attending the top universities in undue numbers, especially Oxbridge. SJW’s are doing what they can to rectify this appalling situation.

          • Findaráto

            We’ll see. A lot of that 7% go into finance, and with the rate of job growth in that sector hitting record lows due to increasing business process automation, we may soon see the Hoorays competing for the same McJobs as the hoi polloi, or the hoiski polloiski…

          • CliveM

            With regards Dawkins, when he talks science I listen with respect, when he stumbles into philosophy and theology, I feel it is better to listen to experts in the field.

          • magnolia

            I find it downright embarrassing. There are also quite a number of the more intelligent breed of atheist who feel the same.

            The sheer ease with which Alistair McGrath and John Lennox demolish his ramshackle arguments should have taught people a thing or two, and if they are permeable to logic, it has.

            If they are set in their ways determinedly, though, and feel it is fine to set yourself up as a philosophical diamond on the basis of being a capable scientist because science is the ultimate discipline and it is unnecessary to learn the basics of philosophy or theology to argue competently against those who have bothered, then Dawkins is their idol.

            But then some can hold two amazingly disparate views without blushing at the same time, both deeply concerned champion of the oppressed minorities and mocker of the disabled, the ill and the wheelchair-bound.

            Called having your cake and eating it!

          • CliveM

            It’s the difference between having a discussion or simply wanting to mock.

          • Findaráto

            Who are Ros and Zoe … characters from “Friends”? Do you mean LG and DN? Are their real names really so monosyllabic?

            Ros is short for what? Rosalind? Rosamund? Rosbif en croûte? The latter would at least be credible. She needs a few more minutes in the oven to brown that pastry though. A hearty dish indeed. I hope you’ve invited a lot of friends for dinner.

            Hmmm, thinking about it, perhaps the pallor is normal. If she’s still in the the freezer encased in Iceland packaging and waiting for you to bung her into the Aga, she would be that colour, wouldn’t she? I’m sure she’ll crisp up nicely. Milk and egg yolk. Works every time.

            And as for Zoe, or Zo as we must call her in the absence of the diaeresis that would make her name bisyllabic, is that short for anything? Zoetrope perhaps? Does she go round in circles repeating the same mistakes over and over again? It wouldn’t surprise me. Or do her parents have a penchant for naming their children after French cars? Does she have one sister called Mégane and another called Twingo? She looks alternative and kooky enough for that to be a distinct possibility…

            I think I’ll stick to LG and DN. So much more descriptive and easy to remember.

          • The Explorer

            You have trouble remembering ‘Ros’ and ‘Zoe’?

            I can think of at least fourteen names that ‘Ros’ might be short for, but I’m happy to keep to her own designation of herself.

            Zoe, without addition to the e, has become perfectly acceptable in English. It is self-contained, and not short for anything. Greek in origin, meaning ‘Life’ I’m sure you know that, but you are choosing to conceal the fact, and some readers might take it for simple ignorance.

          • Findaráto

            Zoë I know. Indeed I know two Zoës. Don’t know any Zoes tho’. Don’t move in the same circles as parents who would do that to a child…

            Fourteen Ros alternatives, eh? Hmmm … well Rosalind, Rosamund and Rosbif-en-croûte I’ve already listed. What are the others?

            4. Rostropovich? Were her parents big fans of Russian cellists? It’s an unconvincing name for a girl though, although in LG’s case gender specific naming may not have been a priority.

            5. Roscommon? Now that suits her. But perhaps there’s no Irish connection to justify it.

            6. Rosti, or 7. Rösti, if we’re going to quibble about accents? A very suitable name for a girl with a potato fixation. Descriptive too.

            8. Rosacea? Her complexion looks clear enough, but perhaps that’s the screen makeup.

            9. Rosh Hashanah? Is she a Jew for Jesus? Ms Kirby would not approve. Also, the nose isn’t nearly big enough, although perhaps if she lost a little weight…

            10. Rosmerta? Is she a Celtic fertility goddess who’s infiltrated Christianity in order to subvert it and gain converts? I’m told the cult of Rosmerta involved drunken feasting and naked dancing. It doesn’t bear thinking about…

            11. Rosières? A French brand of large, cast iron cookers somewhat reminiscent of a cut-price Aga. The size and shape are about right…

            12. Rosicrucian? Careful all you Anglicans. She may be a masonic mole.

            13. Rosticceria? A type of rather delicious Italian sausage roll or, to give it its American name, “pig in blanket”. ‘Nuff said…

            For the life of me though, I can’t think of a 14th possibility. You’ll have to enlighten me.

          • The Explorer

            Rosabel, Rosabella, Rosalia, Rosalie, Rosalind, Rosalinda, Rosaline, Rosamond, Rosamund, Rosanna, Rosanne, Rosemary, Rosetta, Rosina. Take your pick.

          • Findaráto

            I prefer my selection. None of yours seem to fit really, whereas several of mine would be most suitable.

            Does she post here? Could she enlighten us? I’m only moderately interested of course. Whatever she’s called, she’ll always be LG to me. But for form’s sake it’s always good to be able to put a name to a face.

          • The Explorer

            My list is less cruel than yours, but more plausible.

          • Findaráto

            Cruel? Ach, I wouldn’t worry yourself about it. Girls like LG always have a great sense of humour. It’s what gets them through life. They prop it under one armpit, and God goes under the other, and on they stagger.

            As for plausibility, I see what you mean. Unless they were extraordinarily prophetic people, LG’s parents probably wouldn’t have chosen a name from my list. It’s a shame though. We should all just be called “Child” until we’re adults and really suitable names can be conferred on us by a vote of our peers. I’m sure we’d all be much happier for it.

  • len

    Racial hatred seems just as much alive today as it ever was.
    ‘Anders Brevik’ was in court today giving the Nazi salute a grim reminder of the atrocities he committed if ever we needed one.
    It seems only to easy to demonize groups of people and we need to be aware of those who manipulate people for their own ends.
    I wonder how many people were aware of the implications of following leaders such as Hitler in the 1930`s and can only see the horror of doing so in retrospect?.
    ‘Vicki Kirby’ seems to want to implant the same hatred she feels for Jewish people into her children insuring that selfsame hated not only survives but grows .
    There are groups of people who need little encouragement to get involved in violent acts but those who set themselves up as political leaders must be held especially accountable if they advocate violence…

    • Ivan M

      Brevik if you don’t know killed those kids at a camp organized by socialists to address among other things “the oppression of the Palestinians”.

  • dannybhoy

    Here’s an interesting testimony from a serving soldier in Israel’s army..

    http://www.jewishnews.co.uk/theres-only-one-country-in-the-middle-east-that-could-produce-a-soldier-like-me/

    • michaelkx

      the above sort of said all, it well done for digging it out. but of cause the darlings in the left would say its only Jewish propaganda like the holocaust, but I know that the holocaust did happen as a old soldier told me because he was the helping in the rescue of those poor human beings.

      • dannybhoy

        It was interesting to hear the Israeli Arabs at the conference I went to. How they seek to balance their identities as Muslims (with relatives on the West Bank and Jordan and Gaza..), witheir civil identities as citizens of Israel with all the privileges and responsibilities that go with it. This man has obviously found a way to do it..
        Last week I attended a meeting with an Israeli Messianic pastor. It was a great time, and he was telling us about the acts of reconciliation going on between Arab Christian congregations and Jewish Messianic groups in Israel.
        The thing is that the msm does not want to tell us the positive things that are happening because religion has been sidelined.

        • Uncle Brian

          It’s not only religion that has been sidelined. Any truthful statement that tends to show the State of Israel in a good light, or Netanyahu, or the IDF, is liable to be withheld from the public eye because of the howls of anger, frustration, envy and other base emotions it would tend to arouse among the Kirbys of Woking, not to mention the Sizers of Virginia Water and the Wrights formerly of Durham.

  • Inspector General

    Hatred in the Labour party, then. Plenty of that in there for people who are successful through their own efforts and have thrived in this country, but there’s always room for a bit more, as they say. So we have hatred for the people of a successful country who have against the odds, thrived despite the nearby filth that is Islam.

    Never heard of the woman Kirby before, but we all have now. We should celebrate her existence and the fact that she has such a warm cosy home within the Labour party. That her tweets are somewhat aged suggests she has managed to control her digital yap, but what a cost that has taken from her: Any political ambitions beyond branch level at an end, for all time…

  • chiefofsinners

    The endurance of the Jews over so many millennia is evidence for the existence of God. The persistence of antisemitism over so many millennia is evidence for the existence of Satan.

    • Findaráto

      The endurance of the Jews over so many millennia is evidence for the endurance of the Jews over so many millennia. It tells us nothing about the existence of their God. It does tell us something about their resilience and cohesion as a people.

      The persistence of antisemitism over so many millennia is evidence for the existence of xenophobia. It tells us nothing about the existence of Satan. It does tell us something about the tendency of peoples toward tribal and exclusionary behaviour and the prevalence of scapegoating as a means of social control.

      • Anton

        Can you name any other people that has retained cultural identity for even a few centuries, let alone 18, without physical possession of a homeland?

        • Findaráto

          The Roma. The Kurds…

          • Anton

            The Kurds still occupy their ancient lands; they simply have political overlords in the present era, just as the Romans conquered most Western European peoples in their places.

            Roma is a good response; thank you. Where were they from and when, please?

          • Findaráto

            The Jews occupy their ancient lands. What’s your point?

            Linguistic theory backed up by genetic analysis points to a Northern Indian origin for the Roma. They left that part of the world about 1500 years ago.

            So much for the theory that only God’s chosen people could maintain a distinct cultural and linguistic identity in the face of dominant and unwelcoming cultures. Or are the Roma a lost tribe of Israel? The missing 13th tribe in fact, searching for a mysterious planet of sanctuary called Earth…

            Hold on a sec’ … no, that’s Battlestar Galactica, not the Bible. You’ll have to forgive me, but sometimes it’s hard to distinguish between one fairy story and another.

          • Anton

            Try the Book of Mormon for stuff like that.

          • Findaráto

            Will the Book of Mormon also tell me how to stop laughing at crazed and deluded Christians when the evidence they present to support their theory of divine origin falls to pieces around them and leaves them looking like blinkered and ignorant fools? If so, it might be worth a read. Schadenfreude starts to pall after a while…

            But perhaps I’m jumping the gun. So go on, where’s your ironclad proof that the Roma are actually Jews, even though they don’t know it themselves? And if they are, how come they’ve forgotten that fact?

            So much for the idea that God preserved their identity. Or did they commit some kind of sin and are being punished for it?

            I suppose I shouldn’t push, but I’m interested to see just how crazy crazy can get.

          • Anton

            Push as hard as you like. I never claimed and don’t believe that the Roma are an Israelite tribe. What you did was educate me that another people than the Jews has kept its cultural identity for centuries without having occupancy of a fixed piece of land. As for the matter of divinity, you may be glad that you are free to hold the views you do.

          • Findaráto

            You were presenting the fact that the Jews kept their cultural identity for centuries without having a homeland as evidence of their unique status and divine favour. You were wrong.

            What other piece of “evidence” for God would you like me to blast out of the water for you? Careful. As a scientist, if all your data proves to be unreliable, your conclusions will rest on nothing and you’ll be in a bit of a fix, won’t you?

          • Anton

            “You were presenting the fact that the Jews kept their cultural identity for centuries without having a homeland as evidence of their unique status and divine favour. You were wrong.”

            It’s evidence alright, just less decisive. Do the Roma long for their ancient homeland, as it was prophesied the Jews always would? (I don’t know, by the way; do tell me, if you know.)

            1 Peter 3:15 does not compel me to debate with people who are not asking out of genuine interest.

          • Findaráto

            I bet if I did a comprehensive search through all available historical records, I could come up with many instances of dispossessed and wandering peoples who retained a separate identity for centuries. And with each new example, your claim that the situation of the Jews somehow proves God’s special favour would be less and less tenable.

            As things stand, I don’t need to waste my time on it. Originally you claimed that the Jews were the only people EVER to retain their identity once they’d left their homeland behind. Less than 30 seconds of reflection enabled me to blast that inaccurate statement out of the water.

            The problem here is that you’re working back from a predetermined outcome and trying to find evidence to support it. But you’re just not very thorough, are you? When you think you’ve found something, you don’t even “stress test” it to make sure it stands up to cross-examination. I wonder how you ever obtained any kind of scientific qualification. Are you really a physicist, or is that just the persona you assume when playing this Christian version of Dungeons and Dragons?

          • Anton

            I made a mistake and thanked you for correcting me. Have you never made a mistake? In view of the number of times you have failed to respond here after I asked you a hard question (no, I’m not going to count them, I’ve got physics to do) I would like to ask: Is your reply simply an attempt to wind me up?

          • Findaráto

            See my reply to the Explorer above. If you think I’m winding you up, think again.

            And what physics are these? 101? The physics of Star Trek? Can you tell us how the Enterprise’s inertial dampers work? This I’d love to hear…

          • The Explorer

            I’ll let you into a secret. ‘Star Trek’ is fictional.

          • Findaráto

            Shhh! Don’t tell Anton that. If he thinks we know that all his physics degrees from Starfleet Academy and his important position at the Utopia Planitia shipyard are made up, he might do something desperate!!!

          • The Explorer

            Hate to get repetitive, but Anton didn’t raise the subject of ‘Star Trek’. You did.

          • Findaráto

            Sigh. Again: I. Was. Asking. A. Question!

            Anton has provided ample proof on this thread that his mind does not work like the mind of a trained scientist. And yet that’s what he claims to be.

            What I want to know is whether he’s truly delusional (and Star Trek references tend to make the whackos bite and reveal the true extent of their whackosity …) or whether he’s just some kid posing as a physicist for a laugh.

            If I get an evasive answer, or none at all, I might try a leading question about his relationship with Counselor Deanna Troi. Any attempt to besmirch the reputation of the Trekkie’s virgin goddess usual results in a violent reaction. Unmasks ’em every time…

          • Anton

            I take it that Deanna Troi is a character in Star Trek, as series in which I have no interest.

            I might as well query your atheism as you query my being a physicist. Futile either way.

          • Findaráto

            Ho ho! The lady doth protest too much, methinks…

          • Anton

            Think what you like.

          • Findaráto

            I shall.

          • Anton

            But it’s mere speculation.

          • carl jacobs

            If you would just turn him off, and refuse to engage him, he would get bored and go away. You are just casting pearls before swine. Understand this. I have never said that about anyone before.

            All you have to do is turn him off.

          • Findaráto

            You certainly turn me off, but then most Americans do. Something about the corn fed look just doesn’t work for me.

            Nice to know I’m special though. carl jacobs has consigned me to the ninth circle of hell. I’m the only person he’s ever so condemned. Good job I don’t feel the cold. I should be right at home there.

          • carl jacobs

            Do you see, Anton. He can’t even open his mouth without proving the truth of what I say. Just stop responding to him.

          • Findaráto

            Self-fulfilling prophecies have a habit of fulfilling themselves. That’s why people like you are so fond of hurling them at others and then saying “see, I told you so!”

            Malice speaks with an American accent on this blog. All the Limeys are just a bit dazed and confused. But you’re different – much more measured and implacable than the common, garden British Christian who bumbles his way through religion much as he bumbles his way through most things in life.

            I’m sure you’re a force to reckoned with over there. It doesn’t take much to scare an American into cowering repentance, does it? Race memories of the Salem witch trials and fear of being shunned do their fell work of whipping the recalcitrant and uncooperative into line.

            Those tactics don’t work in Europe. And you’ll never understand why…

          • Only one thing to say, really.

          • Findaráto

            What did they do to you in that hospital, poor old Jack? Colectomy was it? It must have been something digestive to make you quite so obsessed with the passing of wind.

            Perhaps it’s senility making you relive your childhood. An obsession with flatulence is common among small schoolboys. Have you really regressed quite so far? What’s next? Will you be regaling us with how you dribble into your incontinence pants?

            Ew…

          • Again you miss the point, Linus. It is you who is filled with flatulence. All you do is emit gas from your anus.

          • Findaráto

            We all do that Jack. Or maybe your obsession with the idea is because you no longer can.

            Sporting a colostomy bag after your stay in hospital, are you? Oh well, never mind. There are advantages, I’m told. No more of the heaving and straining that is the bane of so many old men’s lives. Pity it hasn’t improved your mood though.

          • You’re a sad sack, Linus. Repulsive too. At least appreciate that many people here tolerate you out of pity and a sense of civility. I regret that where you’re concerned, I can’t find it in me to follow their admirable example. Try as as I might, I come close and then you plop another notch lower and, poof! Another thing to add to my Yom Kippur list of confessions.

          • Anton

            OK Findarato, it’s time to go back to the start of this subthread. You wrote to me, above: “Originally you claimed that the Jews were the only people EVER to retain their identity once they’d left their homeland behind.”

            Where? (NB I have not changed any of my posts and I am quoting from one of Findarato’s as it reads at 2110 hours.)

          • Findaráto

            Your claim was posed as a question, as they so often are. As I said somewhere else on this thread, you often do this as a means of beating a retreat when called out on your shoddily researched propositions.

            Go ahead and claim that you really weren’t sure and you were asking a genuine question. And may your imaginary God strike you down where you stand as a just punishment for unrepentant perjury.

          • Anton

            I thought it was probably true but wasn’t sure so posed a question. That is legitimate practice and by calling a question a claim you are twisting words in a way that is disingenuous. I need do no more than call readers’ attention to it.

          • Findaráto

            And they’ll all support you unswervingly, of course. That’s what happens on Christian blogs when an Atheist is holding a Christian’s nose to the grindstone. It doesn’t matter whether they believe you or not. They’ll still support you because the Atheist must be evil and wrong. It says so in the Bible, after all.

            I’ve said it before, you may fool them, or at least get them to pretend they’re fooled. But you don’t fool me.

          • Anton

            I’m not asking them to support me. I’m directing the attention of readers, be they Christians, atheists or of any other belief, to what you are doing. I’m happy for them to make their own judgments of that. You are intelligent enough to know that a question is not the same as an assertion. An assertion answers a question, in fact.

          • Findaráto

            And you’re crafty enough to know that making an assertion in the guise of a question lets you off the hook when it’s demolished by superior knowledge. Only this time the ploy was so blatantly transparent that nobody was fooled. They may pretend to have been fooled in order to save face and teach the Atheist a lesson, but the only lesson to be learned here is that Christians are as insincere and mendacious as anyone else.

            Fruits of the Spirit? If that’s what you’re displaying, your God must be an evil thing indeed.

          • Anton

            I know I wasn’t doing that. Will you call me a liar?

          • Findaráto

            Without any hesitation.

          • sarky

            Anton, I’ve just read your original post again and it definitely reads as an assertion posed as a question.

          • Anton

            It read: “Can you name any other people that has retained cultural identity for even a few centuries, let alone 18, without physical possession of a homeland?” I’d be happy to see it described as a challenge but not as an assertion; that is how I meant it, and you and Findarato responded to the challenge and educated me, for which I am grateful. I regard your “definitely” above as an imputation of your own.

          • CliveM

            ” That’s what happens on Christian blogs when an Atheist is holding a Christian’s nose to the grindstone.”

            Don’t flatter yourself.

          • Ivan M

            You are unhealthily obsessed with the lower regions. You know very that HJ was in for throat cancer treatment. If you take nothing else from here at least avoid scatology.

          • Findaráto

            Throat cancer? I didn’t know that. If it’s true – and with someone like Happy Jack one can never be sure – then he has my sympathy. An appalling affliction that I wouldn’t wish on my worst enemy, or even a common garden Internet troll like Happy Jack.

            If divine retribution is a real phenomenon, one might ask what’s he being punished for. Who did he judge and condemn that he should be judged and condemned in his turn? Or are the works of God merely being made manifest in him? Is cancer a work of God? So much for the beauty of the divine plan.

            Of course none of this explains Jack’s unhealthy interest with digestive processes. That must be down to general senility and regression to a state of second childhood. Most undignified. Poor man.

          • Ivan M

            You know yourself, that you have a cruel streak. Try to tone it down for your own sake.

          • Findaráto

            There’s a fine line between cruelty and truth and those who are afraid of the latter always draw it as far away from the former as they can. Thus anything approaching the truth is qualified as cruel.

            It’s the way conservative control freaks try to shut down valid criticism. Accusing critics of cruelty is an attempt to take the moral high ground, when in reality all it really is is a grubby little play for power.

          • The Explorer

            Foucault strikes again.

          • Ivan M

            Having stalked HJ before and surely after his treatment, you cannot expect anyone to believe that you did not know what he was in hospital for. Why don’t you just stop digging.

          • Findaráto

            Believe what you like but I had no idea what his ailment was. It wouldn’t have changed my behaviour had I known. Sick bigots are just as reprehensible as the healthy variety. Just like wheelchair-bound Christians are just as responsible for all the implications of the evil they support even when they claim not to believe certain parts of it. Let them defend themselves as best they can. Their sickness or disability are not my problem. Quite the reverse. An enemy’s weakness is my advantage.

            And if you want to throw accusations of stalking around, start with the sick bigot himself. If you count the number of times I’ve talked about or responded to him and compare the total to the number of comments he’s made about me and the various personas he’s convinced are me too, you’ll soon see who’s obsessed with whom.

          • Anton

            He should try eschatology instead.

          • Hi happy Jack

            That made me chuckle, especially as we’re in Adar*. LOL. Happy Patrick’s day [next Wednesday /Thursday it’s Purim!].

            *”When [the month of] Adar arrives, we increase our joy!” Talmud, Ta’anit 29a.

          • Hi Hannah, greetings to you and all the “tribe”.
            It really is all that can be said to Linus . What a hate filled man he is.

          • magnolia

            I am beginning to feel we are not helping him if we respond; his responses are becoming if anything more worrying, contumacious and obsessive. The gay issue is his summum bonum and he appears willing to grossly insult the ill and handicapped, even trample over their needs and feelings to advance it even an assumed and uncertain fraction of a mm.

          • Anton

            I appreciate the suggestion but at no point did I feel “at bay” and I wish to remain free respond to him (or not) in any way. If you are tired of him then you can petition his Grace to turn him off. I can’t do so. He can.

          • carl jacobs

            You always have the freedom to respond or not. Who would remove that from you? I would have capped the MIKE FOXTROT from the weblog several months ago, but it’s not my call. And, yes, I am tired of him. I read virtually nothing he writes but I know he litters thread after thread with his poisonous bile. He isn’t here to engage. He is here to piss on this weblog and cause trouble, and quite frankly he is doing damage to it by his diversions.

            I am not seeking to restrict your freedom. I am trying to get you to understand that there is no profit for anyone but Linus in your continued willingness to engage him. You are often his “in” to a thread. If you didn’t respond, he would get much less play. His posts would stand isolated. He would be starved of attention and would eventually leave. He is here to get reactions. Without those reactions he could not get the personal benefit he derives from posting here. There is utterly no reason to engage him.

          • Anton

            I gladly acknowledge that you weren’t trying to restrict my freedom. I should have been clearer and said that I wasn’t going to pledge not to engage with him (something that would have the effect of restricting my freedom, depending on what he said). But in all cordiality I disagree that he should be ignored. I have seen another blog wrecked by somebody who thought she knew everything but posted nonsense and refused to be educated by the regulars, who themselves refused to see nonsense spoken without correcting it. Where these things happen it is up to the blog owner to decide whether to bar individuals.

          • Hi Anton

            Findarto is just not worth soiling yourself within His Mocking of disabled people and ill people , twisting others words and being generally spiteful isn’t moral let alone a sign of good writing, intelligent or erudite by anyone’s standard , whether you are Jewish, Christian or atheist /AN other . I don’t bother much commenting here because of his posts, my post to Anna notwithstanding ,in fact I don’t bother as he’s utterly freaked me out.. he is better off ignored.

          • Anton

            Ask the blog owner to bar him. I’ve seen disputes break out at another blog between those who reckoned a troll should be ignored and those who reckoned he should be taken on. If we disagree, let’s remain courteous or he really HAS won. For me it depends on the issue; I don’t mindlessly take him on every time. (I hope Carl reads that too.)

          • Hi Anton

            That’s perfectly okay , we agree to disagree. It’s not my place to demand who can and can’t comment, and I’m not getting involved . Besides that would just provoke another flurry of posts down here and lend credence to the “all are going against me” meme.

            I have no problem myself with arguing against antipodal views, e.g. I regularly chat with two messianic Jews on my blog. What I can’t be bothered with is arguments in which whatever I propose is twisted and thrown back at me as something that I never actually said or engaging someone who can only critique via personal remarks. That’s what has happened here.

            If you wish to thump your head against a tungsten wall be my guest. I was simply trying to save the precious time we all have on this planet doing something more productive and satisfying than debating Findarato. But it’s your call as an adult .

            Shalom.

          • Anton

            I don’t feel any force in his personal comments as they patently say far more about him than me.

          • chiefofsinners

            What a large pile of guff my short comment generated.
            I said these things were evidence, not proof. Big difference.

          • The Explorer

            Well, you would say that, wouldn’t you?

          • magnolia

            Probably a Fishing Expedition on someone’s part…….

          • The Explorer

            Whether you framed it as a statement or a question, it was you who raised the topic.

          • Anton

            Actually I’ll retract my statement that I made a mistake. I never even asserted that only the Jews had lived without a homeland for many centuries. I thought it was probably true and I asked a question. You educated me. I am grateful.

          • Findaráto

            That’s right, engage reverse gear and backtrack for all you’re worth. You’ve already admitted your guilt. There’s no denying it now.

          • Anton

            I briefly fell into a trap by supposing that you were summarising accurately what i’d said – which you are again doing inaccurately. Readers can verify for themselves what I wrote. I haven’t edited it and shan’t be doing.

          • Findaráto

            A decent enough trick and one that will probably work, given where we are. When arguing against a non-Christian, Christians will always assign the most benign interpretation possible to the comments of fellow Christians. To the point of ignoring what they actually say and hearing only what they want to hear. The Atheist must be the one at fault. That’s just the way things are…

            As I said, it will work here. Your fellow Christians will rally around you and proclaim your innocence and truthfulness and condemn me as an evil twister of words. The Explorer has already done so, more or less. But all three of us know that you’ve really been exposed as an ignorant and doctrinaire fool. Which is enough for me.

          • dannybhoy

            You Sir are acting like a prat, a time waster, an abuser of honest kindly people who are trying to answer questions you pose, not because you really want answers but because you want to make fun of people’s sincerely held convictions.
            Be it on your own head.

          • Findaráto

            And so it starts, as I knew it would.

            Atheist proves Christian wrong, so Christian’s friends gather round and beat up on Atheist. No turning of the other cheek. No meekness. Just pure, naked hatred and aggression.

            See you in hell. That’s where we’re both going if you’re right about God. Me because I don’t believe in him. And you because although you say you do, you act as you please and ignore his commandments.

            Ah, the sight of you burning alongside me will make any torture bearable. And just think, there’ll I’ll be to brighten your day for all eternity. All ETERNITY. Won’t that be fun?

          • dannybhoy

            Don’t give me that rubbish Finderato., I don’t buy false guilt. I suspect that all along you have been taking people for a ride, pretending to ask questions whilst mocking them.
            Whatever it is that drives you along this path, just bear in mind to whom you will one day answer to; just as I will. Stop digging a pit for your self and think about what you’re doing here.

          • Findaráto

            I will answer to my own conscience, which when dealing with Christians whose sole aim in life is to exclude and oppress as many minorities as they can and impose their own narrow and hateful beliefs on everyone around them, is completely clear.

            Derision and mockery are among the most powerful ways of discrediting an opponent. Christians are already figures of fun in society in general, so it isn’t hard to build on that. In many quarters merely mentioning the word Christianity is enough to raise a laugh. And given some of the responses on this thread, it isn’t hard to see why.

          • dannybhoy

            There then, you’ve fulfilled your self appointed mission. You’ve mocked everybody who has tried to engage with you, you’ve made your clever little points, proved to your own satisfaction that we’re all hateful, narrow minded people etc. etc.
            As I said, be it on your own head Finderato.

          • Dreadnaught

            In this thread Fundo’s points are indeed clever, erudite and well written in my humble opinion.

          • dannybhoy

            I would say that people have answered many of his points, he just isn’t interested in the answers.
            There’s a big difference between a person who is seeking answers and is willing to act on the truth he does hear, and a person who has an agenda driven by who knows what.

            It reminds me very much of a passage in C.C. Lewis’s sci fi novel “Voyage to Venus” chapter 7, where a character named Weston asks interminable questions not because he wants answers but because he wants to wear down and mock the other person’s beliefs…

          • Findaráto

            I think you must mean “Perelandra”, Lewis’s only well-written science fiction effort. “Out of the Silent Planet” was dull and “That Hideous Strength” unreadable. But “Perelandra” was a rip-roaring tale and Lewis’s over-the-top and stereotypical portrayal of an atheist in Weston quite the most interesting thing in the whole book. The venom of the man (Lewis) when describing those who disagree with him! Quite an interesting character study of a typical self-important Christian, don’t you think?

            Of course by the time Weston starts asking interminable questions, he’s been well and truly possessed by the Evil Eldil who in our world would be called Satan. Is that what you’re saying has happened to me?

            Tell you what, why don’t you exorcise me and I’ll report back and let you know if the power of Christ compelled the Devil to vacate my premises…

          • The Explorer

            The Pan edition was called ‘Voyage to Venus’. ‘That Hideous Strength’ is incomparably the best of the three. Marvellous read. Prophetic, too. You could insert something by Lacan or Deleuze into the sequence where language deteriorates into gibberish, and not notice the discrepancy.

          • Findaráto

            Well that’s what happened when humankind devolved into paperback-reading Morlocks. One assumes the word “Perelandra” was simply too much for their low brows to handle.

            My Bodley Head hardback edition bears the true title. The whole trilogy was a gift from a well-meaning Christian relative. I did chuckle, but I also read the books. “Perelandra” was the only one I enjoyed.

            I think you probably have to be a Christian to enjoy “That Hideous Strength”. All that dull-as-ditchwater moralizing and the one-dimensional atheist baddies make it impossible to read for anyone whose head isn’t full of thou-shalts and divine retribution.

          • The Explorer

            The Morlocks were into machinery,not books. The library in ‘The Time Machine’ has fallen into ruin.

            I grant you that the humour of ‘That Hideous Strength’ IS rather subtle. To some, it may not even be apparent.

          • Findaráto

            The library in “The Time Machine” had fallen into ruin not because the Morlocks didn’t read any more, but rather because they were all downloading the latest monosyllabic Harry Potter novel onto their Kindles and e-readers.

            And please do stop with the baseless assertions. First you claim there’s an invisible Supreme Being floating about in the sky. Then you claim that his beardy sprog popped out of a virgin and committed judicial suicide 33 years later. And now you’re claiming there’s humour in “That Hideous Strength”. The whoppers just keep getting bigger and bigger, don’t they? Next you’ll be telling me that Morrissey’s toe-curlingly terrible “List of The Lost” is a great work of prophetic vision that heralds the Second Coming…

          • The Explorer

            Kindles. Yes. Wells in’The Modern Utopia’ envisaged a huge filing system in Paris, but he never anticipated the computer.

          • sarky

            I thought Morissey was the second coming.

          • Findaráto

            He certainly seems to think so…

          • dannybhoy

            That Hideous Strength was probably the best, but I enjoy re-reading “Out of the Silent Planet” too.

          • CliveM

            Abound 10 years ago Fay Weldon featured the book on R4’s It’s a Good Read. The other guest was an Oxford Professor. She fulminated about having to read the book, it was hilarious.

            She obviously also didn’t get the irony of her response.

          • The Explorer

            I heard it. Very funny.

          • Findaráto

            Fay Weldon liked it? Well that’s condemnation enough for anyone, don’t you think? The baleful intelligence that could foist “Lives and Loves of a She-Devil” onto an unsuspecting world clearly has it in for mankind…

          • The Explorer

            Depends on your state of devilishness as to how unsuspecting you would be.

          • CliveM

            She’s not an author I read, so have no idea what her books are like.

          • William Lewis

            One does love the strident atheist. Always good value entertainment wise.

          • CliveM

            Not all of them!

          • William Lewis

            Repetition ad nauseam is tedious.

          • CliveM

            As nauseam and at great, mind numbing length.

          • Pubcrawler

            I find some diversion amidst the wearisome prolixity by playing ‘spot the solecism’. The various threads under this post have provided a particularly fruitful haul of orthographic and linguistic quirks that are characteristic of — nay, unique to — Linus.

            (OK, there are myriad more worthwhile pursuits, but it’s the best value that can be gleaned from his offerings.)

          • magnolia

            But while you are laughing at jokes about the wheelchair-bound, the ill, and the overweight-(and to find him “clever, erudite and well-written” I guess you must,) with particular poison where the victim is female, as in the two ladies on TGI, spare a consideration that most of us attempt to abide by some decencies and don’t attempt cheap laughs at the overweight, other races and nationalities, the hospitalised, the sick or the disabled.

          • chiefofsinners

            You have a conscience? Why?

          • CliveM

            Well said Sir.

            Does expect a grown up response however.

          • “You Sir are acting like a prat…”
            He’s not acting.

          • Anton

            I’m happy for any reader to verify what I said, not just Christians. Sarky and others, for instance.

          • The Explorer

            Speak for yourself.

          • chiefofsinners

            Guilt? Where do you obtain the concepts of guilt and innocence, or right and wrong, true and untrue? Why do these concepts even exist?

          • Findaráto

            The concepts you’re talking about existed long before your fake god was invented by backwards and primitive tribespeople. They’ll exist long after your fake god is forgotten. They’re a logical development of instinct among intelligent and social animals.

            Studies show that some of our simian relatives experience rudimentary versions of the same concepts. We’re not special and there’s no god doling our principles out. We’re just evolution’s latest iteration of a particular life form that exploits a particular niche. Others will come after us and they’ll probably develop these concepts even further. Will they believe in your fake god? I doubt it. They’ll recognize these concepts for what they are: the social customs of animals with individual identities who have to cooperate in order to survive.

          • Lienus

            A logical development of instinct eh? Describe the mechanism.
            Do you never wonder why we are the only sentient beings? Why the world is not filled with species of comparable intellect or moral awareness?

          • William Lewis

            “Originally you claimed that the Jews were the only people EVER to retain their identity once they’d left their homeland behind. Less than 30 seconds of reflection enabled me to blast that inaccurate statement out of the water.”

            Except it wasn’t a claim or a statement. It was a question. Perhaps you should trying following a logical debate instead of setting up your own straw men and “blasting them out of the water”?

            The funny thing is that you are the most desperate to “justify” your world view, by fair means or foul, reason or trickery, than anyone else. What a song and dance you try to lead. What a charlatan you are.

          • Findaráto

            Anton does that. He couches his most ill thought-out arguments as questions in order to leave himself a viable escape route when they’re debunked. “I was only asking a question!” he whines when the stupidity of his proposition is revealed for all to see. Only this time he forgot to run away quickly enough and tried to stand his ground and defend himself, so by the time he realized he didn’t have a leg to stand on, running was no longer possible.

          • William Lewis

            What value are your character assassinations amongst the mendacity of your twisted diatribes and assertions?

          • chiefofsinners

            Yes, glory in your narrow victory on self-defined terms. It’s all you’ll ever get.

          • You could also include the Chinese colonies in Asia and Africa. Perhaps.

          • The Explorer

            Typical Linus tactic. You introduce the idea that the Roma are the 13th Tribe, and then try to palm responsibility for it onto Anton.

          • Findaráto

            I asked the question. He replied. And in the meantime, we’ve established that the Jews are NOT a unique people and that their situation offers no proof that their God exists to show them special favour.

            There’s one typically uneducated and ignorant Christian argument debunked. Would you like to try another?

          • The Explorer

            That’s completely beside the point. You introduced the idea that the Roma are the 13th Tribe. Anton didn’t. You then pretended that he did.

          • Findaráto

            Look again. I asked him a question. Quite a reasonable question given the enormity of the fallacy he was peddling about Jews being unique among peoples in having retained their identity without a homeland.

            What you’re trying to do is divert attention from the fact that his argument has crashed and burned by attacking me for the methods I used to shoot it down.

            A weak blow from a blunt weapon, easily parried. Got anything else up your sleeve?

          • bluedog

            The Roma can hardly be compared to the Jews. Where are the writings of the Roma, their history, their unique religion?

          • The Explorer

            Your argument, paraphrased. It is claimed that only the Jews have retained their identity without a homeland. But the Roma have done so too. Therefore, in order to retain the integrity of the theory about the Jews, the Roma must be the 13th Tribe.

          • Findaráto

            The “must be” is your invention. I asked Anton a question about whether he believed that the Roma were the 13th tribe of Israel. A question that was quite reasonable given his claim that the the Jews were unique in being the only people ever to maintain a cultural identity once they’d left their homeland. I then indulged in a few reflections on the ramifications of such a belief. But not once did I actually say he really did believe it.

            He has now answered and said that he doesn’t believe the Roma are a lost tribe of Israel. So there you go. I admit that delusional claims about lost tribes would have been far more entertaining, but I accept his statement for what it is. Which is an admission that he was wrong. And wrong in quite a surprising and troubling way. The Roma are not an obscure people. It took me less than 30 seconds to think of them. Sarky too, who posted his comment just a few seconds after mine. He didn’t copy me because I saw the “somebody else is replying” message while I was typing. So two people thought of the same simple refutation of Anton’s argument simultaneously after thinking about it for only seconds.

            What further proof do you need of the blinkered blindness that descends on people when religion takes hold of their psyche? Anton is not a stupid man. Why didn’t he think of the Roma and refute his own argument before he even made it? Because his beliefs are preconceived and he’ll grasp at any evidence, no matter how shaky it may be, to prove himself right. He doesn’t use evidence to find truth. He plucks truth out of nowhere and uses evidence to try and shore it up.

            Such a method of argument is the antithesis of the scientific approach. And he’s a physicist? I’ve had my doubts for a while, now I’m sure.

          • The Explorer

            “So go on, where’s your ironclad proof that the Roma are actually Jews, even though they don’t know it themselves? And if they are, how come they’ve forgotten that fact?”

            Anton never said so in the first place. We could go on like this forever, but I suggest we call tie on this particular issue.

          • Findaráto

            A tie? No chance. Did you not see the question mark at the end of my words? As Anton had not at that stage answered my question about whether he believed the Roma to be a lost tribe of Israel, I was developing it further, which was quite reasonable given the evasive position he was taking.

            Once he denied believing that the Roma were really Jews, I stopped developing that line of questioning further.

            What we’re witnessing here are Christians closing ranks in the face of a defeat and trying to inflict harm on their attacker in any way they can to claw back some self-respect. Keep on trying. It isn’t working.

          • The Explorer

            Apologies: typo. Should have read ‘time’. Since edited to say so, but your reply must have preceded the correction.

          • Anton

            Before continuing this thread with Finders, do see what I did reply (which is much along the lines you said).

        • sarky

          The Romani. They have been around for over a thousand years.

          • Findaráto

            Which is proof positive that God wants us to live in caravans and not bathe quite so often, if at all.

            Thank their imaginary God we’re going to hell. Heaven must be such a rootless and whiffy place. Is that what they call the “smell of sanctity”? Nothing a good shower and lashings of Insignia can’t handle…

          • Anton

            Nothing quite like sympathy for the landless races, is there?

          • Findaráto

            Wondered how long it would take to fall into that trap. Longer than I thought.

            If you spent less time obsessing over your own responses and more analysing your opponent’s words, you’d have spotted that and called me out on it right at the beginning of this exchange.

            The proof of what I’ve long suspected continues to pile up. Is Anton an erudite physicist or an armchair amateur? I’ll leave it to others to decide for themselves, but I know what I think.

          • Anton

            Better late than never… I have the other parts of my life to take care of…

            You are welcome to any opinion of me that you wish.

          • chiefofsinners

            You think Anton is being dishonest about aspects of his identity?
            Something about pots and kettles…no, it’s gone.

          • chiefofsinners

            The Romani are fastidious about cleanliness. This is a nasty racist comment.

          • Anton

            Good answer; thank you. Where were they from and when, please?

          • sarky

            I believe they are from india and like I said, left around a thousand years ago.

      • chiefofsinners

        Well you would say that, because you’re in the atheist tribe.

  • Anton

    The EU spends our money constructing buildings in Judea/Samaria aka the West Bank with the intention that this land shall be “part of any viable future Palestinian state”:

    http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/209414#.VuifYX2LRpT

  • len

    The Jews God`s chosen people…( not ‘chosen’ because they were ‘worthy’ but because God intended to bless all the people of the world through the Jewish people) have been hated throughout time because satanic forces knew that the saviour of mankind would come through the Jews.
    So God `s enemies have /still are attempting to totally destroy Israel and the Jewish people thereby(in their way of thinking) destroying the testimony of the Jewish people and the Integrity of God to uphold His Promises towards Israel. What Satan cannot kill he corrupts as he has done to so much of ‘the Church’ .The RCC is a prime example of this as with her little sisters ‘cut from the same stained cloth’.

    So every Nation and every person will be judged as to how they have responded towards the Jewish people and the Nation of Israel.

    People such as “Vicki Kirby” are merely pawns spouting forth propaganda given to them by those who intend the destruction of Israel without realising the implications of what they are doing.’

    The enemies of God are gathering announcing to the World who they are…..

    • dannybhoy

      A very good post Len, my only quibble being with
      “So every Nation and every person will be judged as to how they have responded towards the Jewish people and the Nation of Israel.”
      I think its more that all Christians will be well disposed/love/pray for the Jewish people and the nation of Israel.
      The nations and every person will be judged on what they did with God’s salvation through Christ Jesus..
      “Fo God so loved the world that He sent His only begotten Son into the world, so that whoever believed in Him should have everlasting life.”
      John 3:16

      • len

        I will gather all nations and bring them down to the Valley of
        Jehoshaphat. There I will put them on trial for what they did to my
        inheritance, my people Israel, because they scattered my people among
        the nations and divided up my land.(Joel 3;21)

    • Dreadnaught

      (..God intended to bless all the people of the world through the Jewish people).

      Why the Jew and not, say the Chinese or similar Asiatics. Why not the Africans or Indians, Mayans or Aztecs seeing as how there were many more millions of them than Jews. God must have known about their existence and greater numbers rather than a a rag-tag bunch of tribal desert dwellers.
      More like the Roman Empire didnt extend that far`if truth be told; which makes for a political construct at some time, rather than divine direction.
      Just wonderin.

      • The Bible makes it clear that people who love God will be blessing to the rest of the world. Job was not an Israelite, but he was greatly honoured by God and Christians have probably done more in the way of promoting health, education and humanitarian relief across the world. However, the greatest blessing to humankind came from Israel – the Messiah. Nearly all the books of the Bible were written by those of the Hebrew race – another unique privilege, from a Christian point of view.

        Coming to the question of why God chose Israel, the only truthful answer a Christian can give – is that God is sovereign and His wisdom is sometimes inscrutable to the human mind.

        However, Abraham responded to God’s call and promise, and made a hugely risky move from the comfort of a settled life in an advanced nation (Chaldea) to the harsh life of a desert nomad. This move meant that his descendants were subject to great hardships in subsequent centuries, and despite being informed that some of these things would happen, Abraham and his descendants chose to follow God and inherit those promises.

        All the people of the world may choose to serve the same God and to share in the privilege (and the risk) of being a blessing to others, but how many are willing to make that choice?

        • Dreadnaught

          Without the involvement of of the Eastern Roman Empire the history of Christianity would have been a non-event. Religion is a powerful political tool that controls people and that’s why the Romans latched on to it as their Empire was beginning to fall apart.
          As for the Israelites being an advanced nation I doubt that the Persians, Egyptians and such would agree that they were on equal terms ‘advanced’.
          The Bible is a very poor substitute for the historic record as it is a compilation of the gospel written records, heresay in multiple translations ,available to Alexander for inclusion or dumping as he and his bishops decided.
          As for the existence of an omniscient, omnipotent deity who focused his attention on what of the Jews who were not so impressed with J. Nazareth and his claim to be a god and the son of a god at one and the same time. The Jews still remain and thrive, although I am not at all convinced that a supernatural being can actually deal in real estate.
          Rather convenient though especially if it is your own storyline.
          Who gave Egypt to the Egyptians or ‘China’ to the Chins?

          • “Without the involvement of of the Eastern Roman Empire the history of Christianity would have been a non-event”
            Constantine had something to do with the spread of Christianity in Europe, but not in its spread in other parts of the world – Ethiopia, China, India and other parts of the ME, which received the gospel in the earlier centuries. How do you explain its present growth in China, Africa and South America?

            “As for the Israelites being an advanced nation…”
            I was not making a comparison between ancient civilisations, but between Abraham’s lifestyle in his hometown in ancient Mesopotamia (which had an advanced culture for the time) and his later life as a nomad.

            “The Bible is a very poor substitute for the historic record…”
            Many historians would disagree, but that is not the point we were discussing. I was giving you a Christian perspective on why God should ‘choose’ the Israelites in answer to your question, and of course you are free to hold a different opinion on the matter.

            “Who gave Egypt to the Egyptians or ‘China’ to the Chins?”
            In my view, God did.

          • Dreadnaught

            Thanks for the Constantine correction.

          • Dreadnaught

            How do you explain its present growth in China, Africa and South America?

            By military force and hard-nosed commercial interests.

          • Christianity has rapidly increased in numbers in recent decades in Communism China, so your explanation is not correct.

          • Dreadnaught

            Sorry, I missed out your word ‘present’. I admit I don’t know much about present day numbers.

          • Findaráto

            Also by the power of hopelessness coupled with escapist fantasy.

            For the poor and oppressed who know their material lot will never improve, dreams of paradise are free, and the organisation that gives form, order and validation to those dreams will always be able to exercise power and control over the dreamers.

            Of course that applies to all religions, but Christianity has the advantage of the worldwide reach that associating itself with imperial powers gave it. Even though that association is on the wane, it has served its purpose by getting the Church to places and continents it otherwise could not have easily reached.

            The Church uses and discards regimes as suits its purposes, always with the primary objective of reaching as many “souls” as it can. The poorer, the better. The rich have choices that the poor do not, so there’s nothing the Church loves more than poverty. It built its brand on the back of the poor. They’re its cash cow.

          • Anton

            That critique would apply with far greater accuracy to socialism, actually.

          • Dreadnaught

            Surely if scripture is correct J.Naz was very much in the socialist mode when he decried the excesses of the rich in favour of equality and the moral poor . E.g. the parable of the talents?

          • Anton

            He wouldn’t have espoused socialism as the solution to those evils.

          • Dreadnaught

            Was he not practicing or endorsing a form of socialism? Do you use a different understanding of the word?

          • Anton

            Different from whose? Jesus called for charity and for the indifferent administration of the (written) Laws of Moses. Between them, those would have relieved the poor. Socialism today is not based on good laws or personal charity.

          • Dreadnaught

            Has it ever been thus. There is the contract between men at the head of the religion(any) and the the most powerful hard men of the land. The prospect of Jam Tomorrow is the justification to accept what the hardmen demand – what a racket.

          • magnolia

            The Bible is a subset of the record, written as various types of literature. Trying to understand the period and region and happenings described in it without it is like trying to sail a boat after you have taken out the motor with the help of two planks of wood with woodworm in.

            You can make a ham-fisted job of it, but why bother trying?

      • len

        God chose the Jewish people as a means to bless the World. Why the Jews?. ..is the perfectly reasonable question

        God looks to a person or groups of people who are sufficiently open towards God and who can built a relationship with Him built on mutual trust. That is all God requires and God found that trust and that relationship in Abraham the Father of the Jewish Nation.

        God creates covenants with men. Gods says you do this and I will do that. Covenants with God are far better for us than for him. Jesus Christ is a case in point .Jesus suffered all the consequences for our sins whipped humiliated and then crucified was His part.Our part was to accept this atonement for our sins and place our trust in Him .’Bad’ for God good for us …Jesus did this because we were unable to save ourselves.

        So Abraham had /has a Covenant with God which is being honoured through the rebirth of Israel and the blessings from that covenant have overspilled to Christians who place their trust in God and the Covenant they have with Jesus Christ.

  • Although I fully support Israel’s right to its land and believe that Christians should help Jews in whatever way they can, I think Israel is making a mistake in having its cause advanced by the bullying Jewish lobby in the US. It is only natural for American Jews to support their brethren in Israel (and I hope all Christians will do the same), but their methods will eventually prove counterproductive. Forcing the US government to pay billions of dollars in a time of recession, and using their influence to crush politicians who may have (even a principled) disagreement with them on any point – is not right.

    The evangelical Christians, as someone else pointed out, are shrinking in numbers and influence, and are increasingly being replaced by groups less likely to be sympathetic to the Israeli cause. At some point the stranglehold of the Jewish lobby over the US government will gain more publicity than it now has among the ‘low information groups’ (as an American politician referred to them), and this could lead to much resentment if America gets poorer. The result would be growing anti-Semitism, as in Germany before WW2.

    • Ivan M

      Trump is likely to lose the main US elections, since he could not take Ohio. When that happens even groups previously well disposed will have second thoughts about the Jewish Lobby.

    • Anton

      Since 2007 Israel has received approximately 3 billion US dollars per year in aid from the USA, or about 1% of Israel’s GDP. This money is largely tied so as to be spent in the US defence industry.

      If the Jewish lobby has a stranglehold over the US government, how come Obama lifted sanctions on Iran which openly seeks the destruction of Israel?

      • Ivan M

        At some point US interests instead of the pretend Chicken Littles in the US and Israel has to come first. In any case in the matter of Iranian nuclear weapons, Netanyahu and the whole Likud brigade have been shown to be unmitigated liars.

        • Anton

          Please be specific: What is the lie?

          What do you take US interests in the Middle East to be? Islam has been Western Civ’s most implacable opponent for more than a millennium.

          • Ivan M

            I am specific – on the matter of Iranian nuclear weapons – which the Yahooligan assured us was “six-months away” for the last 12 years. They tried to get the Americans to kill Iranians for a non-existent program. That was the last straw as far as I am concerned.

          • bluedog

            One certain indicator of a nuclear weapons programme is the development of a delivery system, see North Korea for independent verification of this point. Both Iran and NK have invested heavily in long range missiles, and you don’t do that just to deliver a tonne of TNT.

            Israel is extremely vulnerable and totally lacking in strategic depth. Given the sheer insanity of Middle Eastern logic, one can envisage a competition to be the first to nuke Tel Aviv in order to achieve global leadership of the ummah. Iran, as a despised (by the Sunnis) Shi-ite state, has clear motivation in that regard.

          • Ivan M

            They ought to put their weapons on the table for a nuclear free Middle East. But they are too high and mighty for that.

          • bluedog

            ‘They’ presumably is Israel. Since when has unilateral disarmament been a successful strategy for survival in the face of existential threat? Would Iran respect Israeli neutrality? Let us know when to stop laughing.

          • Ivan M

            There is nothing unilateral in that. Their weapons in exchange for a nuclear-free Middle East.

          • Anton

            I worship the God of Israel.

            You say that the Israeli government has been lying about the timescale for Iran to construct a nuclear warhead, on the grounds that they still haven’t. But the reason they still haven’t has been action such as the Stuxnet computer virus they got into the centrifuges, and destructive explosions at the Fordow site in January 2013 and the Parchin site in October 2014. Whoever was responsible for these, the entire Sunni Islam world will be glad of. Others should be, too.

          • Ivan M

            I rather take the IAEA’s Secretary General’s word for it than speculations about Stuxnet and the centrifuges. So the Siemens Windows program was compromised and the Iranians could find no other no other means say Mitsubishi plcs or Fpgas that any university level electronics guy can burn to keep the centrifuges running. Give me a break. And really you ought to be consistent in addressing the threat from Islam. Pakistan is adding atomic weapons at a clip of 20 a year to no protest from anyone save the Indians.

          • Anton

            I suppose if you define speculation as anything that has not been confirmed by government sources then it is speculation that Stuxnet was a US/Israeli enterprise:

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet

            Modern gas centrifuges have integrated electronic controls without which they cannot function. Only the earlier generation of machines would be easily reparable, but those machines would not have been susceptible to Stuxnet in the first place. It’s like modern cars getting knocked out by a nuclear EMP whereas your old Land Rover keeps going.

            Perhaps the IAEA Secretary General’s words failed to take into account the brakes placed on Iranian nuclear warhead development by the incidents I described? Do say which words.

            You mentioned the Pakistan bomb, not me. I do not wish nukes to fall into the hands of the suicide bomber mentality, Sunni or Shia.

          • Ivan M

            If you don’t believe the IAEA which in 2003 under Hans Blix concluded contrary to the hysterics in the UK, US and Israel that the Iraqis had no nuclear weapons, then consider instead the National Intelligence Estimate of the US which concluded in both 2007 and 2012 that the Iranians had no nuclear weapons. Are all these fellows morons?
            A centrifuge is just a centrifuge. Set up at most one or two a feedback cycle and you have something the Americans had running in the 1940s.

          • Anton

            Who is disputing that the Iranians had no nuclear weapons in 2007 or 2012? The question is whether they had an active program to make them.

            Hans Blix might be the one man in a million who can recognise components of a nuclear program on sight, but if they are physically hidden from his sight then his expertise is no use. As I recall, the Inspectors’ requests to go on zero-notice visits to places were routinely denied by the Iraqis in the late 1990s, albeit in the usual way: request granted but with mysterious delay after mysterious delay in practice, every time. A suspicious mind might consider that Saddam had something to hide…

            I know what a gas centrifuge is. The proportionate difference in mass of the two isotopes is small, hence the process is difficult.

          • Ivan M

            Why should the Iranians open all their facilities? By what right do the Israelis demand this? Di we have unrestricted access to Dimona? Since when is a nation’s military secrets at the mercy of foreigners? They are in any case entitled to 5% enrichment under the NPT. They have reasons. Are they not entitled to strategic ambiguity ? Nobody gives up secrets just like that. They would be the laughing stock of the world.

          • Anton

            Why should the Iranians open their facilities? When people who have the suicide bomber mentality get hold of nuclear weapons then mutual assured destruction fails to deter and the balloon goes up, that’s why. Be thankful that the West has had enough guts and power to act as policeman until recently.

          • Anton

            By the way, why do the Iranians want a nuclear program if not for military purposes? They don’t need nuclear power as the place is awash with oil and drenched with sunshine.

          • magnolia

            God is the Creator of the whole world not just the God of Israel. From the start “all nations” were described as his. Israel was a “chosen nation” pro tem. They are honoured because they kept alive worship to the one true God, but we do not worship a regional God but a universal one.

            So I would never describe the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ as “the God of Israel” because I think that understanding is too old and unhelpful. God loves everyone, irrespective of nationality, and that includes all we as nations or individuals regard as “the enemy”.

          • Ivan M

            See also what Jesus even though a Jew Himself said about sons of Satan. It always gives me a laugh to hear how if we bless Israel we would be blessed in turn. No serious Jewish religious tradition that I am aware of maintains this.

          • Anton

            History is packed with examples.

            The Egyptians who suffered the plagues prior to the Exodus is an example. Centuries later, Obadiah told the Edomites that they would vanish for their aggression against the Israelites, and today their city of Petra is a ghost town. Cyrus the Persian conquered Babylon and let the Jews return to their land – and when he died he was in charge of the largest Empire the world had yet seen.

            The Emperor Hadrian ordered the putting down of the Bar Kochba revolt (AD132-5), after which he exiled the Jews from Jerusalem; many fled their homeland. Hadrian’s career had been successful before that but, by the time he died in AD138, illness had caused him to attempt suicide several times.

            Edward I expelled the Jews from England in 1290. Earlier he had defeated the Welsh and assumed kingship over them. One month after his deadline for all Jews to leave England, his much-loved wife of 36 years died. Although he eventually remarried, the rest of his life was spent campaigning inconclusively against the Scots, and he died in the bitter knowledge that his heir was a weakling.

            The marriage in 1469 of Fernando of Aragon and Isabella of Castille unified the Spanish. They succeeded, after more than seven centuries, in expelling the Muslims back to Africa, in 1492. That same year, Christopher Columbus set out on their behalf for America. But Fernando also sharpened the Spanish branch of the Inquisition. All Jews in Spain had four months to convert to Catholicism or leave – by the end of July 1492 – on pain of death. Those who converted (‘conversos’) also had to renounce all Jewish culture, and faced enduring suspicion. Many were tortured to death by the Inquisition. And, unhappily for Fernando and Isabella, their only son predeceased them in 1497 and left no heir himself.

            A century later there was a significant movement of converso families – who continued to be monitored by the Inquisition for adherence to Jewish custom – from Spain to the Netherlands, which repudiated Spanish rule in 1581 and guaranteed religious freedom. Amsterdam’s first synagogue was built in 1598. The following century saw a golden age in culture and commerce for the Netherlands.

            Two centuries later, Napoleon gave full civil rights to Jews, convening a meeting of Jews in Paris in 1807. (In 1799 he had invited Jews to return to live in Jerusalem and the Holy Land under his protection, although his power there proved transient.) Although opposition to this policy caused him to waver, he eventually pushed it through. His rise was concomitant, and meteoric.

            Throughout the 19th century, violence against Jews steadily increased in Russia; after the large-scale massacres of 1881-4, triggered by the assassination of Tsar Alexander II (not by Jews), the word ‘pogrom’ entered the English language. His successor Alexander III was a staunch anti-semite; restrictions on the Jews grew. Tsar Nicholas II accepted honorary membership of the Union of the Russian People, an extreme nationalist political group which distributed anti-Semitic propaganda and financed paramilitary squads which further harassed the Jews. He also lent support to a similar group, the ‘Black Hundreds.’ In 1903-6 a far more bloody wave of pogroms broke out. During this time Nicholas II was forced to share power with a parliament, the Duma. In 1917 communism overtook Russia, leading to civil war and revolution, and in 1918 Nicholas and his family were put to death.

            Although Adolf Hitler hated Jews, encouraging cruelty toward them and discriminating against them, there was no Nazi program of systematic killing before 1942; by then Hitler was in control of lands from the Pyrenees to the Ukrainian steppes, from the Mediterranean to the Arctic. That year opened with the Wannsee conference which planned the ‘Final Solution’ for the Jews – the Holocaust. It also witnessed the turning point of the war, which put an end to Hitler’s dreams of a thousand-year Reich after just three more years.

            In communist Russia, Nikita Krushchev was overthrown in 1964, the same year he had visited Egypt and agreed to build up its armed forces for a strike against Israel. This strike was just hours away when Israel took pre-emptive action at the start of the 6-day war in 1967. Most other Soviet leaders died in office.

            Israel’s greatest enemy today comprises its Islamic neighbours. Are they blessed or cursed, i.e., are they good or bad places to live?

            England’s slow but steady rise to greatness and Empire began at around Oliver Cromwell’s time. This was a century before England led the Industrial Revolution, but it is the same era in which the Jews were invited to return to England.

            The day after the Balfour Declaration was published in The Times newspaper, British and empire troops were finally victorious in the Battle of Passchendaele, the most difficult for its men in the entire bloodbath that was World War I. Within a year the stalemate of the Western Front had turned to victory for Britain. Also, on the day the War Cabinet met to determine the Balfour Declaration (October 31st, 1917), allied troops broke through the Ottoman-German defensive line running east from Gaza so as to end a six-month stalemate and enter Palestine. Within two months of that battle at Beersheba, Britain had captured the Holy Land (and Jerusalem) from the Turks.

            Look at the long tenures in office despite personal unpopularity of British Prime Ministers Harold Wilson and Margaret Thatcher, both pro-Israel in practice. Wilson even wrote a major book, The Chariot of Israel.

            Consider the downfall of some post-Balfour British Prime Ministers. Within months of the May 1939 White Paper published while Neville Chamberlain was Prime Minister, he was dying of cancer. He was replaced by Winston Churchill, who had spoken and voted against the White Paper. In 1956, Anthony Eden was finished within days of reneging on an agreement with the State of Israel in the Suez crisis. This debacle essentially brought the British Empire to a close. In October 1973, under Arab pressure, Edward Heath insisted that two paid-for shiploads of spare parts, for Centurion tanks which Britain had previously sold to Israel, must turn back on the first day of the Yom Kippur war. By December Mr Heath was forced to cut British industry down to a 3-day week, and within weeks he called an election in which he lost his majority in parliament. And in 1979 Jim Callaghan lost power in just three days, while the Carter administration was working on a Middle East peace treaty which meant that Israel would get no Arab oil. The Americans asked Callaghan to sell Israel some North Sea oil, and Callaghan affirmed that Israel would be considered when there was a surplus in production. But Tony Benn, the Minister for Energy at that time, dissuaded him. Two days later Callaghan lost a parliamentary vote of no confidence by a single vote, forcing an election which he went on to lose.

            Ronald Reagan gave strong support to Israel because of his Christian faith, and he won the Cold War, leaving America (briefly) the only superpower.

            After the first Gulf War in 1990, President George Bush (senior) pressed Israel into a peace conference with the Palestinians and Syrians, the idea being to give up part of the covenant land for peace. During the resulting Madrid peace conference in late 1991, the notorious “perfect storm” blew up in the Atlantic, in which all storm-generating factors coincided; it gave rise to the largest waves ever recorded. Exceptionally, it moved west and lashed America’s Eastern seaboard, causing heavy damage to George Bush’s family home in Kennebunkport, Maine. In August 1992 the peace conference resumed in Washington DC, again with public statements from the Americans that covenant land should be traded for peace. On the same day Hurricane Andrew hit southern Florida, in what was then the most costly natural disaster ever in the USA, with damage in the tens of billions of dollars. President Bush’s approval rating had also tumbled, from a high of more than 90% after the Gulf War, and he never recovered it.

            In September 1993 the “Oslo” peace program began, in which America pressed Israel to give away Gaza and Jericho, then the rest of the “West Bank” (of the River Jordan), which Israel had won in 1967. This is the heartland of Judea. The announcement shared the front pages with the arrival of Hurricane Emily in North Carolina (although damage was light). In January 1994, President Clinton met President Hafez Assad of Syria, stating publicly that “Israel must make concessions that will be politically unpopular with many Israelis.” Within 24 hours a 6.9-magnitude earthquake rocked southern California, in the USA’s second most destructive natural disaster. In spring 1997, Yasser Arafat visited America to advance the ‘peace process,’ and Bill Clinton continued to criticise Israel. On the day Arafat landed, tornados caused more than one billion dollars of damage, some of it in Clinton’s home state of Arkansas. During Arafat’s visit the Dakotas suffered the worst floods in a century.

            In January 1998, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is secular but realistic about the intent of Israel’s neighbours, met President Clinton and Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. They pressed him to give away land, and declined to lunch with him. Later the same day, the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal broke upon Clinton. In September 1998 Arafat visited America again, and received encouragement for a plan that Israel should give up a further 13% of covenant land. His visit coincided with Hurricane Georges, which did another billion dollars of damage. The next month, Netanyahu and Arafat met in America, with Clinton pressing Netanyahu so hard that some land was finally put on the table subject to Arafat delivering peace. Meanwhile, part of Texas was flooded so badly that it had to be declared a disaster area. In May 1999, on the same day Clinton wrote to Arafat that the Palestinians had a right “to determine their own future in their own land,” he was forced to declare parts of Oklahoma and Kansas disaster areas following the most powerful tornados ever recorded. In September 1999, as Israel met (under US pressure) with Palestinian leaders to give away land, Hurricane Floyd hit North Carolina, causing the largest evacuation in US history and another billion dollars of damage. In summer 2000, as President Clinton was siding with the Palestinians in three-way talks over land, and was proposing to carve up Jerusalem, forest fires reduced areas of Montana and Wyoming to federal disaster areas, and a drought in Texas was compared to the dust bowl of the 1930s. Repeatedly, the front pages of American newspapers have juxtaposed news of America’s role in the Middle East peace process with natural disasters or startling stock market falls.

            In June 2001 the new President, George W. Bush, sent the Director of the CIA to broker talks between Palestinian and Israeli officials about land. Simultaneously, Hurricane Allison ravaged Bush’s home state of Texas, and cut a swathe of destruction east, then north. Meteorologists called it the worst tropical storm in history, and the city of Houston was closed for three days.

            Now the scale magnifies. It is believed that the US government had decided, shortly before September 11th, 2001, to recognise a Palestinian State and announce it (to the Saudi Arabian ambassador) on September 13th. The ‘9/11’ attacks on New York subjected America to what Israel had long suffered from Islamic terrorists, and no such announcement was made.

            In August 2005 Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans, in the US’s (new) worst natural disaster, taking 2000 lives and costing 80 billion dollars. Katrina grew as Israel evacuated Gaza in readiness for handover to Palestinians and was congratulated in a speech by President Bush, who had pushed for that outcome. Rockets have subsequently rained on Israel from Gaza (which is covenant land).

            You need only know where to look.

          • Ivan M

            I can see that when you look you find it. Only thing missing there is the Bible Codes.

          • Anton

            I can see that when you look you turn an eye that is blinded.

          • Ivan M

            BTW Anton, when can I expect to see some money from the wicked since I am badly in need of it. Some sort of redistribution according to Rafael Cruz.

            https://youtu.be/kNa5w9js48s

          • Pubcrawler

            I thought that was John the Baptist and ‘children of Abraham’. (e.g. Luke 3.8)

          • Ivan M

            I got carried away Pubcrawler. Thanks for the corrections.

          • Pubcrawler

            pas de quoi

          • Anton

            Certainly I wouldn’t use the phrase “the God if Israel” in street preaching. My comment that I worship the God of Israel should be seen in context as a reply to Ivan’s comment that he didn’t worship Israel. Israel is still the only nation with whom He has a covenant, of course.

          • magnolia

            But the glories of grace and mercy and the New Covenant is where it is at with humanity’s relationship with the Almighty! I sometimes feel that this awareness has slipped with some of the Christian Zionists!! And there are no such things as first second and third class recipients. Indeed the last worker in the vineyard is paid the same as those who have laboured in the sun all day. Even a foul-mouthed blasphemer of Christ and taunter of Christians at the last second of his life would get the same reward!!

          • Anton

            “But the glories of grace and mercy and the New Covenant is where it is at with humanity’s relationship with the Almighty!”

            Yes, absolutely. But the church is not a nation: that is all I am saying.

          • Ivan M

            Even a foul-mouthed blasphemer of Christ and taunter of Christians at the last second of his life would get the same reward!!

            Linus ; are you reading this?

          • The children of Abraham are not a nation state or the physical descendants of him, but are those in covenant with God by faith (Gal. 3:6-7). God’s promise to Abraham of blessing for the Gentiles (Gen. 12:3) is the foundation of the Gospel (Gal. 3:8-9). The Gospel can be described as the proclamation that the blessing for the Gentiles is now coming to pass through Christ (Eph. 3:6). Within covenantal history, the promise of blessing was given to Abraham and fulfilled by Jesus, who fulfils the Law and gives it to the pagans, who can now accept it, thereby becoming children of Abraham.

            Jesus is the promised shoot of Judah, who unites Israel and the nations in the Kingdom of God. Therefore, members of all nations enter the People of God with Israel through adherence to the will of God and through acceptance of the Davidic Kingdom, understood not as a temporal political entity but as God’s rule on earth extended from heaven (Isa. 52:7). In consequence, there is only one People of God, the Body of Christ, in which both Jews and Gentiles are welcome.

          • Anton

            “The “Children of Abraham” are not a nation state nor his physical descendants, but are those in covenant with God by faith (Gal. 3:6-7).”

            Yet Romans 11:28-29 speaks to Christians about the Jews, saying that as far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account, but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable.

            Clearly God has both physical and spiritual children through Abraham and it is incumbent on us to work out which is meant in each passage. In view of Romans 11, many churches need to stop assuming it is always the latter meaning.

          • We know God loves the Jews and we also know they have a role to play in Christ’s return.

          • dannybhoy

            Christ Jesus is the promised Messiah, who was sent only to the house of Israel. He was rejected as Messiah, but not by all Israelites and the Church was founded on Jewish believers, His disciples.
            Nowhere is it stated that God therefore abrogated His Covenant with Israel, but the temple was destroyed as prophesied and by and large the people driven out and dispersed around the known world.
            Until God began the ingathering of the (unbelieving) exiles, culminating in the re-establishment of the Jewish nation of Israel.
            St Paul makes it abundantly clear in Romans that whilst the Jews as a nation may have rejected Jesus as Messiah, God has not rejected them as His people. Just as they were led away into exile to Babylon, so they were exiled from the land God gave them.
            There remains the Jewish people
            There is the State of Israel -to which our Lord will return
            There is the true Church, the Bride of Christ; made up of believers from all countries and all denominations, both Jew and Gentile.

          • dannybhoy

            Genesis 12>

            Now the Lord had said to Abram:
            “Get out of your country, From your family
            And from your father’s house,
            To a land that I will show you.

            2 I will make you a great nation;

            I will bless you and make your name great; and you shall be a blessing.

            3 I will bless those who bless you,

            And I will curse him who curses you;

            And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.”

            Then 13,
            “14 And the Lord said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him: “Lift your eyes now and look from the place where you are—northward, southward, eastward, and westward; 15 for all the land which you see I give to you and your descendants[b] forever. 16 And I will make your descendants as the dust of the earth; so that if a man could number the dust of the earth, then your descendants also could be numbered. 17 Arise, walk in the land through its length and its width, for I give it to you.”

            Genesis 15..
            “12 Now when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and behold, horror and great darkness fell upon him. 13 Then He said to Abram: “Know certainly that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, and will serve them, and they will afflict them four hundred years. 14 And also the nation whom they serve I will judge; afterward they shall come out with great possessions. 15 Now as for you, you shall go to your fathers in peace; you shall be buried at a good old age. 16 But in the fourth generation they shall return here, for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete.”
            18..”To your descendants I have given this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the River Euphrates— 19 the Kenites, the Kenezzites, the Kadmonites, 20 the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim, 21 the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.”

            Exodus 1..
            “23 Now it happened in the process of time that the king of Egypt died. Then the children of Israel groaned because of the bondage, and they cried out; and their cry came up to God because of the bondage. 24 So God heard their groaning, and God remembered His covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob. 25 And God looked upon the children of Israel, and God acknowledged them.
            Exodus3..
            “4 So when the Lord saw that he turned aside to look, God called to him from the midst of the bush and said, “Moses, Moses!”
            And he said, “Here I am.”
            5 Then He said, “Do not draw near this place. Take your sandals off your feet, for the place where you stand is holy ground.” 6 Moreover He said, “I am the God of your father—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon God.
            7 And the Lord said: “I have surely seen the oppression of My people who are in Egypt, and have heard their cry because of their taskmasters, for I know their sorrows. 8 So I have come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up from that land to a good and large land, to a land flowing with milk and honey, to the place of the Canaanites and the Hittites and the Amorites and the Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites.

          • len

            God has made himself known as the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob”. I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not the God of the dead but of the living.” (Matthew 22;32)

            Israel is largely secular I believe?. But God will honour his Covenant with the Jewish people.

            How this leaves Churches which have adhered to the false premise of ‘replacement theology’ will be interesting to see?.

          • Ivan M

            You take care of your own soul first.

          • Through Jesus, “the God of Israel” has become the God of all the nations.

          • Anton

            Yes and No!

            In the sense that there is only one God, who created everything, he has always been the God of all the nations. At present, though, he has covenants with one nation – Israel – and one (other) grouping, the church – which scripture tells us is called out of each nation.

            The floor is yours, Jack, as I’m off for 48 hours. May your recovery prove complete, and may you still be healthy when this blog celebrates the 500th anniversary of the Reformation late next year!

          • Now your quibbling.

            The Abrahamic Covenant is with the “People of God”, not with any one nation or ethnic group since the Mosaic Law was fulfilled in Jesus Christ.

          • Anton

            You need to learn to examine the OT covenant by covenant. What you say about the Mosaic covenant is true but I am talking about the Abrahamic Covenant. Romans 11:28-29 speaks to Christians about the Jews, saying that as far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account, but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable. Paul is speaking here about Jews who reject the gospel, so the definition of Jewishness that he is using in this context is not one that is conditional on faith. The ‘patriarchs’ are Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, so the call refers to the Abrahamic covenant.

            And before that there is the covenant with Noah promising no repeat of the flood. Whatever be the status of the Abrahamic covenant, so also that with Noah. Tremble whenever it rains?

        • dannybhoy

          It has always been the case that get power have their allies or client states to help promote their strategic interests and security. The US is no different.
          When the State of Israel was established in 1948 the USSR tried to woo her as an ‘ally’ and lost out to the USA (thank Goodness!)
          Israel has to balance her needs with those of the US. This latest POTUS does not seem so well disposed towards Israel, and lets not kid ourselves that the US administration will put it’s own interests first, -as we are seeing with our own special relationship.
          That’s how things are.

      • First of all, I support Israel’s right to their land and believe that Christians should support them – generously and sacrificially – through just and legitimate means.

        I don’t think 3 billion (or 4 billion from next year) is a small amount, do you? Even if Israel promised to spent it in the US defence industry (whether they actually do so is unclear); it is not fair that the US taxpayers are forced to pay this amount in a time of recession and austerity.

        Now I am not opposed to the money being given to support Israel, but this should be raised through voluntary donations – from the American Jews, churches and other well wishers – and not imposed on the US taxpayer, many of whom are worse off than they were. At some point this is bound to cause resentment against the Jews.

        I am not against lobbying groups in principle, provided they are engaged in advocacy, but the strong-arm tactics of the American Jewish lobby (and several other lobbies) are well known – and what do you make of Netanyahu’s behaviour in the US congress in 2011? Where was the humility and gratitude towards the American people for their generosity? I believe that Netanyahu is the right man for Israel at the moment, but his arrogance was disturbing. There are plenty of Jews who share these views.

        As Christians, I believe we should demonstrate a sense of balance and fairness in these matters; otherwise we are not being true friends to Israel. The west has a deplorable history of anti-Semitism and it could rise again. Whatever protection Israel receives from the US is bound to be temporary. The Jews are few in number – with too many enemies and too few friends – and these things will not help their cause.

        Coming to your last point on Iran, the answer is I don’t know. There are many things in politics that are unclear to observers who are not privy to what goes on behind the scenes – it is only when you observe a trend over the long term, that you can come to conclusions. But I doubt that Iran seeks the destruction of Israel – they have been all threats and no action for the past 30 years, since the Shah was deposed.

        http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/so-just-how-powerful-is-the-israel-lobby-in-the-us-8478432.html

        http://www.haaretz.com/for-mideast-peace-israel-must-cut-off-u-s-jewish-lobby-1.411091

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_lobby

        • Anton

          Three billion dollars is not a small amount compared to your shopping bill, but on the scale of nations comprising millions of people and at a time when Uncle Sam has effectively been printing trillions in QE it is not a large amount. As I said, it is 1% of Israeli GDP, it is a much lower proportion of US GDP, and much of it is restricted to be spent in the US defence industry anyway. As the Israelis are smart, it doesn’t go on cavalry but on developing projects like Iron Dome (low-trajectory missile shootdown) which are an asset for Uncle Sam to have anyway. Israel is the only country in the Middle East with a broad set of Western constitutional features and its foes are motivated by a militant faith that has been the West’s most dangerous and implacable enemy for 1300 years.

          If Iran does not seek the destruction of Israel, why do its leaders (repeatedly) say otherwise?

          http://edition.cnn.com/2015/09/10/middleeast/iran-khamenei-israel-will-not-exist-25-years/

          • 3 billion dollars is also huge when compared to the money that is usually dispensed by the west as aid to developing countries.

            My question is: should this be imposed on the Americans taxpayers? I consider it wrong that indebted nations should use borrowed money to give aid, and leave their taxpayers to suffer the consequences. A possible exception might be providing humanitarian relief in the event of a natural disaster. In this case, the US government has no choice.

            About Iran, I suspect – and I could be wrong – that they are trying to prove their Islamic credentials to a largely Sunni Muslim world by their belligerent attitude to Israel. Lots of Muslim governments make these threats for the benefit of certain sections of their population, but few put their money where their mouths are. The Muslims hate Israel, but attacking it now would be suicidal and of little profit to them. The Muslim world has its eyes set on a bigger prize – gaining control of the West, and once they have made sufficient inroads, then they might try and isolate Israel.

          • Anton

            You say you “suspect – and I could be wrong – that [the Iranians] are trying to prove their Islamic credentials to a largely Sunni Muslim world by their belligerent attitude to Israel.” The thing is, you can afford to be wrong and it makes no difference to your life. But it would make a BIG difference to the life of Israel, wouldn’t it? You say that “The Muslims hate Israel, but attacking it now would be suicidal” but please grasp that death does not deter the suicide bomber mentality.

            US aid to Israel is called helping your strategic allies and has been a routine part of diplomacy for centuries. Who on earth wants to be allied with Saudi Arabia and ISIS in that part of the world?

          • You misunderstand my statement.

            I said I could be wrong about Iran’s “reason” for making these threats which they never carry out. The Iranians realise that it would be suicidal, and they will never make the first move in that direction.

            “US aid to Israelis is called helping your strategic allies. Who on earth wants to be allied with Saudi Arabia and ISIS in that part of the world?”

            The US and the west are allied to Saudi Arabia and selling them arms.

            I think this discussion is getting a bit heated – you seem to be implying that people who don’t share your outlook toward Israel, must hate Israel.

          • Anton

            Anna, you wrote: “The Iranians realise that it would be suicidal, and they will never make the first move in that direction.” They certainly realise it would bring retribution of that magnitude. I am questioning whether it would deter them. Out of what religion do suicide bombers come?

            The West needs Saudi oil, and Saudi backwardness makes a partnership possible. But let’s not confuse expediency with an alliance based on shared values.

          • “I am questioning whether it would deter them.”
            It has deterred them so far. The Iranians are not stupid. They have made these threats for 35 years – and they seem to enjoy the panic and confusion.

            “Out of what religion do suicide bombers come?”
            These stray Muslims are useful, but the Jihad would fail if the Muslims governments got directly involved, which is why Saudi Arabia prefers to shake hands with western leaders and fund terrorism through the back door – via mosques and madrassas. Iran also funds religious studies and mosques abroad, but I doubt that they fund terrorist activities.

            “Saudi backwardness”?
            They have the upper hand in this special relationship.

            The Islamic world will attack Israel once they have gained sufficient control over the west and not before. For now, a strong America (and the west) is Israel’s best defence. Things may change in the future especially with Turkey entering the EU.

          • Anton

            It hasn’t deterred them so far – they don’t yet have a Bomb!

          • Few countries with the bomb actually plan to use them.

          • Rhoda

          • Anton

            Few countries have leaders with the suicide bomber mentality.

        • Hi Anna

          So you can get the facts properly. Here’s some info from Wikipedia:

          1). Military aid to Israel:

          ” Currently, Israel receives $3 billion annually in US assistance through Foreign Military Financing (FMF).[82] Seventy-four percent of these funds must be spent on the acquisition of US defense equipment, services, and training.[3] Thus, “United States military aid to Israel is seen by many as a subsidy for U.S. industries”, according to Kenneth M. Pollack.[83]

          -In other words most of the aid flows direct BACK to the U.S.!! Ergo your suggestions the Jew is taking undeserved money from the U.S. taxpayer is nonsensical.

          As for your concerns about the 1930s and that “Jewish lobby”:

          2) your usage of “Jewish[not Israeli] lobby” is inappropriate as it is an historic antisemitic trope about Jews controlling the world:

          “Robert S. Wistrich, of the International Center for the Study of Antisemitism, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, sees reference to the phrase, when used to describe an “all-powerful ‘Jewish Lobby’ that prevents justice in the Middle East”, as reliance on a classic antisemitic stereotype.[11]

          Bruno Bettelheim detested the term, arguing “The self-importance of Jews combined with the paranoia of the anti-Semite had created the image of this lobby.”[12] Michael Lasky describes the term as an “unfortunate phrase”, and “imagines” that Alexander Walker’s use of it while writing about the Nazi films of Leni Riefenstahl was not intended pejoratively.[13]

          The B’nai B’rith Anti-Defamation Commission of Australia states that “the stereotype of the ‘Jewish lobby’ is that the Jewish engagement in politics and policy debate is above and beyond the ordinary participation of a group in public policy-making. It paints Jewish involvement as surreptitious, and as subverting the democratic process. It alleges that a ‘Jewish lobby’, through bribery, bullying and manipulation, pressures politicians to act against their will and duties.”

          Regards.

          • Thank you. BTW it is the same link I posted. My question is: can the US refuse to pay the 3 billion dollars? Or would that be the end of someone’s political career? How does the US taxpayer benefit from these transactions?

            “…the Jew is taking undeserved money from the U.S. taxpayer is nonsensical.”
            Does anyone ever deserve aid?

            About the terms, I used the one mostly used in the mainstream press.

            I would like to make it clear once again, I support Israel’s right to its land, but the way this lobby operates is not right or fair. Are you suggesting that they are just an advocacy group? I don’t believe that Jews “through bribery, bullying and manipulation, pressures politicians to act against their will and duties”, and I consider the ‘Jewish lobby’ to be a separate entity. Really, this is an overreaction to my comment.

            I have read several conspiracy theories about Jews and I don’t believe them; but this is a separate issue. I was talking about a group of American Jews, not all Jews.

            Please read the following link (you will find that there are some in Israel who don’t believe that this lobby is such a wonderful thing for Israel):

            http://www.haaretz.com/for-mideast-peace-israel-must-cut-off-u-s-jewish-lobby-1.411091

          • Hi Anna

            Haaretz is the Israeli equivalent of the guardian…. but anyways. I’m not really looking to engage in debate here, I was giving you info FYI. You are free to take that as you want.

        • Ivan M

          They even have a fatwa against building atomic weapons from Khomeini, though like the one against Salman Rushdie it may not have been carried out.

        • dannybhoy

          “Now I am not opposed to the money being given to support Israel, but this should be raised through voluntary donations – from the American Jews, churches and other well wishers – and not imposed on the US taxpayer, many of whom are worse off than they were. At some point this is bound to cause resentment against the Jews.”

          Anna as has been pointed out much of that $3billion is spent on American armaments and training. In that sense Israel has been a client state as well as a strategic ally.
          What has happened during this present US administration is that the thinking has changed, overall global objectives have changed (consider power blocs and trade agreements (TTIP for example)
          http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/what-is-ttip-and-six-reasons-why-the-answer-should-scare-you-9779688.html

          Israel is being portrayed as an aggressor and a liability, where once she was regarded as a beacon of freedom and democracy.Jewish people in the West are coming under increasing criticism, vilification and violence.
          So it is natural that Jewish citizens will always try to support Israel and make representation on her behalf to their governments.
          Just as Sikhs, Hindus, Muslims, Afro-Caribbeans do.
          Christians like me believe that God is ultimately in control of this world, and the covenant he made with the Jewish people is still in force. The State of Israel came about through Him using man’s freewill decisions in order to accomplish His purposes.
          Jews and Christians should support Israel. I support an Israeli charity organisation, and there are any amount of appeals for contributions for various causes within Israel.

          • Thank you for the calm tone in your comment!

            What I find most exasperating is that this topic seems off limits, as I just discovered on this blog. Why? When Israelis themselves are ambivalent about this group of people – I had no idea that calling it a ‘lobby’ was not PC, as all the newspapers seem to use that word or people wouldn’t understand – why should Christians who support Israel be forbidden to talk about it, as though that would be an act of betrayal or disloyalty? I believe a friend should be able to speak the truth in gentleness, and not pretend that a problem doesn’t exist.

            About the money, the problem is that America is heavily in debt, and has to borrow to give this aid, leaving their children poorer. Since it apparently ‘costs’ Israel to receive this aid, shouldn’t Israel just borrow the money themselves and buy whatever arms and training they need? I realise all aid is given to benefit the donor as much as the recipient, so it is no surprise. Rarely will either reveal how the money was spent.

            All around the world, people (not just the media) criticise the undue influence this group wields in US politics. It is very difficult to defend Israel in conversations when this point is raised. When the information comes from a number of media sources – many considered reliable – I find it hard to believe that those sources are in some sort of conspiracy against the Jews.

            In one of the links I posted, there was a bit of discussion about the importance of perception. If there is a strong perception that something is wrong, it is better to tackle that perception -with facts or corrective steps, if the perception is valid – than to silence discussion around it.

          • dannybhoy

            “Thank you for the calm tone in your comment!”
            It’s what I do Anna! ;0) ;0)

            I am past the stage of wanting to be right all the time, and old enough to know that God loves people so much His children’s egoes are sometimes more of a hinderance than a help….
            Perception is sometimes more important than the truth, and some people are so determined that their opinion/bias is the truth that they will seek to squash all opposing views.
            This is becoming the trend in the modern world.
            Like football supporters with their favourite teams.

            I think we have to point out to detractors that the Jewish people are overwhelmingly in favour of the survival of the State of Israel, but not so much as to what this means…
            I know Christian folk who are (imo) ott about the the subject, and for them Israel can do nothing wrong.
            I had the great privilege of spending five years living and working in that country, and I can tell you
            there are as many different personalities and opinions as there are in any country.
            But (subjectively) there is a sense of God in that country which (personally) I have experienced nowhere else.

            And sometimes, in discussing the Jewish/Irael issues, you have to accept you just ain’t gonna win…

    • johnb1945

      You should be careful about using the term “Jewish Lobby” – it is close.. too close to “Jewish conspiracy”.

      Especially in context of your post.

      America’s Jews are traditionally liberal, and many of them find the right wing, hawkish and illiberal Likud exasperating.

      The relationship between US Jewry and Israel is far more complex than a bunch of influential people in Washington who push Israel’s agenda without compromise or condition.

  • Lamia

    For all his faults, Ed Miliband moved swiftly to eradicate anti-Semites from his party.

    Actually he didn’t. He took no action against the likes of Martin ‘Tentacles’ Linton, Andy Slaughter and Corbyn himself, overlooking their persistent apologism for and keen association with blatant and even genocidal anti-Jewish hatemongers.

    I believe Miliband was more honourable in intention than Corbyn, but he simply closed his eyes to the problem. If he had acted then, then Corbyn would long ago have been disciplined or even expelled.

    Otherwise, very good article. Thank you.

  • Royinsouthwest

    Vicki Kirby and Corbyn’s Labour Party are proof that political correctness and hypocrisy and inextricably intertwined.