Cameron with Satan1
Conservative Party

Nick Griffin votes Ukip? So what? 45% of British Satanists vote Conservative

 

“Is it true? Is Nick Griffin now a Ukipper?” tweeted staunch and loyal Tory Walaa Idris ‏(@WalaaIdris), aghast, disgusted and ever so slightly delighted dismayed by the smeary associational slur (but not so aghast, disgusted and dismayed as those of us who wonder why this failed ex-MEP and bankrupt racist continues to merit so much airtime and so many column inches). “No. Our constitution forbids ex bnp members joining so please nip this particular smear in the bud before you spread falsehoods,” slapped Ukip Stormtrooper Bill Etheridge (‏@BillDudleyNorth), with all the combat effectiveness merited by Emperor Faragine.

“So you don’t want Nick Griffin’s vote?” taunted Ms Idris for the Dark Side. “Then better let him know – hear he intends to vote and support Ukip.”

This got Dudley-North Bill’s goat a bit, and it became apparent that his armour had been cloned. “Gosh we better start vetting everyone who votes for us to make sure they are a good person then hadn’t we?” he mocked. “Dear oh dear.”

But then the Galactic Ukip Empire mobilised. Deputy Chairman (and formidable media performer) Suzanne Evans (‏@SuzanneEvans1) waded through her schematics on the Death Star and fired a tractor beam: “Seriously Walaa, research by academic mate of mine found 8/10 Satanists vote Tory. Will you tell them not to?” And she expanded her universe: “Could be more now of course 😉 but less than 2,000 votes in it nationwide according to 2011 census.”

This was far too tempting a statistic not to dig out.

The article to which she refers is ‘Satanism in Britain Today’ by Graham Harvey in the Journal of Contemporary Religion (10:3, 1995). So it’s not so contemporary, but certainly worth a bit of extrapolation. Harvey found that 45 per cent of self-identifying Satanists voted Conservative in the 1992 General Election. But “a member from the Isle of Man.. would have voted Conservative given the opportunity”, which raises potential Satanist support of the Tories to a startling 55 per cent.

Yes, it was a very tiny data set: members of the Temple of Set, the Church of Satan and the Order of the Nine Angles and Dark Lily (not making this up – honestly) were all contacted with a questionnaire and 11 of them responded. The existence of the Northern Order of the Prince (aka the Order of Satanic Templars) could not be corroborated. But that was 11 responses out an estimated 50 (devil-worshippers were fairly thin on the ground in the immediate post-Thatcher years: her light of righteousness obviously kept them at bay). In research terms, a response rate of 22 per to a questionnaire is actually quite impressive.

There are other variables at play, of course. Rather like Conservative Party members, Occultists may have deserted the Tories in droves after John Major began to spread his particular brand of polytheistic paganism. And this was the pre-Ukip era, which, had they existed, might have been the preferred party of choice for all those who read horoscopes, played with Carebears, listened to Led Zeppelin and Deep Purple, or enjoyed fantasy visits to Narnia. And it isn’t quite clear what Satanists believe (or do). Not all are into child abuse or sacrificing chickens; not all subscribe to the horns-and-pointy-tail depiction of their supreme deity; and, for many adherents, the correlation between Satan and Set is theologically dubious, not to say a principal cause of schism among them.

But what is interesting is the reason given for Satanists supporting the Conservatives: the party “best represents my own standards of stability and law & order”, explained one. So Satanists incline toward conservatism, presumably because Lucifer himself knows and understands the principles of Natural Law and the preeminence of organic and incremental societal development in accordance with the the traditions and mores of an established culture. But three members voted Labour (remember this was pre-Blair, who did much to re-cast New Labour as the natural party of Law and Order), and one even voted Liberal Democrat. “This should already suggest that the stereotypical Satanic image is inaccurate!” Harvey parenthetically quips.

So, Suzanne Evans isn’t entirely wrong (though she admitted possibly confusing her “8 out of 10” with cat food). The manifest objective is to tarnish Ukip with some sort of endorsement from Nick Griffin, leaving voters to infer more than a whiff of racism permeating its substructures.

But surely democracy is about persuading supporters of one party to vote for another? Provided that you remain true to your core philosophical principles and seek to propagate values consistent with participation in the democratic processes of liberal democracy, what is wrong with trying to attract the votes of those (many thousands) who voted BNP in 2009? There were 943,598 of them. That’s an awful lot of potential racists to right off.

And then there’s the crass assertion that a party must be judged not by its reasonable moderate and enlightened core vote, but by the most extreme, obnoxious, vile and loathsome individuals it might also attracted. If former BNP-ers are a constituency to be written off, why bother trying to court the votes of any who resile from the prevailing orthodoxy of immutable equality? Or is it only the refusal to accept racial equality that is beyond the pale?

Judging a political party by its most eccentric supporters or infamous apologists is as unintelligent as judging a blog by its comment thread. Just because people with “silly monnikers.. sound off in a way they never would at work or at home (and) reinforce the worst aspects of their characters.. (in) a seething mass of babyish sarcasm ” (© Bishop Alan Wilson), the assertion is that all ensuing conversation below the line either springs from the prejudices or is endorsed by the mind of the author. And so the most obsessive, aggressive, unpleasant and hyper-critical who infest a blog chat-thread become the yardstick by which the blog’s arguments are judged. If the barometer registers even slight Islamophobia, racism, homophobia or misogyny, and such comments are not somehow monitored, rebuked or censored, the assertion is that these are the accurate readings of the blog’s pressure gauge and the author or host must agree with them.

And so, if you write about the BNP and then permit Nick Griffin to respond, you’re gifting a platform to an abhorrent racist and so you, too, must share his hateful bigotry. And yet Griffin might be just one respondent in a hundred, and those hundred might represent just a tiny fraction – just 0.5 per cent – of a blog’s entire readership, for the vast majority of daily readers of this blog never bother to comment at all. Is it really sensible to judge the goodness or worth of an entire presence in cyberspace by the feverish ranting of the six, eight or 10 who have set up their tabernacles and established a permanent residence in the comment threads?

Is it really rational to disparage an entire political party just because it might attract a few die-hard bigots or revolutionary zealots?

Would Hitler support Ukip?

Would Margaret Thatcher like Downton Abbey?

  • Uncle Brian

    Bishop Alan Wilson seems to be surprisingly well informed about people who “sound off in a way they never would at work or at home.” Where did he do his research? Whose homes and workplaces has he been checking up on? Is Edward Snowden doing his sigint for him? I think we should be told.

    • He has a Facebook account, where there is intelligent and erudite discussion, don’t ya know. Comparative research an’ all dat.

  • CliveM

    Bishop Alan Wilson comes across as a very judgemental, unpleasant individual. I wonder if he would say these things to an individuals face, or does he just hide behind a blog?

    In today’s world racism seems to be the unforgivable sin, from which their is no chance of redemption or forgiveness. Murder someone’s mother, knee cap a few individuals and without a single sorry you will find yourself glad handing with the Queen and welcomed into the establishment, on a simple promise that you might not do it again.

    Whilst racism is indeed ugly and considering europes history worthy of being treated with absolute contempt, it shouldn’t be used to blacken your opponents reputation simply because someone unpleasant has expressed support.

    Indeed if you used that principle with other issues ie being blackened because of the behaviour or manner of some of your supporters, the campaign for Woman Bishops, could have had their position fatally undermined by the support of a certain Bishop.

    • Tsk, tsk, Clive. One isn’t permitted to say “being blackened” anymore !!! And it’s “coffee without milk” too.

      • CliveM

        Well that’s my political career finished!

        • Dominic Stockford

          Well, at least we aren’t allowed to blackmail you any more – and even emotional MANipulation is suspect…

          • In 2010, an advert for ‘reliable’ applicants was rejected by a Job Centre in Thetford, Norfolk, as it could be offensive to unreliable people.
            (Jack kids you not)

          • Uncle Brian

            Carl Jacobs wasn’t so far off the mark, then, with his quip about Edmund Burke being the victim of unfair discrimination in the 2014 Cranmer Award, which “displays an exclusivist and intolerant attitude towards those Christians who happen to be dead and is therefore a malignant display of necrophobia.”
            I wonder whether the Thetford Job Centre permits prospective employers to specify that they will only consider applicants who are not dead yet.

          • Nothing Carl says is accurate. He’s American.

          • carl jacobs

            Now… Didn’t I say that Winston Churchill was one of the greatest men in Western history?

          • This being the exception that proves the rule …….

          • carl jacobs

            So then… this must be another example of non-standard British usage where ‘nothing’ means something other than nothing? I keep telling you, Jack. You Brits really need to learn the English language.

          • American’s just do not have the subtlety of mind to appreciate English language. Jack attributes it to a failure of their educational system to teach Shakespeare.

          • carl jacobs

            Nah. I was afflicted with Romeo & Juliet at a young age, and still bear the scars. The play would have been much better (and shorter) if the Capulet retainers had simply killed Romeo at the first opportunity. Plus there never would have been a movie named “Titanic.”

            Macbeth and Julius Caesar were substantial improvements. I had to read A Midsummer Nights Dream in college, but I remember nothing about it. I might have read the Merchant of Venice. And of course Henry V’s speech before Agincourt is one of the greatest pieces of writing on the English language. Oh, and I had to read a dreadful sonnet once. It was awful. I much prefer the poetry of Poe.

            For some reason, English teachers love teaching Shakespeare.

          • Ah …. Poe over Shakespeare. This explains a lot. Please don’t tell me. ‘Alone’ changed your life.

            And your Shakespeare play preferences is …. ummm ….interesting.

          • carl jacobs

            Alone? Eh. It’s OK I guess. Conqueror Worm is poem that stuck with me. There are three others in the same category. Here Dead We Lie by Houseman and two by Kipling: Young British Soldier and Tommy Atkins. Yeah, yeah. Three of those four are British. America is not exactly overrun with good poets. And all three are pretty universal in their application.

          • ‘Conqueror Worm’? An awful poem. Human life a mad folly ending in hideous death; a universe controlled by incomprehensible dark forces; forces for good watching powerless to help. Males me shudder.

          • carl jacobs

            Precisely. Dark themes are the best themes.

  • This prejudice against Satan should not be tolerated in a pluralist, liberal democracy. People who worship Lucifer are perfectly entitled under equality legislation and human right’s law to express and practice their faith.

    Think, without Satan where would we be? Without him tempting our “evil inclination” would the human species have survived to reach such heights?

    • Dominic Stockford

      Not a joking matter.

      • Indeed but looking at the satanic belief system it’s scary how much of it has been absorbed into out culture in recent times.

        • Dominic Stockford

          Scary doesn’t even begin to cover it.

        • sarky

          Absolutey, most people live the satanic commandments without realising! !!

          • Very astute, Sarky. Which ones do you have in mind?

          • sarky

            If your talking about the church of Satan, probably all of them apart from number 7, which acknowledges the use of magic. There is a kind of morality to them that always surprised me! !!!

    • IanCad

      To give you an update Jack;
      Although you were, indirectly, the cause of my week-end marital woes, I am pleased to let you know that your Baptist/Bridge joke went some way towards making peace.
      She loved it.
      Thanks
      Ian.

      • Happy Jack is pleased to have been of some assistance, Ian.

        Now you have the ‘Rules for Marriage’, as seen from a woman’s point of view, you can build on this. Being open with praise and love is the next step.
        Here are some fine ways of expressing appreciation:

        “I love talking with you; you’re interesting and funny.”
        “Today was another one of those days that made me so glad I asked you to marry me.”
        “Your life tells the truth about love.”
        “The kind of mum you are makes it so much easier to be the kind of a dad I need to be.”
        “Sometimes you are so beautiful that I just want to stand still and look at you.”
        “Thank you for being such a hard worker.”
        “Thanks for loving me the way you do; you make me want to be a better man.”
        “You’re the reason this place is called ‘home’ rather than just a house.”
        “Thanks for being my best friend.”
        “Thanks for your honesty.”

        A compliment a day keeps the divorce lawyer away.

        • IanCad

          Thanks Jack,
          I would really have to work into giving all of that to her.
          My track record would expose me as a total phony if I were to give her the whole nine yards.
          Here a little, there a little.
          Gradualism, that’s the way.

          Perhaps the best recipe for harmony that I know of comes from Ogden Nash:

          “To keep your marriage brimming;
          To keep love in the loving cup.
          When you’re wrong admit it,
          When you’re right, shut up.”

          Ian

          • See, it’s that attitude of reserve that causes problems, Ian. Practice in front of mirror … talk to a pet … get comfortable with the words – and mean them. And, of course, one at a time.

          • IanCad

            Well, maybe I could put my own spin on those phrases:

             

            “I love talking with you; Almost much as I love listening to the BBC.”

             
            “Today was another one of those days that must have made you so glad that you asked to marry me.”

             
            “Thank you for being such a hard worker.” “Now, when you’ve finished bringing in the firewood —-.”

             

            “Thanks for your honesty – but next time just admit it right away.”

          • Hmmm … let Jack know how you get on.

          • IanCad

            If I don’t post again you will know that something bad befell me.

          • In France if you insult your spouse you could face jail under a French law introduced in 2010 making “psychological violence” a criminal offence. Britain is moving in that direction too with the slogan ‘Domestic Abuse, There’s No Excuse’. One such category is “psychological abuse”. You have been warned.

            Here’s an insult from the great Bard himself:

            “Out of my door, you witch, you hag, you baggage, you polecat, you ronyon!”

            Or, on a more contemporary one:

            Ian’s wife bought some new expensive cosmetics to make her look years younger. She applied the “miracle” products for what seemed ages…

            Mrs Cad: “Honey, what age would you honestly say I am?”
            Ian: “I would say, from your skin 20, your hair 18, and your figure 25.”
            Mrs Cad: “Oh, stop!”
            Ian: “Wait a sec. I haven’t added them up yet.”

  • Dominic Stockford

    Bishop Michael N-A also votes UKIP, so does that pairing then create an impossible conundrum?

    • David

      It wouldn’t be a pairing. They would never get near enough. The red, leery chap would run like hell all the way back to Hades if Bishop Michael N-A so much as even appeared in sight. + Michael being one of the few, truly God fearing and Bible believing C of E Bishops we have. That’s why he isn’t popular within the establishment.

  • carl jacobs

    Politics is a contact sport, and there are no rules except “Win!” You can punch your opponent in the kidneys. You can kick him in the testicles. You can gouge his eyes or break his fingers. You can smear, lie, cheat, and steal – just so long as you pull a majority. The only referee is what the voting public will tolerate. So long as they don’t care, you don’t care.

    This weblog post is on point and well-reasoned but utterly worthless as a political response. There is nothing fair about it, but it doesn’t matter if some faceless Satanists voted for the Conservatives. They don’t have the political impact of Nick Griffin supporting UKIP. He can and will be used by UKIPs enemies to frame the party to its political disadvantage. “You see, Griffin proves UKIP is just a user friendly version of BNP. That’s who they are.” UKIP should have pre-empted this eventuality.

    • Inspector General

      What could UKIP have done to pre-empty. Nothing.
      Nobody cares about Griffin anyway. A failed politician and bankrupt.

      • carl jacobs

        Inspector

        Your enemies care very much about him. That’s why they are trying hang him around your neck like a burning tire. And our weblog host cared enough to write a post about him.

        The fact that Griffin is a failed politician helps their narrative. Why did he fail? Because he is a racist nutjob. His party was too extreme. So, look! He has found a kinder gentler version of the BNP and it’s called UKIP. It’s just the BNP dressed up in pretty clothes.

        Political parties pay consultants big money to figure out how to diffuse situations like this. I don’t know the best way to handle it. But there had to be a better way than just wait for it to happen. There should have been a pre-emptive plan to mitigate the damage. Because if your enemies succeed in labeling UKIP as BNP redux, then UKIP is finished.

        • Uncle Brian

          My impression is that Ukip has already gathered sufficient momentum of its own to put it out of reach of that kind of reductionist nothing-buttery. But I’m sure you’re right that Ukip can’t be too careful about infiltration. As long as it’s only the left chanting the “Ukip = BNP redux” mantra, then I’d think they’re safe. But if Griffin himself, and others like him, were to get up and stand on a soapbox tomorrow and issue a public appeal to all their old admirers to join them in being reincarnated as Kippers, then that would be a nasty stab in the back for Farage & Co.

        • Inspector General

          Carl. The British character does not do far right and
          couldn’t care less if Oswald Mosely himself said he was going to vote UKIP, if he was still around. The attitude of
          the people here would be that of all the choices available to him, he would of course choose them. “What of it ? That would be him all over. Nobody to blame” would be the
          general thoughts. Guilt by association being the weakest crime you can be accused of, and it’s always thrown out by the fair minded British. Interestingly, guilt by association does crop up in the bible, despite the fathers sins not to be visited upon the sons, so it is said. Original sin, anyone ?

          In fact, this man remembers when he was still around and
          self-exiled in France. Right to the end he was still expecting his country’s call to return to save us all from parliamentary democracy. You must admit, he presented an interesting conundrum, if nothing else. He couldn’t crack it with
          the British Union of Fascists and that was before Nazism tainted forever the far right – and his movement continued to exist, while it did, only through the patronage of the more loopier members of the landed classes.

          • CliveM

            One of the joys of our parliamentary system. It blocks out extremes of both right and left. Stops them getting a foothold or just enough seats to start being influential. I think you are right Inspector, we don’t do far right (or left).

    • Doh

      You can’t ban people from voting.

      You can’t even ban people from saying in public who they are going to vote for.

      Not in the UK, anyway.

  • LeoSavantt

    One supposes that the notorious dictator might have been unable to reconcile UKIP’s non-whipping policy with his own propensity for the centralisation of authority.

  • Inspector General

    Cranmer, dear fellow. Allow the Inspector to enlighten the baying PC mob. There are for the main two types of Briton in the country. Those who are racist to some degree who don’t mind admitting it, and those who are racist to some degree who do mind admitting it. That’s about it then. And what is more, the be racist to some degree, or to give it it’s correct nomenclature, ‘racial wary’, is an honourable estate fully in line with what it is to be a patriot. To wit, one who puts his country first,
    well third to be accurate, after God and Queen.

    Now, what do you say to that ?

    Racial wariness has been forced upon the indigenous by successive governments who for some reason value incomers of black and brown skin more than they do the existing inhabitants of these isles who were rather hoping that their sons and daughters would be moving into properties now occupied by these types and who now, inevitably, find said offspring may never leave the family home for want of an affordable destination. Yet the ‘welcome’ coloured immigrant, more than likely here to better themselves economically and often on the run from some hideous country miss-run by their own race need barely leave the plane before some local authority whisks them to some desirable and roomy residence paid for by the likes of you and me, while they await dependants to follow.

    Makes sense to question all this, don’t you think. After all, what good are they. Bringing into the country their ethnic ways, much of which are damn unpleasant and some of it downright dangerous…

    • Martin

      IG

      Actually, since we are all descendants of Noah & his family (and before him Adam) there is only one human race. The correct term therefore is xenophobia.

      • Inspector General

        How delightful Martin. The story of the flood due to the great thaw after the last ice age personified in fable. You must take great comfort from that. You and all the other evolution deniers….

        • Whatever you believe about evolution, do you reject our common parentage in one couple, Adam and Eve, Inspector?

          • Inspector General

            Let not this man interrupt you flat earthers in your comfort…

          • CliveM

            Hi Inspector,

            Tell me does not the Pope believe in evolution? Is HJ perhaps in danger of heresy?!!

          • Martin

            Clive

            The pope believes in all sorts of weird things, he’s hardly one to rely on.

          • Martin

            IG

            Did you realise that the concept of flat Earth belief was only introduced in the 19th century.

            Indeed, to the observant it is obvious that the Earth is not flat. No sailor could believe the Earth was flat simply because objects disappear below the horizon & reappear above it. Likewise climbing a mountain teaches you the same thing. Why do you think you can see further the higher up you are?

        • Martin

          IG

          Don’t be silly. If it were only a local flood why would Noah have to build a huge vessel to contain the animals and birds? Indeed, why would he need to have birds on board at all, they could merely fly to safety.

          And of course the fact that ~90% of the Earth is mantled with a layer of sediment or sedimentary rock and vast fossil beds is excellent evidence fro the truth of the Flood narrative.

          And can you demonstrate the descent of all life from an original form, or even one tenth of it? There is simply no evidence to support Evolution, it is not science and it is simply an excuse to pretend God is not the Creator.

          • Inspector General

            God has created us Martin. We’ll leave it at that for now…

          • Martin

            IG

            But how does God say He created us?

          • Inspector General

            By the way, old fellow. Did you have a formal education. You know, science and all that business. Or did you find yourself sweeping a chimney aged 8. One has to ask due to your somewhat limited understanding of what is…

          • CliveM

            Lol :0)

          • Martin

            IG

            Is that really the best you can do? My formal education included the concept of thinking for myself, not blindly following what I was taught.

            The Royal Society was founded with the motto that tell us not to take the words of any man at face value but to test the idea & prove it for ourselves. That is what science is. Sadly too many today accept the consensus without testing.

            In science classes it is usual to look at the subject, perform experiments and test. That is, all science except for Evolution, where no testing occurs. Do you wonder why?

  • Inspector General

    So there you have it. And we haven’t even touched on those chancers from East Europe here on the make who need to be sent back, before their own countries economically fail in the EU style we’ve come to know so well, as our tiny England slowly fills up with them and our services are stretched to breaking point. But that’s not going to bother the children now being carried in their mothers stomachs over there right now. They know their children’s destiny lies across the channel. (For example, we now have an ‘International’ Health Service apparently, paid for by you and me yet free at the point of delivery to any European who cares to make the unhindered journey here).

    No need for images of the devil then. If Alan Wilson (this man can no longer refer to him as a bishop, unless he’s allowed to prefix that ecclesiastical title with ‘Judas’) goes around berating people for their stance, he’s wasting their time as well as his own. People who are going to vote UKIP are going to vote UKIP. They’ve been driven to it. They will just do as this man would if taken to task by ‘one world’ dreamers – shrug their shoulders. UKIP offers a way out of our largely self-imposed madness. We’re going to take it…

  • Politically__Incorrect

    “…those of us who wonder why this failed ex-MEP and bankrupt racist continues to merit so much airtime and so many column inches). …”
    Indeed. Which left me wondering why we are discussing this at all. Political parties do not decide who votes for them, and I bet there are plenty of nasties and pond-life-forms who vote for LibLabCon. Indeed, some of them seem to have slithered successfully up the party pole. If Nick Griffin wants to vote UKIP, then let him. It seems no worse than giving convicted criminals a vote from prison.

    • Inspector General

      And it is no worse than Clegg ‘reaching out’ for gayer votes. See Pink News, if the smell of drains doesn’t bother you…

      • Politically__Incorrect

        Inspector, I wouldn’t pollute my computer by even opening their site – the smell of drains is the easy bit to stomach

        • Inspector General

          In that case P_I allow the Inspector to elaborate…

          That man is keen that sex education in schools being redefined. That the gays are giving him the thumbs up informs you of the ghastly reality that is when you go grubbing for votes in the depths of sexual orientation mental
          disorder, where one in seven men are now HIV+ (figures for London gay men, the one’s that they know about, that is)

          For the indignant following this site, the answer is yes. Homosexual influence in this country is fair game to decry. As much as scrapping what immigration barriers we still have left, championed by damnable lefties, who are bloody well silent when it comes to policies spreading an incurable fatal
          disease….

          • Every time you click the link to that site you are financially aiding and abetting the enemy, Inspector. It’s funding is dependent on the number of ‘hits’ it receives.

          • Inspector General

            One of your more pitiful responses….

          • CliveM

            Inspector

            You never know what you might catch on their sight!

            Oh actually you do! Was the treatment painful?

  • This chap Alan Wilson does not think too highly of regular Cranmerites.

    “Personally”, he acknowledges, the Archbishop “sometimes does say really insightul things that are worth hearing, albeit from a very unreaconstructed (sic) right wing perspective.”

    However, here’s what he thinks of many of us:

    “I think what I learn about blogging, however, is that if you build a community on people who assume silly monnikers (sic) and sound off in a way they never would at work or at home, they reinforce the worst aspects of their characters, all you get is a seething mass of babyish sarcasm. The anger of man (and it is about 90% men — they come over as prep school masters indulging their shadow sides) really doesn’t work the righteousness of God.”

    On the other hand, his reconstructed perspective (i.e. left-wing, progressive and oh, so modern) and open identity (well he does have a book to sell and Pink News awards to attend) attracts a more erudite and cultured audience offering superior commentary:

    “Compare and contrast a conversation I (sic) on my Facebook page where around 30 people, including specialist doctors, lawyers (including one who had worked on the Shipman case), care workers, bereaved relatives and others, engaged in a hugely respectful mutual conversation about assisted dying.”

    Question: is anyone going to nominate him for Top 100 Christians of the Year?

    Snobby lot these lefties, you know.

    • Politically__Incorrect

      I’m certainly no prep school master. Neither is the bishop, otherwise he would know how to spell moniker correctly (it’s one “n” your grace). Just read one of his Grauniad articles on gay “marriage”. All I can say is that if he ever read the Bible, he wasn’t paying attention.
      Talking of silly monikers, does anyone know what a “bishopric” is?

      • Is there a ‘k’ missing?

      • magnolia

        Talk about broad brush strokes and unjust caricature. I can think of several prep school masters and almost to a man they are all courteous gentlemen who would not harm anyone nor indulge in scurrilous gossip.

        Of course the other sort exists but I would not think they are anything but a small minority. Perhaps the Bishop had bad experiences from one or two, perhaps he was caned or assaulted- I don’t pretend to know- but I do think he is being unfair.

    • CliveM

      Boy oh boy, does he not have a high opinion of himself!! Talk about name dropping.

      Sanctimonious, supercilious, hypocritical cant

      And I know I was repeating myself.

      Also offended that he thinks my Moniker is silly……… My parents tried very hard to come up with a good name!

      At least I don’t wear a dress!

      • Do not give in to your shadow self, Clive.

        The bishop has probably attended lectures on psychology Clive, so knows about these things. It’s not sin we have contend with anymore; it’s our shadow.

        As Jung said: “Everyone carries a shadow and the less it is embodied in the individual’s conscious life, the blacker and denser it is.”

        • CliveM

          Ah so your a Jungian. I think what Kohlberg has to say on moral development is nearer the mark!!

          • Not Jack …. Alan maybe as he used the expression. Too much Hinduism mixed in with Jung for Jack’s taste.

    • Martin

      HJ

      Didn’t he appear here once & get a sound drubbing?

    • CliveM

      Re read this and tried to give you two upvotes!

      Still irritated by his attitude.

  • bugalugs2

    If Nick Griffin does now share the more moderat,e non-racist views of UKIP does not the phrase ‘There is more joy in Heaven over 1 sinner who repents than over 99 righteous people who do not need to repent?” come to mind?

    And if it comes to giving a home to former members of the BNP, what about the Labour councillor who was a former BNP activist, or the Tory councillor who was? Does failed MEP candidate abhor those parties because they are not only supported by former members of the BNP but have actually selected former members and activists for the BNP to stand for them at council elections?

  • Inspector General

    Have we wronged Wilson. Let him appear here and account for himself. Though one
    suspects he’s only comfortable when ministering to victim mentality devotees.

    Discourse with those who don’t need to lap up his words of comfort would be right out. Not in control, you see. Makes all the difference when the faithful aren’t humping your leg in humbling gratitude…

    • His Facebook account is worth a read. Very strange for a bishop; very strange.

      • CliveM

        Facebook! Satans unholy domain……

        Probably why the Bishop uses it!!!!!!

  • Trojan

    Attacking a political party by association with persons deemed politically unacceptable is a familiar tactic of leftish groups, like UAF or Left Unity. They usually choose notorious right wingers. However, Labour and most of the parties to the left of it are not embarrassed by the number of former Maoists, Trotkiests and even Stalinists in their ranks. And the body count for these far exceeds anything of today’s extremist right.

  • Ricky Tomlinson, actor and occasional Grauniad columnist used to be a very busy member of the National Front. A lot of Guardianistas like to forget that, and in particular when I helpfully pointed it out over at CiF. Of course I got modded to the naughty step forever.

    • DanJ0

      Really? :O

      • CliveM
        • James60498 .

          He’s right about one thing.

          “there’s no difference between the (new) Conservatives and New Labour”.

          • CliveM

            I’m not so sure with Milliband it’s as true as it once was.

    • CliveM

      As DanJo said, really! Got a link?

      Well, well, well……….

  • So he has seen the light. More than Cameron has!

  • If Adolf Hitler wiped his backside and washed his hands after going to the poo, then if I do the same does that make me a National Socialist?

    As I often say, just because the detestable Nick Griffin says ‘The country’s full’ doesn’t mean it isn’t true.

    Its going to be a long and filthy election campaign. It might just backfire on the left though, as I think titsgate will.