Nissar Hussain attack 2
Christian Persecution

Nissar Hussain battered with a pickaxe in Bradford for converting from Islam to Christianity

 

Quite a few British Muslims are eager to abandon the path of Mohammed and the faith of their forefathers. Some are brave enough to convert to Christianity and make a public profession of their new faith in Jesus, but most commit quietly and incrementally (and often unconsciously) to morph to the secular-non-theistic attitudes of society. It’s no big fuss: they just prefer texting girls to reading the Qur’an, and watching Gogglebox instead of listening to some tedious imam drone on about dīn and duʿā. Not many would call themselves atheists, but there are very many thousands of young British ex-Muslim agnostics. They daren’t go any further for fear of..

Well, the grainy picture above is of Nissar Hussain being bludgeoned not-quite-to-death with a pickaxe. He and his entire family converted from Islam to Christianity in 1996, and life in Bradford has been hellish ever since. So hellish, in fact, that they gave up on the Church of England (though correspondence directly with Nissar Hussain subsequent to that report elicited nothing of substance at all: promised documents were never received).

But his persecution is manifestly real:

Nissar Hussain attack 3

West Yorkshire Police are at last treating this as religiously motivated ‘hate crime’ (though why it isn’t attempted murder is another investigatory policing mystery). Nissar Hussain’s persecution (for that is what it is) has now been reported nationally by the Daily Mail, Express and the Telegraph (why is this only of concern to the ‘right wing’ media? Why nothing in the Guardian or on the BBC?). He is clearly intelligent, thoughtful and eloquent: wouldn’t he make a good guest on Channel 4 News or Sunday Morning Live? Speaking from his hospital bed, he said:

“The Muslim community are largely decent people but because of the taboo of converting to Christianity we are classed by them as scum and second-class citizens. Over the years our lives have been subjugated and stripped of any dignity. Our lives have been jeopardised and subjugated, we have been forced to live under a climate of fear, this is not England. I grew up in in to a free decent country accepting British values and the British rule of law. I think multiculturalism has failed, I think David Cameron’s Big Society has failed and I think there is two laws, one for them and one for us.”

There’s a lot in here to chew over, but there is one fundamental dichotomous tension: “The Muslim community are largely decent people but because of the taboo of converting to Christianity we are classed by them as scum and second-class citizens.”

No “decent people” classify converts to Christianity as “scum and second-class citizens”. All decent people will respect the fundamental freedom of religion and the inviolable human right (and ‘British value’) to manifest whatever faith one chooses and to abandon that faith if one wishes and do so with impunity. Perhaps Nissar Hussain’s mistake was to talk about “the Muslim community” when there are, of course, a myriad of disparate Muslim communities. It’s easy but lazy to lump them all together. Not all have sympathies for the Charlie Hebdo murderers: it’s just 27%. Not all think acts of violence against those who publish images of Mohammad are justified: it’s only 24%. But that BBC poll needs urgently to extend the scope of its enquiry.

How many British Muslims favour the quranic exhortation in ayah 256 of Al-Baqara that “there is no compulsion in religion”? And how many instead incline toward the hadith which records Mohammad saying: “Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him” (Bukhari 9.84.57)?

O, we can debate the relative authorities of the diverse schools of Islamic jurisprudence, and ponder the principal Sunni and Shi’ite soteriological divergences. But the fact remains that you don’t hear many British imams (or representative Muslim community leaders or councils) contending against the view of Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who has stated, seemingly somewhat authoritatively: “The Muslim jurists are unanimous that apostates must be punished, yet they differ as to determining the kind of punishment to be inflicted upon them. The majority of them, including the four main schools of jurisprudence (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, and Hanbali) as well as the other four schools of jurisprudence (the four Shiite schools of Az-Zaidiyyah, Al-Ithna-`ashriyyah, Al-Ja`fariyyah, and Az-Zaheriyyah) agree that apostates must be executed.”

If British Muslims are not free to reject Mohammed as a false prophet and embrace the lordship of Jesus Christ without being beaten and battered on the sharia streets of Bradford, then Nissar Hussain is right: “this is not England.”

  • bockerglory

    So sad. Following on from your previous post about there not being enough active peace makers – it shows that perhaps Cranmer you too are misunderstanding what is happening.

    This is not about number of good Muslims v. Violent Muslims. It is about a religious belief system that is 100% based on denying the resurrection of Christ. Islam main purpose and reason for existence is to deny the Christ & Trinity I pray that more humans suffering under the yoke of Islam cast off this yoke and turn to Christ.

    • David

      Indeed ! But unlike atheists they enforce their beliefs with violence !

      • Martin

        David

        Atheists may be more subtle in their methods but their methods are just as violent.

        • David

          Yes, I take your point.

  • The Explorer

    I once heard a foolish joke, which nevertheless has some relevance here.

    “I’m changing my name.”
    “Why, what’s your name?”
    “Peter Skunk.”
    “Don’t blame you. What are you changing it to?”
    “John Skunk.”

    To British officialdom ( and the liberal wing of the C of E) a move from Islam is of this order. There is so little difference, why make the change? And why support anyone misguided enough to do it?

    It’s only among those who appreciate that different religions say different things that the issue is meaningful. (However, the two Paris attacks this year may have given even officialdom and the C of E cause to think again. But not enough to be significant in this particular instance.)

  • sarky

    Prehaps muslims got they’re ideas on how to treat apostacy from your bible.

    “If your brother, the son of your mother, or your son or your daughter or the wife you embrace or your friend who is as your own soul entices you secretly, saying, ‘Let us go and serve other gods,’ which neither you nor your fathers have known, some of the gods of the peoples who are around you, whether near you or far off from you, from the one end of the earth to the other, you shall not yield to him or listen to him, nor shall your eye pity him, nor shall you spare him, nor shall you conceal him. But you shall kill him. Your hand shall be first against him to put him to death, and afterward the hand of all the people. You shall stone him to death with stones, because he sought to draw you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. …

    • bluedog

      OT and OTT. Christ fulfilled the Covenant and the New Testament is the relevant work of reference. But you know that.

      • sarky

        Cant beat a get out clause.

        • The Explorer

          Your argument goes like this. Christians are sinners; so they shouldn’t accuse other people of being sinners. But if a Christian says, “I’m a sinner, and so are you; we both do things that are wrong,” then that argument falls apart. You can argue that Christians ought not to do wrong things, but that’s another issue.

          And on a point that has been argued many times, if it’s wrong to have sex at ten, it doesn’t follow that it’s wrong to have sex at eighteen. What is wrong at one stage of development may become right at another without any hypocrisy involved.

    • chiefofsinners

      Have your parents treated you thus?

      • sarky

        No, but how many christians actually faithfully follow any of the bible these days?

        • chiefofsinners

          Your parents do, it would seem.

    • CliveM

      So what’s your point?

      We shouldn’t blame the Muslims who did this?
      Christians should do this as well?
      Muslims are right to do this?
      Christians (who don’t do this) have no right to comment?
      All Muslims should do this?
      Muslims shouldn’t convert, it’s their fault?

      Because to be honest, I see little point or relevancy to your post.

      • DannyEastVillage

        the Prophet would say the people who did this are no Muslims. Muhammed says very clearly in the Qu’ran that coercion in religion is off limits. Full Stop.

        • The Explorer

          Don’t be so naif. Because the Prophet says one thing somewhere doesn’t mean he doesn’t say something different somewhere else. Haven’t you heard of the Islamic principle of abrogation?

        • CliveM

          Have you read the article? The Hadith certainly suggests death for apostates and certain Muslim communities take the Hadith very seriously.

        • Dreadnaught

          He also said ‘kill apostates’ – this was just a taster.

      • sarky

        My point is how can you condem what your own book condones.

        • CliveM

          I would of thought of more relevance to the post is that a man has been half beaten to death, following a long campaign in which the authorities have failed to offer him necessary support.

          Better watch it, some might accuse you of making a cheap point.

    • alternative_perspective

      Do you ever read texts that don’t affirm your narrow understanding of the Bible and Christianity?

      Seriously. I posted for you numerous links, numerous times, to sites for your perusal? Have you ever once followed any of those links? Did you ever once challenge your pre-suppositions, have you ever critically appraised what it is you think you believe and why you think you believe it?

      I would argue the majority of Christians under 45 nowadays are convers from secularism, from agnosticism lived atheistically. Most of us have had to pass through these arguments, the misunderstandings and the outright lies. We’ve had to challenge our priori beliefs and prejudices and critically appraise the basic assumptions of our lives.

      It isn’t easy. Often its lonely. Commonly older members of the church or those raised within it don’t have any answers (including arts majors functioning as priests), they just accept (I find this frustrating and un-Biblical). But against all these odd so many of us found the worldview you defend asymmetrically shallow, unconvincing and cold.

      There’s nothing you can post that we haven’t considered. There’s no argument you’ll post we haven’t grappled with. Do you seriously think we haven’t read that very passage in scripture and never questioned it. What; you think we’re un-questioning morons who’ve never read the Bible…wake up Sarky. We’ve read the Bible, we’ve critiqued it. We’ve asked questions and you know what… we still find it far more satisfying, enlightening and intellectually honest than the vacuum of thought called atheism.

      Yes, at times and on occasions we just have to park the question until we find answers later but we pursued the truth against the mocking of the world… mocking from people like yourself and you know what: it brought us to Jesus, who is Lord of all and saviour to those who are willing.

      • David

        Well put !

      • ronmurp

        Until you address the unjustified presupposition that there is a god that is he source or inspiration for the that ancient mythical book, none of your links are going to be convincing. Everything modern Christians know about Christianity comes from the NT – either directly, or by other material written by Christians in support of the the NT. Even the content of the NT was massaged into shape by disagreeing Christians. As such the bible is no better that a liar’s book declaring it is the work of an honest man: http://ronmurp.net/2013/09/30/can-faith-ever-be-rational/

        • Phil R

          Not another troll. ..

        • CliveM

          So let’s see if we can sum up your argument. The persons who wrote the NT believed in what they were saying, therefore the NT must be lies?

        • The Explorer

          “Everything modern Christians know about Christianity comes from the NT.”

          Not entirely true. What about Josephus, Pliny, Tacitus, people like that? They weren’t Christians.

        • William Lewis

          “Until you address the unjustified presupposition that there is a god that is he source or inspiration for the that ancient mythical book, none of your links are going to be convincing”

          There is no unjustified presupposition that God is the source and inspiration for the Bible. It’s all contained therein.

        • Martin

          Ron

          Trouble is we have sufficient of the early copies of the NT to know that its content wasn’t massaged into shape. Indeed, it is that original writing that enabled Christians to abandon Rome and return to the doctrine of the Apostles.

        • alternative_perspective

          Do you actually believe what you’ve written? I read the first paragraph of your link and my eyes began rolling around in their sockets:

          “Buchak characterizes faith as a commitment to acting as if some claim is true without first needing to examine additional evidence that could potentially bear on the claim.”

          What a totally bullshit definition of faith. Dear ronmurp if this is the quality of the scholarship on which you’ve based your value system then it truly is Bull cr*p and you’ve been sold a lie.

          Take the opening few lines of your polemic, do you realise you are arguing FOR prejudice? You’re not even arguing from reason or evidence mere supposition and rhetoric. You don’t put forward any arguments but just sling mud. Would you accept this as a reasonable line of argumentation or debate from anyone else?

          You are clearly set in your ways and unable at this time to entertain evidences and arguments for theism and Christianity. But I will post one link for you, if you wish to follow it and explore what is actually classed as scholarship in philosophy then be my guest. But if you don’t wish please be honest enough to accept that you have chosen out of free will and not rational debate, evidence or argument this path.

          I will leave you with one question:

          “If Christianity were true, would you convert?”

          http://www.reasonablefaith.org/

          • ronmurp

            You do realise that the “Buchak characterizes faith as ..” bit wasn’t mine, but Lombrozo’s; and that I was already pointing out the equivocating use of the term faith? You do get that, don’t you?

            What you quoted wasn’t the first paragraph of my link, but a block quote, taken from some way into the Lombrozo piece. So, “I read the first paragraph…” seems confused.

            If you’re actually complaining about the definition of faith I provided at the top, that’s just a pretty standard dictionary definition which, along with a definition of ‘reason’, was just setting up the basic definition of those words, precisely because the Buchak one was so lame.

            You have no idea if I’m set in my ways or not. If you’re not sure, try this page which links to many other posts of mine that clearly state my open mindedness, and my view that knowledge is contingent: http://ronmurp.net/thinking/

            “If Christianity were true, would you convert?”

            That would depend what was true about it. Remember, there’s a lot of variety in Christianity out there, from Creationists to ‘sophisticated theologians’ that barely accept the existence of Jesus the man, let alone his divinity and miracles. Your question is pretty hopeless. But let me help out…

            If it could be shown (with evidence and reason) that there was some agent intelligence responsible for the wilful creation of the universe, then would I believe such an entity existed? Yes. Would I worship this thing? No.

            If it could then be shown that life occurred as an accident in this creation I’d have no reason to hold this thing responsible for the misery and suffering any more than the joy we experience. But if it turns out that this joker had intentionally created the universe with life, and still allowed all the suffering, then I want him put on trial for all the genocide done by his creation, and the incompetent way he allows natural disasters to wipe out so many people, and the way he incompetently built the human body to suffer cancer and all the other crap.

            Is that getting somewhere? Is that getting specific enough for this dumb shit Christianity? I know we haven’t even gotten to Jesus the hippy Jew – for all I know that poor sucker had his life taken over by a bunch of idiotic zealots that thought he was divine.

            And, please, NOT WILLIAM LANE CRAIG, the baby eater! Divine command my ass! I was going to post some links to the many refutations of WLC BS, but go and search for yourself.

      • sarky

        It brought me to atheism.

        • Martin

          Sarky

          Your Atheism is really self-worship.

          • sarky

            Well, if I have to worship something…

          • Martin

            Sark

            Trouble is, you’re a pretty poor god to worship.

          • sarky

            You’d have to ask my congregation about that.

          • Martin

            Sarky

            Your congregation of one, a fool.

          • sarky

            Takes one to know one!

          • Martin

            Sarky

            I’m not part of your congregation.

            For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. (Romans 1:21 [ESV])

          • sarky

            And they all lived happily ever after…

          • Martin

            Sarky

            You think that living with a darkened mind, as you do, is living happily? You really haven’t a clue.

          • sarky

            I’m very happy. Its you who seems to wallow in the misery of your worldview.

          • Martin

            Sarky

            I’m not miserable, far from it. But then neither does God torment in this world those destined for judgement in the next.

          • sarky

            Hence why you’re not miserable.

          • Martin

            Sarky

            Desperately trying to dodge what you know is true.

            That’s the big advantage I’ve got, you know I’m right.

    • Martin

      Sarky

      One has to wonder if you bother to read the context passages were written in.

  • chiefofsinners

    Multiculturalism has failed. When an ex-Muslim says it, who is there left
    to disagree? Only our political elite, it seems, who prefer to spend all their days scooping up the dung of the elephant in the room: FGM, sex rings exploiting vulnerable girls, bigamy, tacit and open support for terrorism. Too busy to deal with the odd Christian being beaten half to death.

  • Is it multiculturalism that has failed or is it that Christianity and Islam just cannot co-exist?

    There are many cultural differences amongst British people – Scots, Irish, Welsh and English – but we are held together by a “glue” that is based on shared Christian values. Similarly, many of the Eastern Europeans who settle here are Christian, as were those from the West Indies.

    Perhaps we need to focus more on the incompatibility of Islam with the Christian basis of Western society.

    ” … when people become part of a country, they have to believe in the basic principles that unite it. These include constitutional-legal principles and fundamental political philosophy, to be sure, but also certain basic ethical norms, social mores, and religious perspectives. People don’t have to all be the same religion to peacefully and cooperatively share the same political community, but they cannot be deeply in opposition or resistant to accommodating their worldviews ….

    ” …. when immigrants come the unspoken understanding is that they must accept and accommodate themselves to the country they go to and not the other way around. In the case of Moslem immigrants, particularly in this era of jihad and Islamic terrorism and in light of the serious scholarship about the repudiation of reason in the long tradition of Sunni Islamic thought as traced by writers such as Robert R. Reilly, it is a legitimate question about whether the basic considerations mentioned as necessary to maintain the civic bond or common good of countries is likely.

    “The pattern of Islamic immigrants resisting acculturation into their new countries, seeking the establish “their own rules” such as sharia law for their enclaves as their population grows in size, and then seeking to effect broader political, legal, and socio-cultural change as they approach a majority buttresses this concern. Reilly has convincingly argued that these deeper concerns—the age-old intellectual crisis in the predominant (Sunni) strain of Islam—have everything to do with these large socio-political questions. There are indeed “moderate” Moslems, who might more readily fit into Western political societies, but there is much reason to doubt that this more than a distinct minority.”

    http://www.crisismagazine.com/2015/what-the-migrant-crisis-means-for-the-future-of-the-west

    • chiefofsinners

      Spot-on, Jack. Islam is beginning to look like a cuckoo in the nest.

    • Cressida de Nova

      This is the point….Christianity and Islam cannot coexist successfully in the west. I do not understand why this was never taken into account when immigration policies were formulated all those years ago. Anyone who was educated or travelled in these countries would have known this. If it was done for the sake of acquiring a cheap labour force then this unconsciounable act has cost the western world dearly. We are now in a mess we cannot extricate ourselves from.

  • Darach Conneely

    According to the Office of National Statistics there are about a quarter million hate crimes a year in England and Wales. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/266358/hate-crime-2013.pdf The question you should ask isn’t: why wasn’t this particular crime reported in the Guardian? but: why of all these hate crimes do right wing media jump on one committed by Muslims? Could it be it suits the message of hate they preach?
    It’s a hate crime, but it is being treated as one by the police. I agree it is an issue Muslims need to deal with, but lets not forget Catholics and Protestants used to burn their heretics and apostates, and not 50 years age the ‘B-Specials’ auxiliary police in Northern Ireland used to regularly beat up Catholics.

    • The Explorer

      “why of all these hate crimes do right wing media jump on one committed by Muslims? Could it be it suits the message of hate they preach?”

      Who’s doing the preaching here: the Media or the Muslims?

      • Darach Conneely

        The right wing media have been preaching their hate of the unemployed, disabled, migrants, refugees and Muslims for years. If you want the Muslim communities to fully embrace British values of tolerance, perhaps you need to reject the messages of intolerance being preached to you by right wing billionaires from their tax exiles.

        • CliveM

          Darach,

          its a false argument isn’t it?. Based on your prejudice of what you term the ‘right wing’ media. Now coming from your political views I wouldn’t expect you to read it regularly, but the following link took me approximately 3 seconds to find. There is hundreds (thousands) more like it. I chose the Daily Mail, as I am sure this is a suitable representative of the right wing media you had in mind.

          http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3275447/Vile-racist-rant-London-bus-caught-camera.html

          There is plenty of coverage on attacks on Muslims, none of it approving.

          • Darach Conneely

            That’s good to see. What proportion of Daily Mail headlines about Muslims do you think defend them or support tolerance towards the Muslim community? Interesting article though. Apart from all the photos of the woman, how many times did the article specifically refer to her as black?

          • CliveM

            Its only the one article of many. Im sure you can find an article featuring a white woman.

            In answer to your question, it was a lengthy article. Black was mentioned in the fourth paragraph and once more further down. I may have miscounted, I’m sure you can check.

            Do you think they should have ‘whitened’ out the photos? She is a black person so photos of her will show her as black.

            But again, you try to muddy the waters, you argue that the ‘right wing media’ don’t mention Islamophobia, this is clearly nonsense and when it is shown to be nonsense, you try to suggest the article was simply being racist against blacks.

            I think this says more about your prejudices, then it does about the Daily Mails.

        • The Explorer

          Do you know the Pact of Umar? Some think it dates from the C8 and some from the C10 and there is doubt as to whether or not it was genuine or forged. But when or what, its terms about how to treat your inferiors (dhimmis) have entered Muslim thinking and never gone away.

          If I want to look at the reasons for Muslim intolerance I find them in Umar, the Qur’an and the Hadiths. They were around long before the British right-wing press. If I extend tolerance to Muslim intolerants (and in that I by no means include all Muslims) then then will not hail my as a brother, but they will be happy to accept me as a dhimmi.

          • Darach Conneely

            At least Muslims in the Middle Ages had some kind of tolerance going, unlike Christian Europe who burned people they disagreed with at the stake. Don’t forget the troubles in Northern Ireland kicked off because Catholics were marching for Civil Rights, a basic right to vote. This was in the UK in the 1960s. We didn’t call it dhimmi status but Catholics were 2nd class citizens. African Americans were second class citizens in the USA back then too. The American right is still trying to suppress their vote and right wing cops are shooting them down in the streets. We need to take the log out of our own eye, instead of using dhimmi as an excuse for our intolerance towards our Muslim neighbours, how about we show them tolerance and love ourselves, lead by example.

          • CliveM

            Really Darrach, this whole post is irrelevant to the question. We have a man nearly beaten to death for changing religion and you whitter on about the Middle Ages and 1960’s Ireland. Indeed the uncharitable might come to conclusion that you are of the opinion that all this is down to ‘western intolerance’ and that if it hadn’t been for the Orange Lodge, he would have been sharing a cup of tea with his attackers.

          • Darach Conneely

            What?

          • CliveM

            I think it’s clear.

          • The Explorer

            Actually, one of the things that sparked the Crusades was the little matter of Islamic crucifixion of Christian pilgrims. Not that many, I grant you, but enough to give the lie to claims about tolerance.

            Given the Pact of Omar, the right to vote would have been way down on the list of oppressions the dhimmis suffered under.

            Christians are intolerant; therefore we should not criticise Muslim intolerance is not the point at issue. If you are saying that Muslims are intolerant because of Christian intolerance, then I disagree with you. Muslim intolerance has roots of its own that are independent of Western/Christian attitudes.

          • bockerglory

            No – Muslims in Spain slaughtered Jews and got Christians to pay extra taxes and do the dirty work. Muslims copied Greek texts and used Greeks academic slaves translate passages. Polygamy was horrific and in mid-ages they castratred male slaves to care for Harems. Justice was done by a religious council – no juries et.

            In Anglo-Saxon Britain we had trial by Jury and great skills – books Lindisfarne / boewulf and great Monasteries acting as hospitals schools and universities.

            Saladdin killed Moslems in Egyptian wars in his young life than killed by Crusades. The only reason Saladdin softened up in old age was he felt guilty fighting Islamic wars and so tried his hardest to run Jersulaem differently.

            The DARK AGES in the Med. Europe were started by Muslim wars destroying roman and Christian communities.

    • James Bolivar DiGriz

      “why of all these hate crimes do right wing media jump on one committed by Muslims?”

      Well a fair minded observer would say that it is because it really is a hate crime.

      From your link
      Definition of hate crime
      ‘any criminal offence which is perceived, by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by a hostility or prejudice towards someone based on a personal characteristic.’

      So absolutely nothing about there being any evidence just a perception by the victim or any other person.

      So the, say, black mugger steals things from a white person who thinks he was mugged so that is not a hate crime and the mugger then walks round the corner and steals things from a Muslim and this is recorded as a hate crime.

      Built on such foundations, anything that is built is of no value whatsoever.

      • Darach Conneely

        You don’t think there are real hate crimes committed against Muslims, Blacks, the disabled? Assaults on the disabled soared when they right wing press started preaching their hate against disabled ‘scroungers’. I find that despicable.

        • Royinsouthwest

          I can recall reading articles about people convicted of fraud by pretending to be disabled but I cannot recall any articles expressing hatred of people who are disabled.

          Perhaps you are one of those people who want as many people as possible to be trapped in a state of welfare dependency. It is a good thing for Britain that we allowed Nelson and Douglas Bader to show exactly what some disabled people are capable of doing.

          • Darach Conneely

            “I can recall reading articles about people convicted of fraud by pretending to be disabled but I cannot recall any articles expressing hatred of people who are disabled.”
            That’s how it works.

        • James Bolivar DiGriz

          That’s right, totally ignore what I said and attack a strawman.

          If you really think that I said there are no attacks on Muslims because they are Muslims then you are illiterate or stupid.

    • Phil R

      The guy was nearly killed and you spew your hateful little rant.

      Nasty does not begin to describe it.

      • Darach Conneely

        Perhaps if you could address my point instead of name calling.

        • Phil R

          There was no point. Just bile and spite.

          The guy is in hospital. That was the post. Not the time and place to air your racism

        • James Bolivar DiGriz

          But I did address your point and you just ignored what I said and attacked a strawman.

    • Royinsouthwest

      You know perfectly well that politically correct types, such as the typical Guardian journalist or any member of the BBC editorial staff, are more interested in the race, religion, sexuality etc. of the parties to any dispute or affray than in who is in the right and who is in the wrong.

      Do you think that white men in Rotherham (or many other English cities) would have been allowed to rape girls from ethnic or religious minorities for a couple of decades without the police and social services intervening? When electoral fraud was committed in Tower Hamlets the Guardian described critics of the mayor as “racists.” The Electoral Commission did its best to turn a blind eye to that problem. Its chair, Jenny Watson, was the last Chair of the Equal Opportunities Commission prior to the creation of the Commission for Equality and Human Rights,

      The whole notion of “hate crimes” is deeply flawed. Is the victim of grievous bodily harm any better off if the crime is not a hate crime? As for the “right wing media” (and how “right wing” is the Telegraph nowadays) preaching a “message of hate” if you think that daring to mention the problems of mass immigration is a message of hate then you would obviously be more at home in a totalitarian society than a democratic one.

      It was the right wing Daily Mail that exposed the murderers of Stephen Lawrence, not the Guardian. That is because left wing media tend not to be terribly bothered by murder unless they can find a PC angle to the story.

      • Darach Conneely

        I don’t like the idea of anyone’s free speech being muzzled, whether it is a Muslim Imam preaching hate from the mosque or a right wing media tycoon preaching hate in his rag. What decent people should do is reject the message they preach for the ugly hatred it is. How is it totalitarianism to criticise hate speech for being hateful?
        Why do you think the so called “problems of mass immigration” are the fault of immigrants? They make a huge contribution to the UK economy and to the NHS, and are the best job creators we have (according to an article in the right wing Mail). Isn’t the real problem that Government and cut back Councils haven’t done their job and prepared for demographic changes? Maggie started the housing sell off and kept the money to balance her budgets so councils couldn’t build more housing to meet the demand. But blame the immigrants. Get your rich media backers to blame innocent scapegoats then they won’t blame right wing policies that caused the problem.

        • Dreadnaught

          They make a huge contribution to the UK economy and to the NHS, and are the best job creators …

          Get over yourself. They bring more than their share of pressure on the NHS; with their old decrepits they have in tow from Pak and Bangla. Their multiple ‘wives’; 8/10 child families; not to mention the life-care and treatment for their abnormal inbred offspring. You want to check out the reality before delivering your multicultural platitudes of praise and equality.

          You won’t see many indigenous British employed in many Asian owned businesses either.

          • Darach Conneely

            Have a hospital appointment next week, perhaps I can check with one of the Filipino nurses or my Asian consultant.

          • Dreadnaught

            If the Filipino doesen’t bump you off and the consultant can speak English I’m sure you’ll be fine.

          • The Explorer

            At whose expense was the nurse and the consultant trained? If they were trained here, fair enough. If they weren’t, then we are stealing the resources other countries can’t afford. Nice for us, but not so nice for them.

          • grutchyngfysch

            It’s ironic that the greatest advocates of multiculturalism are often also amongst the greatest critics of the peripheralisation of everywhere outside of the West.

          • James Bolivar DiGriz

            Actually it is not at all clear that we are stealing from those countries.

            In medium income countries (such as the Philippines) if medical staff go abroad to work there are three positives for the country. Firstly the ex-pat medics send home a lot of money.

            Secondly the number of people entering medical training tends to go up. Rather than being limited to working in their own country and being relatively poorly paid, people know that it is easy to go abroad and get a much better paid job.

            Finally a lot of the people go home after some years with more experience and having received training, sometimes training that is not available in their own country.

          • The Explorer

            I’m not clear about your second point. Medical training is expensive. If the recipients then go abroad, what’s the benefit to the training country, other than providing work for those training them to go elsewhere?

            I suppose I was thinking primarily of somewhere like South Africa, which has seen an egress of expensively-trained doctors, dentists and vets who don’t send money back since they are busy forging new lives for themselves, and who have no intention of returning.

          • James Bolivar DiGriz

            I am not an expert but my understanding is that medical training is a lot cheaper in the places where a lot of people come from.

            If the need in country is for, say, 1,000 new nurses per year and none of them ever went abroad then there would only be 1,000 places and significantly they might not all be filled if local nursing salaries are relatively poor.

            If hundreds of nurses go abroad each year then there might be 1,500 places and all of them would be filled, as the job holds out the possibility of a much better paid job abroad.

            Tying in to that, if some people come back better trained & more experienced then they will some of the more senior roles without incurring the costs of that training & experience.

            Does this make sense now?

            “I suppose I was thinking primarily of somewhere like South Africa”
            I did specifically say medium income countries. Taking people from wealthy (Western, First World, whatever you want to call it) countries such as the US, Australia, etc, I don’t think that anyone would regard as a problem.

            I would regard South Africa as something of a special case in that it has some totally top-notch medical facilities despite being on average a relatively poor country [1] but also being more dysfunctional than that level of wealth would indicate. So I think that there may be more people leaving there permanently than would other wise be the case.

            1. This
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29_per_capita
            has the UK GDP/capita as 14th-23rd on USD42,000-45,000, South Africa as 86th-87th on USD 5,800-6,900 and the Philippines 123rd-134th on USD2,800-3,000.

          • Mr B J Mann

            So why is one nurse per hundred population in the UK not enough, while the third world is lucky to have one nurse (and no doctor) per 100 THOUSAND population?

            I think THOSE are the relevant statistics, regardless of the cost of training in the third world, or the first world income remitted to the third world, neither of which seem to have done anything for medical care in the third world!

          • James Bolivar DiGriz

            When replying to someone it is always useful to respond to what the person said rather than to some, largely or totally, unrelated topic that interests you.

            To be totally clear. I did not say that the UK is entitled to a higher ratio of nurses than some other countries. However if you quote what I said that makes you think that I will be more than happy to explain what I said in more detail.

          • Mr B J Mann

            It what way was my post *TOTALLY* unrellated?!

            And you’ve spent two long posts trying to justify why the “UK is entitled to a higher ratio of nurses than some other countries.”, but apologies if that isn’t what you blieve.

            Hope that makes you more than happy!

          • James Bolivar DiGriz

            When replying to someone it is always useful to respond to what the person said.

            I did not say that your post was totally unrelated. Nor have I ever said that the UK is entitled to a higher ratio of nurses than some other countries.

            I will try one last time. If you quote where I said either of these things I will be more than happy to explain what I said in more detail.

            However if, as seems to be the case, you are just interpreting my words to be something other that what I actually said then I cannot help you.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Yes,

            You can.

            You can explain what you were trying to say in those two posts where you appeared to be trying to justify why the “UK (and/or similar countries) is entitled to a higher ratio of nurses than some other countries”/”stealing from those countries”, which, regardless of the “statisics” quoted, doesn’t lead to an economic benefit, or, if it does, not enough to outweigh the loss of the nurses in question as it results in “one nurse per hundred population in the UK……. while the third world is lucky to have one nurse (and no doctor) per 100 THOUSAND population”m

            And as this is a direct counter argument to your assertions, feel free to explain how I failed to:

            “respond to what the person said rather than to some, largely or totally, unrelated topic that interests you”?

          • James Bolivar DiGriz

            You clearly are not reading what I wrote as what I meant. And you clearly think that I said something that means that the UK is entitled to a higher ratio of nurses than some other countries.

            However I can only explain the part of what I said if I know what part you are referring to. So for the third, and definitely final, time I am quite willing to explain what I said if you will just quote the relevant parts.

            As to your last point, I think it is abundantly clear that I was not talking about the nurse/patient ratio in the UK compared to other countries, as I did not mention nurse/patient ratios at all.

            Hence it is obvious that talking about the nurse/patient ratios in different countries is at best tangentially related to what I said.

          • Mr B J Mann

            You started this sub thread with:

            “Actually it is not at all clear that we are stealing from those countries.”

            And then, for the xth time, you have at least twice tried to justify the “use” (=acceptance/ encouragement/ enticement/ poaching/ stealing) of trained medical staff from the second and third world.

            You might not have written the words:

            “the UK is entitled to a higher ratio of nurses than some other countries.”

            But your first two posts are unarguably, regardless of your intent, or the words you used, justifying the practice of first world countries poaching third world medical staff and gaining massively disproportionate numbers of nursing staff.

            And you have repeatedly declined to accept that your defence falls down because regardless of whether, or how much, of their first world income they remit: their native countries cannot afford to replace them.

            In fact, you have repeatedly rejected this as an off topic irrelevance.

            However, the only statistics you have produced to back up your argument are ones that show that rich countries are richer than poor countries?!

            And when I point out that that statistic is irrelevant to the argument, what is is that first world countries have a THOUSAND times as many nurses per capita when discussing YOUR claim that:

            “Actually it is not at all clear that we are stealing from those countries.”

            And YOUR *TWO* posts trying to justifyi YOUR claim:

            You accuse me of:

            “When replying to someone it is always useful to respond to what the person said rather than to some, largely or totally, unrelated topic that interests you.”

            You have had ample opportunity to come back with, say, statistics showing that before the West started poaching it had two thousand times as many nurses per head, and the only nurses they had were nuns and volunteers from the first world.

            But instead you choose to “argue” that I am not reading your posts, not quoting you, even when I cut and paste a quote, going of topic, and insisting, repeatedly, that I quote the parts you need to explain.

            OK, I’ve tried quoting parts of the parts.

            Here’s the whole of what you need to explain and justify, with evidence that significantly more nurses are trained as a result, and that significant numbers remit money, and that significant numbers return home:

            James Bolivar DiGriz -> The Explorer
            2 days ago
            Actually it is not at all clear that we are stealing from those countries.

            In medium income countries (such as the Philippines) if medical staff go abroad to work there are three positives for the country. Firstly the ex-pat medics send home a lot of money.

            Secondly the number of people entering medical training tends to go up. Rather than being limited to working in their own country and being relatively poorly paid, people know that it is easy to go abroad and get a much better paid job.

            Finally a lot of the people go home after some years with more experience and having received training, sometimes training that is not available in their own country.

            And:

            James Bolivar DiGriz The Explorer
            2 days ago
            I am not an expert but my understanding is that medical training is a lot cheaper in the places where a lot of people come from.

            If the need in country is for, say, 1,000 new nurses per year and none of them ever went abroad then there would only be 1,000 places and significantly they might not all be filled if local nursing salaries are relatively poor.

            If hundreds of nurses go abroad each year then there might be 1,500 places and all of them would be filled, as the job holds out the possibility of a much better paid job abroad.

            Tying in to that, if some people come back better trained & more experienced then they will some of the more senior roles without incurring the costs of that training & experience.

            Does this make sense now?

            “I suppose I was thinking primarily of somewhere like South Africa”
            I did specifically say medium income countries. Taking people from wealthy (Western, First World, whatever you want to call it) countries such as the US, Australia, etc, I don’t think that anyone would regard as a problem.

            I would regard South Africa as something of a special case in that it has some totally top-notch medical facilities despite being on average a relatively poor country [1] but also being more dysfunctional than that level of wealth would indicate. So I think that there may be more people leaving there permanently than would other wise be the case.

            1. This
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
            has the UK GDP/capita as 14th-23rd on USD42,000-45,000, South Africa as 86th-87th on USD 5,800-6,900 and the Philippines 123rd-134th on USD2,800-3,000.

            Is that clearer for you?!

          • James Bolivar DiGriz

            You might not have written the words:

            “the UK is entitled to a higher ratio of nurses than some other countries.”

            But your entire output has been based on my having said that, or words to that effect. So you are now saying that the entire foundation of your posts was bogus.

            “And then, for the xth time, you have at least twice tried to justify the “use” (=acceptance/ encouragement/ enticement/ poaching/ stealing) of trained medical staff from the second and third world.”

            Nope, total projection on your part. I’ll expand in a moment.

            “But your first two posts are unarguably, regardless of your intent, or the words you used, justifying the practice of first world countries poaching third world medical staff and gaining massively disproportionate numbers of nursing staff”
            When you mean ‘In my opinion’ or ‘It appears to me’ then that is what you should write rather than “unarguably”.

            What I very clearly said was that it is a complicated area and the flow of benefits goes both ways. I made no comment on the net outcome. Hence it is very arguable that the West is not just taking from these countries but that there is an arrangement with benefits on both sides.

            Picking up on my earlier, hypothetical, example. If nurse training costs the trainee and is not well paid and there is no chance of a better paid job overseas, then if there are 1,000 training places pa there might only be 500 people apply. However if there is a chance of a better paid job overseas, then all 1,000 of the places may well be filled. If 200 of those nurses actually get jobs abroad that still leaves the country with 300 more nurses than under the other scenario. Would that make the country better off of worse off?

            When some nurses & doctors come back with more experience and training (things they might not have been able to get at home) the country clearly gains from that. Does that offset the fact that they were abroad for a number of years? I don’t know but it clearly is a benefit.

            “And you have repeatedly declined to accept that your defence falls down because regardless of whether, or how much, of their first world income they remit: their native countries cannot afford to replace them.”

            Firstly, I’m not ‘defending’ any position. You are accusing me of having said something that I did not say and that I have repeatedly told you I did not say. Secondly, you have not shown that their native countries cannot afford to replace them. Thirdly, it is possible that some, but only some, locally trained staff going abroad may increase the number who remain. Fourthly, “regardless of whether, or how much, of their first world income they remit” is nonsense. If it costs £5,000 to train a nurse and one of them remits £2,000 a year for 10 years the country is clearly better off. If a quarter of that goes in taxes to train a new nurse then the country has obviously gained overall.

            “In fact, you have repeatedly rejected this as an off topic irrelevance”
            I said that talking about nurse/patient ratios was irrelevant to what I said, simply because I was not talking about nurse/patient ratios and so it was irrelevant.

            “However, the only statistics you have produced to back up your argument are ones that show that rich countries are richer than poor countries?!”
            Now I am beginning to doubt your basic literacy. Those links were clearly in the context of a specific question from The Explorer about why South Africa might be different from other countries. No reasonable person can take them as relating to anything else.

            You clearly have a concern about the number of nurses per capita in poorer countries but you are trying very hard to shoehorn that concern in somewhere that is does not really go.

            If A steals from B then A gains and B loses. If the UK was truly stealing staff from poor countries then those countries would be getting nothing out of this which is clearly not the case. I have listed three benefits those poorer countries get from this.

            Nowhere did I make any comment about nurse/patient ratios or say that the UK is entitled to a higher ratio. But that is what you have persisted in talking about, for example
            “You have had ample opportunity to come back with, say, statistics showing that before the West started poaching it had two thousand times as many nurses per head, and the only nurses they had were nuns and volunteers from the first world”
            which has no connection with what I said. And to be doubly clear. What I said was that there are benefits to poor countries of some medical staff coming to the UK but I did not comment on whether this was of overall benefit to those countries.

            “OK, I’ve tried quoting parts of the parts.”
            Actually you didn’t. I asked you to quote what I said that made you think I believed the UK was entitled to a higher ratio and you never did that. All you ever quoted was me making that request, never anything from my posts that supported your contention.

            “Here’s the whole of what you need to explain and justify,”
            And there you come across as a totally obnoxious person. I don’t need to “explain and justify” anything to you. My original posts were clear. You misinterpreted them and when I asked you to show me where I had made the points you said I had you did not do but just kept on accusing me.

          • Mr B J Mann

            “But your entire output has been based on my having said that, or words to that effect. So you are now saying that the entire foundation of your posts was bogus.”

            Errrmmmmm, no, again you misquote me, or ignore my quotes.

            My entire output has been based on you having written two posts trying to justify the stealing of nurses from third world countries.

            And several more posts trying to distract from the fact that you did.

            Therefore the entire foundation of YOUR replies was bogus.

            As for “projection”:

            When you say, “arguably”, then what you should write is:

            ‘In my opinion’ or ‘It appears to me’ rather than “arguably”.

            Perhaps you are not a native speaker, in the UK, when someone says:

            “Actually it is not at all clear that we are stealing from those countries.”

            It is a polite way of saying: “you are wrong, we are not stealing”!

            And the rest of your post should have read:

            ‘It appears to me’ In medium income countries (such as the Philippines) if medical staff go abroad to work ‘in my opinion’ there are three positives for the country. ‘In my opinion’ ‘It appears to me’ Firstly the ex-pat medics send home a lot of money.

            [You have no evidence for this, especially for those who have families here.]

            ‘In my opinion’ Secondly the number of people entering medical training tends to go up. Rather than being limited to working in their own country and being relatively poorly paid, ‘it appears to me’ people know that it is easy to go abroad and get a much better paid job.

            [You are probably right that as time progresses, more and more people enter medical training, all other things being equal. The question is, do poor countries train more or less than they would, or even do they train less than they did, having wasted scarce resources on training staff who then left – you have no evidence that there is any benefit to their economies, just the assertion that, ‘it appears to be a benefit to you’]

            ‘In my opinion’ Finally a lot of the people go home after some years with more experience and ‘It appears to me’ having received training, sometimes ‘in my opinion’ training that is not ‘it appears to you’ available in their own country.

            And in Britain, hypothetical means that you have just made it all up.

            If there are 1,000 training places pa there might well only be 500 people applying. However if there is a chance of a better paid job overseas, then all 1,000 of the places may well be filled. If 1000 of those nurses actually get jobs abroad that leaves the country with NO more nurses than under the other scenario. Would THAT make the country better off of worse off?

            And when NO nurses & doctors come back?!

            Or, with more experience and training (things they might not have been able to get at home) they move on to the US for even higher pay?! How does that offset the fact that they were trained at home and then abroad for a number of years? I don’t know how it clearly is a benefit?!?!?

            As for “If it costs £5,000 to train a nurse and one of them remits £2,000 a year for 10 years the country is clearly better off. If a quarter of that goes in taxes to train a new nurse then the country has obviously gained overall.”

            But that’s in your hypothetical world.

            What if they remit nothing?

            And what if they do? Do they send it to their teaching hospital? Do they send it to their family who are paying 25% tax on it?! Why, in your opinion, does it appear to you that third world countries levy first world tax rates? And why do you think that they have first world tax collection systems. How many people paid income or sales tax in Greece?! And how many people have died over the ten years while the government saves up the £5,000 to train a replacement in your fantasy world?!

            And what if they sent it to a people smuggler?

            And how you can say:

            “In fact, you have repeatedly rejected this as an off topic irrelevance”
            I said that talking about nurse/patient ratios was irrelevant to what I said, simply because I was not talking about nurse/patient ratios and so it was irrelevant.

            No, you were talking about:

            “Actually it is not at all clear that we are stealing from those countries.”

            And if the first world has a THOUSAND times as many nurses per capita than the third world, and, regardless of whether, in some convoluted and indirect way, at some point in the future, it appears to you, there is some kind of potential benefit to the third world, in your opinion, the first world seduces those nurses to come to the first world to work, the first world is still clearly “stealing” them. It’s clearly not leaving them with more nurses than the first world, or equalising numbers, it’s leaving them desperately sort.

            If I seduce your wife, the fact that, hypothetically, that leaves you free to find a better one, doesn’t alter the fact that I have “stolen” your wife!

            So, clearly, the ratios were directly relevant to the topic at hand.

            At the end of the day we have only produced two facts or statistics:

            Yours that poor countries are poorer than rich ones (and that you admit have no relevance to the general issue).

            And mine that rich countries have a thousand times as many nurses as poor countries.

            You haven’t even begun to produce an argument that “arguably”, “in your opinion”, “It appears to you” that your hypothetical guesses bear any relation to real life!

            Now I am beginning to doubt YOUR basic literacy.

            I raised a point that reinforce the fact you were wrong to claim that:

            “Actually it is not at all clear that we are stealing from those countries.”

            You have no evidence whatsoever that:

            “If the UK was truly stealing staff from poor countries then those countries would be getting nothing out of this which is clearly not the case.”

            You “have listed three benefits” that in your opinion it appears to you that “those poorer countries get from this.”

            But you have nothing but your imagination to back up your case.

            It is YOU that clearly has a concern about the medical staff being poached from poorer countries but you are trying very hard to shoehorn hypothetical justifications into the discussion.

            Are you perhaps a foreign medical student with a guilt complex, or in some other way involved in their importation?!

            It is you who come over badly, perhaps due to language issues. I don’t need to “quote what [you] said that makes [me] think that” anything to you. Your original posts were clearly supporting or defending “stealing from those countries”.

            And I also repeatedly show you where you had made the point I said you had that:

            “James Bolivar DiGriz -> Mr B J Mann
            a day ago

            When replying to someone it is always useful to respond to what the person said rather than to some, largely or totally, unrelated topic that interests you.”

            I shall not be wasting any more time on this “argument”.

            Goodbye.

            8<——————–

          • James Bolivar DiGriz

            This is getting very boring as you are being very silly.

            “Errrmmmmm, no, again you misquote me, or ignore my quotes.”

            In your first post you said
            “So why is one nurse per hundred population in the UK not enough, while the third world is lucky to have one nurse (and no doctor) per 100 THOUSAND population?”

            And in your second you said
            “And you’ve spent two long posts trying to justify why the “UK is entitled to a higher ratio of nurses than some other countries”, but apologies if that isn’t what you believe.”

            But now you claim you did not accuse me of saying that the UK is entitled to a higher ratio of nurses than some other countries.

            “My entire output has been based on you having written two posts trying to justify the stealing of nurses from third world countries”

            And I have explained as simply as possible that I did not do that.

            As for “projection”:

            When you say, “arguably”, then what you should write is:

            Not at all, you really don’t understand logic. If someone says ‘X is not possible’ then one counter example shows that this is false. Similarly when you said ‘your first two posts are unarguably …justifying …’ all I had to do was to say I disagreed to show this was arguable and so your position was false.

            However a positive statement (‘X is possible’) cannot be falsified in this way.

            Perhaps you are not a native speaker, in the UK, when someone says:

            “Actually it is not at all clear that we are stealing from those countries.”

            It is a polite way of saying: “you are wrong, we are not stealing”!

            Total and utter drivel and if you really think that is what I meant that you really do have a literacy or comprehension problem.

            What I wrote taken out of context could (but only could) be interpreted to mean something like that, but in the context I used it, where I listed some benefits other countries receive, there was no doubt that what I meant was exactly what I wrote.

            “You have no evidence for [remittances], especially for those who have families here”
            Apart from the fact that I pay some attention to the world around me, none whatsoever.

            A whole 30 seconds looking on Wikipedia found this
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remittance
            which say that global remittances were c. $583 billion in 2014. For the Philippines, where a lot of nurses come from, they were $21.3 billion in 2010 or 8.9 per cent of the country’s GDP.

            “If 1000 of those nurses actually get jobs abroad that leaves the country with NO more nurses than under the other scenario. Would THAT make the country better off of worse off?”

            And where is your evidence that the UK (or the West as a whole) has recruited an entire cohort of nurses from a training programme?

            “And when NO nurses & doctors come back?!”

            And your evidence that for even one country not a single nurse or doctor has returned?

            You are very dismissive of what I have said for lack of evidence. So you really need to hold yourself to at least the same standard.

            “What if they remit nothing?”

            What if the moon was made of green cheese? Where is your evidence that loads of other people remit huge amounts of money but that medical staff are unique and send not a penny home?

            “In fact, you have repeatedly rejected this as an off topic irrelevance”
            I said that talking about nurse/patient ratios was irrelevant to what I said, simply because I was not talking about nurse/patient ratios and so it was irrelevant.

            No, you were talking about:

            “Actually it is not at all clear that we are stealing from those countries.”

            And now your are straying in to Humpty Dumpty land where words mean what you want them to mean.

            You accept that I was not talking about relative nurse/patient ratios but when you introduced the topic of relative nurse/patient ratios it was (according to you) on topic. Very bizarre indeed.

            “If the UK was truly stealing staff from poor countries then those countries would be getting nothing out of this which is clearly not the case.”

            You “have listed three benefits” that in your opinion it appears to you that “those poorer countries get from this.”

            But you have nothing but your imagination to back up your case.

            Just my imagination and being aware of what is happening. A quick google found http://www.hst.org.za/news/sa-nurses-are-staying-put-even-coming-home
            http://www.intlnursemigration.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/ReturnmigrationA4.pdf

            And your evidence that the three benefits I listed are totally untrue is where exactly?

            “Your original posts were clearly supporting or defending “stealing from those countries”.”

            No they weren’t but in this case you are clearly a good example of ‘There are none so blind as those that will not see’.

          • Mr B J Mann

            I said:

            Goodbye.

            8<——————–

          • James Bolivar DiGriz

            You have said many things. That was probably the most sensible one.

          • Mr B J Mann

            I said: Goodbye. 8<——————–

          • James Bolivar DiGriz

            So as well as not being able to stay on topic, nor to quote meaningfully, nor to read and comprehend what someone actually says, nor to do very basic research, nor to keep your story consistent, you have absolutely no idea how the internet works.

            You don’t get to tell someone else what they must (“Here’s the whole of what you need to explain and justify”) or must not say.

          • Mr B J Mann

            I’m merely sick and tired orf trying to have a rational debate with a moronic troll.

            And now you’re pretending that you are Al Gore who claimed he invented the internet, and can decide who can do what on it.

            Stop projecting.

            Among other things you asserted:

            James Bolivar -> DiGriz Mr B J Mann • 3 days ago
            “When replying to someone it is always useful to respond to what the person said rather than to some, largely or totally, unrelated topic

            To which I replied:

            Mr B J Mann -> James Bolivar DiGriz • 2 days ago
            “In what way was my post *TOTALLY* unrelated?!”

            You responded:

            “James Bolivar DiGriz -> Mr B J Mann • 2 days ago
            When replying to someone it is always useful to respond to what the person said.
            I did not say that your post was totally unrelated….
            [My Emphasis]
            I will try one last time. If you quote
            [Your Emphasis] where I said either of these things I will be more than happy to explain what I said in more detail.
            However if, as seems to be the case, you are just interpreting my words to be something other that what I actually said then I cannot help you.”

            I didn’t address this point in my reply, but in your next response you said:

            ” James Bolivar DiGriz Mr B J Mann • 2 days ago
            You clearly are not reading what I wrote as what I meant……..
            However I can only explain the part of what I said if I know what part you are referring to. So for the third, and definitely final, time I am quite willing to explain what I said if you will just quote the relevant parts.
            As to your last point, I think it is abundantly clear that I was not talking about the nurse/patient ratio in the UK compared to other countries, as I did not mention nurse/patient ratios at all.
            Hence it is obvious that talking about the nurse/patient ratios in different countries is at best tangentially related to what I said.”

            Which only tangentially addresses why you asserted that my original reply was:

            “largely or totally, unrelated topic

            Nor does it address the point that you had denied that you had said:

            “….totally, unrelated topic“”

            The main point of the “argument”, that you initially contributed two posts trying to justify that “Actually it is not at all clear that we are stealing from those countries.”

            And numerous posts since.

            Which I have demonstrated to be wishful thinking, fabrication, guesswork, and, as you repeatedly admit, “hypothetical”.

            So I’m not going to go over it all over again.

            Take your own advice, and:

            “When replying to someone it is always useful to respond to what the person said rather than to some, largely or totally, unrelated topic that interests you.”

            “When replying to someone it is always useful to respond to what the person said….. However if, as seems to be the case, you are just interpreting my words to be something other that what I actually said then I cannot help you.”

          • Mr B J Mann

            By the way, if you’d spent more than 30 seconds you might have spotted that your figure for the Philipines, like the rest of your argument, was hypothetical.

            As for your second link, wow, to back up your argument, you are quoting that, unlike earlier, when South Africa was robbed of 3,000 nurses a year, only 107 had RESIGNED to work abroad over the past decade, and a whopping 74 had returned from the WHOLE of the UK AND Middle East?!?!

            Because it was now cheaper to rob the Philippines of nurses!!!!

            And nurses aren’t returning to South Africa because that was the plan:

            They were returning because of the rising cost of living in the UK!

            And if you had followed the links from the page YOU linked to, you would have found:

            “The nursing drain is a crisis of international proportions – and South Africa, with its highly skilled professionals and weakened rand, is bearing the brunt of it.”
            “The ripple effect is that South Africa now has too few qualified nurses to cope. And those it has are moonlighting to fill in shifts and earn more money – leaving crucial, sometimes life-saving standards under threat, even at private hospitals.”

            And:

            “he nursing shortage in Cape Town and surrounding areas is so bad that many managers won’t give their staff time off to do advanced training courses.
            “……around one-fifth of the Western Cape’s nursing posts are empty and nurses cannot be found to fill them. It is widely acknowledged that South Africa is facing a desperate shortage of nursing staff……..”
            “The nursing shortage could cause the entire health service to collapse.”
            “The Independent in London reported yesterday that Britain is continuing to loot the poorest nations of the world of their skilled medical staff to shore up the National Health Service (NHS) in defiance of a 2001 government ban on the practice.”

            Meanwhile Migrationwatch points out:

            3. The NHS Code for International Recruitment is supposed to ensure that poor countries do not suffer as a result of UK overseas nursing recruitment. The Code is not mandatory, however, is limited in scope and does not apply to private agencies.

            4. The three countries supplying the largest number of overseas nurses to the UK are the Philippines, India and South Africa. There is evidence that poorer countries, such as Malawi, are being denuded of their nursing workforce by UK and other Western recruitment.

            5. The Government claims that most overseas nurses return to their country of origin within a short time frame, but there is little evidence to support this contention, which would in any event imply high staff turnover in NHS trusts if correct.

            6. There is, however, an outflow mainly to other English-speaking countries of about 8,000 nurses per year; up from 3-4,000 per year in the mid-1990s.

            8…… The Chairman of the British Medical Association said in a speech on 28th June 2004; Throughout the history of the NHS, we have relied on other countries to fill our NHS manpower gaps both for nurses and doctors. As the fourth largest economy in the world we are still doing so still taking doctors away from countries like South Africa and nurses from the Philippines, who need them more than we do. It’s a shameful record of exploitation.

            And to really put your claims of benefits to poor countries into perspective:

            9. A BBC television news report of 17th August 2004 concerned a hospital in Ilongwe, Malawi; one of the worlds poorest countries, where the average life expectancy is just 38. The number of nurses at the hospital had fallen from over 500 to just 2, resulting in women giving birth unassisted and regular patient deaths from quite curable diseases. Like many of her former colleagues, one of the two remaining nurses was planning to go and work in the UK, where she could earn in a morning what she currently earned in a month. A spokesman for the Government of Malawi said that they would have to train more nurses, and train them so that they would not be marketable in the UK, but unacceptable to the west…..

            10. The Government emphasises that most employment of nurses from abroad is for a specified period, so their country of origin will benefit from their training and experience in the UK on their return, within a relatively short time-frame. Due to the abolition of exit controls, however, the Government has no way of knowing whether any individual has left the UK. One of the Trusts examined in the Kings Fund research reported that, of the nurses it had recruited from overseas, only about 10% had left [6]. Given that many have paid thousands of pounds to undertake a student programme as part of a period of adaptation to the UK profession, as required by the Nursing and Midwifery Council, and many more have paid a placement fee to a recruitment agency, they would be failing to make the most of a big personal investment by leaving the UK after only a short period.

            11. Even if the Governments assertion that nurses return to their country of origin relatively quickly was correct, this would mean that the increasingly large, internationally recruited element of the NHS nursing workforce would be subject to sustained high staff turnover and that NHS patients would benefit little from the UK training and experience provided to internationally recruited nurses. Whilst there could be mutual benefit from controlled internship or training programmes, current overseas recruitment trends, whilst target-driven, are not controlled and are not recorded in aggregate.

            12. An important consideration is the outflow of nurses from the UK; mainly to Australia, North America and the European Economic Area (EEA); this last being mainly accounted for by a reversal in the direction of the traditional flow of nurses from the Republic of Ireland to the UK in recent years [7]. The outflow is thus mainly to other developed, English-speaking countries.

      • bluedog

        ”Hate-crimes” are purely subjective and political rather than criminal in nature. It follows that those incarcerated as a result of a hate-crime are political prisoners. It’s about time that informed opinion woke up to see things in those terms.

    • dannybhoy

      ” I agree it is an issue Muslims need to deal with, but lets not forget Catholics and Protestants used to burn their heretics and apostates, and not 50 years age the ‘B-Specials’ auxiliary police in Northern Ireland used to regularly beat up Catholics.”
      Nope, I’m sure we won’t forget that Darach.
      As long as somewhere in the world an aggrieved Irishman remains upright, we will remember.
      I wonder if on that last Great Day of Judgement God will set aside extra time to deal with the issue?

      Every now and again I think of that poor Jean McConville. I wonder what her last thoughts were before the bullet smashed into her skull?
      http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/jean-mcconville-murder-the-protestant-turned-catholic-mother-of-10-executed-by-the-ira-9312852.html

      • CliveM

        Good comment.

      • Darach Conneely

        We had 800 years of British occupation, you have a way to go yet.
        No I am all for ‘forgive and forget’. But like in the parable of the unforgiving servant, when other people are being condemned in the name of British tolerance, a little reminder is called for. You really have come a long way, just don’t forget how far you have come when you are tempted to condemn others.

        Anyway I’ll leave it at that.

        • grutchyngfysch

          So that would be collective guilt you’re peddling then?

        • Phil R

          800 years of British Occupation.

          The Welsh the same. You can either blame others for your problems or you can move on.

          95% of the Welsh have moved on. 75% of the Irish it seems waste their lives moaning.

        • Dreadnaught

          And we have had it since 1066. How far back do you want to carry your grudge?

        • dannybhoy

          “We had 800 years of British occupation, you have a way to go yet.”
          I am sincerely sorry for every innocent person who died in the Troubles. They deserve our respect, and we should all work towards making a better, fairer, juster society for all. Thus in some small way their deaths will count for something.
          What I sincerely regret is the milking of every outrage, mistake and execution in order to keep the whole thing like an open sore.

        • Mr B J Mann

          Who are the “British”?

          Are you confusing them with the Irish who conquered parts of Scotland?!

          Some of whose descendants later returned to Ulster!!!

        • Mr B J Mann

          And the “British” have had 950 years of French occupation.

          And the British and French have had even longer of Nor(se)man occupation.

          And aren’t the “British” of 900 years ago a figment of your imagination?

          And weren’t the people who came over from the big island invited over by some of the Oirish Kings to help out in your brotherly Gaelic wars?!

        • Ah, yes, finally a solition to Mr Hussein’s little problem: Lwt us collectively examine Britain’s past, take out our handkerchief and have us a weep-fest.

    • Mr B J Mann

      Because the official “hate crimes” are things like that bloke who revved the temperamental engine of his sports car adjacent to a group of Musl!ms in a “rac!st” manner!?!?!

      Whereas it takes years to get officialdom to investigate even a blatant and obvious rac!st k!lling if the v!ctim is white.

      Oh, and Stephen Lawrence’s k!llers were suspected of a string of other assaults and even another k!lling.

      How many of those were prosecuted?

      How many of those were even charged?

      But then none of the others where b!ack!

  • David

    This is so sad.
    Christian Concern run safe houses for individual, Muslim to Christianity converts feeling from such hated. But this is a whole family. Should they not leave Bradford and start a new life elsewhere ? Obviously it is their decision.
    We need no further proof that the pet theories of the political elite regarding cultural relativism and multiculturalism are utter, dangerous rubbish. Where are all the middle class academics who have pushed this at young people now ? Safe in their secular homes perhaps.
    As a nation of people, whether religious or not, we have indeed been grossly misled and misguided by the cultural, media and political establishment. They have certainly betrayed this poor man and his family.
    Over the last few months alone the already considerable gap between the Islamic community and most of the rest of us has become much wider. Will our cultural and political elite do anything to prevent it becoming a gulf ?

  • It seems to me the difference between Christianity and Islam can be seen in terms of their understanding of Truth. If you say “2+2=5” I have no need to forcefully impose the truth of ‘2+2=4’ upon you because, in reality, reality has already ‘imposed’ that truth upon you – it is just that you do not realise. This is why Christianity says “turn the other cheek”, for what is true (and apparent) to the Christian is already true for all men. The fact that Islam has to impose itself upon people betrays its faulty relationship with Truth. If Islam were true, it would already be true for me, and no amount of violence could make it ‘more true’.

    • Kamran Maharramov

      There’s no “truth” in religion. Religions aren’t sets of facts (rather agreed-upon myths), more cultural systems.

      Islam is definitely more of a cult-like “mafia” system, where is christianity is a peacenik flower-hippy brigade.

      Both suck.

      • You will notice I defined their difference in terms of ‘their understanding of Truth’. Therefore we agree: Truth is independent of religion. Religion is that sphere of knowledge through which we try to understand God (hence Buddhism not being a religion). God is truth, for if God is not truth, truth could not exist. Truth exists: therefore God exists. Religions recognise the nature of God either accurately or inaccurately. Either way, there is only one God so only one nature to accurately recognise. Christianity is just the name given to the religion which truly recognises God’s nature.

        • Kamran Maharramov

          I am sorry. I did not understand a word you said.

          • Phil R

            Quite right why listen when you have genocide to plan and impliment.

          • Kamran Maharramov

            You’d be surprised how many people approve of genocide.

          • Merchantman

            ‘Ello, ‘ello,’ello what’s going on ‘ere then?

        • Kamran Maharramov

          You may find this convincing, and it’s your right, but I don’t.

      • dannybhoy

        Well thanks for that.
        Concise, to the point.
        What’s your next project?

      • The Explorer

        Actually, I don’t agree with you. Christianity stands or falls on the Resurrection. In that sense, it is a religion founded on historical fact. “If Christ did not rise from the dead your faith is in vain.” So said one of its foremost advocates.

        As for the flower-hippy brigade, I don’t think the Hippies would thank you for the association. All the Hippies I came across hated traditional Christianity, which they saw as bigoted and intolerant. Insofar as liberal Christianity agreed with them it had become superfluous, and superseded by their own vacuous beliefs.

        • Kamran Maharramov

          Who cares. Both Christianity and Islam will stop existing in 50 years. I will make sure of that in my country, by extermination if necessary.

          • CliveM

            ROFL. OOhhhhhh frightened.

          • The Explorer

            I’m assuming you care, since you went to the trouble of making the statement. I was simply pointing out its factual inaccuracy.

            When you say Christianity and Islam will stop existing, do you mean everywhere, or just in your country? If you mean everywhere, that’s 3.4 billion people affected. Quite a prediction to be achieved in just thirty-five years.

            I’ve heard of predictions for one or the other. But both together: wow, that’s quite something.

          • Kamran Maharramov

            I will work hard to do it!! Atheism is the only way!

          • The Explorer

            Best of luck with persuading all those Muslims, old chap.

          • Kamran Maharramov

            I was thinking more along the lines of bullets in the head, which is more persuasive than the anglo-saxon methods of argument.

          • William Lewis

            Bullets to the head is traditional for establishing atheist utopias.

          • Kamran Maharramov

            If you kill all the troublesome people, you are left with people who are cooperative.

          • Phil R

            Sigh. ..yet another troll

          • Martin

            Phil

            Isn’t troll just another name for Atheist?

          • Phil R

            It seems to be. What particularly annoys me here is the guy is in hospital and they rant on about others as if his suffering is irrelevant.

            Of course they are for once acting in character. Especially the troll who wants to murder everyone who disagrees with his worldview.

            They are jealous underneath is all. God has given you and I something immensely precious and I think that they know that they will not receive it. Hence the bile and spite that is the hallmark of any discussion with them.

          • William Lewis

            You’d better hurry up before you end up on someone else’s troublesome list.

          • Kamran Maharramov

            Don’t you assholes want to kill all the muslims? I’ll help you do it. I’ll just kill some christians on the way as well.

          • CliveM

            Your clearly in need of help. I don’t know what country you live in, but I’m sure the medical authorities will be able to give you support.

          • Kamran Maharramov

            No I don’t need help, you need help.

          • CliveM

            Well we’ll just pray for you. I take it psychiatrists are in short supply where you come from .

          • Don’t kid yourself. They’ll give him a bottle of pills, a list of homeless shelters and soupkitchens and “release” him into the “community” (a.k.a.in the vernacular as toss him out on the street).

          • CliveM

            Possibly that’s already happened.

          • William Lewis

            Thanks, but I’ll pass.

          • Piss off, troll.

          • Kamran Maharramov

            No.

          • Kamran Maharramov

            That sounds like utopia to me.

          • The Explorer

            That sounds just the sort of argument the Muslims would understand. Your head would probably feature in any response they might come up with.

          • Kamran Maharramov

            My head will indeed feature in these things. But not in the responses. In planning and logistics.

          • Kamran Maharramov

            Starting in my country I mean.

          • Martin

            KM

            Only an idiot makes a ‘prediction like that.

      • Martin

        KM

        Atheism is as much a religion as any and just as intolerant of apostasy. You only have to look at the treatment of Michael Reiss when he dared to suggest that children in the classroom should not be shouted down when they expressed doubt over the Atheist’s creation myth.

        • Kamran Maharramov

          I don’t care. I’m tired of islam and christianity. I want a new future for my country.

          • Martin

            KM

            And the future of a nation without Christ is this:

            Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.

            For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

            And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Though they know God’s decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.
            (Romans 1:24-32 [ESV])

          • Kamran Maharramov

            What a load of ancient bullshit.

          • Martin

            KM

            Hadn’t you noticed, its already happening.

          • Inspector General

            Do say which country you are in.

          • I’m guessing France.

          • Inspector General

            Ah, there you are, Avi. One is not entirely convinced that KM is not a schoolboy displaying a picture of an older brother. He display’s a schoolboy’s gusto, one finds.

          • Actually, a very viable hypothesis this. Seems childish…even thoigh that’s not a feature entirely absent among formally designayed adults. It’s not as if HG can check for ID at the door, though. But he appeared under this identity only for a few posts and may already have been dragged away by the ear by his mom.

  • dannybhoy

    This chap and his family were in the news a few weeks ago, weren’t they.

    Back then he said he had received no help or support from the CofE..

    Here’s the link.

    https://www.premierchristianradio.com/News/UK/British-Christian-family-who-converted-from-Islam-has-given-up-on-the-Church-of-England-in-light-of-persecution

    Obviously something has gone wrong. I would imagine that the CofE vicar did all the things the law says it is permissable to do, and contacted all the relevant agencies.
    Truth to tell though, no one would want to take this on, because it would mean upsetting people who are so devout, that they would happily batter an apostate with a pickaxe handle to defend the religion of peace..
    This is a case that should have been addressed in one of those interfaith meetings the CofE leadership holds with our Muslim citizens.

    • Dreadnaught

      I agree; but these ‘devout’ Muslims and not and tiny minority, are a law unto themselves or at least, their understanding of Sharia. They wouldn’t be satisfied until they had driven the man and his family out of the area. His life will never be peaceful; it just they way Islam works its corrosive influence wherever it takes root. Islam is incompatible with the Rule of Law.

      • dannybhoy

        My real concern is what has been done by Christians in the community to help them. I don’t know; there may be more to the story than has been published.
        My concern is that we (the Christian community) and the laws of the land do not in this case appear to have done anything, and are acting like a minority rather than the lawful majority.
        I will investigate this further.

        • Dreadnaught

          Dan; apart from relocating them to a distant parish there is not much that anyone could do for the poor sod and his family.

          • dannybhoy

            Yes there is!

            If it is true and they have been unfairly dropped like a hot potato, we should do something.
            If for example the AofC is offering to put up refugees on a cottage in the grounds of his palace, why not them?

            Why not put them somewhere with other Christians families or a Christian organisation?

            As I say, we don’t know the full facts, but we should be helping them and getting them protection.

            The blog owner said this the other day,

            “But an awful lot of Christians prefer to talk about peace rather than bother making it. In fact, there are so many committees, meetings, conferences and community development projects dedicated to talking about peace that making it hardly gets a look in. We observe the rise of ‘networks’ of ‘specialists’ who listen to the ‘concerns’ of ‘stakeholders’ and help them ‘identify’ their ‘needs’ to develop a ‘strategy’ for ‘effective change’. Theoretical method and proposals for process have supplanted doing and being.”

            This issue is not directly about peace, but it is about putting our money/faith where our mouths are.

          • Dreadnaught

            That’s exactly what I said a ‘distant parish’ Lambeth Palace is not in Bradford!

          • Royinsouthwest

            Of course there is! Suppose a black man had been beaten up by a bunch of white thugs. The police would try to apprehend the culprits and, if caught, they would be put on trial and the sentences would probably be strong enough to have a deterrent effect – and quite rightly too. That is what should be done in this case.

          • Dreadnaught

            You are assuming the police are going to do nothing. The point is that in Muslim street ghettos the man still would not be safe even if the thugs were in jail. No doubt some other arseholes would take it out on his kids,his missus or fire bomb the home. This man can not live in the same area he was attacked.
            The point of the article is that he says he has had no help from the wider Christian community.
            It’s bugger all to do with racism.
            ‘Suppose a blackman etc’ … Pah.

          • Royinsouthwest

            We would not tolerate a situation in which a black family were permanently in danger in a predominantly “white” area and it is a very good thing that we would not tolerate that situation. Why should we tolerate a situation in which a Christian family are permanently at risk in a predominantly muslim area?

          • Dreadnaught

            Who said anything about tolerating? No one apart from the Muslims are tolerating it and the will have closed ranks behind their brave little jihadis. The point is one of realism and the safety of the family.

  • carl jacobs

    What a fatiguing thread, and after just 40 posts.

    1. We have Darach Conneely holding his own personal contest to see how many times he can include “right wing media” on a thread. Perhaps we should all contribute to help him purchase a sharpening stone for that ax he seems intent on grinding.

    2. We have a gaggle of atheists who have shown up to say “Look! It’s all the fault of religion. If we could just get right if it, we could all be enlightened and peaceful…”

    And the guy in the hospital? Well, who the f*** cares about him? What’s he got to do with anything?

    • chiefofsinners

      How many of the atheists are Linus, do you think?

      • The Explorer

        Impossible to say, at the moment. They’d have to spout off a bit more first, to reveal the tell-tale patterns of thought and expression.

        • CliveM

          “So far, Linus’ avatars have been consecutive, not simultaneous”

          Do we know that?

          • The Explorer

            I’ll rephrase that. “So far, Linus’ significant avatars…”
            Random snipers don’t count. I’m talking about those capable of launching a sustained bombardment.

          • Dreadnaught

            Clive – its a blog and an anonimity is the safest way to deal with unwanted intrusions anywhere on the web. A comment is a comment is a comment. There’s nothing to be taken personally unless you let it become a reality. Don’t know why some people let certain posts and character types get to them – its not reality unless you make it so. Don’t feed the Trolls.

      • carl jacobs

        Of this flotsam and jetsam? None. Say what you like about Linus. He does have a brain in his head.

  • Philip___

    “(why is this only of concern to the ‘right wing’ media? Why nothing in the Guardian or on the BBC?).”

    What would the coverage of left-wing media (such as the Guardian and BBC) have been if it were a homosexual beaten up? Or a Muslim beaten up?

    To add the comment of David 2 hours ago, the cultural relativism and multiculturalism pushed by the political elite (who live, as he says, safely in their middle-class homes in safe areas) means all beliefs and lifestyles must be promoted, except Christianity which must be marginalised.

  • preacher

    No religious belief has the right to enforce itself by using violence to protect it from those that disagree with its principles or seek to leave it.
    If it can only exist by using this sort of force to validate its truth then that truth must be highly questionable to say the least.
    Freedom of belief is fundamental in civilised society & must be protected by stringent enforcement of the law or a state of anarchy will exist & eventually engulf all of that society.
    As I believe someone one said “I don’t agree with your beliefs, but I will defend with my life your right to hold & express them”. To that I would only add – Peacefully.

  • Mr Hussain says that multiculturalism has failed. From the point of view of its proponents, however, multiculturalism is a runaway success. The whole purpose of subjecting white Christian countries to an influx of unassimilable peoples and religions is to wreck those countries. The highly developed altruism and poorly developed ethnocentrism of the white race, the former reinforced by Christian teachings, combine to make white Christian countries uniquely susceptible to attack.

    Mr Hussain’s observation, ‘this is not England’, is music to the ears of our enemies. Perhaps one day, Your Grace will recognize your own party as one of the enemies of the British and of Christianity; the Conservatives and Labour brought Islam to this land and they are now salami-slicing our freedoms to protect and preserve it.

    • Dreadnaught

      The big mistake was equating Islam with national Cultures and not having the any idea of what Islam is really about. Churchill knew only too well and describes its nature in River Wars.

      • @ Dreadnaught—I think those responsible for bringing Islam here knew full well of its enmity to Christianity and they knew it would send Christianity and the West reeling. Yes, Churchill wrote scathingly about Islam and he was horrified by the idea of a ‘magpie society’, as he termed it, but he said in 1955 that he was powerless to stop immigration: ‘I think [immigration] is the most important subject facing this country, but I cannot get any of my ministers to take any notice.’ (Ian Gilmour, Inside Right)

        • Dreadnaught

          I don’t think immigration is at all wrong or un-British. What is wrong is uncontrolled and non-selective immigration. Race or skin colour is irrelevant, skills and allegiance is what matters.

          • Hagen vanTronje

            “”Race or skin colour is irrelevant, skills and allegiance is what matters.””

            Disagree, we are naturally a tribal folk, I feel more at home interacting with my own sort and that is white skinned Christians.
            Regarding skills I also have objections to enticing skilled folk to come here because in effect you are robbing their homeland of a valuable resource and that is unforgivable.
            I would much rather see indigenous UK folk forced to work for a living, let’s get the three Million UK unemployed into work first and if they refuse to work then stop all benefits, make the UK a no-work, no-eat society !

          • “I feel more at home interacting with my own sort and that is white skinned Christians.”

            Hmm … you may have a problem when you meet Christ and the Apostles and early Christians then.

          • Hagen vanTronje

            I will be dead ! so whats the problem ?

          • Yes, you will.

      • bockerglory

        Too true. For the last 150yrs we have called Islam one of the he great religions. Wrong. It is a cult who say the perfect example of a human is a polygamist war monger. Mohammed IS NOT A GOOD EXAMPLE to follow. We need to teach this IN ALL schools now.

      • Cressida de Nova

        There is absolutely no excuse for not knowing what it was about. I do not believe that. Everyone who is educated or has travelled knows what it is about.

        • Dreadnaught

          I wasn’t offering a statement of excuse; merely stating a fact that politicians put the need for cheap labour economics before considering the impact on wider society.

  • Inspector General

    It could be argued that the fellow, who accepts he lives in a multicultural society, had no right whatsoever to assume he was eligible to enjoy the freedoms that are the realm of the indigenous. He is part of a culture which has emigrated to England, (against the average Englishman’s wishes it should be added,) and is therefore subject to the (unwritten) rules and regulations his people brought with him.

    If the opposite is true, and he IS eligible, then we don’t have a multi cultural society at all. He has a British passport and enjoys the rights of living in England as a de facto Englishman, one of which is the freedom to choose his religion or no.

    Do see the problem here. Is he victim or attention seeking public nuisance guilty of provocation…

  • Billo Qasira

    Can somebody explain to me why the Archbishop of Canterbury has not spoken out about Islam’s apostasy codes? Ex-Muslims are some of the most vulnerable people in society. If the Archbishop cannot speak out for them, what has Britain come to? Are multicultural sensitivities allowing for atrocity? Christianity accepts people are free to leave it, isn’t it time the highest Christian authority in Britain told Muslims in the UK that the apostasy laws of Islam are incompatible with our civilisation, and actively supported Ex-Muslims publicly?

    • Inspector General

      Yes, this man can. We don’t want to see churches burning in this country, that’s why. Because that is what you are risking. Horrible it has to be that way, but there you are…

      • Dreadnaught

        And what is British Christianity doing about it? not much but rely on the Polish diaspora.

        • Inspector General

          BQ asks what has Britain come to. We’re both old enough to know a better time before, eh, Dredders.

          • Dreadnaught

            Not doubt about that IGs.

      • So it’s cowardice in the face of the enemy, then. Appeasement and silence only feeds evil, Inspector. You know this.

        • Inspector General

          We can do something, but only in good time. We have to endure much more persecution from Islam before the country awakes. You know this.

          • Nonsense. That way leads to eventual civil disorder. Come down hard now on the attitudes in Islam to apostasy and other criminal acts, and declare them for what they are – something that will not be tolerated in this nation.

          • Alas, we are not and will not be coming down hard because we lack the will and the people in leadership to implement this hardness. The Inspector is not prescribing, but describing.

          • Inspector General

            You’ll have to define what you have in mind for civil disorder, Jack, and whether or not it is any worse than 132 dead on just one night.

            Once again, you display your lamentable lack of understanding of the way things are. In a democracy like the UK, if you carry the greater number of the people with you, you can do anything. Even re-introduce the death penalty for terrorism. When Churchill became PM in 1940, getting the people onside was his number one priority. It paid off handsomely. The people were thereafter his to endure the very worst without (too) much grumble.

    • dannybhoy

      Are multicultural sensitivities allowing for atrocity?
      In my opinion, yes.
      But all this HR multiculti stuff hides a failure of nerve by our politicians in the face of a potentially explosive minority.

    • The Explorer

      Stunning avatar!

      • Best comment thus far on the silence not only of the Established Church but also our politicians – and for that matter the Catholic Church in Britain.

        • The Explorer

          Agreed. A comment to match the avatar.

          • Who is the image? Do you know?

          • The Explorer

            No, but I wish I did.

          • First Carl confesses that he sips Baiely’s, then I find you revving up over a caricature. I thought I knrw you guys….

          • The Explorer

            Yes, Carl is full of surprises.

      • Pure patriarchal sexism focusing on physical attributes promoted by dominant white males while disregarding intellectual contributions by women. Please assemble a change of clothing, pack a cheese sandwich and present yourself to your nearest Human Rights Peoples’ Tribunal.

        • The Explorer

          Patriarchal. You just want her calling you “Daddyo”.

    • dannybhoy

      Here’s another article on the subject..

      http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/2231787.i_was_told_stop_being_a_crusader/

      I see also that he was supported by Christian Solidarity Worldwide..
      http://www.csw.org.uk/2008/04/29/news/736/article.htm

      This all rather reminds me of Pastor Neimoller’s words,

      “First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
      Because I was not a Socialist.
      Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
      Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
      Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
      Because I was not a Jew.
      Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.”

      http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007392

  • Hagen vanTronje

    Nobody ever asked me if I wanted Multiculturalism foisted upon us, I most of the folk I know are of the same opinion too.
    Our Politicians made an almighty cock up by allowing Millions of strangers to come to live in the UK without requiring they integrate but that they allowed millions of Muslims to come here is unforgiveable because Muslims cannot integrate, if they did they would not be Muslim any more and so the sad disgusting saga drags on and on and here we have an ex Muslim who is confirming what we all know.

    • Inspector General

      What was so unbearable was that both main parties were in on it. Still are, in that one understands a muslim lad can bring over some non English speaking schoolgirl from Pakistan to be his wife. That needs to stop. Surely they now have enough cousins for that purpose home grown.

      Anyway, the only party that can be trusted in the years ahead is UKIP. See you at the polling station…

  • jsampson45

    What is the local MP doing?

    • Martin

      Making sure the electorate would vote for him?

      • Inspector General

        Just about the most insightful thing you’ve ever posted, Martin.

        • Martin

          IG

          You’d be surprised. 😉

  • carl jacobs

    109 comments now. Any form of the name of Nissar Hussein has been mentioned twice in the comment section – both times in one by Johnny Rottenborough. The irony is striking. Johnny Rottenborough!

    Evidently it is far more important to complain bitterly about the afflicition of the most afflicted country in the history of the world … excuse me … Ireland. Or perhaps to suggest that there really isn’t a victim, because the religious man is simultaneously both victim and victimizer. The smarmy implication being that the only difference between Mr Hussein and his attacker is who was holding the weapon.

    • The Explorer

      Because he hasn’t always been mentioned by name doesn’t mean he hasn’t been mentioned.

      • carl jacobs

        It would have been mentioned a helluva lot more if certain individuals hadn’t invaded this thread with extraneous agendas. [Cough] Darach Conneely [Cough] A couple of atheists. [Cough] You would think a man being attacked with a pick axe would have produced unanimity.

        • chiefofsinners

          You would think a man being nailed to a cross would have produced unanimity.

          • carl jacobs

            He didn’t come to bring peace but a sword.

          • Same as the religion of peace then ….

            One cuts the heart of man in two, exposes and then bends his individual will to that of His Creator. The other uses the sword to chop off heads.

  • chiefofsinners

    Yesterday Cranmer asserted that peacemaking was about “the emptying of self”. That sounded pretty good. But this country has now emptied itself of what it was in order to peacefully accommodate others. What do we get? Peace? No – we get people who talk loudly and carry big picks.
    Peace at any price isn’t peace, it’s defeat. Laying down the truth in order to buy peace is a price that we must not pay. Nissar Hussein is a man who knows that. How many of us would do the same?
    Go back to the article on the top 100 Christians of the year and nominate Nissar Hussein.
    Is that enough Nissar Husseins, Carl?

    • carl jacobs

      I don’t know. Are we actually paying attention him now? Or are we still bitching about Ireland and its terrible fate?

      • CliveM

        Carl

        Some people like playing the victim.

    • “Go back to the article on the top 100 Christians of the year and nominate Nissar Hussein.”

      That’s actually a good suggestion.

      • chiefofsinners

        No need to sound so surprised.

        • Not surprised …. embarrassed not to have considered it already.

          • chiefofsinners

            Ah, your humility is surpassed only by your Catholicness.

          • dannybhoy

            Yes. I am surprised and slightly disappointed Jack….

          • chiefofsinners

            How many Hail Marys shall it be?

          • dannybhoy

            Oh, fifteen minutes self flagellation should do it.
            Plus a postal order for 17/6d to me for hurt feelings… :0)

          • chiefofsinners

            17/6 eh? I’m afraid he lives in Scotland. Once we apply the Barnett formula, you’ll find that you owe him.

          • dannybhoy

            Very droll!

          • chiefofsinners

            If you look closely at his hat there’s a ticket saying ’10/6 in this style.’ He might be able to trade up.

          • carl jacobs

            Doesn’t living in Scotland count as something akin to a stay in purgatory?

          • Watch it!!! Scotland is the most beautiful part of Britain, if not the worl. Its people are smart and industrious, its traditional music haunting and it produces the best whiskeys.

            Unferstand that I have to protest. If my wife were to ever wander on here and didn’t see an objection from me….bad things would happen.

          • carl jacobs

            Scotland is a Socialist paradise. Doesn’t truth count for something? Shouldn’t you be willing to stand up and be counted no matter the consequences?

          • Sure, in priciple, yes. But then, you don’t know my wife.

          • carl jacobs

            You measure your commitment by your willingness to face adversity.

          • Absolutely. You’ve never met my Mrs Adversity.

          • carl jacobs

            Defend the Patriarchy! Buy her a vacuum cleaner and an apron for her birthday. Refer to her as “Woman.” Establish male preeminence.

            This is your sacred responsibility to the XY Brotherhood.

          • Now I’m finally convinced that you”re trying to kill me. I knew all along.

          • carl jacobs

            Oh, that’s right. You’re Canadian. I forgot.

            Nevermind.

          • carl jacobs

            P.S. I’m not an expert in such things since whiskey is to my mind a low-grade form of gasoline, but … isn’t it “Whisky?” I thought “Whiskey” was an American product.

          • Well, you should maybe stop mixing good scotch with Coke and try it straight (no ice) with lox or pickked herring.

          • carl jacobs

            Yeah, actually I have. It was awful. My wife’s aunt said “Oh, it wasn’t ‘the good stuff.’ Try this.” It was awful. A sample space of two was adequate to make a definitive determination.

            P.S. No fish, though.

          • You probably corrupted the sample data by stuffing your face with your aunt’s hot apple pie and vanilla ice cream while sampling. Check your lab notes.

          • carl jacobs

            No, but she gave me some Bailey’s Irish Creme afterwords, and that was good. My wife buys me a bottle of that stuff every Christmas.

          • Oh dear. Bailey’s. You’re going transgender on us. Caitlyn Jacobs.And you wife is enabling you.

          • carl jacobs

            There is nothing wrong with Bailey’s. And anyways. I drink good beer … unlike someone I know.

          • It”s ok to come out of the closet nowadays…to chuck the beer pretense and to openly sip Balileys. Daintily, so as not to mess up the lipstick. With little sips, pinkie extended.

            PS Pace Seinfeld: Not that there is anything wrong with Bailey’s.

          • Anton

            Baileys is too sweet. Better to make your own mix.

          • carl jacobs

            Two fingers makes a nice late night drink.

          • James Bolivar DiGriz

            Carl,

            Sorry, I’ve just made the same comment as I did not see yours.

            It is Whiskey in the US (and I think Canada) and Ireland and Whisky in Scotland (and I think everywhere else).

          • sarky

            I feel your pain – scottish mother in law!!

          • Quote sweet to me actually. Has compassion for the downtrodden and oppressed.

          • sarky

            🙂

          • James Bolivar DiGriz

            “Scotland … produces the best whiskeys”
            Sorry but not a drop of that is produced in Scotland. To find a whiskey distillery you would need to go to Ireland.

          • …or anywhete else in the world. A mix of terms; here in the Americas we call scotch “scotch whiskey” (and many call the Scottish “scotch”) as we add the generic name for the drink. Scotch, I undetstand, is still classed as a whisky/whiskey. Similar to bourbon; only if made in Kentucky can it go under that name, elsewhere it goes by the generic “corn whiskey.”

          • James Bolivar DiGriz

            “Similar to bourbon; only if made in Kentucky can it go under that name, elsewhere it goes by the generic “corn whiskey.” ”

            I thought that, legally, it was more complicated than that and a whiskey made with 50-80% corn was bourbon and that one made with more than 80% corn was corn liquor. Albeit a lot of, if not most, bourbon is made in Kentucky.

            And I thought that bourbon filtered through charcoal (and probably some other conditions) is legally a Lincoln county process liquor or a Lincoln county bourbon or something like that.

            Lincoln county in Kentucky being where Jack Daniels (the most famous of this type of spirit) originated but not where it is made now.

            And I think I heard that someone else set up a distillery in Lincoln count, partly so they could advertise it as the only Lincoln county bourbon actually made in Lincoln county.

          • Whoa! You’re way ahead of me on this one…I don”t even like bourbon!

          • Sirbastion

            Bushmills NI

          • dannybhoy

            Ermmmm..
            May I ask how much they* paid you for that endorsement, and don’t you have any pangs of conscience Avi?

            * http://www.visitscotland.com/

            Scotland is ideal material for postcards and documentaries. The scenery is beautiful especially the West coast. But Scottish midges are bad tempered, cantankerous, vengeful and …..everywhere. ;0)

    • TrippingDwarves

      Nominated.

      • dannybhoy

        Ditto.

    • David

      I’ll support that !
      You’ve stumbled on something there.
      Excellent suggestion !

  • Royinsouthwest

    The report on this case at the ITV website quotes these remarks by Terry Long, an inspector with Bradford District Police.

    http://www.itv.com/news/calendar/2015-11-19/police-investigating-hate-crime-after-man-attacked-on-cctv/

    All reports of hate crime are taken seriously and West Yorkshire Police is committed to working with partners to identify and, where appropriate, prosecute those who commit such crimes to increase the confidence of victims. Police are aware of past matters involving Mr Hussain and a senior officer is continuing to investigate a number of allegations he has previously reported, to establish what offences have occurred. Work is also ongoing with a range of other partners including local councillors, to address these issues.

    In other words the police are going through the motions of investigating the case and have had a chat with local councillors, some of whom will be moslems, in an effort to make sure that “community cohesion” is not imperilled by pursing this case too vigorously.

    • Bradford is like a primitive village in Pakistan. What’s really going on there is that the police are scared to uphold British law. I think the gov and the army need to support them when they make uncomfortable arrests.

      I also think it’s about time British imams, community leaders,councilors and those also living in Britain found preaching stuff that goes against British laws should be arrested and imprisoned and deported, no messing about. They will learn that we do not tolerate this medieval rubbish This is the only way our civilised country will survive.

      • Fasdunkle

        I think it’s time we scrapped the notion of community leaders – in places like Bradford it is merely self appointed village elders with a grudge

        • Inspector General

          Wouldn’t say it was grudge orientated. More asserting their position as it would be in the ‘old country’. Where they ruled other peoples lives. It’s all racial, you know. In the blood, if you will…

        • No, I wouldn’t say it was grudge orientated, they live in Bradford exactly how they lived in Pakistan. Their imams fill their worshipers’ heads with the same narrow minded stuff as if they were in Pakistan. They follow Yusuf Al Qaradawi’s dangerous fatwas that sanction violence and others like him

      • IanCad

        I do agree the time has come to declare that our laws and liberties are not to be amended by recent arrivals.

    • WTF …. a man has been seriously assaulted, probably attempted murder, and the police come out with this PC twaddle. There is video footage of his assailants. Surely they can be identified by those in this “community”?

      • Albert

        Jack, I’ve just been told you’re not well. I’m so sorry to hear this; please be assured of my prayers.

      • What? I noticed your sporadic appearances and thought you’ve been annoying other blogs! A רפואה שלמה/refua sheleima: May God grant you a full recovery, you old rascal.

        PS You were right about 24 mg nic e-juice. My cravings returned, most prominently on camping trips and when imbibing and I nearly back-slid. I also switched from the disposable starter kit pen-style mech-mods to a good variable Wattage box mod with a digital display and repleacable battery; much better throat hit and oddly enough, the coils last much longer. I keep the vape cool by staying between 9.5W and at most 11.5W.

        • Thank you, Avi. Jack will continue to annoy those on this blog and others for as long as he can.

      • dannybhoy

        Jack you haven’t been well? I am sincerely sorry to hear that, and I wish you a speedy recovery and the grace and humour to cope with whatever it is..

      • IanCad

        No idea that you had been unwell or what with.
        All the best for a quick return to normal/abnormal.

    • Mr B J Mann

      Compare that with the reaction of the South Yorkshire Police to a historic abuse allegation against Cliff Richard?!

  • Martin

    One has to think that a ‘god’ who cannot deal with those who abandon him is not much of a god. If Allah requires his minions to punish the apostate then Allah is not much of a god, certainly not great.

  • “It’s easy but lazy to lump them all together. Not all have sympathies
    for the Charlie Hebdo murderers: it’s just 27%. Not all think acts of
    violence against those who publish images of Mohammad are justified:
    it’s only 24%.”

    Don’t confuse polling with reality. It’d be more accurate to say:

    “27% had sympathies for the Charlie Hebdo murderers *and were willing to say so to a pollster*. 24% thinks acts of violence against those who publish images of Mohammad are justified *and were willing to say so to a pollster*”. How many thought so, but were ashamed to say so to a pollster? It’s surely not zero.

    • Inspector General

      When we speak of violence, we mean murder. Don’t we…

    • TimeslipDreamer

      The reverse is probably true too, though. How many wouldn’t dare say that they think it’s not justified because that’s what they’ve been taught to believe?

  • IanCad

    Time to fire some police chiefs??

    • dannybhoy

      They can’t be that short of ammunition?

  • Royinsouthwest

    Has the Equality and Human Rights Commission ever had anything to say about the threats to “apostates” in this country? If not, why not?

  • kishkeyum

    24%, 27%. These percentages reflect vast numbers of people. And still fools claim that there are hardly any radical Muslims. There are many millions at the very least.

  • Brendan Jennings

    Seems to me this is a basic civil rights issue that the Archbishop and the Church of England – not to mention the Cameron government – should get behind, big time.

  • LeLeMans

    Well, Rev, if Mr. Hussain lived here in the States, he could exercise his God-given 2nd Amendment right to defend himself and shoot the SOB’s in the face. Not exactly Christian but, nonetheless, highly effective at deterring further attacks.

    • Montjoie

      There’s nothing unChristian about defending your life.

      • TimeslipDreamer

        Yes there is. Jesus explicitly told off his disciple who tried to defend him. He explicitly taught “turn the other cheek”

        • Anton

          Then the New Testament contradicts itself. The resolution is that one must not use force in defence of one’s faith. In defence of one’s life, yes.