Christian Persecution

Persecuted Middle East bishops banned from visiting UK

Why are suffering Syrian and Iraqi bishops banned from visiting the UK? They only wanted to attend the consecration of the country’s first Syriac Orthodox cathedral, dedicated to St Thomas. They might even have met the Prince of Wales for a cup of tea, but after that they’d have surely returned to serve their rapidly-diminishing flocks and lead them through their daily crucifixions, beheadings, enslavement, murder, rape… Surely the Sunday Express has got this story completely wrong. Bishops banned? Why on earth? Why would the Home Office not see fit to grant three brave Middle Eastern bishops a visa so they might attend the consecration of St Thomas’ Cathedral and visit some of their refugee brethren, and then perhaps pop along to Clarence House for a chat with the Prince of Wales? He cares about these things, doesn’t he? Good grief, he might even have invited them.

Bishops banned? Why on earth, when we roll out the red carpet for hate preachers and those who incite the murder of Christians. Surely the Sunday Express has got this story completely wrong.

Well, it’s certainly wrong in one word. They credit the article: ‘Caroline Wheeler Exclusive’ (published Sun, Dec 4, 2016). Yet the Barnabas Fund published this story two days earlier, under the headline ‘UK visas: YES to radical Islamists, NO to Christian archbishops‘, so not so exclusive. Or perhaps Christian websites just don’t count. A bit like Christian bishops.

The Prime Minister sent a letter for the consecration, which spoke of “the appalling violence that has afflicted so many areas of the Middle East”, and how this “reminds us how fortunate we are to live in a country where different religious beliefs are not only tolerated, but welcomed”.

Unless, of course, you’re a bishop from Syria or Iraq, and then you’re not so welcome. The Home Office won’t extend Christian hospitality to some of the bravest Christian leaders on earth because they don’t have enough money to support themselves in the UK or they might not leave the country after the consecration. Yes, that’s what they were apparently told. Shocking, isn’t it?

Makes you ashamed to be British.

Imagine Nicodemus Daoud Sharaf, Archbishop of Mosul, flitting out of the consecration straight after Prince Charles spoke and heading off to the UK Border Agency to claim asylum while his flock back home bleed to death. Or Timothius Mousa Shamani, Archbishop of St Matthew’s Monastery atop Mt Alfaf in northern Iraq, demanding a four-bedroomed house in Acton and living off British benefits while his flock back home squat in tents and eat sand. Or Selwanos Boutros Alnemeh, Archbishop of Homs and Hama in Syria, exaggerating the atrocities committed against him in order to scam the welfare system of hundreds of thousands of pounds…

Insulting, isn’t it?

The Express quotes a Home Office spokesman, who explains: “All visa applications are considered on their individual merits and applicants must provide evidence to show they meet the requirements of the immigration rules.”

If the applications of these three bishops were considered individually, it beggars belief that they were refused for not having enough money or because they might not leave the country. Whatever happened to righteous government? This Home Office decision is a national embarrassment – shameful, indecent and immoral.

So let’s try and remedy the Home Office’s delinquency, shall we?

Here’s the Archbishop of Homs and Hama, pleading: “We have shouted to the world but no one has listened to us. Where is the Christian conscience? Where is human consciousness? Where are my brothers?

Here’s the Archbishop of St Matthew’s Monastery, defiantly sheltering Christians from the Islamic State.

And here’s the Archbishop of Mosul, weeping:

If we may not hear of these things in person from the persecuted bishops banned from entry to the UK, let their witness cry out from the Cyber Cathedral of Archbishop Cranmer, and let the world know how much we Christians are deeply shamed by the incompetence, insensitivity and moral poverty of the UK Home Office.

  • I want to comment but at the moment I am speechless with rage. This is outrageous and I will return when I have calmed down a little. The Home Office is a disgrace to the nation in this regard.

    • Merchantman

      The ever vigilant Home office is still not fit for purpose then. If judged by its own miserable standards ‘heads should roll’. But we don’t yet do that sort of thing in the UK do we?

    • Merchantman

      We want the Home Office back urgently. We should start lobbying by every means possible to do this. We didn’t vote for this sort of outrage. The trouble may indeed have started with collusion in the benighted Foreign Office by the sound of it, so we want that back too.
      ++Mosul has it. He recognises that the Human Rights, PC, Secular thought is behind this at least. We should weep with those that weep.

  • David

    “Makes you ashamed to be British ”

    Yes, Archbishop Cranmer ! This is disgusting !
    This Christian is indeed ashamed of the country that my father and his forefathers fought for !

    Having read this account and listened to these good, innocent, Christian people I am now too beset with both rage and compassion to write much coherently now.

    My God – how our political elite has brought us so low….we need so much change in this, now dysfunctional society !

    So this is the Home Office over which Mrs Theresa May presided until recently !

    May God have mercy on this nation !

    • Anton

      Is it not obvious what God’s impending judgement is?

      • David

        And you may well be right, Anton !
        I am just nearing reading to the end of the OT for the umpteenth time, and the point that you identify has been leaping out at me even more strongly than on previous readings.

  • PessimisticPurple

    No great mystery. Allowing in Muslim hate preachers proves how “compassionate” you are, whereas banning Christian bishops proves your secular credentials. And yes, “disgust” is the appropriate emotion when one thinks of the kind of person responsible for this decision.

    • Mike Stallard

      I heard the BBC woman taking apart the new Libdem MP for Richmond. She was loud, rude and bullying. Eventually the poor MP – just an accountant thrust into the headlights – was forced to withdraw after a snidey remark or three by Julia Hartley-Brewer.
      To my disgust, the comments were all delighted with the rude BBC “interviewer”. That is what you get when the government takes all the wrong decisions: all MPs are despised.

      • James Bolivar DiGriz

        Except JHB wasn’t being loud, rude and bullying, she was just asking Olney if she had any consistency and would apply the same standards to her own election as she wants to apply to the referendum.

        “the poor MP – just an accountant thrust into the headlights”
        Oh, there I was thinking that she had chosen to stand knowing that if she was elected she would have to do interviews when in fact she was forced to be there. Thanks for clarifying that.

        • Mike Stallard

          Mr Bolivar – I love the sarcasm! I saw the video on Pete North’s blog. I put the reference because Peter North is a famous porn star and you get a shock when you google it!
          http://peterjnorth.blogspot.co.uk

          If you have ever stood as a Libdem, you will know that the machine takes completely over and you are just sort of carried along. It does not allow you to argue and you have to put the point of view of the fixers. So my heart goes out to her. I found her really pathetic actually. Very sad.

          • Pubcrawler

            The fixer obviously hadn’t been paying attention to JHB’s Twitter feed for the hour or so before the interview, where the intended line of questioning was heralded, otherwise the hapless new MP might have had some sort of answers prepared/scripted.

          • James Bolivar DiGriz

            The fixer clearly was not very competent to say the least. One did not have to follow JHBs feed to know that some (if not all) interviewers would ask the ‘when is the second by-election’ question.

          • James Bolivar DiGriz

            If anyone wants to see the interview it is here
            http://order-order.com/2016/12/02/sarah-olney-walks-interview-spin-doctor-intervenes/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+guidofawkes+%28Guy+Fawkes%27+blog+of+parliamentary+plots%2C+rumours+and+conspiracy%29
            it is not actually on the site you linked to (albeit that site does have a link to it).

            “If you have ever stood as a Libdem”
            Good heavens no. I believe in liberty & democracy (and decency, honesty, etc) so I would not fit in well with them and have never had anything to do with them.

            “you will know that the machine takes completely over”
            Which rather proves my previous point. Also Olney is 38yo not a child. If at that age she does not know that people in politics get asked hard questions then she is, at best, wilfully blind. And if she was willing to do & say things that she was not happy with then she lacks character & a backbone. What could the party do to her? The worst would be to throw her out, which would not be a big loss to her as she has only been a member for five minutes (actually 18 months).

            “So my heart goes out to her”
            I am sure that her corruption (if that is the right word) did not come all at one but step by step but if she never came to realise that she was being manipulated into doing & saying things she was not comfortable then she is even less competent that I thought.

            “I found her
            really pathetic actually”
            There I agree with you. However she could have withdrawn from the election at any stage but she chose to carry on. Adults are supposed to realise that actions have consequences.

      • Pubcrawler

        It wasn’t BBC, it was on Talk Radio. If it were a BBC interview it would have been far more ‘accommodating’.

        • Mike Stallard

          see below.

    • Heloisa

      Got it in one – almost. The powers that be don’t want Joe Public to know what’s really going on in the Middle East and Europe and everywhere else.

    • Sarky

      Sorry but you’re just shooting the messenger!!!

    • Watchman

      The thing that is no great mystery is the number of Muslims in executive position in the immigration office who are allowed to welcome in their jihadi brethren but reject anyone who may warn them of the antics of their jihadi brethren.

    • jsampson45

      Re hate preachers, it is not clear to me why Muhammad Naqib ur Rehman and Haseeb Ur Rehman were welcomed by the Archbishop of Canterbury at Lambeth Palace. Apparently these are supporters of the assassin Mumtaz Qadri.

  • Inspector General

    There was a time when our brightest and best would automatically join the higher echelons of the civil service. Not so now. Everyone knows the elite can earn many times more outside of it. So we make do with average types. This decision will be overturned, if it has not already. But the question is this – which idiot in the Home Office took it upon himself to ruin his career as he has done, and is his first name ‘Mohamed’ by chance….

  • IanCad

    I’m not ashamed to admit it, but the Good Bishop’s tears brought the same to my eyes. Fifteen Hundred years, and in our enlightened age, it is now all finished. Our leaders, our wise men, we who elected such, all stand condemned. That we offer no sanctuary for those displaced through the implementation of insane foreign polices which have wrought havoc in the ancient world, cannot go unjudged. The cry of the dispossessed reaches God; may he have mercy on us.
    Thank you YG – I had no idea…..

  • CliveM

    I am stunned. The language I would like to use would probably result in me being banned from the blog. BUT, what the hell is going on here?

    Can I make one point. This is purely rhetorical, because these are brave and faithful men. But let’s suppose for a second they were actually looking for asylum, why would we be saying no anyway? Can anyone justify its refusal?

    Now they aren’t asking for it. They wish to do their pastoral duty and visit their flock and some idiot has said no. In doing so, they have shamed this country.

    • Sarky

      Their refusal can be justified within the rules of the immigration system. It’s not an attack on Christianity it’s just a sign of a broken system.
      The poor ‘idiot’ was just working within the system, you can’t blame them.

      • Royinsouthwest

        “Only obeying orders” is no excuse in matters of life and death. The verdicts in the Nuremberg trials set a precedent.

        • Sarky

          I hardly think you can compare the two.

      • Yet, so many atheists blame St Paul – a persecuted Christian – for ‘justifying’ slavery, when all he did was to advice the slaves and masters to remember Christ in their dealings with one another.

        • Sarky

          Because he advised and didn’t condone it.

          • “Because he advised and didn’t condone it”.

            Assuming that you mean that Paul did not ‘condemn’ it, here are some scripture references, which show that Paul did not approve of ir –

            “We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine…” (1Timothy 1:9-10 NIV)

            “Were you a slave when you were called? Don’t let it trouble you–although if you can gain your freedom, do so.” (1 Corinthians 7:21 NIV)

  • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

    Outrage…this is an outrage. Except…it comes as no surprise.

    • Dominic Stockford

      Exactly so. A sad indictment of what our country today has become.

  • Merchantman

    The Government in those parts that matter is apparently still in thrall to the un-British elements. A blind beggar or indeed anyone visiting your friendly Home Office would suspect infiltration is a distinct possibility.
    This wretched bias against suffering Christians is ruthlessly shameful and hypocritical. Maybe our MPs will call those responsible to explain themselves or maybe n…..

    • Coniston

      The real reason is that the true Islamophobes in this country are politicians, government departments, the civil service, police, social services, local councils, etc. They are absolutely terrified of upsetting Muslims.

  • Dreadnaught

    Shameful decision if true.
    This must be questioned in Parliament.

  • YouTube has videos of the consecration of the cathedral. The full service, running for 93 minutes, is here and The British Monarchy provides highlights here.

    • Watching this service with all the religious representatives of Christianity and others present, I can understand even more now the Bishop of Mosul’s tears of frustration and despair and the disappointment of the three banned Bishops must have experienced at having to miss it.

  • Irene’s Daughter

    Sadly nothing new.
    Do you remember the 2010 case of Gospel singer Helen Berhane who was invited by Open Door for a meeting to tell people about her torture in an Eritrean prison and denied entry. Many MP’s complained. nothing happened.

  • Dominic Stockford

    While I have a major theological issue with the ritualistic basis for the faith of these men I think this decision by the Home Office is one of the most shocking and disgraceful things they have managed in decades.

    Despite my aforesaid misgivings, had I been elected to parliament, this is a matter I would have raised in the house at every opportunity. Will any MP do so?

    • Anton

      We can write to them, especially the ones who have declared themselves Christian.

  • len

    The arrival of some Syrian and Iraqi bishops might upset the Islamic community here. Cannot have that.

  • chefofsinners

    The official who made this decision might be in for a tricky discussion with St Peter at the pearly gates, regarding visa requirements for the heavenly kingdom.

    Who’s going to start a petition to parliament about this? Dominic?

    • Anton
      • David

        Err ! I am being more thick than usual ? That’s not a parliamentary petition ?

        • Anton

          It’s a reference to chef’s first paragraph, not his second!

          • chefofsinners

            Aye, and a cracking good read, too. Lovely bit of medieval satire.

          • Pubcrawler

            Renaissance. For mediaeval satire, try the Roman de Fauvel.

          • Anton

            I’ve written my own version about JP2. But this thread is not the place to expand on it.

          • David

            Understood !

  • PessimisticPurple

    And trawling though the BTL comments in the Express, we have no trouble finding a smattering of Berks (and look up the etymology of that word to find what I really think of them) who are more concerned with showing us all how achingly clever they are by displaying their atheism than they are about addressing what has happened. It’s the reason why atheists are actually more disgusting than the prats who refused these men entry.

  • Maalaistollo

    Why should it come as a surprise? The Home Office is only following ‘The Agenda.’ Better to enquire who sets that agenda, both for foreign and domestic policy. Unfortunately, once you have established that, you will not find them sympathetic to your arguments.

    • Mike Stallard

      Same old story: the government cannot tell the difference between people. It lets in “14 year old children” from Calais on humanitarian grounds. But it bans these three brave bishops. But government is blind to people: it deals in figures.

  • Anton

    Who else recognises the hand of Satan in the welcoming of the perpetrators and the banning of their victims?

    • Sarky

      Erm no. Just a crap immigration system.

      • Anton

        I asked who did, not who didn’t! I don’t mind your reply, of course.

  • Mike Stallard

    “Yet the Barnabas Fund published this story two days earlier,”
    When I left the CoE with four children and a very loyal wife (who has to this day remained a faithful Anglican) I was told that there was money available to support me while I looked for a job. Cardinal Basil Hume however transferred all the money which was set aside for the Vicars who had “gone over to Rome” into the “Barnabas Fund”. So we didn’t get any. My wife was working some 12 hours a day to support us for eight years until her back went.
    But – tell you what – there were an awful lot of desk bound managers who benefitted!

    • Maalaistollo

      I don’t think the Barnabas Fund to which you are referring can be the same as the one which released this story. Yours sounds like an internal RC accountancy exercise, about which I have been unable to find anything on Google. There’s plenty there about the other one, which I commend to all communicants who wish to help persecuted Christians. Paying the fares to get such Christians to a safe country (not this one, obviously) is quicker and achieves more than writing to your MP is likely to do. Time is of the essence. There are several sayings about where you should put your money, eg (a) where moth and rust do not corrupt, or (b) where your mouth is.

      • Mike Stallard

        I have written above.

    • Iain Templeton

      I think you are referring to the St Barnabas Society, which exists to give help to clergy who convert to the RC church. I can’t understand why they didn’t help you: did you apply to them? See http://www.stbarnabassociety.org.uk

      • Mike Stallard

        Maybe I have made an error. The fact is that the Converts’ Aid Society (Hope that is right) was absorbed into the St Barnabas Society and we didn’t see a penny – until a couple of years later.

  • Typical Home Office ban the wrong ones. It’s easy you see to ban Christians, they don’t fight back. Whereas some loud, violent, stinking jihardi arguing the toss about his ‘human rights’ to visit his cousin’s cat would be let in.

    • David

      Christians need to learn that they must fight back to defend their faith, nation and culture. Until we relearn what our ancestors knew instinctively we will lose. The instruction to “turn the other cheek”, did not mean lay down and allow the holy truths which we bear to be walked upon.

      • MSApis

        It used to be called Ecclesia Militans. Not so much after Vatican II.

        • David

          Thank you.

  • Shadrach Fire

    Who in Westminster is going to call the Home Office to account or are they going to get away with it as usual?
    This is disgraceful. Even May say’s one thing but then turns a blind eye to this. There should be a full apology.

  • Symmetry Therapy

    England needs a Christian Revival. It would be glorious.

  • Don Benson

    I would guess this has everything to do with the Westminster/MSM propaganda machine not being spiked by undeniable witnesses who might accidently reveal the truth of our recent governments’ disastrous Middle-East interventions. That would never do; and anyway we have to expect a few hiccups as the Arab spring heralds the new glorious summer which is just round the corner…

    So let’s not give the oxygen of publicity to something as dangerous as the truth. And as long as we accept the journalism offered by our intrepid and much revered BBC reporters, particularly the women with an obvious agenda and gloriously eccentric accents, the government can continue its valiant support of jihadist terrorists for as long as it wants.

    And of course we in the CofE are far too busy weeping over homosexuals (to whom we’ve all been so vicious) to be overly worried about a bit of inconvenience experienced by Christians in far away places of which we know nothing.

  • Anton

    And will the Archbishop of Canterbury say anything? Let alone appear in full regalia at the gates of Downing Street having called the TV cameras to an opportunity, and let rip?

  • Albert

    “All visa applications are considered on their individual merits and applicants must provide evidence to show they meet the requirements of the immigration rules.”

    There are evidently some very stupid people in the Home Office.

    Can these bishops not be made Cranmer’s Christians of the year? We might even get some publicity for them.

    • Anton

      All visa applications are considered on their individual merits

      That’s amusing, given that all have sinned and fallen short…

    • David

      Good idea.

  • liam nolan

    Its about time Christians took to the streets and protest, no point sitting back and being quiet. The vicars and priests will not stand up and be counted, we most make our voices heard because we are quiet our brothers and sisters are being murdered in Iraq and Syria if our voices are heard then the news will spread about our christian brothers and sisters.

    • David

      I totally agree.

  • Phil R

    I suspect that they meet the criteria for hate preachers in some way, shape or form.

    I mean, preaching the Gospel is not very inclusive. One way to salvation etc. What sort of divisive message is that?

  • Evangeline1031

    Ours is a world gone mad, absolutely mad. Up is down and black is white, and our pope and his men are heretics all. My God, help them, help us.

    • Not all.

    • Dominic Stockford

      Which pope do you refer to? There are two – not that it matters. He isn’t my pope. Nor that of the vast majority of the population of the world.

  • A year or so ago I was chastised and corrected by some here when I expressed confusion over why you Christians cannot stand up for your coreligionists the way Jews have done and still do. Why you cannot make clear choices and give preferential treatment to your brethren who should expect, even demand, such. I heard what still sounds to me like dubious scriptural interpretations and fluffy theological ideology about universal love for the “stranger” and stuff. Fine, I don’t understand and won’t understand how any people can put victims and persecutors on the same level, how it is more moral to bring in the poor of aggressor nations at the clear detriment of your poor neighbours next door and I remain puzzled. And here you are, complaining about secular callousness which is but a logical result of your theological confusion. So, now you have a situation expressed best by Evangeline below: Ours is a world gone mad, absolutely mad. Up is down and black is white… Go on, I’m curious, see if you can address her confusion.

    • Christianity, unlike Judaism, doesn’t have a nation state representing its interests or advocating on its behalf, Avi. There was a time when there was a Holy Roman Empire, but ’tis no more.

      • Not an issue of having a nation state, Jack; the State of Israel and its rescue of European, Middle Eastern and African Jews came much later. And the state would have never been rebuilt without the foundation of nearly two milenia of world-wide solidarity among scattered Jewish communities. Not just a question of brotherly love and good intentions, but firm goals, solid organization and coordination. It took well-managed communities with effective self-government, charities, hostage rescue organizations, self-defense groups and local and international community welfare efforts, many of which today fund ecumenical projects and provide major assistance to non-Jewish neighbours as well.

        Theology and prayer is fine, Jack, but when you’re done chatting with and impressing the Almighty, you need to build and maintain healthy families, to squeeze donations from the rich and poor, volunteering from young and old, lobbying, to engage in serious kvetching, begging, demanding, promoting, threatening and doing everything possible for the welfare of your coreligionists in a hostile world.

        I’m sorry, but with all your grand churches, big councils, world-wide missions and wealthy denominations ensconced among the governing elites in dozens of super-powerful nation states, you folks can’t pull together and focus enough to rescue a remnant of isolated Christians stuck in today’s anus mundi from a pack of primitive savages? Shame.

        Btw, who among us is going to let Linus down with the news that Matteo Renzi got his arse handed to him in the referendum?

        • But wasn’t it biblical prophecy and the dream of an eventual earthly Jewish State that fuelled Jewish survival, solidarity and political activity?

          • Yes and no. For at least two centuries prior to the establishment of Israel, mainstream Judaism treated the idea of a Jewish state as a vaguely defined mystical messianic event which God would somehow take care of through divine miracles. A form of tele-transportation, if you will.

            The focus of the synagogue and the kehila…the community leadership… was on Jewish communal and institutional survival in Europe, which most of the rabbis regretfully assumed would continue as before with a good amount of lobbying and tributes and outright bribes to corrupt officials, even as the Wehrmacht was clearing out Europe’s ghettos and loading Jews into cattle cars. Israel was largely established by modern secular Zionists fired-up by the ideals of European nationalists, with many of them disappointed former communists and socialists.

            Practical religious Zionism was an insignificant force. The driving force was Europe’s rejection of Jewish assimilation or even partial integration … from the left, right and centre… of Jews not just as demonic followers of a wrong relihion, but as irredeemable racial enemies whose evil resides in their blood, rather than their thoughts.The practical contribution of religious Judaism came in the form of ethno-religious solidarity backed by skilled leadership and institutions, administrative and organizational skills and generous donations of time and money…not to mention martial skills gained in the Allied armies.

        • Sarky

          I’ve said this many times on here, Christianity in the UK is weak. It’s one of the reasons it’s declined so much, weak is not attractive!

          • David

            Thank you.
            People are impressed with firm beliefs and achieving things, under God, not wishy washy.

          • Agreed. Coming from an atheist and a religious Zionst who welcomed the weakness of the modern Church three decades ago, it may be funny idea to express, but who would have known back then?

          • The Explorer

            Tell that to PC. To PC, ONLY weak is attractive. You must have victim status I feel you want to get anywhere.

            (For PC, Christianity does not have victim status; it has oppressor status.)

        • David

          Well said Avi.
          I’ve been saying similar things, though perhaps not as eloquently, for years. Christians must become more practical and more proactive, do useful things, and protect other Christians.

          • You’re too kind, David. It’ll happen, but time is of the essence. Don’t forget to include the Yazidis; just went to a fund-raiser and a baby shower organized by members of my synagogue for a family that made it to Canada, in spite of our Immigration favouring Syrian Muslims. Nice, polite people with ambition, who will do very well here…and anywhere.

          • Dominic Stockford

            Australia has been doing well, they should be encouraged to do more.

        • Coniston

          An excellent short talk was made 3 years ago by the then Chief Rabbi, Jonathan Sacks. See:

          Thought for the Day – The Chief Rabbi Lord Sacks – 14/05/2013
          http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0190ffk

          Most in the West have lost their collective memory.

          • Thanks!

          • Can’t get the audio here in Canada, but did get the text. R’ Sacks is the master of the mini-drash (sermon). Proof that you can pack life-changing ideas and deliver them without throwing your audience into a comma.

      • “Christianity, unlike Judaism, doesn’t have a nation state representing its interests or advocating on its behalf…”

        A nation state is not necessary. If the persecuted early Christians (in Paul’s time) knew how to help each other, it is a disgrace that we do so little today.

        “As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith” (Galatians 6:10).

        There is much that we can learn from the Jews, and even the Muslims, about helping our brothers and sisters. Sadly, we have forgotten to mourn with those who mourn.

        • David

          I totally agree Anna. Jack lets his dislike of nation states blind him to what is being said I’d conjecture.

      • David

        Silly excuse Jack.
        You allow your dislike of nation states to blind you to the truth offered by others.

      • Anton

        Odd comment from someone in a denomination run from its own nation state!

    • IanCad

      Because Avi, we are lukewarm, we are rich and increased in goods, have need of nothing. We know not that we are wretched, and miserable, and poor and blind and naked.
      We are Laodicea.
      We need eyesalve.

      • Eyesalve, good leadership and entire divisions of fund raisers, Ian.

        • Dominic Stockford

          Because those in charge of what happens in this country are, contrary to their own claims, not in fact Christians. Thus they do not understand how to live as Christians.

          • I’d be the last person here to have an opinion on who’s real and who’s not, Dominic, but theology aside, I’d say you need a foundation of dedicated people able to give time and money. Less gardening, fewer restaurant dinners, more modest vacations…real tithing.

    • Cressida de Nova

      It’s the Protestants Avi. They have caused nothing but trouble ever since the Reformation.

      • You know that I try not to stick my head into that Orange vs Green buzz-saw, Miss Cressida. More so when you are about.

        • CliveM

          You are a wise man Avi.
          Tend not to get involved myself.

      • chefofsinners

        To be fair, they were good as gold for 1500 years before the reformation.

    • Coniston

      Present day society in the West has largely adopted relativistic beliefs – there is no objective truth, everything is equal, every ‘truth’ is equal, every religion and belief is equal, and so on.
      The abandonment of any idea of objective truth or morality can only end up by appealing to feelings & desires. This leads to those who have the power – the ruling elites & the media – imposing their own will, feelings & desires on everyone else. This is known as political correctness. You are not allowed to have certain beliefs, certainly not to express them. The denial of objective truth leads inevitably to a manipulative society, governed by the feelings & sentiments (and ‘convictions’) of those in power.
      One result of this relativism is that most of our rulers, media & ‘intelligentsia’ are utterly unable to understand other cultures and religions. So most Western rulers and media are quite incapable of understanding Islam (or of course Christianity – or Judaism).

      • Well put. The supposed highly ethical super-intellectuals and multiculturalists have, in a single generation, become turnip-stupid provincials ready to kill their unborn and ailing parents, kowtowing to celebrity trash and buying into any sexualized pseudo-mystical idiocy that comes their way. A tender lunch snack for the Islamists.

  • chefofsinners

    It is an odd time of year to refuse entry to three wise men, travelling from the east.

    • David

      No, no, it’s in their hats !

    • IanCad

      Brilliant Chef!!!

  • len

    Not much point in looking for ‘deep motives’ from the Home office or from most other Government department, it would appear the simple reason for their actions is they haven’t a clue what they are doing.

    As’ Evangeline’ says “The World has gone mad” and indeed it appears so.

    This is a parallel I once read about, imagine the animal world where’ instinct’ was suddenly removed. There would be utter chaos in the animal world.
    Man was created to be filled with the Spirit of God which would guide and instruct man but mankind (generally) has rejected God and gone his own way ‘doing what is right in his own eyes’. Result Chaos.

    • David

      Interesting analogy with the animal kingdom.
      I suspect that you are right, that they’ve lost their moral compass and are therefore wandering around totally cluelessly.

  • stephen bellamy

    There can be no revival of Christianity in the country while we tolerate the Zionist takeover of our churches.

    The Methodist Church. Surprised? Don’t be.

    http://wp.me/p5W2a1-KQ

    • Anton

      The Wesleys were Christian Zionists as a result of their studies of the scriptures. Of course, that would not mean condoning every action of a then-hypothetical Jewish government in the Holy Land, and Christian Zionists affirm that every Jew, like every gentile, needs Jesus Christ for salvation.

      • stephen bellamy

        But not necessarily today.

        • Anton

          The meaning of the scriptures doesn’t change.

    • CliveM

      There is no Zionist takeover of the Churches in this country. Indeed if you listen to CofE Bishops, quite the opposite.

      • Indeed. Wrong orientation for the sanctuaries, and the kitchen and social hall are too small. With the liberal Jewish congregations crashing, we religious Zionists have plenty of real estate to choose from.

    • Dominic Stockford

      What a disgraceful thing to say.

    • chefofsinners

      Bothered? Don’t be.

      • stephen bellamy

        But I am

        • chefofsinners

          There are worse things than Zionism. Anti-Zionism, for instance.

          • stephen bellamy

            Its a point of view I suppose.

          • chefofsinners

            I’m no fan of either. Christians are Christians. Some are far too obsessed with Israel, either pro- or anti-. However, given the fact that God’s purposes have been worked through this nation for so much of history, and will be again in my view of prophecy, I’d prefer the pro to the anti.

    • Inspector General

      The Jews are the good guys, and the Palestinian muslims the bad. Don’t forget now…

      • stephen bellamy

        No fear

        • Inspector General

          That’s the spirit. It not rocket science. Ah, rockets, shouldn’t have mentioned them…might embarrass you..
          ..

          • stephen bellamy

            I don’t embarrass easy

          • Inspector General

            I’ll say! Have read a few of your posts. Foaming at the mouth stuff…you’ve got the anti Zion real bad…

            Look old chap, if you work for Islam, they aren’t going to reward you, you know. You’d need to become an Al-Britani for that. Otherwise you’ll always be a Western infidel dog as far as they’re concerned, albeit of the ‘useful idiot’ category for now…

  • “when we roll out the red carpet for hate preachers…”

    About ten years ago, I heard the story of a Christian refugee couple who came to the UK to escape Muslim persecution. They said nearly everyone assigned to look into their case was a Muslim.

    The reality is that the Christians in Europe do not realise what a great treasure they have (or had). An alarming spiritual apathy has set in, which blinds the leaders to the difference between sheep and wolves. When Obama says that “it is un-American to apply a religious test”, he ignores the historical context. In the past this meant only Christians and Jews.

    The fate of the ME Christians should be a warning to the West about the consequences of spiritual apathy. St George was a Syrian saint. In the past the churches in Syria sent missionaries to China, India and Africa; yet when these churches slipped into apathy and infighting, they fell prey to Muslim invasion, and have suffered the terrible consequences for a thousand years. Too many Christian families converted to Islam – only the descendants of a brave few remain.

    • David

      Very moving – thank you.

  • Royinsouthwest

    For once Sarky, I agree with you.

  • B flat

    Once again, you bring news of persecuted Christians, which I did not see elsewhere. God bless you for this.
    I am really as indignant as so many other commenters here. My reaction of contempt for the Government, is mixed with pity for their stupidity. Do they not realise that by failing to lead this country in accordance with its foundational (they ignorantly fear ‘fundamental”) principles of Christendom, they bring all authority into disrepute? That defeats the object of every politician’s personal ambition. Cameron found out the hard way.
    They don’t have the sense to protect their own self-interest. They have no democratic constituency, except among Christians, whether these be the practising minority, or the cultural majority.

    • Dominic Stockford

      Both the hated Express and the hated Daily Mail have carried this story, to their credit.

      • Royinsouthwest

        But not so far the beloved Guardian which will probably want to ascertain the Bishop of Mosul’s stance on LGBTQWERTY issues before deciding whether or not to publish this news.

  • layreader

    I hope the Pope is not considering a visit to these shores in the near future. Not much hope for him if he has to demonstrate how much money he has got before they let him in. Does this same logic apply to visiting heads of state/pop stars/footballers, all of whom have their wealth squirreled away in the Cayman Islands?

    • Dominic Stockford

      The Pope of Rome hath no jurisdiction in these shores. As well as (allegedly) no money…

      • Cressida de Nova

        The Pope does not need any money. All he has to do is cash in a little of the vast tracts of real estate you stole from the Catholic Church previously

        • Dominic Stockford

          Dear Cressida:
          Two problems with your little tirade.

          1. I am pastor of an independent church which bought its own land, paid for its own buildings, and continues to survive from its own pocket.

          2. The buildings you speak of were bought, paid for, and built by Englishmen, Welshmen and Scotsmen. How could they have ‘stolen’ what they built, and was paid for out of their pockets?

        • chefofsinners

          New Vatican Bank credit card: your pontiflexible friend.
          Welcome at all good indulgence outlets.

        • Oisín mac Fionn

          Nothing was stolen from the Church. Its lands were held in fee simple from the Crown, which as the holder of the allodial title had the right to revoke the grant whenever a vassal was in breach of his feudal obligations.

          In denying the king’s right to dispense justice in his realm, the Church was guilty of compromising his sovereignty. This was a clear breach of its obligation of fealty to the Crown.

          Under the terms of feudal land tenure, the Church forfeited its right to its estates by its own actions. There was no theft. The Church was the author of its own downfall.

          Perhaps you should reconsider your accusations. Remember, bearing false witness is a mortal sin.

          • Impressive. Of course your argument will hinge and pivot on claims of breach of tenure versus claims of established customs and the Church’s exceptional nature of its fealty.

          • Oisín mac Fionn

            Praemunire was used as justification for the suppression of religious houses as early

          • Please finish your thought, this is actually interesting. If you’ve wandered off to check dates, do look for examples of outright confiscation or dissolution of Orders, if any.

          • Oisín mac Fionn

            No orders were dissolved by civil statute. Monastic orders are constituted by the Church and their organisation is not subject to civil law.

            All that was dissolved were the religious houses, which as legal entities were attached to specific territorial estates. As soon as control of an estate reverted to the Crown, the religious house associated with the land ceased to exist in law whether or not its members continued in the monastic life together or apart, elsewhere.

          • Something general histories never seem to clarify, allowing for the assumption that the real estate confiscation was an insignificant by-product of a purely religious persecution. As bad as glossing over the fact that “witches” were typically widows whose property and lands were, coincidentally, shared out among the various secular and ecclesiastic authorities.

            Much obliged for that one.

          • Cressida de Nova

            You need to acquaint yourself with the nature of grievous sin and basic history. Now that I know you are Linus, I will not read your posts again.

          • Oisín mac Fionn

            The person who needs to acquaint herself with English history is you.

            Theft may be a sin according to the Church, but no Church property was stolen during the Dissolution of the Monasteries. Much of it was confiscated, but confiscation and theft are not the same thing.

            Of course as a Catholic you believe in a set of predetermined conclusions that require you to rewrite history in order to claim that your assertions are true. This reliance on confirmation bias reveals the hollowness of your faith. You do not believe in truth, you believe that whatever you believe must be true, and by God if the facts don’t support you, new facts can easily be created to provide all the support you need.

    • DP111

      The is present pope is a liberal theology pope. He is cheered on the by Left, all right with invasion by Hijra, so I see no reason why he would be refused entry.

    • Oisín mac Fionn

      The Pope is a head of state and therefore doesn’t need a visa to travel.

      • How was the Florence trip, Linus? So sorry that dear old Renzi blew your hopes for a pleasant refuge, not to mention days of gloating here about the inevitable victory of cupcake socialism. But you’ll always have Vienna, und das Sacher kuchen, ja?….

        • Oisín mac Fionn

          The markets have already shrugged off Renzi’s defeat. Italy is Italy: instability is part of the deal.

          The Daily Mail is also the Daily Mail. Predictions of the imminent demise of the EU are part of that deal. If that’s where you get your news (and it sounds very much as if it is) then you’ll never want for disaster scenarios. And yet the euro is still alive, and Greece (and Italy, and Portugal, and Spain) are still members of the EU, which doesn’t have a single far right head of government or state.

          Keep on squawking that the sky is falling, Czechen Little. Only those motivated by the fowlest of intent will believe you.

          • Glad you found your silver lining: the markets “shrugged off Renzi’s defeat.” Your cup is always half-full, I bet. Of course, had things gone the other way, you’d be blowing trumpets and commissioning a canvas of Jacques David showing Renzi’s nag riding over and crushing “populist” heads.

  • Pay for the drinks? That would keep me sober. We don’t carry cash on Saturdays, but all of us regular lushes are required to donate bottles. Healthy one-upmanship guarantees at least one unaffordable bottle of smooth-as-butter single malt.

  • Cressida de Nova

    Come out from your hiding place. You deserve to have your ears boxed for telling such wicked lies . Catholics are famous for their generosity and btw it’s about time you had your kilt dry cleaned.Once in ten years is not excessive !

  • Cressida de Nova

    She’s still here.You’re not going to like the thrashing with the wooden spoon either. I know where you are. Catholics are gifted, prescient and usually know everything !

    • Well, greetings, Miss Cressida. This man never assumed you had left and always kept an eye out for that wooden spoon. A general policy of caution works better for me than an assumption of prescience.

    • CliveM

      Oh hello. What do you mean?

      Gasp!

      Who hacked my account and said those dreadful things?

      I don’t about you, but I’m shocked by what people will do!

  • Ha! Too late, Clive.

  • DP111

    The Home Office is full of Muslims deciding who gets a visa or asylum, and who gets deported.

    I find it astonishing that for the teeny amount of Christians who manage to make it to the UK, there seems to be a disproportionate number who are deported back, to the face the persecution, crucifixions, beheadings and rape.

    • David

      So if what you say is correct, and I have no reason to impugn your truthfulness, the Home Office is a victim of PC ideas switched to turbocharge.

      • DP111

        The question arises, are decisions of such a nature, taken at the ministerial level, or a much junior level.

        In either case, this does not look good for the HO.

        What does seem peculiar, is that the tiny number of Christians who run the gauntlet of the invading Muslim army successfully, it is they who are more likely to be deported back to what the West deems is the domain of the Religion of Peace.

  • Jon of GSG

    I’ve just written to my MP (Jo Johnson). Thank you – as other people have said below – for writing about this. I hadn’t seen it elsewhere.
    If Mr. J says anything interesting then I’ll post it here but he never has on anything yet – he’s a minister and presumably is careful to make sure no boats are rocked.

  • chefofsinners

    I am wondering why the Sunday Express carries this story alongside a picture of Prince Harry dressed as the Indian from Village People? (top of page). Has YMCA been refused a visa too?

  • chefofsinners

    Farewell then, Matteo Renzi. Some of us recognised you as our own Nick Griffin. Not the Italian electorate, apparently.

  • magnolia

    A vile decision. Either a thick and very under-educated person made it or one determined on evil. Whichever it leaves many of us feeling utterly ashamed of our own country, a bit more disenfranchised, and saying “Not in my/our name.”

    How patronising, unimaginative, out of touch, and overweening can they be?

    • Sarky

      The decision is made by a system not a person. Stop blaming people for something they have no control over.
      If you’re that unhappy campaign to get the system changed, don’t take the easy route and blame individuals.

      • David

        “The decision is made by a system not a person”
        Really ?
        Do you not recognise that individuals must take responsibility for their own actions ?

        • CliveM

          David

          He does have a point though. The guidelines also need addressed. Otherwise some other functionary will simply make a similar decision when another case arises.

          • David

            Yes. The responsible “individuals”, those in charge, need to correct this so obviously perverse vetting procedure.

          • CliveM

            As so often, it comes back to our disfunctional politicians.

          • David

            Yes. In the main, with just a few honourable exceptions, they are not of sufficient calibre intellectually or morally.

          • magnolia

            I agree that part of the problem is likely to be administrative rigid box syndrome, which fails to serve people. However some cases are taken out of the general flow and looked at hard; this should so clearly have been one.

            Instead they made a poor judgement about likelihood of reneging on episcopal ministry from a position of clear ignorance< which brings us back to people who are to blame.

      • Royinsouthwest

        Is a system manned by “jobsworths” a desirable system?

    • Maalaistollo

      I think you are being a little hard on the Home Office functionaries who made these decisions. All they are doing is looking after their own, which is something the Christians in this country consistently fail to do. Shouldn’t hope for any improvement under the present administration. Have you seen where Mrs May is at the moment? Taking instructions, no doubt.

      • David

        So are you promoting the idea that each religious group must act purely for their own and say “damn the rest” ?

        “something the Christians in this country consistently fail to do”

        Many of the sincere Christians are helping as much as they can, but our governments are largely manned by people who are largely either merely, cultural Christians or post-Christinans

        • Maalaistollo

          There can be no rational accommodation between Christianity and Islam. One or the other must be dominant (unless a secular authority suppresses both equally). The difference is that, for the past couple of centuries at least, a dominant Christian culture is less likely to be oppressive in its treatment of a Muslim minority than vice versa. In my comment I suppose I ought to have used the term ‘Christian denominations’ rather than just ‘Christians.’ The impression I have is that the denominational establishments show remarkably little interest in or concern for the fate of Christians in the Middle East. I accept that sincere individual Christians and some non-denominational organisations such as the Barnabas Fund are the honourable exceptions.

          • David

            Basically I agree. I would only vary from your comments to say that history and current affairs demonstrates that there can be no accommodation between Islam and any other system. The insular, arrogant western political elites assumed that all religions would quietly fade away. That was a fateful mistake. I wouldn’t like to predict the future either for the west or the ME, but none of the options that occur to me seem attractive. We must all learn to fight our corner I think and stop hiding in make-believe land.

    • David

      I agree Magnolia.
      Much about the west is now vile.
      This general feeling you’ve expressed is why the recent dramatic political events, that so shock the liberal establishment, are unfolding across the western world. The west is dividing into two camps, those that uphold traditional beliefs, as cultural if not active Christians, and those that want this brave new world of god-lite or god-free, so called liberalism.

  • Ivan M

    The best way to help the Middle-Eastern Christians is to help the Syrian-Russian axis win everywhere. The Russians and Syrians if nothing else, care for their brother Christians. They are indeed winning much to the chagrin, of assorted neocons. The survival of Christians in the Middle-East in the end has depended on ex-Communists and anti-Wahabist Muslims. No thanks whatsoever, to the so-called Christians in the West.

    • David

      Absolutely !
      Since the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the godless Soviet Empire, Russia has reverted to Christianity and the west has abandoned its historic faith and become post-Christain. In short they have switched roles.

      Despite the efforts of a few Christian leaders in the west, the western political powers have largely acted against the interests of Christianity in the ME. Many in the US have identified Obama as discriminating against Christianity. His wars of regime change, eagerly and unthinkingly supported by the UK and Nato generally, have been particularly effective at emptying the ME of Christianity.

      Great is the culpability of the west in destroying the faith that gave its’ culture life, meaning and energy and in many ways led to its prosperity. God’s judgement now hangs over the west. We must pray for his mercy and our peoples’ repentance and reconversion.

      • Ivan M

        St Paul’s conversion on the Road to Damascus, can stand as the start of Christian civilisation. That no one in power in the West, thought it tragic and an affront to their cultural origins that later day head-choppers were on their way to Damascus to among other things get rid of the Christians, speaks of great moral decline.

        • David

          Yes indeed. In a few short sentences you have encompassed good theological, historical and political points of deep significance. Whilst many in eastern Europe and Russia would agree with us, few here in western Europe have the knowledge or values to comprehend the significance of what you have just said.

          • Ivan M

            Very sad as you say.

      • DP111

        Quite right.

        To me it seems that the West first turned hostile to Russia and Putin, when Putin refused to go along with the Homosexual agenda of the West.

        The timing was the same.

    • Royinsouthwest

      The “Syrian-Russian axis” also have the support of Iran whereas their opponents have the support of the Saudis and the West. Despite worries about the Iranian regime and its attempts to develop nuclear weapons it is not the Iranian supported Shia Muslims who have been the main terrorist threat to the West in recent years but the Saudi supported Sunnis. Do our rulers really know what they are doing?

      • Ivan M

        The American and British millitaries have their reasons for wanting to give the Iranians a bloody nose. Chief among that it was the Iranians that made life a misery for them in the South of Iraq, with their IEDs and irregulars. Even so, they should have kept a watch for what are called the Takfiris – the Saudi financed militias.

      • DP111

        who have been the main terrorist threat to the West in recent years but the Saudi supported Sunnis.

        Not main but ALL terrorist attacks on the West has been by Sunnis.

        And its not just in the West, but all over the world, including the ME.

    • Dreadnaught

      Its a bit late now for the West to change sides but your points are valid. Western ignorance of how the ME is structured and socially constucted is blindingly obvious. Even with the hands-on experience of T.E. Lawrence, politicians arrogantly dismiss referencing his works yet will recognise Peter O’Toole and assume they know about ME History.
      We had a Prime Minister who may have heard of Sykes-Picot but when asked could not expand on the relevence of the Magna Carta, why should we have expected him to know about Syria, Arab Tribalism and Islam.

      • Ivan M

        Now that the Aleppo is falling to the government, this would be the right time to revisit the anti-Syrian propaganda that are purveyed in the papers. I am not claiming that no human rights violations occurred or that Syrian intelligence services don’t use the third-degree. But the choice was never between Assad and a Gandhi, but rather it is between Assad and Saudi financed Wahabists, closely controlled by Turkish interests. In such an arrangement, the minorities and all the secularists among the Sunnis would have gone to the wall.

        • Dreadnaught

          I agree with what you say here.
          According to the excellent BBC vid Bitter Lake, The Saudis (Family) owe their position of power entirely to the Wahabists. Here in the UK Government refuses to acknowldge this fact for economic/energy considerations. If you have not seen this vid please do. It should be compulsory viewing for all politicians in the West..

          • Ivan M

            The Saudis will say that they are “owed” something for going along with the Americans in removing Saddam. The balance between the Shias and Sunnis tipped in favor of the Iranian Shias. As you say a wiser generation would have left the Muslims to duke it out.

        • LOL

      • DP111

        Syria has always been a hotbed for the Muslim Brotherhood. If the Assad had ever lost to the MB, there would be no place for Christians in the ME.

        And as for Assad being a brutal dictator. Well that is what it takes to win if you fighting the MB, al Qaeda or ISIS.

        Just imagine that we had millions of fully armed Nazis in Britain, hell bent on making Britain a Nazi, or for that matter, a Stalinist state. Does anyone seriously think that we, the decent side, will win by employing Marquess of Queensberry rules.

    • I know you think that parrotting RT’s neo-Soviet propaganda on Google without crediting them makes you look like a geopolitical genius, Ivan, but not everyone can be fooled.

      • Ivan M

        So if RT says 2+2=4, I am to disagree?

        • Actually, you can do that if you go with nominal or ordinal measurement scales, but leaving that aside, do you think a hostile propaganda organ of the Kremlin is going to provide us with objective or even useful information on a complicated world events?

          • DP111

            Could you please suggest one such organ of news?

          • Of course not. You won’t easily find one source you can allow to feed all your info and do your thinking for you. Assume there is bias everywhere, in varying degrees and of varying consequences, but you can look for signs of consistent accuracy and credibility, and take second and third opinions. But the point is that RT is a competent and powerful propaganda organ set-up and dedicated to sway, fool and frighten on behalf of an authoritarian government. A dangerous enemy of the West, one which is even making military postures, to be perfectly blunt about it.

          • Ivan M

            You mean like this:

            https://youtu.be/EOaHW3BcI1c

            Give it up Avi. Your schtick is stale.

      • Anton

        The problem is Obama deciding that Assad had to go because Assad was a brutal dictator but without giving thought to the alternative, ie fundamentalist Islam. Obama made the same mistake in Egypt and Libya. This folly let in Russia. Assad persecuted anybody who didn’t do what he said but he never singled out Christians. Al-Qaeda aka Free Syrian Army, and ISIS, do. Whoever believed that the next president after the one in power on 9/11 would ally with the perpetrators of that attack?

        • Even Obama can bumble onto a correct decision or two. And errors don’t necessarily mean that the US and West must abandon the ME to everyone else. There are many more players in this drama…Russia, the US, NATO, Israel, Lebanon, Iran, the Saudis, and not to mention the factions and terror groups. There are also many more victims and potential victims, not just Arab Christians. I’m sure you’re not implying that for their sake alone we need to go easy on a murderous dictator, an ambitious Iran and a neo-imperial Russia. Neither Assad, nor Russia and certainly not Iran, gives a hoot about Christians, anyway. How about making a real and principled political effort to protect Christians by at least providing them with tailored assistance?

          • Anton

            In a choice between a nominal Muslim secular dictator and a fundamentalist Islamic regime the West should support the former. That’s realpolitik. Some of that support can have strings attached regarding the treatment of Christians.

  • David

    To put it sparingly, it is the apostasy of the western nations that is sealing the fate of Christianity’s fragile outposts in the ME, the lands of its origins. Great is the unfaithfulness of the west.

    Thank God a remnant still stands here, both in these western lands, and in the ME as well.

    But during all this turmoil, death and destruction the Holy Spirit is at work in surprising places. Many conversions from Islam to Christianity are occurring thanks to missionaries like Open Doors. However we hear little about it through the MSM and even the alternative web-based media, but only via the agencies themselves. This is largely because the converts, in order to survive, have to live carefully and quietly under the radar, and of course the western media are largely anti-Christian.

  • Politically__Incorrect

    This is a deplorable decision by the Home Office, especially when one looks at the purveyors of Islamic hate who are cleared to enter the country. ..

    http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/12/06/home-office-allow-pakistani-hate-preacher-deliver-speech-scotland/

    The Home Office, like the rest of our political elite, are so blinded by political correctness they have lost any sense of good judgement. I am deeply sad for these Bishops. Not just because of their suffering, but because a peaceful Christian democracy has turned its back on them and chosen to give succour to their persecutors instead.

    • Royinsouthwest

      In case any people casually browsing this blog think your description “purveyors of Islamic hate” is an exaggeration I think it is worth quoting the opening sentences of the article you linked to.

      A hate preacher linked to the murder of Ahmadi Muslim Asad Shah in Glasgow has been cleared to enter the UK to spread his message in Scotland.

      Pakistani cleric Syed Muzaffar Shah Qadri has been banned from preaching by the authorities in Karachi, Pakistan’s largest city thanks to his “firebrand” image and zealous message. Yet the British authorities have given him the go ahead to speak at Falkirk Central Mosque later this month.

      Qadri is a supporter of Mumtaz Qadri, the Islamic extremist who in January 2011 murdered populist politician Salman Taseer for speaking out against Pakistan’s blasphemy laws, Scotland’s Sunday Post has reported.

      Mumtaz Qadri was also idolised by Bradford taxi driver Tanveer Ahmed, who travelled to Glasgow earlier this year to brutally murder shopkeeper Asad Shah after he wished his customers a happy Easter on Facebook.

      According to the paper, Qadri praises Ahmed in some of his sermons for carrying out the bloody murder.

      Our Home Office and its jobsworth bureaucrats is looking increasingly vile.

  • The government banned the Bishop of Homs but recently let in to the UK for a visit Raed Saleh an al-Qaeda operative and member of that shadow organisation of western funded terrorists the White Helmets. Shocking!

    Good news from Vanessa Beeley in Syria, Eastern Aleppo has been liberated from the jihadis by the Syrian Arab Army (Assad’s army)

  • People of Britain, you should definitely add Kafka to your libraries, right next to your Bible which you also don’t read.