Friday, August 22, 2014

The Islamic State presents us with a wholly abnormal situation of national emergency



Say we catch the barbarous "Jihadi John" or "John the Beatle" or "John the Jailer" or whatever he's called. And say we then gather the evidence against him and bring a charge of murder. He'll be entitled to legal aid (which will cost), prosecuted (which will cost), and, if found guilty, imprisoned 'for life' (which will cost). He might then be freed in 15 or 20 years or so to wreak revenge on the liberal democratic state he so loathes and despises - a few bombs, a bit of torture, the odd beheading. If we're lucky, we might catch him again. If we're luckier, the police might shoot him dead in the process. How exactly should we punish the Islamists found amongst us?

Some BNP types favour rounding up all the Muslims and deporting them en masse, as if such 'cleansing' is any better than the Islamist vision of the purified Caliphate. Others favour an enforced assimilation; the suspension of their liberties and the suppression of their democratic rights. Nigel Farage apparently wants to revoke their citizenship, which is relatively straightforward for those a-jihading in Syria or Iraq. We could, in theory, prevent their return. But whither do we send (and by what right do we impose upon another state) the Islamists who possess a British passport and EU citizenship? Certainly, we may agree they are not 'British' in the sense of respecting our culture or sharing our values. But the act of revoking citizenship results in stateless exile, perhaps wandering through the deserts of Syria or Iraq where they already feel quite at home. That is a woeful retribution.

A multi-faith consortium has written to the Telegraph:
SIR – What we are witnessing in northern Iraq today is a tragedy of historic proportions in which thousands of innocent people are at immediate risk of death for no other reason than their religious beliefs. Freedom of religion and belief, a right set out in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, is being denied in the most gross and systemic way possible through the attempted extermination of religious minorities. There is no justification for the violation of this inalienable human right.

Such violations as are currently taking place are crimes against humanity that must be both stopped and punished. The culture of impunity within which these dehumanising atrocities have been committed needs to be challenged most vigorously. Given that Iraq is not a state party to the International Criminal Court (ICC), the Government must now work towards a United Nations Security Council Resolution that refers this matter to the ICC for investigation and, where necessary, prosecution. The international community must send a clear signal to those who are committing such atrocities that they will be held accountable for their actions.

These violations are, however, sadly part of a wider global pattern of increased societal hostility to, and government restrictions on, freedom of religion or belief. Governments, international institutions and non-governmental organisations need to recognise this wider crisis and commit the necessary time, energy and resources to ensure greater respect for this fundamental freedom and forestall further such tragedies.

The Rt Rev Dr Christopher Cocksworth
Bishop of Coventry, Church of England’s Lead Bishop on Foreign Affairs
Dayan (Judge) Ivan Binstock
Court of the Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth
Ayatollah Dr Sayed Fazel Milani
Imam al-Khoei Islamic Centre, London
Ramesh Pattni
Secretary General, Hindu Forum of Britain
Commissioner Clive Adams
Territorial Commander, Salvation Army
His Grace Bishop Angaelos
General Bishop of the Coptic Orthodox Church in the United Kingdom
The Rt Rev Richard Atkinson
Bishop of Bedford
Malcolm M Deboo
President, Zoroastrian Trust Funds of Europe
His Eminence Gregorios
Archbishop of Thyateira and Great Britain
Rabbi Laura Janner-Klausner
Senior Rabbi, The Movement for Reform Judaism
The Rt Revd Declan Lang
Bishop of Clifton
Chairman, International Affairs Department, Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales
Moulana Mohammad Shahid Raza
Principal Imam, Leicester Central Mosque
Dr Shuja Shafi
Secretary General, Muslim Council of Britain
Lord Singh of Wimbledon
Vice-Chairman, All Party Parliamentary Group on International Freedom of Religion and Belief
That's six Christians, two Jews , three Muslims, a Hindu, a Sikh and a Zoroastrian.

That's nice.

The thing is, the United Nations has been so utterly deficient in the defence of religious liberty that it is highly unlikely to prove adequate in the administration of justice. When the United Nations Human Rights Council is already captive to those who despise human rights, and when it agitates for religion (ie Islam) to be protected from "defamation", it beggars belief that a body of international judges would ever agree that those who plot the extermination of Christians and other religious minorities are committing crimes against humanity. Are they not Allah's warriors and Mohammed's freedom fighters?

Are the values of the Islamic State so very different from those of Saudi Arabia or Iran? Persecution? Imprisonment without trial? Forced conversion? Beheadings? Saudia Arabia and Iran might not crucify their Christians, but the international community turns a very convenient blind eye to their appalling treatment of religious minorities.

These faith leaders are doubtless well intentioned, and a resolution of the United Nations Security Council might indeed trigger an investigation by the International Criminal Court. But to what effect? The signatories say these violations are crimes which must be punished. How exactly?

It is estimated that somewhere between 800 and 2000 British Muslims are fighting with the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. Surely the "culture of impunity" within the British state has contributed to this. Our shared commitment to multiculturalism; the diminution of our Judæo-Christian notions of honour, justice and freedom; and our embrace of moral relativity and a positivist conception of nature have fundamentally challenged our understanding of national identity. We cannot "send a clear signal of intent" to those who violate human rights or commit atrocities because we can no longer agree what we mean by "clear", "violation" or "atrocity".

Surely the Jihadis that went out from amongst us ought to be tried in British courts? And surely, if found guilty, their life must be forfeit? For the commandment of God against killing is an expression of His will for the protection and affirmation of the lives of those who dwell in peace; not an absolutist expression of their inviolable and intrinsic worth.

The preservation of life may, paradoxically, occasionally require its termination. The problem, then, is that by taking up the sword against Jihadists we potentially create a legion of Islamist martyrs, who, by their submission to the will of Allah and sacrifice in the name of Mohammed, may inspire another wave of Christian-crucifying zealots.

Peacemaking is the fundamental task of Christian ethics, but the Islamic State presents us with a wholly abnormal situation of national emergency. We either confront and kill, or surrender our hard-won liberty, our cherished freedoms and our national independence. We cannot wait for the United Nations to deliberate and proclaim their resolution any more than we can depend on them to guard our freedoms of religion and belief. We are talking here about the physical, intellectual and spiritual lives of the British people, and their relationship to God. We cannot abdicate our national responsibility to supranational deficiency.

302 Comments:

Blogger Dreadnaught said...

There is a danger of allowing the Robert Foley murder becoming a distraction. His murder is nothing but a speck against the record of violence metered out against thousands of others.

Islam is the guest that not only fails to flush the toilet but also shits on the carpet for good measure.

22 August 2014 at 10:20  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

My error - James Foley.

22 August 2014 at 10:25  
Blogger Sidney Deane said...

Dr Cocksworth believes in witches and even he gets it.

22 August 2014 at 10:45  
Blogger Len said...

It would seem that the main point coming from most of what is confronting mankind today is how do we deal with evil?
Evil quite plainly exists as a spiritual force but it is outworked in and through humanity.
Evil needs to be restrained and opposed otherwise it spreads and gains power like a virus.
We saw the spread of this evil under the Nazi regime and many many other regimes.
When fallen man gets hold of a 'theology' which 'authenticates' his fallen corrupt nature then evil is allowed to express itself without restraint.
God has restrained evil for centuries but now His hand of restraint is coming off and we are going to see the true nature of evil and what resides in the heart of fallen man.

22 August 2014 at 10:47  
Blogger Manfarang said...

The president of Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim-majority country, deemed the actions of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria group “embarrassing” to the religion and called upon Muslim leaders to unite in tackling extremism, Agence France-Presse reported.

Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono said the scale of the killing instigated by the extremists in their offensive in large areas of Iraq and Syria and the level of violence being used was appalling.
It is shocking. It is becoming out of control,” he said in an interview with The Australian, a day after ISIS released a video showing a masked militant beheading U.S. reporter James Foley, provoking worldwide revulsion.

“We do not tolerate it, we forbid ISIS in Indonesia,” he added.

“Indonesia is not an Islamic state. We respect all religions.”

Yudhoyono also urged international leaders to work together to combat radicalization.

22 August 2014 at 11:01  
Blogger Chiff said...

Battle of Vienna comes to mind. Different location, same issue: stand and fight or face oppression. Islam is only peaceful when in the minority.

22 August 2014 at 11:08  
Blogger Inspector General in Ordinary said...

Good point Cranmer. What to do with up to 2000 young men being muslims in the Saracen manner. Stop them from coming back in and let them wander the Islamic earth is it. What else can you do ?
They have resigned their British citizenship in effect. If any do make it back, throw them out. Put them on a plane to Mosul.

One would say the biggest advantage of that course would be to un-demonise the largely peaceful muslims here. We’ll all sleep a lot more peacefully at night if we knew that John and his pals weren’t sitting up all night a few streets away, eagerly planning OUR demise.

22 August 2014 at 11:24  
Blogger Owl said...

An excellent article YG.

Our civil legal system is completely inadequate to deal with a "total war" situation.

Might this be a case for military justice?
Our enemy is certainly in no doubt that they are at war.

When will out glorious leader(s) wake up to reality?

22 August 2014 at 11:24  
Blogger Irene's Daughter said...

The psalmist wrote (Psalm 121)
1 ¶ ..... From whence comes my help?
2 My help comes from the LORD, who made heaven and earth.

Jesus speaking of His return to a chaotic world said:
(Lu 21:28) And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.

It is sad to see Christian leaders appealing to the UN for an answer. They cannot help since they are mere men. The world is chaotic. Israel is surrounded by enemies, there is distress of nations. Men's hearts are failing from fear. Natural disasters are happening everywhere. We may or may not be seeing the prelude to Jesus' return but one thing is clear. Men cannot solve any of this. The UN is a dead dog. Politicians are mere men and have no answer. The battles in the Middle East are spiritual battles. IS and the other Jihadists are pawns in the heavenly battle between Jesus and Satan for the eternal souls of men. A battle which Jesus has already won. We may well be seeing Satan's final death throes.

But our Church leaders are not obeying Christ. They are not looking up. Jesus' principles apply even if this is not the prelude to the End Times. We must look up to God and see what He is doing. Our help can only come from Him and no one else.

22 August 2014 at 11:26  
Blogger Mrs Proudie of Barchester said...

Goodness! If I were Dr Cocksworth I would consider changing my name. Cockwaffle has a much better resonance, don't you think?

22 August 2014 at 11:31  
Blogger Sidney Deane said...

Proudie

It's not as bad as some. I've happened upon a Christopher MyCock before.

His email address was Cmycock@...

22 August 2014 at 11:38  
Blogger Inspector General in Ordinary said...

"Cocksure"? Mrs Proudie

22 August 2014 at 11:39  
Blogger Albert said...

Another good article, thank you.

the United Nations has been so utterly deficient in the defence of religious liberty that it is highly unlikely to prove adequate in the administration of justice. When the United Nations Human Rights Council is already captive to those who despise human rights

And there is a similar problem closer to home. The West doesn't really have a concept of human rights as such. To have any teeth would require some concept of truth beyond what is strictly measurable. Moreover, as the European Convention on Human Rights expresses religious freedom, it can simply be trumped by a change in the law, and in any case, religious freedom is habitually trumped by other rights. We saw in the comments yesterday how easily those infected with secular liberalism give up on the human rights of the innocent.

The problem, then, is that by taking up the sword against Jihadists we potentially create a legion of Islamist martyrs, who, by their submission to the will of Allah and sacrifice in the name of Mohammed, may inspire another wave of Christian-crucifying zealots.

There is certainly a real problem here. However, I am more optimistic than Dr C on this. Firstly, I think we need military action because it is right. Secondly, these kinds of Muslims thrive off their victories - it confirms for them that Allah is with them. A few heavy defeats will undermine that confirmation and quite probably, for some at least, will show that divine power does not support their wickedness.

22 August 2014 at 11:40  
Blogger genghis said...

When I hear the calls for retribution for the murder of a photographer in Iraq/Syria, when I read of the ‘hostages’ held by this group of psychopaths calling themselves ‘Islamic State’, I am certain of only one thing; these people, the hostages, the murdered man, they all brought their fate upon themselves.

Whatever their reasons, which range from ““Can you change your daughter, who has these values and has strong ideals about solidarity and human empathy?” or “I go to help the sick and injured” or “I report upon disaster” or any other of the silly and self-serving reasons which placed them in grave danger; they simply cannot state thet they were not warned. For whatever reason, they all went into the deadliest place, at least for Westerners, and they all got caught, or abducted or whatever. It serves them right for thinking that they knew better than anyone.

I am reminded of Alan Johnston, the ‘reporter’ and firm friend of all things Palestinian, who was kidnapped by those same Pallies, and only released because they were afraid he might actually bore them to death with his voice.

It is all very well saying ‘These actions, by these murderous men, are against civilised behaviour’, when everyone accepts that most of these terrorists, and probably all of their supporters, don’t accept Western values or behaviour at all. They think us decadent, they think us immoral, they think us foolish. So why even bother to help, when the helpers will no doubt be treated the same as they do to their other enemies and captives.

It is all very well for Lord Dannatt, he of the smart uniform and totally-closed mind, to state that British soldiers should go and fight in that sandy shit-hole; but I notice that he wasn’t volunteering his services.

As I stated before, they brought their fate upon themselves, and not a single bullet, nor a gallon of fuel, nor a drop of blood should be spilled by America or the United Kingdom to rescue the fools who knowingly went into Bedlam!

22 August 2014 at 11:43  
Blogger Johnnyrvf said...

Until these people comprehend the mindset of these jihadists ( small j because by their actions they become much less than human, a homo sapien maybe, a human being No ) which is difficult for someone who has a heart made warm by compassion rather than the flames of hatred, the killings and undermining of the west will continue. This world is fallen and this situation forces us to commit violence. The aim of Islam is to ultimately subjugate all, despite the proterstations to their plagiarized psuedo parody of Judaism and Christianity. However much it is abhorrent weapons of modern warfare must roll to terminate the threat of this faux 'religion'.

22 August 2014 at 11:51  
Blogger Uncle Brian said...

The practical difficulties of implementing a deportation programme would be enormous. A milder, though easier, alternative might involve an oath of loyalty, perhaps along the lines of Avigdor Liberman’s “responsible citizenship” proposal for Israel. Subsequent to swearing the oath of loyalty, the penalty for committing any act of disloyalty need not be deportation but simply loss of voting rights. That would help solve the problems posed by politicians’ fears of alienating “the Muslim vote”.

22 August 2014 at 11:51  
Blogger skeetstar said...

Genghis, there is some truth in what you say, that these folks put themselves in harms way, in places I would not go to in a million years. What would your view be of those who suffered the same fate without the inconvenience of travelling to Iraq and Syria, Lee Rigby for instance?

How about those who lived peacefully in Iraq and Syria, attending their churches, until European and Chechen and Afghan and Tunisian etc etc 'fighters' turned up to mete out the most appalling punishment to them simply because of the beliefs they held?

We can act now in some way, or we can act later at greater cost.

22 August 2014 at 12:15  
Blogger Chiff said...

Oath of loyalty?? How on earth would this method deter? It wouldn't change or restrain behaviour.

22 August 2014 at 12:27  
Blogger bluedog said...

Dear me, Mrs Proudie, here we are with the barbarian hordes at the gates and all you can do is titter about a man of the cloth's rather splendid surname.

Given your own standing in the community, it must be time for you to call out the Barchester Voluntary Aid Detachment with its horse-drawn field kitchen. The men now repairing the town walls for the first time since Naseby will expect something sustaining in just an hours time. Go to it, Madam!

22 August 2014 at 12:30  
Blogger B flat said...

i encountered deprivation of citizenship in Germany, and it worked as a great deterrent to abuse of the comforts of residence in Germany for an immigrant. But how does it work for someone born in the UK to UK citizens? The EU does not even permit us to deprive criminals of a vote in democratic elections as part of their punishment by imprisonment.

The Inspector would have us keep the IS fighters in Mosul after their defeat. Is he altogether heedless of the fate of the 60,000 Christians whose homes are there? Such proposals of a solution at other people's expense are despicably mean.

The RC Archbishop of Mosul was quoted in an earlier article and pointed out that to fight the Islamists we would have to make strong and courageous decisions even at the cost of contradicting our principles. There are still vestigial Christian principles in our churches and society. I see none whatever in our politicians, except lust for power and contempt for those without it. That is probably why we see no strength, no courage, and no decision from David Cameron, Barak Obama, or anyone else.

They should start by swallowing their stupid diversionary tactics of the last couple of years, and try to win Vladimir Putin's co-operation in the Security Council of the UN on this issue. He at least, has a consistent record of positively supporting Christian principles in society. The Chinese too, being so heavily invested in the West and in Africa, can have no sympathy with the Islamist aims of expansion. Their control spells total economic disruption for a nation, followed by atrophy.

22 August 2014 at 12:45  
Blogger David Hussell said...

Another good article Your Grace, so thank you.

Citizenship has been revoked by their own actions, leaving only the formal confirmation of this by cancelling their passports, for ever. Let those who are not killed be exiled to the Islamic world. We cannot accept either their presence amongst us or the vast cost of endless trials and incarceration.

IS must be decisively defeated. Only overwhelming force will be understood. The pressing circumstances justify limited, defined objective, military deals with Iran and Assad. In the land of the blind the one eyed is king. The objective is not, and hardly ever should be, the dreamy liberal imposition of democracy, but simply the crushing of that which is totally unacceptable to any civilised culture.
Vigorous, realistic programs must be boosted here to achieve integration of those who wish to live amongst us.
A hard nosed realistic eye must be cast on future inward movements from the Islamic world.
Effective leadership is now necessary, not liberal waffling. We must move both decisively and sensitively.
These tasks may dominate the next century.

22 August 2014 at 12:50  
Blogger Inspector General in Ordinary said...

B Flat, keep your voice down will you ! Others might hear...

Unfortunately, the West is somewhat tied in it’s ability to {AHEM} ‘dispose’ of terrorist fighter-murderers, but one feels the Middle East has no such qualms about the fate of those wicked men who fall into their hands, if you catch this man’s drift. Graves for the deserving, if you will.

22 August 2014 at 13:11  
Blogger IanCad said...

Inasmuch as we will certainly have a problem when those who went "A-Jihading" (love the term) return; we must ensure that as few do so as possible.

Probation, self-esteem counseling or anger management ain't going to cut it.

These wretches need deceaseing - over there.

We need to send all power with all speed to those who will fight these primitives.

22 August 2014 at 13:19  
Blogger Manfarang said...

David Hussell
"the dreamy liberal imposition of democracy,"
With a ballot paper in this hand and an Armalite in the other eh?

22 August 2014 at 13:20  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

YG
“But whither do we send (and by what right do we impose upon another state) the Islamists who possess a British passport and EU citizenship? Certainly, we may agree they are not 'British' in the sense of respecting our culture or sharing our values. But the act of revoking citizenship results in stateless exile, perhaps wandering through the deserts of Syria or Iraq where they already feel quite at home. That is a woeful retribution.”

It's about choices. The conscious independent choices people make and the consequences thereof, and taking full responsibility for those choices. Our government didn't ask them to go and join the violent jihadis, or join any other faction fighting in another country.

We have standards still in this country for being a British citizen I would hope.

We wont be imposing upon another state violent 'British' jihadis they will just add to the ones that are already there and be dealt with accordingly even though their British passports have been revoked they can take on the nationality of their parents/grandparents or the country their team mate jihadis are from.

I agree reducing their numbers whilst over there is the best option.

22 August 2014 at 13:26  
Blogger Manfarang said...

Irene's Daughter
...the hills of Moriah and Zion
Isis believe the second coming is imminent.

22 August 2014 at 13:37  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Oblique relevance to the topic.

In the 1920's the USA thought of itself as another Europe.

In 1965, it decided, rather, to become a microcosm of the World by changing its immigration policy. By 2050, all things being equal, it will have become so.

Well and good, one may say: once the US had displaced its indigenes its population was made up of immigrants.

Can the same be said of Europe? Somebody - presumably going back conceptually to the Fifth Century - obviously thought yes.

Europe is made up of immigrants, just like the USA. So, rather than being a microcosm of Europe, Europe ought to become a microcsom of the world. So we needed immigration to bring this about.

One big difference between us and the USA (apart from our history) is that under 15% of the USA is inhabited. The same cannot be said of Europe: and especially Britain, now its most crowded part.

What I am unclear about: who exactly made thesse decisions about Europe on Europe's behalf?

Or to particuiarise the question: who exactly made these decsions about Britain? (Originally, I mean: I know about Neather and rubbing the Right's faces in diversity.)

22 August 2014 at 13:56  
Blogger Shadrach said...

Your Grace,

A worthy Post. How is it though that in all the collective pronouncements there is never anyone from the Non-Conformist Churches? Their collective numbers are probably greater than the CofE yet no one from Elim or AOG, the Methodists, Baptists, Congregationalist and any other such group seem to be quoted. Maybe it's because they don't have people with the grand title of Bishop.

You wrote;
Our shared commitment to multiculturalism; the diminution of our Judæo-Christian notions of honour, justice and freedom; and our embrace of moral relativity and a positivist conception of nature have fundamentally challenged our understanding of national identity. Could not get through that without gulping for breath!
What can one say but Yes. We have lost them all.

You also said,
We cannot "send a clear signal of intent" to those who violate human rights or commit atrocities because we can no longer agree what we mean by "clear", "violation" or "atrocity".
Will the Liberals please take note. This all as a result of their weak kneed policies that say anything goes. Now we have no voice.

As you said,
We cannot abdicate our national responsibility to supranational deficiency.
Quite. Come next May we must find a way to change our situation.

22 August 2014 at 14:03  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

At any moment in Britain, a moderate Muslim may decide to exercise his inalienable human right to freedom of religion and belief by studying the Qur’an, undergoing a Damascene conversion and becoming a born-again Islamist eager for martyrdom, all of which rather leads me to think that the well-meaning folk who drew up Article 18 didn’t know what they were doing, ditto a multi-faith consortium happily sitting round a table with three representatives of a faith that spits on freedom of religion and belief and, if it had its way, would kill the Hindu and the Sikh at the earliest opportunity for not being People of the Book. Welcome to the British franchise of the multicultural West.

22 August 2014 at 14:10  
Blogger Born Again Agnostic said...

As his Grace notes, the way forward is not an easy one. I must admit I do find myself smiling at the irony of religious leaders pleading for Freedom of Religion when (in the West at least) for much Christianity’s history – particularly where a certain version of Christianity gained political power, the suppression of freedom of religion and freedom of speech has gone hand in hand with Christian power. We (rightly) condemn the beheading of a journalist, but Christians, throughout the centuries, until the Enlightenment, have committed equal crimes – they are appear to go hand-in-hand with ‘exclusive’ religion (see: http://bornagainagnostoc.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/what-goes-around-comes-around.html for my reasoning on this). Thankfully Enlightenment values and democracy have tempered these excesses in many Western societies.

The problem, as I see it, with the Islamic State, is that it is a well oiled and well-run organisation. It has found ways and means of funding and organising itself – yes there is the booty capital (aka theft) gained from invasion – but it is has also employed other methods that would work well in the West (e.g. protection rackets). This is no band of rabid nutters – the usual end of such groups is schism and the possibility they may just kill each other via infighting. Islamic State is far more organised and sophisticated. A real danger is that if it successfully sets up shop in the West where there are considerable numbers of disaffected Muslims – and even more to pray on for finance an infrastructure then Enoch Powell will go down in history as a Prophet, doomed to suffer the same fate as Cassandra.

Yet this is being rather selfish – there is Iraq and the people – Christians, Muslims and others, who are being slaughtered and something has to be done. Care is needed – do we arm the Kurds? Well it is true to say that much of the problems we have with militant Islam at present can be laid firmly at the feet of Regan and Thatcher. In the 1980s, America, Britain, France, Egypt and others were happy to round up Islamic extremists, arm them and send them to fight in Afghanistan in the hope of defeating the USSR invasion by proxy. When the Soviet Union crumbled no thought was given to rehabilitating these Western enabled mercenaries and Afghanistan became a training camp where Islamic extremists could hone their skills.

Arming Kurds could result in a similar outcome – the Kurds have long wanted their own homeland; alas when France and Britain carved up the Ottoman Empire, the Kurds weren’t given their own land as the there were better candidates for puppet kingdoms to meet the needs of the colonial powers. Arming the Kurds could result in war with Turkey, Iraq and Iran. Therefore great care is needed before going down that path.

The only real solution is the UN – but it seems to be dragging its feet. Therefore the US and Britain - perhaps (and ironically) with the aid of Iran - may have to do the right thing.

In the long term, what is going to happen? The problem with an exclusive religion like Islam is that it is fundamentally in opposition to Western democratic values. Yes, there are ‘liberal’ versions of Islam wheeled out by Blair and Cameron, but these are in the minority. Exclusive religion results in the idea that the believer is superior to the non-believer (in a sense it is a species of fascism) – which perhaps explains why despite Islam being a ‘conservative’ religion, we see such a disproportionate number in our justice system. It doesn’t matter if you’re a Muslim if your crime is against the Kafir...
In the long term perhaps the world will just have to be divided... Muslim and Non-Muslim: a far fetched and unworkable idea? Perhaps, but integration doesn’t appear to be working, so what’s the alternative..?

22 August 2014 at 14:15  
Blogger Preacher said...

Residing in Britain & holding a U.K passport surely means accepting the responsibilities as well as the benefits of being a British Citizen. I believe in freedom of religion as part of the Constitution. This is not the case with IS who feel free to torture, kill & glorify in the bloody murder of defenceless people.

Many have suggested that all the Moslem people resident here should be deported to their Countries of origin, an impractical, senseless knee jerk reaction to the problem.

However the perpetrators of these crimes from this country cannot be allowed to return & set at liberty but must be bought to justice.

The Muslim Community international is very close knit so it stands to reason that if between 800 - 2000 young men from this country have decided to get involved in this genocide, they are not in the main anonymous.

Is it not possible that a phone line could be provided for the names of these terrorists to be passed to the relevant authorities anonymously? In so doing this would bring the offenders to book & prove the integrity of the Muslim majority & their abhorrence of the evil committed in the name of their religion.

22 August 2014 at 14:26  
Blogger Preacher said...

Shadrach @14.03
I think you will find there are non-conformists here, myself & I think Len spring to mind, but he must confirm or deny this for himself.

22 August 2014 at 14:34  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

In 1850, do you know what the big immigration crisis in the US was? The country was being positively overrun by ... the Germans and the Irish. Learned Anglo-Saxons furrowed their collective brows and worried about the character of the nation. How times change.

My Dad visited Sweden before he died. He wanted to see the family homestead and visit those relatives who still live there. He came back saying that Swedes think America ruined Sweden because so many with initiative and drive simply left for the new world. Sweden's loss was America's gain. That's basically the pattern with immigration. It benefits the receiving country because of the type of people who immigrate. Be afraid when people don't want to cone to your country.

The new world becomes a homogenized version of the old. That's not a bad thing. The receiving culture has to be strong enough to assimilate the new arrivals. But it will also be changed by the new arrivals. The sum will be stronger than the parts. The US benefitted from moving beyond European bloodlines.

carl

22 August 2014 at 14:42  
Blogger The Explorer said...

The standard explantion for immigration to Britain is post-war labour shortages, followed by multi culti to make the new arivals feel at home.

I'm sure that's true, and making new arrivals (making vital contributions to the economy) feel at home would be common sense and common decency.

I'm just not sure it's the whole story. Labour shortages, for example, were not the reason for the 1965 US Immigration Act. That had far more to do with shiftting the balance of power within the country.

22 August 2014 at 14:43  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Carl @ 14:42

Those are interesting points. I don't think many British realise that at the time of World War 2 he US had around 80 million of German extraction, 40 million Irish, 40 million? Italians. And then to decalre war on an Axis of Germany and Italy?

"The new world becomes a homogenized version of the old." Fine, I can see that; as I said, I don't have a problem with it.

My question is, should the old world become a homogenised version of the new? (Euro policy seemed to follow American policy.)


The US benefits from moving beyond European bloodlines. Fine; I can see that.

And Europe benefits from moving beyond European bloodlines. So why all the fuss about immigration? We'll be fine. (Or we wouold be; if therre weren't more at stake than biology.)

22 August 2014 at 14:55  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Sorry for the typos above: using an old laptop at the moment without automatic spellchecker.

22 August 2014 at 14:57  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Clinton, I believe, said that immigrants tend to vote Democrat. So give them the vote quickly, and ensure a contant supply of immigrants to keep the Democrats in power indefinitely.

Andrew Neather's comments in 2008? suggest a dislike of traditional British society, and the determination to change it irrevocably.

That's my real question: when does Neather's attitude date from, and who first exemplified it?

22 August 2014 at 15:27  
Blogger IanCad said...

Carl @ 14:42 wrote:

"That's basically the pattern with immigration. It benefits the receiving country because of the type of people who immigrate."

Or, as NewZealand Prime Minister, Robert Muldoon?? observed when countering complaints that too many of NZ's young people were emigrating to Australia.

"It's a win - win situation. Raises the IQ of both countries."

22 August 2014 at 15:35  
Blogger Manfarang said...

Preacher
"However the perpetrators of these crimes from this country cannot be allowed to return & set at liberty but must be bought to justice."
They are members of an organisation that is legally claasified as terrorist and as such there are various offences they can be prosecuted for

"The Muslim Community international is very close knit so it stands to reason that if between 800 - 2000 young men from this country have decided to get involved in this genocide, they are not in the main anonymous."
Why should they be able to know the whereabouts of every individual.There are millions of Muslims

"Is it not possible that a phone line could be provided for the names of these terrorists to be passed to the relevant authorities anonymously?"

The telephone number is 0800 789 321.

22 August 2014 at 15:40  
Blogger The Explorer said...

There's no doubt that the decisions of those who decide immigration policies are political as well as economic.

Among Bobby Kennedy's motives (alongside, probably, genuine compassion) for the 1965 Act was the desire to break WASP power. More Mexicans, for example, would mean more Catholic voters.

22 August 2014 at 15:46  
Blogger Uncle Brian said...

Tuesday, August 12, 2014

Why can bishops organise to condemn foodbanks but not genocide?


Eleven signatures appeared, eventually, on that list. But no Bishop Cocksworth among them, despite his sonorous title of Lead Bishop on Foreign Affairs.

22 August 2014 at 15:48  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Lest readers think I have been trying to divert the topic of the thread, the gist of my question is whether those originally responsible for our immigration policies would have envisaged that we would end up with something like Jihadi John.

At one time, I would have said, "Of course not."

Now, I am actually unsure.

22 August 2014 at 16:36  
Blogger IanCad said...

And I thought Hague was bad!!??

We are ruled by children.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28892755

22 August 2014 at 16:42  
Blogger Edward Spalton said...

I would only call the situation abnormal in terms of the last two centuries or so when Western technology saw off the Muslim threat to Europe . For the other 1200 years of the world's experience of Islam what we are getting now is not far off average.

At the Geert Wilders' trial, the judge who insisted on prosecution tried to nobble a defence witness - one Professor Jansen, a distinguished Arabist. Jansen's testimony was that there was no such thing as "moderate Islam" because the faith was scripturally determined for all time. There were, of course, moderate Muslims - that is, Muslims who are not always fully observant of all the faith's demands.

At any time, a religious revival will rekindle the fires of Jihad - as surely as events like the Billy Graham crusades used to produce outbreaks of charity, marital fidelity and financial probity - so will an Islamic revival produce outbreaks of war, murder, sexual aggression and terror against non Muslims. It was the conduct of the prophet himself who is regarded as an exemplar for young men.

We have to recognise that.

22 August 2014 at 17:17  
Blogger jsampson1945 said...

I don't know what your Grace would have said before being barbecued, but it is rather obvious that no-one knows what to do about this situation. As far as I know, w
hen our backs were to the wall before the Dunkirk evacuation, the King ordered a national day of prayer. Perhaps those of us who still believe in God were to pray, things would change as they did then.

22 August 2014 at 18:04  
Blogger Darter Noster said...

It's no surprise that we're contributing a fair share of the jihadists now rampaging around the Middle East. You only have to look at what's been allowed to go on in mosques and universities around the country for the last couple of decades.

If a university Christian Union had invited senior figures from the Ku Klux Klan or Aryan Nations or Westboro Baptist Church (the "God Hates Fags" lunatics) to speak, there would have been an outcry, and they would have been stopped. It would just never have been allowed to happen, yet Al Muhajiroun, Hizb-ut-Tahrir, and a host of other extremist Imams, speakers and organisations have been given free reign to preach, radicalise and recruit for decades.

22 August 2014 at 18:09  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ The Explorer (16:36)—the gist of my question is whether those originally responsible for our immigration policies would have envisaged that we would end up with something like Jihadi John

On the thread, your comment is opposite a picture of Churchill. He had no illusions about Islam:

‘No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Islam is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science—the science against which it had vainly struggled—the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.’

And yet, around the time of Churchill’s post-war premiership, Muslim immigration to Britain was either being finalized or had begun—odd point number 1.

Odd point number 2 is this remark made by Churchill to Ian Gilmour in 1955: ‘[Immigration] is the most important subject facing this country, but I cannot get any of my ministers to take any notice.’

Returning to your question, I don’t know whether Churchill could have envisaged Jihadi John but, from his writing, it is surely beyond doubt that he would have been horrified at the prospect of Muslim immigration. But Muslim immigration occurred on his watch and it seems he could do nothing about it.

That may suggest the involvement of a supranational body in deciding immigration policy. Once again, I don’t know.

22 August 2014 at 18:48  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

carl

Be afraid when people don't want to cone to your country.

Be afraid when too many people come to your Country might be more appropriate; even more so when they begin to set up their own ethnic colonies and rip off your welfare system to buy land and build mansions back home.

I wonder if you would be saying the such if the population density of the US had reached 266 people sq km as it is in the UK, instead of the measly 33 per sq km you have now?

You don't know how fortunate you are - for now.

22 August 2014 at 19:01  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Johnny R @ 18:48

Thanks for responding.

I can think of two possible attitudes among initial instigators of mass immigration.

1. Enlightenment idealism, on the lines of those who said that every comprehensive would be a grammar school. (The alternative possibility seems never to have occurred.) New immigrants would enrich by being themselves enriched, and assimilate within a generation. Lovely vision, true of some, but not of our current crop of jihadis.

2. Marxist cynicism. The hope of social chaos (the assault on the family another arm of the same strategy) to enable the final Marxist revolution that will eventually usher in the good society.

Either? Both? I don't know. Perhaps we'll never know.

Most of the original architects of the immigration policy have now gone to their graves, taking the secret of their motives with them.

22 August 2014 at 19:40  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

JR

"That may suggest the involvement of a supranational body in deciding immigration policy. Once again, I don’t know."

Come now, don't be shy. Its so unlike you. Go on, hazard a guess.

22 August 2014 at 22:08  
Blogger bluedog said...

Some interesting posts, Mr Explorer, and you seemed to have distilled the truth @ 19.40.

It has been suggested before on this blog that the genesis of Muslim immigration was the respect felt by former officers of the Indian Army for their Muslim troops.

You may recall that in British imperial thought the world was divided into martial and non-martial races. The martial races were militarily valuable and the rest considered to be of lower, though possibly economic, value. Within India, the martial races were almost without exception Muslim. The Gurkhas were the exception, but they were not ethnically Indian.

This division into martial and non-martial races was in itself almost certainly a profound misconception. In practice, any race becomes martial with sufficient motivation. For example, the standard Indian assumptions lead to the great surprises in Malaya, where the indigenous Muslim Malays were militarily useless and the supposedly non-martial Chinese proved to be formidable guerrilla fighters. The Chinese were motivated by Communism.

The French seemed to have similarly under-estimated their subjects in Indo-China, where the veterans of the Waffen SS were demolished by the Communist inspired Viet-Minh at Dien Bien Phu in 1954. So much for the master race.

Another factor in British immigration policy, apart from those of subversive intent that you identify, would have been the influence of classical education. Chaps brought up in the shadow of Civis Romanus Sum and ruling the greatest empire since Rome could easily fall for the line, Civis Britanicus Sum, with swelling pride and not much thought for the consequences.

Put together the imperial pretensions of the elite and the subversive intents of the Left and you get the current multi-cultural and multi-faith utopia.

The drivers of post-war British immigration policy can be summed up by the Chinese metaphor for a bad marriage: same bed, different dreams.

22 August 2014 at 22:52  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

Terrorism has been funded in the ME since the 1980s by the House of Saud. The US have been blinded by largess from Riyadh in the form of billion $ contracts, huge salaries, grants, etc.. to the Saudi's funding of terrorists across the ME. The Saudi Royals have been backing Al Qaeda and others and now IS. They've been paying for paramilitary training camps, and recruitment and also the purchase of weapons all done through their dodgy charities.

22 August 2014 at 23:57  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Dreadnaught

I wonder if you would be saying the such if the population density of the US had reached 266 people sq km as it is in the UK

Not sure what to make of this statement. In fact. I live in a city with a population density of app. 700 people per square kilometer and I do not find this burdensome. So what am I supposed to infer from this number of 266? I don't know what you think you are entitled to in terms of space, but the idea that you are crowded is laughable.

Have you ever been to Okinawa? It's a volcanic rock. About 1.4 million people live on 1200 sq km. They squirrel houses everywhere, and yet you would still be amazed at how much open space there is on that island. I know because I have driven from one tip of the Island to the other. So are the Okinawans oppressed by their population density? It's over 8000 people per sq km in the capital city. Is that some kind if human rights violation? Because if it isn't, I am not sure why you are complaining about 266?

Okinawa is a first world place, btw. It's a resort island. It's where the Japanese go for vacation. Land prices are extraordinarily expensive. It's safe and pleasant and a nice place to visit.

carl

23 August 2014 at 00:05  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

We need to get to the roots of their recruiting methods in Britain and stop it, difficult when there is a bottomless pit of money from the Saudis and You Tube channels and other social media grow like mushrooms.
There is also the coming future threat of totally safe peer to peer communications from companies like Maidsafe being developed using layers of encryption ensuring total privacy. It's good for privacy and freedom, but bad for fostering the spread of terrorists, paedophiles and criminals.

http://maidsafe.net/

23 August 2014 at 00:13  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Not to put a downer on the discussion but we in the West have brought this on ourselves.

Jeramiah:

"“Thus saith the Lord God: Because thy heart is lifted up, and thou hast said: I am God, and I sit in the chair of God in the heart of the sea: whereas thou art a man, and not God: and hast set thy heart as if it were the heart of God. Behold thou art wiser than Daniel: no secret is hid from thee. In thy wisdom and thy understanding thou hast made thyself strong: and hast gotten gold and silver into thy treasures. By the greatness of thy wisdom, and by thy traffic thou hast increased thy strength: and thy heart is lifted up with thy strength."

Wealth, economic prosperity, 'enlightenment' deistic belief, at best, and liberal abandonment of God, at worst, and an absence of faith. And we wonder why we are facing such a crisis!

"Therefore behold, I will bring upon thee strangers the strongest of the nations: and they shall draw their swords against the beauty of thy wisdom, and they shall defile thy beauty. They shall kill thee, and bring thee down: and thou shalt die the death of them that are slain in the heart of the sea. Wilt thou yet say before them that slay thee: I am God; whereas thou art a man, and not God, in the hand of them that slay thee? Thou shalt die the death of the uncircumcised by the hand of strangers: for I have spoken it, saith the Lord God.”

Western decadence comes at a price. No good blaming the Muslims, or any other group for that matter. Put ourselves above God and abandon His laws and there is a price to pay.

23 August 2014 at 00:33  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

You're not wrong there Happy Jack.

23 August 2014 at 00:47  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Marie

They are Jeramiah's timeless words, not Happy Jack's. Very troubling they are too.

Destruction happened to Israel; it can happen to the West. Israel, by God's mercy, was restored after capture and exile. Not just once was their temple destroyed but twice. We now have a new resurrected 'Temple' in Christ Jesus. What will happen to the once Christian, now increasingly Godless, West remains to be seen.

23 August 2014 at 01:21  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

bluedog :"You may recall that in British imperial thought the world was divided into martial and non-martial races."

Not just the British, as the recent series on the Yesterday channel showed.

23 August 2014 at 05:45  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

I see the Home Secretary is considering banning groups which hold violent ideas now, instead of just having links to terrorism. That might be tricky, given the opinions surveyed by Pew about Sharia etc. It'll be interesting where the line might be drawn, recognising the call for capital punishment in the article.

23 August 2014 at 06:22  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

carl

I take your point - the world is running short of sustainable living space by all accounts.

23 August 2014 at 08:16  
Blogger thumrat said...

Oh my Dear Mrs Proudie,

You do strike one as a lady who titters at a contraction of Richard to "Dick" whilst munching on a creamed bun.

23 August 2014 at 09:03  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Carl:

Cities are a special case, and I'm told the whole global population, standing shoulder to shoulder, could be fitted onto the Isle of Mann.

But any Brit driving in France notices the comparative emptiness of the roads; the relative ease of getting from one place to another. (I don't mean within Paris.) You'd have to allow an extra hour to cover the same distance in Britain because of the sheer traffic congestion. (Maybe two hours, to allow for an accident that wouold grind everything to a halt.)

Yes, there's lots of empty space in Britain. But immigrants don't settle there; they settle in the cities. Some spaces are areas of outstanding natural beauty: staying that way because they aren't good for anything else: which is why the immigrants don't go there. (If they're found to be good for fracking, we'll have an issue.)

Some of the space is farmland in our attempt to partially feed our 62 million (soon to become 77 million) people.

One solution would be to concrete it all over so our population can spread outwards rather than upwards and we get our food entirely from abroad.

Re Japan, their immigration policy has been interesting. Non-existent. Even now that there is the oldest population in the world, and subsequent demographic implosion, Japan has still not relied on immigration for the solution. Robot technology, instead.

23 August 2014 at 09:37  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Explorer: "Even now that there is the oldest population in the world, and subsequent demographic implosion, Japan has still not relied on immigration for the solution. Robot technology, instead."

I hadn't considered that as a drive over there towards technological innovation. A very interesting explanation.

23 August 2014 at 11:25  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dreadnaught: "carl I take your point"

Don't conceded so easily!

Let's take a reasonably-sized UK house in the Home Counties. Somewhere where there are a number of commutable, well-paid jobs:

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-45907937.html

£550,000 for detached 4 bedrooms and a garden big enough that one could safely leave the kids in to play. Salary for a university-educated software engineer in this area? £35K to £45K. Salary for an office administrator? £20K.

Now, in the UK, a 4 bedroomed house would allow for 3 kids to grow up within the aspirational constraints of the UK.

One could fit 3 kids into a semi-setached 3 bedroomed house like this for £375K at a push:

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-45481837.html?premiumA=true

How does one pay for either of those on the salaries on offer, other than by both partners going out to work, or through an inheritance, or the largesse of rich relatives? Especially if one wants to send one's kids to university later in their lives.

This notion that UK couples are sacrificing the option of kids in favour of multiple foreign holidays, and trips out to nice restaurants, and on Mercedes cars because they're selfish is a bit iffy really. If anything, many parents are focusing their resources on fewer kids so that the kids have better life chances in the UK because they love them and want the best for them. We're not living in an episode of The Waltons over here. The cost of living is very high partly because the are too few houses in the right areas for jobs to go around, and not enough space to build more without destroying the countryside around there.

23 August 2014 at 11:46  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

23 August 2014 at 11:47  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ The Explorer (19:40)—In The Hidden Hand: Britain, America and Cold War Secret Intelligence, Richard Aldrich writes that in the late 1940s and early 1950s, the creation of a united Europe was:

‘a holy grail for Washington. Extensive covert operations for the specific promotion of European unity were launched by the CIA’s greatest luminaries and they continued for over a decade. The most remarkable US covert operation was vast secret funding of the European Movement. By the early 1950’s promoting European unity was the largest CIA operation in Western Europe. This covert contribution never formed less than half the European Movement’s budget and, after 1952, it was probably two-thirds. Simultaneously this programme sought to undermine the staunch resistance of the British Labour government, and then of the Conservatives, to federalist ideas.’

Also heavily involved at the time in working for European unification was Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi’s Paneuropean Movement. It was Coudenhove-Kalergi, the crackpot’s crackpot, who promoted the idea of interbreeding the world’s races to produce a new race, Eurasian-Negroid. Believing the Jews to be God’s/G-d’s Chosen People, they were to be exempted from participation in his breeding programme.

You mention Marxism in your comment. Although by now in its new guise of cultural Marxism, its aims remained the same, as expressed by Willi Münzenberg: ‘We will make the West so corrupt that it stinks.’

Add to the above the desire of the Jews to guard against another Holocaust by camouflaging their minority community in a sea of minorities, racial and religious, drawn from all over the world, and mass Third World immigration was the answer to the dreams of European unifiers (who had to break down national identity), of Coudenhove-Kalergi (who had to interbreed the races), of Marxists (who had to destroy) and of the Jews.

As you suggested on His Grace’s 7th August thread at 14:32, ‘dismantling the nation’ is a combined effort.

23 August 2014 at 11:51  
Blogger Shadrach said...

Preacher said..@14:34
I meant that there never seems to be any Non-conformists quoted in the media or consulted to be part of letters of the type that His Grace has included in his post.

May I say that I find your comments both balanced and Biblical.

23 August 2014 at 12:30  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

DanJo

For one Given the seriousness of things - I didn't feel justified in diverting the thread and for another I just couldn't be arsed.

The Explorer stepped in, in timely fashion.

23 August 2014 at 12:46  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dreadnaught: "[...] for another I just couldn't be arsed."

Heh.

23 August 2014 at 12:53  
Blogger The Explorer said...

DanJ0:

Thanks. I don't claim the idea as original: I came across it when I was trying to find out why the Japanese were so gadget crazy.

Your points about the cost of housing are very well made. I'm sure you're right that many who limit their families are driven not by hedonism, but by the wish to do the best for their offspring in limited space.

Where we'll be if Migration Watch are right, i don't know. I suspect some of their predictions are made in the hope that, by making them, they won't come true.

23 August 2014 at 12:55  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

The TFR for Japan was 1.41 in 2012, up from 1.26 in 2005. Weirdly, in Okinawa it was 1.90 which is just a little under the UK's. Perhaps Japanese men impregnate women without realising it in Okinawa, simply by being pressed together on public transport given that population density. ;)

23 August 2014 at 12:59  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Johnny R @ 11:51

Thanks for that. I take all those points. With a statement like that, M'berg would have been rubbing his hands at the prospect of a few Jihadi Johns returning to Britain.

It seems that some of the West's recent ancestors, on both sides of the Pond, have an awful lot to answer for. A pity they aren't around to live with the consequences.

23 August 2014 at 13:03  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

While Cameron is splashing about on his surf board and Obama's out on the golf course - is it any wonder Islamists knbow that they can get away with murder?

We should all be deeply ashamed that we have given out politicians and Church leaders a soft ride fore too long.

In a July 25, 2014 Friday sermon, Taji Mustafa, head of the media for the U.K. chapter of Hizb ut-Tahrir, called upon the Muslim armies to take action.
With Cranmer's permission:

https://www.youtube.com/user/MEMRITVVideos

“You need to contact everybody you know in the army of the Muslims and open their eyes. They must be urged to “to remove these chains and disobey their rulers.

Why is it that the [Muslim] armies have not moved? Is it that we don’t have armies? Is it that we are cowards? No, no, no. This Islamic nation has been blessed with men, with women, with faith, with people who long for martyrdom, with people who want to be the descendants of Saladin.

Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan – we could drown this place. But what we have today is rulers who have abandoned the Quran?

The solution is clear: that Muslims have armies, and these armies should move. What we have today are rulers who prevent the armies of this nation from moving. It is not because we are weak, and it is not because we don’t have men or weapons. It is because the armies have been chained. The armies should be released. This is the Islamic solution.

I speak to brothers from Egypt, from Sudan, from Saudi Arabia, and from Pakistan, and they all say to me: “Oh, my uncle is a colonel in the army.” “Oh, my brother-in-law is an admiral in the navy.” This is the army of the Islamic nation?! These are our relatives.

Maybe we have not reached them. You need to contact everybody you know in the army of the Muslims. Contact them, call them, visit them. Go abroad and visit them. You need to speak to them. You need to open their eyes. How is it that they agree to be chained? They need to remove these chains and disobey these rulers.”


Why have we not executed this BASTARD?

23 August 2014 at 13:32  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

DanJ0

within the aspirational constraints of the UK.

My argument is entirely contained within the implications of that phrase. Different attitudes would have produced an entirely different market. The striking feature about Okinawa to an American is how small everything is. That includes expectations of how much space is necessary to comfortably exist. Our expectations are greater. The question is not "How many bedrooms?" but "How much floor space?"

My wife voluntarily left the job market to raise our children. Given a reasonable expectation of what she would have made, that means we as a family voluntarily chose to forgo between 1 and 2 million dollars in gross income over that period of time. That's the marginal income that sustains the ridiculously overpriced housing market. How much different would the housing market be if we were the norm and not the outlier?

The fertility rate has been falling since I was born and has been below replacement for two generations now. The fertility rate for women is down all over the West. It's not related to space. And it falls as income rises. How is it that people with less income can find ways to afford children?

carl

23 August 2014 at 14:02  
Blogger Rambling Steve Appleseed said...

'Pale Ebenezer thought it wrong to fight
But Roaring Bill (who killed him) thought it right.

Have ISIS signed the Geneva Convention?

As Peter Hitchens often points out, our liberal rulers shrink from judicial execution of proven murderers but shrug off the 'collateral damage' from drone and bomber attacks. Let alone the victims of the tribal and religious bloodletting our 'liberal'interventions to remove Saddam and Gaddafi enabled.

The UK ISIS fighters should be condemned to death in absentio to be enacted on sight if they return to the UK. And string up a couple of parasitic 'human rights ' lawyers either side of Anjum Chowdury to show we mean it.

Oh sorry I forgot death penalty not allowed under EU law. That's a shame.

23 August 2014 at 14:07  
Blogger Ivan said...

Johnny R, I hope you are just having a lark. My advice to you is to consider the stupid right-wing nuts, as much liars as those on the left. Use the disinformation there with as much discrimination as you would those on the left.

23 August 2014 at 14:25  
Blogger Rambling Steve Appleseed said...

Seriously, as our host suggests in a most thoughtful post, the situation currently facing us is not one we are prepared for. The west including Israel faces an implacable and detetmined foe that is both deluded and unconstrained. Sometimes the only way to deal with an armed lunatic is several hollow point 9mm rounds to the centre of the target then another two to the head. Debate the matter if necessary once the immediate threat is managed.

As with bomber command in WW2.

23 August 2014 at 14:29  
Blogger Uncle Brian said...

The IS can’t be defeated without carrying the fighting into Syria as well as Iraq, The Economist argues,
calling on Obama to do just that. Will he, though? I think he’s more likely to go on dithering until it’s too late. The golf course is such a nice place to be in August. And we’re still supposed to be supporting the Syrian rebels against Assad, aren’t we?

23 August 2014 at 15:06  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Carl: "How is it that people with less income can find ways to afford children?"

In the UK, our welfare state supports many of them and their decisions about the size of their families. The Welfare State that is, incidentally, paid for by people like me, amongst others. We'll have child care provided by the State soon, so that working couples can pay other people to care for their children.

We are where we are. House prices in the UK are beyond the means of most young couples in areas where there are jobs. They're certainly beyond the means of almost all single people. Why? Because they have been pushed up by the buying potential of the combined income of a couple.

How can a couple both work and have children too? Well, they could rely on an extended family to provide child care. But who has extended families living nearby when people move about the country following the work? Many of our immigrant families from South Asia, of course.

How did we get to the point where both people in a couple can work? Because some women wanted to have careers too. That aspiration started after the first world war, and consolidated after the second. Should women not aspire to a career and the country not harness their talents?

There are many factors that have come into play over the years which lead to where we are in the UK now; that place being that house prices are too high unless both people in a couple work, and rents higher than mortgages in many places only with less security of tenure. That is the decision people have to make today and, I assert, they don't make it merely because they are selfish and hedonistic.

For sure, in places like Nepal people live on a pittance and subsist on the produce from the land in many parts of it. Women till the fields in the day, rural children are poorly educated, and people die in their early 60s if they're lucky, or in their childhood from things like acute appendicitis if they live too far from a hospital or can't afford the medical treatment.

In the UK, we have families that are paid below 60% of the median and live in cramped and overcrowded conditions. The children suffer from lack of computers, space, and quiet to do their homework. They usually feel disadvantaged relative to the rest of society. Families like that can easily be made homeless if the primary job is lost or a parent becomes ill. I wouldn't welcome your puritanical aspirations for people, and I doubt the victims would either while you're remodelling society.

23 August 2014 at 15:13  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Steve: "The UK ISIS fighters should be condemned to death in absentio to be enacted on sight if they return to the UK. And string up a couple of parasitic 'human rights ' lawyers either side of Anjum Chowdury to show we mean it. Oh sorry I forgot death penalty not allowed under EU law. That's a shame"

We're essentially at war with the Islamic State now, they made that clear in that video of James Foley's murder. I will do everything I reasonably can to stop capital punishment returning to the UK but I'd be happy for every last one of our citizens fighting for the Islamic State to be killed on the battlefield, and by a sniper's rifle or a quiet knife in the back from our covert forces if necessary. They're the moral and practical equivalent of the SS in Nazi Germany. They must not be allowed to come back.

23 August 2014 at 15:21  
Blogger Roy said...

I think DanJO speaks for the vast majority of us on this topic. Ideally I would prefer it if the IS terrorists repented en masse of their atrocities and devoted all their efforts to making peace in the Middle East and helping the victims of terrorism. That, however, will not happen and it would be better for humanity if all unrepentant members of IS were shortly dispatched to find out what awaits them after death.

Perhaps the consciences of a handful of them might be awakened and they might turn to Christianity. I hope that 7 year old boy who was photographed a couple of weeks ago holding up the head of a man who had been beheaded is somehow delivered from the terrible environment his father deliberately brought him into and learns true values.

23 August 2014 at 15:44  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

DanJo

We had a decorated soldier do just that and because some idiot got him on camera - we had him sent to jail.

Muslims continually bleat about a shared 'victimhood'. 'Our brothers' in Palestine, my Muslim brothers in Iraq, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Syria, Pakistan, Libya et cetra ad nauseum.

This is where our line should drawn; If Collective identity through their ideology is how they incessantly demand us to accept them, then they should be prepared to receive the same collective rough justice and retribution in return.

But no, they want it their all own way, all ways.

The 57 States of the Islamic Conference, most armed to the teeth with high tech ordinance and delivery systems, should be more than capable of sorting ISIS/ISIL/IS or whatever the latest obscenity format is, but they won't while we allow ourselves to be inert and held hostage to their good fortune.

They know that most people the West can't comprehend Islam as anything other than just another religion. They also know Islam can't survive without recourse to the extreme violence of the tribe. The Heads of those States also know that neither can they.

The West is in denial of the real cause of what it has yet to recognise and facedown. There is no reason why we should go on accepting crap on the carpet as an unchallegable, cultural right.




23 August 2014 at 16:11  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dreadnaught: "Muslims continually bleat about a shared 'victimhood'. 'Our brothers' in Palestine, my Muslim brothers in Iraq, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Syria, Pakistan, Libya et cetra ad nauseum."

One of my Muslim colleagues was giving me that narrative a week or so ago during lunch. Including the collective oppression thing, and that both Shias and Sunnis were his brothers. He also told me he was sure the situation was being manipulated. I said that I hope he wasn't going to point at "the Jews" and he shook his head. I pointed at Saudi Arabia and Qatar as the likely culprits built unfortunately we arrived back on work premises where such talk is discouraged so I couldn't ask any more. In particular, I wanted to ask why he was so bothered about the situation in Gaza when large swathes of Muslims are being oppressed and persecuted by other Muslims, often brutally, including Palestinians neglected or mistreated in Syria, Jordan, and even Lebanon. Perhaps that's for another day. :)

23 August 2014 at 16:25  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

I know I'm an a-theist so it is hardly surprising that I don't, but I really don't get the notion of the Ummah, other than conceptually. Yet most Muslims I know genuinely seem to feel that connection. Also, I know full well that Christians are being persecuted in other parts of the world but it seems to me that some Christians in the UK and the USA seem to be trying to emulate this collective Muslim thing of victimhood, asserting rights, and an Ummah. It's as though they see the success of it elsewhere and want to try it for themselves, even though it seems to me that in the UK and USA the alleged persecution is merely the state of getting used to not always getting one's own way politically and socially any more.

23 August 2014 at 16:32  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

DanJo

That's exactly it.

We can see a Muslim as a decent sort and treat him with the same degree of civility or friendship that we value. He can't truly reciprocate unless he deserts his 'faith' and when the chips are down he will let you down or face the wrath of his 'brothers'. Islam is a tribal orthodoxy. It's an extended tribalism living amongst us and Muslims are a long way from sloughing that particular skin even if they ever could.

It's not for nothing that it is said 'birds of a feather, flock together' is as true in Nature as it is in us, as part of Nature - but we call ourselves intelligent and invent excuses to ignore what others see as our weakness and their opportunity.

23 August 2014 at 16:56  
Blogger The Explorer said...

DanJ0 @ 16:32

Interesting post.

I'd say the idea of the Ummah was probably originally copied from the Church: expressed in 'Revelation' as those from every tribe and tongue and nation united by their common belief. That idea was around hundreds of years before Islam.

It's also a very worrying concept for the nation state (as in Hobbes' 'Leviathan') in that first loyalty may not be to king or fellow citizens. Obedience to conscience above obedience to law of the land etc. Why Locke had a problem with Catholics in the 'Essay on Toleration': firstt loyalty elsewhere. Why Lee Rigby's killer could say "your government" when he himself was British. His identity was elsewhere.

It may be that modern British Christians have copied the Ummah. I think it's more likely though (certainly the point made by Anthony Browne in 'The Retreat of Reason') that they have simply got wise to how a PC society operates.

If you want to have any clout as a group you have to have victim status. It may be no more than that.

23 August 2014 at 17:46  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ Ivan (14:25)—I don’t quite understand. I wasn’t aware that anything I wrote could be classed as disinformation. The US, the European Movement and the Paneuropean Movement wanted European unity; von Coudenhove-Kalergi dreamt of a universal race; Marxism has the West in its sights; the Jews, having suffered as the West’s only high-profile minority, are now out of the spotlight. No, I’m still scratching my head.

23 August 2014 at 18:03  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ The Explorer (09:37)—(soon to become 77 million)

The UK’s population was estimated at 77 to 80 million back in 2007. Heaven knows what it is now.

23 August 2014 at 18:43  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

All this mutual back-slapping and hugging from the cabal of secular atheists and right wing fascists is very interesting to witness.

Having achieved what you want, basically the removal of religion and Christian influence from our society, what are you now left with to resist Islam? A call to group prejudice, repression and arms that will necessitate an authoritarian and totalitarian government. You can't wage the kind of civil war you're calling for peaceably. You want to break the rules of civilised conduct to protect a civilised nation?! And what will your future state be based on? What will bind it together? Fear? A theory of the innate superiority of western man? Or some other ideology that will hold society together? Something will have to fill the vacuum, the consequences of which you all now fear.

Oh, the sublime irony as the fruits of the *enlightenment* become clear.

23 August 2014 at 19:29  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

What a berk.

23 August 2014 at 20:02  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

When a disillusioned atheist, a white supremacist and an a-theist homosexual all start singing from the same hymn sheet, it is not Happy Jack who is ... what was the reasoned and erudite expression ... oh, yes .... "burk".

23 August 2014 at 20:13  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Johnny R:

That 'Independent' article is scary.

1. Because it's in 'The Independent' and not in 'The Daily Mail'.

2. Because the official 2014 estimate is 64-65 million. (And the Census can only send forms to those it knows about.)

77 million and counting, already! No wonder the roads feel as crowded as they do.

23 August 2014 at 20:14  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

One would have thought NI numbers might be more of a clue given that people need one to legitimately work and to access services.

23 August 2014 at 20:31  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Also, the census is based on addresses.

23 August 2014 at 20:35  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ The Explorer—Similar estimates are based on gas and electricity consumption, on the quantity of sewage treated and on National Insurance numbers…

@ Dan—In 2007, David Davis MP said, ‘There are in existence 76 million supposedly valid national insurance numbers – 29 million more than there are eligible British citizens in the United Kingdom’.

23 August 2014 at 20:49  
Blogger IanCad said...

Happy Jack @ 19:29

Sometimes we agree, often we do not.

On this I'm with you.

With the braying of the mob for a repudiation of our laws and liberties, I fear that "Duckling" may not enjoy the fruits of civilization as we have.

An anticipatory neurosis is infecting the fearful.

I am so disappointed with my countrymen.

After 9/11 I always comforted myself that we British would never overreact as did our American friends.

How wrong I was.

23 August 2014 at 20:53  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

Danj0
I'm sure when there's 14 to a house who don't speak very good English or none at all, they are going to put all the names of everyone living in the property down including the ones in the shed! It's not going to happen.

23 August 2014 at 21:08  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Johnny, it seems I was wrong about NI numbers if that link is to be believed as it seems to say that the number is unreliable.

23 August 2014 at 21:11  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Marie, the census will never record everybody as there are undoubtedly illegal immigrants here. I was merely pointing out the mechanism.

23 August 2014 at 21:14  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ Happy Jack (19:29)—I deplore Christianity being marginalized. Although I have difficulty accepting its supernatural aspects, I recognize that it provides a moral compass that has yet to be surpassed. Imagine my incredulity, then, as the denominations fall over themselves to welcome Islam, sell their churches for conversion to mosques, take the side of Islam against the EDL, and ban membership of the only anti-Islam party, the BNP. The anti-Christian forces need do nothing to remove Christianity from national life; by surrendering to Islam, Christianity is removing itself.

23 August 2014 at 22:33  
Blogger Uncle Brian said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

23 August 2014 at 22:52  
Blogger bluedog said...

Mr Explorer @ 20.14, perhaps somewhere in a recess of Whitehall there is a UK population policy document.

Based on results, it appears quantity has long been deemed of greater importance than quality. So why the emphasis on quantity? Well, size matters in global forums including the EU. In terms of economic machismo, there are two paths to growth, one is to increase GDP in total through increases in productivity so that GDP per capita rises. The other is to increase the number of capita. Why is this important? As a nuclear weapons power and a permanent member of the UN Security Council, the UK's position at the top table is threatened by India, Brazil, Japan and Germany in descending order of population.

Being a permanent member of the UN Security Council is important as it gives the UK the right to share in setting the global agenda, an undoubted economic benefit. Conversely, the UK also has the right to veto threats to its position that are expressed through the agency of the UN. Again, very important.

It follows that if the UK population can be pushed up to say, 100 million, in raw numbers and in resulting GDP, both the Germans and the Japanese are neutralised.

Nobody takes Brazil seriously, but India is a real threat and communicants will be aware that when the UN was established, India was British, thus justifying the UK's own position. The EU is now a clear threat to the UK's position within the UN in view of the emergence of the High Representative, the noble Baroness Ashton. It is not impossible that if left unchecked, the EU would petition the UN for its own privileges as both a member and a security council permanent member. This would implicitly threaten the position of both Britain and France within the UN. By leaving the EU, the UK therefore neutralises the EU threat to its global position, which may be why official sentiment is becoming more Eurosceptic.

If the UK leaves the EU, the French UN position becomes of critical importance to the EU. France implicitly becomes the sole agent for handling EU business in the UN, to the great benefit of the French. One can scarcely imagine the French surrendering that position.

Then there are the resource rich dominions of Canada, Australia and NZ. With a combined population slightly smaller than that of the UK, but a GDP per capita significantly higher than the UK, and sharing HM Queen as head of state, the dominions can be notionally aggregated with the UK in terms of a global bloc. The economic weighting of this bloc far exceeds that of India.

On this basis it follows that UK plus old dominions rank behind only the US and China. Indeed, USA, UK, plus old dominions remain unchallenged in terms of global power.

Now what was that about 10,000 Islamic irregulars driving pick-ups around in the desert?

23 August 2014 at 22:54  
Blogger Shadrach said...

Your Grace,

On the news tonight, Teresa May has declared that among other things she will introduce banning orders for extremist groups.

Those Christians who believe the Bible explicitly and are prepared to die for their brother and their Lord, will they be considered an extremist group?

23 August 2014 at 23:45  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Shadrach

Come on, Jack thinks you jest.

In all likelihood it'll only apply to those 'Christians' who believe the bible calls them to armed insurrection against the state, or to those who believe they are called to a violent 'Holy Crusade' against Islam in Britain and want to take matters into their own hands.

JR

Come on now, Jack wasn't born yesterday.

"I deplore Christianity being marginalized. Although I have difficulty accepting its supernatural aspects, I recognize that it provides a moral compass that has yet to be surpassed."

And yet you rather conveniently overlook its perspectives on human equality, dignity and loving one's neighbour and one's enemy.

You simply want to use Christianity as an ideological foundation for the supremacy of white Europeans. Its convenient because ideologically it is opposed to Judaism and Islam.

All other races are inferior in some way to Europeans. However, one particularly gifted and close knit race, welded together by its Holy Book, has down the centuries repeatedly taken advantage of pluralism and Christianity to promote its own interests at 'our' cost. Guess who they might be? You use this and the threat from Islam, which is undoubtedly real, to spread your separatist and white elitist opinion.

Jack has been reading the articles you've posted and their sources and tracking the roots of your thinking. Very interesting it has been too and much has been learned.

The third Reich would be proud of your 'modernist' and 'scientific' approach.

24 August 2014 at 00:40  
Blogger Uncle Brian said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

24 August 2014 at 00:49  
Blogger Uncle Brian said...

Bluedog, perhaps you have access to more recent information, but the last time I saw anything in the Brazilian press about that old proposal to create four new permanent members of the Security Council, raising the total to nine, it had been written off as a non-starter. Brazilians themselves, by and large, think it’s pointless, a fantasy that the “lace cuffs” at the Foreign Ministry dreamed up just to make themselves seem more important, while the rest of the world abominates the prospect of nine countries with vetoes, which would slow down UN business virtually to a standstill.

24 August 2014 at 00:53  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Uncle Brian

I can't imagine any change to the Security Council that would result in the removal of American Allies. The US simply wouldn't allow it. Perhaps the council could be expanded, but I don't see members being swapped out. Not that it matters much. The UN is an overgrown bureaucracy with no authority and pretentions of grandeur. All that really matters is that it can be kept out of the way when it matters.

And, for the record, I have never understood why France received credit for helping to win the war when its principle contribution was running away and making a separate peace. France should not have ever received a permanent membership. France should not have been treated as a peer of the victorious powers.

carl

24 August 2014 at 01:16  
Blogger Inspector General in Ordinary said...

Inspector here...

Just back from the annual reunion of Ugly Baby winners as held at the Mouse and Wheel

Looking back over many decades, one is surprised he secured his own title in his year as he was up against neo natal Mohameds with visible beard growth. Just goes to show that REAL ugliness shines through...

Tally ho !

24 August 2014 at 01:55  
Blogger Tom Mushroom said...

Carl

"And, for the record, I have never understood why France received credit for helping to win the war when its principle contribution was running away and making a separate peace."

I see from your profile that you live in a country that's never known the humiliation of having a foreign power invade you three times in less than 100 years.

Where your countrymen have never had to make decisions about the fine line between surviving and co-operating with an enemy in your street, home and business, in sometimes appalling circumstances.

24 August 2014 at 05:35  
Blogger Rambling Steve Appleseed said...

Returning to the post, it seems to me that in ruling out the death penalty for sedition, treason, insurrection and murder our rulers are claiming to be more morally enlightened than a majority of governments that have ever existed. But what they are actually doing is abandoning their first responsibility which is to protect the citizen from violent disorder and the state from being overthrown.

We even have, if reports are true, some western governments paying ransom money for hostages- thus funding terrorism and ensuring further hostage taking. I have in the last half hour heard on BBC radio 4 another whimpering little report blaming ' radicalisation' of the poor little jihadist boys on 'social exclusion'. Bishop Spacely-Trellis 'We are all guilty!' and his 'long march through the institutions' Marxist chums in broadcasting, law, academia and government are alive and well and their post-Christian 'Enlightenment' thinking continues to advocate more of the same old failed philosophy. They just think their secular liberal revolution hasn't gone far enough yet.

Given that the world is as it really is, and not as Enlightenment Liberals wish it was, this will end badly.

24 August 2014 at 06:21  
Blogger Rambling Steve Appleseed said...

Just Googled Bishop Spaceley Trellis and found this gem. Nail on the head.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/4265957/Peter-Simple-column.html

24 August 2014 at 06:31  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

DanJ0

You don't have to tell me all those things. I spent the first eight years of my marriage in Southern California. My first child was born there. My first day of work involved a two hour commute on the 91 Freeway. For a while I was getting up a 5 am to catch a 6:00 am carpool, and getting home at 7 pm. I was one of those people who was priced out of the market for housing. The one time I went looking at houses out there, the realtor actually apologized to me for the first house he showed me. It was in my price range but ... well, you can image the rest. isn't theory to me. I lived it.

We are where we are not because we were all sitting around one day when an asteroid hit the Earth. We are where we are because people have preferred certain outcomes to others. We remain there because people still prefer those outcomes. And by and large those preferred outcomes favor the interests of adults over their children. It isn't going to change so long as no one wants to change it. But let's not pretend its about economic compulsion and that a hundred wombs would bloom if only circumstances were better. It's about what you are willing to sacrifice for the sake of what you value. Those priorities aren't going to change in fat times. Which is why you don't see a direct correlation between income and increased fertility rate.

carl

24 August 2014 at 06:57  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

24 August 2014 at 07:14  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Tom Mushroom

Make all the excuses for France you like. Their craven behavior damn near threw the world into a thousand years of darkness. Too gutless to act when they could. Too weak to act effectively when action was forced upon them. In the end they did what they swore they would not do. They made a separate peace. And they resisted the German occupier only for the amount of time it took to remove the national underwear. My father fought harder for France than the French. And he was only there six weeks before an artillery shell took him out.

This is a nation that atoned for its collective shame by shaving the heads of women who did literally what the whole nation did metaphorically. And yet France was given a place of honor after the war. It's a travesty. Poland had more claim than France. At least Poland fought hard - and kept on fighting.

carl

24 August 2014 at 07:17  
Blogger IanCad said...

RSA,

Thanks so much for that Steve.
They are with us yet. With us yet.

Carl
We had a little debate about the French; when was it? A couple of years ago?
Then, as now, we differ.
I did not know then that your father had made such a sacrifice.
God Bless him and all the other Americans who gave so much.
The New World rescuing the Old.

BTW. France was an early member of the nuclear club. Better to have them all together in the Security Council.

IGIO
Going back a bit I know, but there is a "Ugly Baby" skit on Youtube by Flip Wilson.
Maybe you've seen it. O, how much more laid back folks were then.

24 August 2014 at 08:48  
Blogger Ivan said...

Johnny @ 23 August 2014 18:03, I had prepared a longer reply last night, but decided that it was too boring
and deleted it. I'll try again:

The machinations of the CIA in Europe were in the main to counter that of the Comintern. The
Communists were in fashion for many decades, and were able to call on the services of the major part
of the intellectual class, along with the violent proletarian class to disrupt economic recovery and civil life. They sought
to deny those who could see through the manipulations of the KGB, such as the Christian Democrats any role in civic life.
The conservative intellectuals were not as well funded and often had difficulties making ends meet. Leo Labedz lived in
a rented flat and even today men such Vladimir Bukovsky don't live the Life of Riley. The CIA was at that time run
by the finest men the West had, William Donavan, James Jesus Angelton, Jesse Helms and backstopped at the political level
by those such as JFK and Richard Nixon. It would never have occured to these men to undermine the West. If they had a co-conspirator
in Europe, it was obviously the Roman Catholic Church, which had been the implacable enemy of the Communists since the earliest days.

The aforementioned Willi Munzenberg, one of Lenin's troublemaking friends, was tasked by him to sow doubt and confusion among
the Europeans prostrate after WWI in preparation for the World Revolution. One of the founders of the Comintern, how can both he and
the then CIA be on the same side? (Though of course, Munzenberg having come to a well-deserved end in 1940 preceded the CIA
by some years.)

A far more important driver for European integration was the economic condition the Europeans found themselves in at the end
of WWII. The Europeans having fought to exhaustion found themselves squeezed between their two behemoth daughters, the US and
the USSR. Lacking both markets and economies of scale the European industries foundered. The original Iron and Steel Union,
guided incidentally by three Catholics was originally formed to address these issues. Tracing the history of just one industry,
that of the aircraft industry, shows the combined effect of the lack of the two factors mentioned above. The Europeans aircraft industry did not have the massive demand that the Americans and the Soviets generated through the Cold War and the race to the moon. Enormous sums were
required for R&D and there was no out but through cooperation and integration. The British struggled manfully on the outside, but by the time of Concorde and the Jaguar fighter, they too had to succumb to the inevitable. And the results are good, without ArianeSpace and Airbus,
do you think the Americans would make it up for the British by giving them a slice of their action?

Some may say that capitalists and their banking toadies are responsible for the evils of the EU, on St Paul's principle that money is at
the root of all evil... But I ask, what about the wankers supporting the BNP ? Don't they love money too and lots of it? What have they done lately, except live on government handouts and make themselves a total nuisance at Motherwell games? What have they done except puking and calling everyone else a Paki or Zionist dog?

continued...

24 August 2014 at 09:08  
Blogger Ivan said...

But back to the larger theme of European integration. The other factor behind the drive for unity was the desire to anchor the Germans firmly
in Western Europe as a conterweight to the Russians. For without the Germans, who at that time were being wooed by the Soviets with numerous
blandishments, the Europeans would only be a backwater to the Soviet land mass. Uncle Joe Stalin proposed in 1952 in the famous
'Stalin note' agreeing to a reunified Germany, with the only proviso being that she should be neutral. This caused serious panic in the corridors
of power and as a result all residual talk of the 'pastoralisation' of Germany was abandoned and the Germans regained much of their freedom of manuevre...

As to the count promoting miscegenation, I hang aroung more or less the same sites as you and came across this only a few months ago. The
buggers running these sites have an overinflated sense of their ideas and promote all kinds of third-rate fellows as heroes and villians. For example who would have heard of small timers such as Leon deGrele, Codrescu, Revilo (Paul or is it Peters?), were it not for these idiots? The fate of those seeing conspiracies everywhere is like that of the boy crying wolf; no one will believe them when the real wolf is at the door. Perhaps this was the intent all along? And with my question have I not contributed to the creation of another conspiracy?

And what about the conspirators on the other side? I don't mean intelligent men such as Malcolm X, but say some rabble-rouser such as the Rev'rnd Al Sharpton. If you run this business by him, would he not immediately sense that the conspiracy was against blacks all along? A plot to take off the cream of the black men, through exposure of some white skin. As a swarthy man from South India it is difficult for me to avoid laughing at this. In the heirarchy of colour, we duskier folks are at the lower end.

24 August 2014 at 09:09  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

YG

Agree with your assessment of Daily mail article..was it sloppy work by proof reader or something more 'sneaky'?

But has Carey lost his mind in evaluating what Islam is and represents in the UK?

"In Britain’s hospitable establishment different beliefs were welcomed but only one was pre-eminent – Christianity. (Indeed we have but we are not pre-eminent anymore and your lot (Hierarchy)have helped achieve this)

The fact is that for too long the doctrine of multiculturalism has led to immigrants establishing completely separate communities in our cities. This has led to honour killings, female genital circumcision and the establishment of sharia law in inner-city pockets throughout the UK.(But old Rowan said that we weren't doing enough, so lets go all sharia happy, to help them feel less 'alienated' in a foreign land? )

It is a situation that mainstream Muslims – the vast and quiet majority – are fed up with (YOU UTTER LIAR...PROOF PLEASE?). They are witnessing the radicalisation of some of their young people and feel powerless to do anything about it (Powerless...Really??).

The majority of Muslim leaders firmly condemn such radicalisation (Where. Show us this majority dissent.), but the appeal of such illicit underground movements to radicalised young men cannot be underestimated (This is because Islam teaches them that they MUST change the environment they find themselves in, so Allah and his may thrive...It's called a Trojan horse except we didn't drag it in, we opened the doors and showered benefit upon benefit for the ungrateful rabble traipsing across the borders).

The best way to challenge a thoroughly bad thing is to offer a better one.

The better idea we can offer is the broad and all-encompassing values of liberal democracy in which we all have a voice and a say in shaping our future together (it appears the 'alienated' muslim chants are going deep under the hierarchy's skin whereas the opposite is true. They SELF ALIENATE!!!). In this must involve the power and co-operation of Muslim communities who need to state, more clearly than they have done so far, their denunciation of these fanatical forms of Islam. (Dear crazy old AB of C..Let imams state that Israel should be forgiven and allowed a place in the world and then watch those silent majorities here go nuts in their mosques...They would not be sooo silent then, would they. They are silent for a reason, bit like the fifth amendment in good ole US of A. No incrimination by religious association...Bit like atheists and their times in power and atrocities carried out in the name of NO god. Communism/Atheism? Not in our name it weren't!)

Islam has many strengths to contribute to our land (Name just ONE?). When I was Archbishop of Canterbury I had a strong and rich friendship with Sheikh Zaki Badawi, who sadly died in 2003.

He often remarked that Muslims had difficulties living as minorities in plural societies and much more work had to be done by Muslim scholars (Because they desire supremacy over the infidels in their midst, you numbskull??). With him I set up an important ‘listening exercise’ that eventually led to a Christian-Muslim Council (They weren't and aren't LISTENING. All one sided, submitting to subversive wishes of pretend victims claptrap. CAPICHE?).

No wonder we cannot look for answers when old codgers like this have gone nuts so publicly.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2732895/Why-I-Christian-believe-banish-evil-British-jihadis-shores-Says-former-Archbishop-Canterbury.html#ixzz3BKOPsYQu
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


Blofeld

24 August 2014 at 09:56  
Blogger Roy said...

In the past few days David Cameron has been body surfing in Cornwall, Barack Obama has been playing golf somewhere, and Matthew Parris wrote an article published in yesterday's Times on the dangers of islamophobia.

Life is obviously continuing as normal.

Don’t lump all Muslims in the extremist camp
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/article4184798.ece

24 August 2014 at 09:59  
Blogger Shadrach said...


Jack said @00:40
Come on, Jack thinks you jest.
You may think I jest but don't count your chickens. Unless they define clearly what they mean by extreme we have no assurance that it won't be long before we are side lined as extreme. The more posters objected to, the more preachers arrested on the street, those who stand up for righteousness and oppose the immoral society of today, then we WILL be called extreme.

24 August 2014 at 10:44  
Blogger Len said...

It is perhaps only when the threat presented by terrorists comes down to a personal level that any action will be taken?.
9/11 is a a case in point.
All the time it is happening' over there' no action will be taken at least no really effective action.
Western Governments seems to vacillate between taking action or to risk being seen as Islamophobic such is the emasculating effect of 'Political Correctness'.
"Peace in our time" said Chamberlain waving his scrap of paper the peace agreement which Hitler had no intention of keeping.
Radical Islam intends to spread across the entire Globe while we watch and wait..

Oh and the UK intends to slap an ASBO on any returning Jihadists (that will have the quaking in their bloodstained boots)

24 August 2014 at 10:49  
Blogger The Explorer said...

bluedog @ 22:54

100 million? Yes, it makes sesne.

When Britain was the foremost world power it was as the British Empire: with all the numbers involved.

Maybe the thinking on immigration was that even if you couldn't keep the Empire physically, you could still retain the numbers game by importing former Empire members into Britain.

It's like the Japanese issue. If the Japanese manage their ageing
problem without resorting to immigration, then in due course there will be fewer people and more space available.

The price will be the dimished world status that goes with a diminution in population.

24 August 2014 at 10:52  
Blogger The Explorer said...

PS "sesne" in this instance was deliberate pun.

24 August 2014 at 10:54  
Blogger bluedog said...

Ivan @ 09.08 says, 'The British struggled manfully on the outside, but by the time of Concorde and the Jaguar fighter, they too had to succumb to the inevitable.'

The problem arose during WW2, when the allies divided responsibility for aircraft production into two streams. The US was largely responsible for the development of transports, such as the DC3 and DC4, while the British were told to concentrate of warplanes, being nearer the front.

After the German surrender, the bottom fell out of the market for warplanes. But if you had focussed on building transports, you were all set for the post-war civil aviation boom.

Look at post-war British civil aircraft like the York, Lancastrian, the catastrophic Avro Tudor and similar products. These bomber derivatives were completely out-classed by the Constellation and DC aircraft. Boeing did a brilliant job on the B29 which morphed into the Stratocruiser.

Then Britain tried to leap-frog with the under-developed Comet. The superb VC10 came too late and the 707 had the market sown up by the mid-sixties. Very sad.

24 August 2014 at 11:00  
Blogger bluedog said...

Yes, Mr Explorer @ 10.52, the Japanese are a fascinating study and it will be interesting to see how their deliberate policy of population decline pans out.

One reads that they have been accepting a few immigrants, from Brazil. But these Brazilians are all ethnic Japanese!

No second thoughts or self-flagellation about the merits of racial purity amongst the sons and daughters of Nippon.

24 August 2014 at 11:06  
Blogger Tom Mushroom said...

Carl

Firstly, I salute your father.

"Make all the excuses for France you like"

I made no excuses for France.

I am saying that the situation was considerably more complicated than you imply. It's something that the French are still coming to terms with.

24 August 2014 at 11:22  
Blogger Tom Mushroom said...

Carl

Firstly, I salute your father.

"Make all the excuses for France you like"

I made no excuses for France.

I am saying that the situation was considerably more complicated than you imply. It's something that the French are still coming to terms with.

24 August 2014 at 11:23  
Blogger seanrobsville said...

Exxon Valdez syndrome.
After 50 years of unquestioned Islamophilia, the political establishment have finally realised they're on the wrong course and are trying to do a U-turn. Most likely they'll just end up with the ship hitting the rocks.

24 August 2014 at 11:24  
Blogger Manfarang said...

Bluedog
"One reads that they have been accepting a few immigrants, from Brazil. But these Brazilians are all ethnic Japanese!"
One reads wrong then.Some of them are mixed.They have brought with them Brazilian cuisine and music.

24 August 2014 at 12:02  
Blogger bluedog said...

Uncle Brian @ 00.53, my somewhat paranoid post about the UN Security Council is prompted by a Chinese initiative to set up a BRICS development bank. Some of His Grace's communicants might be familiar with the name of Jim O'Neil, the former Goldman Sachs chief economist who invented the acronym 'BRIC' to describe the emerging economic powers of Brazil, Russia, India and China. The Chinese promptly took the idea to heart and recruited South Africa into a formalised grouping, which given the Chinese neo-colonial approach to Africa makes complete sense. Hence BRICS.

Communicants who understand China's salami tactics will see in the BRICS Development Bank the genesis of a raft of institutional structures which are designed to subvert and replace their Western equivalents. All for the greater glory of China, of course. If one accepts that the Chinese fully expect to achieve world domination, the idea of a Sino-centric equivalent of the UN, or a restructured UN to reflect Chinese priorities including BRICS realities, cannot be dismissed out of hand.

Whether or not the Chinese have the skills required to achieve their undoubted goals is another matter.

Thanks, Manfarang @ 12.02, I stand corrected. The essential point remains; the Japanese didn't go to Brazil looking for non-Japanese workers. They were looking for the descendants of nineteenth century emigrants from Japan. And they found them.

24 August 2014 at 12:25  
Blogger Manfarang said...

The head of the Islamic Centre of Ireland, Dr Ali Salim, speaking to RTE, said he believed that many of the foreign Islamists who were in Iraq and Syria were there from countries such as Britain and the United States. The Republic's neutrality, he said, was a factor in the non-radicalisation of young Muslims here.Dr Salim said the Muslim community in Ireland "deplores the violence in Iraq and does not recognise the Islamic State" which, he said, was causing huge damage to the reputation of Islam.

24 August 2014 at 12:46  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Manfarang: "Dr Salim said the Muslim community in Ireland "deplores the violence in Iraq and does not recognise the Islamic State" which, he said, was causing huge damage to the reputation of Islam."

I know our mass media here in the UK is useless at reporting certain 'off message' things but I'd really like to see large demonstrations in London by Muslims denouncing the so-called Islamic State as unIslamic and evil. Perhaps they happen and don't really get reported but I doubt it.

24 August 2014 at 12:52  
Blogger Uncle Brian said...

Bluedog, Manfarang

By and large the dekasegi, as they're called, have some Japanese connection, such as, for instance, a man of European descent whose wife is wholly or partly of Japanese ancestry. And I think they consider themselves (and are considered by the Japanese authorities) as guest workers rather than immigrants, who regularly transfer a significant part of their wages back to their families in Brazil.

24 August 2014 at 13:00  
Blogger Manfarang said...

bluedog
The Yellow peril eh?

24 August 2014 at 13:04  
Blogger Manfarang said...

Dan J0
Will a small demonstration in Dublin do?

24 August 2014 at 13:09  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Manfarang @ 13:04

Since I'm the one who raised the issue of Japan in the first place, isn't 'Yellow Peril' about increase in numbers?

bluedog and I were talking about Japan managing a decline in numbers. As I said a while back, diminished status in the world.

24 August 2014 at 13:13  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Tom Mushroom

Things were complex in Germany as well. Complexity doesn't constitute de facto mitigation.

In case I left a false impression, my father wasn't killed in France. He was removed to the US for the sake of his injuries. Dad referred to it as being ZI'ed. His road during the war lead from St Lo to Mortain. And that's as far as he got.

carl

24 August 2014 at 13:13  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Manfarang:

Cancel that. I take it you meant bluedog in realtion to China?

24 August 2014 at 13:16  
Blogger William Lewis said...

Re France's seat at the top-table post WWII: It's my understanding that this was a bit of Realpolitik from Churchill who ultimately wanted a stronger France rather than a weakened one as he knew that Germany would be resurgent again and clearly approved of the standard British foreign policy of maintaining a balance of power in Europe. Churchill's understanding of history was ever to the fore.

It would be nice to think that there are such leaders now looking at and understanding the medium to long term consequences of what is going on in the ME and at home! Given how recently our leaders wanted to arm the Syrian rebels, however, I don't think that the current crop can offer much. Mind you Philip Hammond did speak of betrayal today w.r.t "British" jihadis! One has the feeling that if the Tories play their cards right (big if) then they could recapture the conservative electorate and win the next GE. Assuming they are believed of course.

24 August 2014 at 13:24  
Blogger Ivan said...

Roy@959
Keep calm and score a birdie.
Keep calm and get a suntan.
Keep calm and kiss a muslima.

bluedog@1100. Thank you for the information.

24 August 2014 at 13:25  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Its laughable to hear someone like Robert Winstone, Lord Winstone ffs sake on TV this morning, saying that ISIS is nothing to do with 'the real' Islam. That poverty and underprivilege results in the marginalisation of Muslim 'youth' in Britain and is the reason for hundreds of them going on a Jihad-Jolly Holiday.

It obviously doesn't enter the heads of the apologists like him, that such an excuse doesn't hold water or explain why so many, from so many other countries have been also affected by the same sense of marginalisation and lack of
understanding of Islam's message that we alone are seemingly held responsible for.

They marginalise themselves as soon as they start pointing their arseholes skywards and calling us kuffar anywhere except Mecca.

24 August 2014 at 13:38  
Blogger IanCad said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

24 August 2014 at 14:14  
Blogger IanCad said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

24 August 2014 at 14:20  
Blogger IanCad said...

Carl,

Well, I'm glad your dad did not pay the ultimate sacrifice for the liberties we enjoy today. It seemed terminal to me; thus my post @ 19:29.

That said, it would seem to me, on this day, of all days -- the two hundredth anniversary of our eating and drinking President Madison's dinner-- then proceeding to burn down the White House and almost the entire city of Washington DC.-- that you would at least have the humility not to post on this day.

That is, unless you acknowledge that it was only by the greatest of luck, and with the assistance of the "FRENCH" that you are not under the administration of Whitehall today.

24 August 2014 at 14:22  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ Ivan (09:08 et seq)—At some time, presumably in the 1940s, it was decided to make Europe less white and more Muslim, and my comment at 11:51 yesterday does no more than suggest several interested parties who may have seen mass immigration as a means of achieving their objectives and who had enough influence to bring about a fundamental change in the population of Europe. It may have been all of them, one or two, or none. Whoever it was, their influence was such that even Churchill, a fierce critic of Islam and of non-white immigration in general, was apparently helpless to prevent Muslims and other Third Worlders arriving in Britain.

The CIA may well not have meant to undermine Europe; it may have proceeded on the assumption that ‘United States of Europe’ had a ring of ‘United States of America’ and, the American way being the best, ‘Let’s go for it.’ But, however noble its intentions, the CIA’s intervention has helped undermine accountable government in Europe as power is transferred to Brussels.

You ask how Marxists and the CIA could be on the same side. First, I have only suggested which parties may have been involved in promoting mass immigration, not the extent of their cooperation. Second, Marxists are under no obligation to flaunt their affiliation: what better disguise than a Tory membership card or a mitre?

As well as puking, the BNP runs food banks. I live in hope the two activities remain separate.

You should move to Britain. Here, the hierarchy of colour places the white man at the lower end.

24 August 2014 at 14:25  
Blogger Manfarang said...

Dreadnaught
Marginisation had nothing to do with recruitment to para-militaries in NI?

24 August 2014 at 14:27  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Manfarang

Marginisation had nothing to do with recruitment to para-militaries in NI?

And your point caller?

24 August 2014 at 14:33  
Blogger Manfarang said...

Johnny Rottnborough
Without the help of the third-worlders-the British Indian Army in Burma in the 1940s WW2 would have had a different outcome.(Also in north Africa and other places).

24 August 2014 at 14:34  
Blogger Manfarang said...

Dreadnaught
The complete lack of insight.
It seems many in the present government have no understanding of how others live.

24 August 2014 at 14:39  
Blogger Shadrach said...

Dear old Blowers referenced Lord Carey in the Mail on Line,
I once served as an airman in Egypt and Iraq and can vouch for the kindness and goodness of many Muslim people. Indeed, more than three million have made their home in Britain, and by far the majority want to get on and make good and peaceful homes among us.
Much the same can be said for millions of so-called Christians, Church Goers, who are very nice people but no more a NT Christian than fly. They tacitly acknowledge Jesus as the central character of Christianity but do their lives reflect Biblical Christianity?

The Muslims that Carey refers to are the same, they tacitly acknowledge Islam but do they live their lives as the Quran tells them to live. No, those who do are now the IS supporters and the Imams in the Mosques.

24 August 2014 at 14:40  
Blogger Manfarang said...

Shadrach
You mean the Church Goers should be like their counterpart Church of the Almighty God in China?

24 August 2014 at 14:49  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Absolutely no comparison at all. I served in NI and never came across any case of pretend Irish Nationalists coming in to the cross-hairs.

24 August 2014 at 14:52  
Blogger Manfarang said...

Dreadnaught
I know republicans but "pretend" Irish Nationalists who are they?SDLP?

24 August 2014 at 15:00  
Blogger Shadrach said...

Manfrag,
Not quite sure what you mean. If you are saying that the Chinese Christians have much more enthusiasm for their faith (developed under extreme persecution), then yes. No persecution, no need to develop faith! But yet, they are many, many Christians in this country who have had an encounter with the living God and are alive and genuine.
The other type are those who are nominal, take it or leave it. 'As long as it does not interfere with my lifestyle I will continue'. Much the same with Muslims. The 'nice' ones are those who are because they that's the way they were born but don't ask them about the Quran.

24 August 2014 at 15:17  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ Happy Jack (00:40)

● To me, ‘moral compass’ includes the qualities you mention.
● It is not a statement of supremacy for the Japanese to wish to live among their own kind in Japan, or the Indians in India. Likewise the British in Britain, etc. Countries just work better that way.
● Other races, including the Jews, have an advantage over the white race in that the latter lacks their inherent sense of group identity. If whites had been blessed with a strong group identity, Third World immigration would never—could never—have happened. In that respect, the white race is inferior.
● Heil what’s-his-name.

@ Manfarang (14:34)—Britain was so impressed, she decided to become a Third World country herself.

24 August 2014 at 15:18  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Manfarang

I know republicans but "pretend" Irish Nationalists who are they?SDLP?

You are the one who drew the comparison ffk what reason, between NI and British JihadiJoes - you work it out!

24 August 2014 at 15:39  
Blogger Manfarang said...

Johnny Rottenborough
India is a very diverse place.
The Jews are a diverse people.Who knows you may have sat next to one on a train in Britain without ever knowing.

"Impressed"
Not much chance of Britain becoming a tropical paradise anytime soon.How is the summer weather?

Shadrach
The C of the AG was in the news recently.You must have missed thst.
Anyway about Islam.
There are three groups.
1.Liberals -not so many.Not harmful.
2.Conservatives-a large number.These are people who won't hurt you.No stealing or anything.
3.Extremists- small in number but they have increased due to socio-economic conditions of modern times.Dangerous.

24 August 2014 at 15:49  
Blogger Inspector General in Ordinary said...


Really you lot. One would think the multi cultural message of equality and brotherhood and respecting and alien grievances is all but dead on this site.

24 August 2014 at 16:03  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Inspector @ 16:03

BROTHERhood? Personhood, please; if you want to talk multi culti.

24 August 2014 at 16:51  
Blogger Inspector General in Ordinary said...

Head hung low Explorer. No wonder our government can't entice enough immigrants to come here. They're far better than the rest of us, and of course, our burgeoning economic recovery is entirely down to Eastern Europeans gracing us with their presence.

24 August 2014 at 17:10  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

IanCad

I realize the burning of Washington was supposed to be the "Ok, we've won and now you must surrender" moment, but Americans didn't see it that way. If you read our history books you will see the US won the war of 1812. Yeah, yeah. Treaty of Ghent, and something Latin about Status Quo Bella Lugosi. And I do realize the Britain had been otherwise occupied at the time with that minor skirmish against Napoleon. That's why we took it easy on you.

carl
A proud product of the American public education system

24 August 2014 at 17:17  
Blogger Darter Noster said...

@ bluedog,

I think you're being a little unfair - Britain today has the second or third (depending on exactly what numbers you use) largest aerospace industry in the world; we don't produce many complete aircraft, but we manufacture an enormous range of components and provide a wide range of related services.

The VC10 was stymied by BOAC's insistence on 'hot and high' operating capabilities for African routes, which made it uneconomical for anywhere else.

The Bristol Britannia would have been a world beater when designed in the early 50s, but was obsolete by the early 60s when it finally began to appear.

The best was the Vickers Viscount, which sold in large numbers even in North America and, if fitted with jets, could have been a British 737.

The post-war history of British aviation contains a fair share of missed opportunities and tragedies, but we're not doing too badly even so....

24 August 2014 at 17:40  
Blogger Shadrach said...

Carl,
With the greatest of respect Carl, the Yanks were helping the French and the Spanish so that our Atlantic efforts were well hindered.

24 August 2014 at 17:43  
Blogger IanCad said...

Carl wrote:

"A proud product of the American public education system"

And so you have the right to be proud. Most particularly if you were a resident of the great state of Kansas around the 1900's.

Keeping in mind that the boys had to milk the cows and the girls did household chores, they sure learned a lot during their six hour school day.

A sample of the tests given to fourteen year olds:

Name events connected with the following dates: 1607, 1620, 1800, 1849, and 1865?

What is meant by the following: Alphabet, phonetic orthography, etymology, syllabication?

What are the following, and give examples of each: Trigraph, subvocals, diphthong, cognate letters, linguals?

Use the following correctly in sentences, Cite, site, sight, fane, fain, feign, vane, vain, vein, raze, raise, rays.

Mark diacritically and divide into syllables the following, and name the sign that indicates the sound: Card, ball, mercy, sir, odd, cell, rise, blood, fare, last.

If a load of wheat weighs 3942 lbs., what is it worth at 50 cts. per bu, deducting 1050 lbs. for tare?

District No. 33 has a valuation of $35,000. What is the necessary levy to carry on a school seven months at $50 per month, and have $104 for incidentals?

Find the cost of 6720 lbs. coal at $6.00 per ton.

What is the cost of a square farm at $15 per acre, the distance around which is 640 rods?

Name and describe the following: Monrovia, Odessa, Denver, Manitoba, Hecla, Yukon, St. Helena, Juan Fernandez, Aspinwall and Orinoco.

Name all the republics of Europe and give capital of each.

Describe the movements of the earth. Give inclination of the earth.

Not allowed at tests:
Maps, books, abacus, slide rule, pocket calculators.

No wonder the USA became top dog.

24 August 2014 at 18:03  
Blogger Uncle Brian said...

The 1812 war and the burning of Washington -- I'm pretty sure that was never so much as mentioned in any history lesson. I only found out about it years later. I think they only taught us about the wars that Britain won. Jenkins' Ear War is one I distinctly remember, though I couldn't say now what date it was.

24 August 2014 at 19:22  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

IanCad

To Carl

"And so you have the right to be proud. Most particularly if you were a resident of the great state of Kansas around the 1900's."

Yep, he was.

24 August 2014 at 19:27  
Blogger Tom Mushroom said...

Carl

I said to you: “...you live in a country that's never known the humiliation of having a foreign power invade you three times in less than 100 years.

“Where your countrymen have never had to make decisions about the fine line between surviving and co-operating with an enemy in your street, home and business, in sometimes appalling circumstances.”

A Pole first made this point to me about England and the English.

Jan fought the Germans in 1939, was imprisoned in France in 1940, together with French prisoners. He escaped to fight at Monte Cassino and in north Africa. He escaped from the Arnhem fiasco and was demobbed in England.

Jan was typical of the impossibly brave, mad, loyal Polish generation that suffered and lost so much. To be tipped into Communism under the Russian thumb which they held the US and the UK responsible for.

“We told you and we warned you (UK & US) and you would not listen,” a Communist Mayor told me in 1985. His father was shot at Katyn. Round the table, 70 miles from Oswiecim, his deputy, three Catholic priests, laity and Jan nodded in agreement.

24 August 2014 at 20:13  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Carl @ 17:17

I thought part of the reason for the 1812 war (apart from the Royal Navy's habit of press ganging American sailors: I'd have been hopping mad about that myself if I'd been an 1812 American) was to add Canada to the US. That failed (officially, anyway).

So the British won in the North, and were routed in the South. (Hence the song, "We fired our guns and the British kept a comin'...")

The Americans also (inadvertantly) aided British ship design. Not being in a position to build full ships of the line, the Americans came up with something intermediate: frigates far heavier than anything the Europeans had. (A bit like the later battle cruiser: with the speed of a cruiser and the armament of a battleship.) After suffering losses accordingly, the Royal Navy adopted the idea for its own ships.

24 August 2014 at 20:25  
Blogger The Explorer said...

PS: Warfare in those days was all very civilised. Press-ganged Americans could be required to fire upon the French, but were excused gun-crew duty when the target was American.

24 August 2014 at 20:41  
Blogger The Explorer said...

In the film 'Master and Commander', the American ship of the novels is changed into a French one.

Funding for the film, (and the need to keep American audiences happy) probably had something to do with the decision

24 August 2014 at 21:01  
Blogger Darter Noster said...

Explorer,

Ever larger frigates were part of a general trend in those days, which the Royal Navy did adopt but then tended to keep its most powerful ships, for obvious reasons, in the European theatre.

The French and the Americans were well ahead of us in this trend, although the Royal Navy was producing 44 gun (as opposed to earlier 28 or 36 gun) frigates by the time of the war of 1812.

In the mid 19th century Britain effectively talked the USA out of annexing Canada - if it had wanted to do so, as the British government recognised at the time, and as a substantial section of US opinion wanted to do, it could have done more or less unopposed - at least by Britain; what the Canadians would have done is one of history's great "what ifs".

Fortunately sense prevailed, and instead of making enemies out of each other Britain and the US grew gradually closer during the late 19th century, whilst Germany chose to piss the Americans off with ill considered actions in Venezuela and Haiti. One of the great scenes from that period involved British navy sailors cheering the American fleet leaving harbour in the Spanish-American war - a war in which Britain, expected to support a fellow European colonial power, made it very clear where her sympathies lay.

24 August 2014 at 21:45  
Blogger Elwin Daniels said...

The Labour shadow home secretary in today's Sunday Times repeats the establishment mantra that IS in nothing to do weigh Islam. Its like saying that AIDS is nothing to do with anal sex-it avoids upsetting certain people but will kill with ignorance.

But fear not. Any blooded Jihad is returning from Iraq or Syria to Bow, Bristol, Bradford or Birmingham will have to engage with a de-radicalisation programme.

So that's all right.

24 August 2014 at 21:51  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Darter @ 21:45

The 'USS Constitution' (which sank, if I remember, five Royal Navy ships), had 32 x 24 pounders, and 20 x 32 pounders. That was quite some armament for a frigate!

The Napoleonic War went on so long that the British were running short of oak. The French could draw on their own much-more extensive forests than ours, and on the forests of conquered territories.

The Royal Navy came up with the only practical solution: let the French build a new ship, and then immediately capture it.

Sure, the Americans could have taken Canada later in the century, but in 1812 they were, after all, still a young nation.

24 August 2014 at 22:05  
Blogger Darter Noster said...

Explorer,

True, the Americans in 1812 were building larger frigates along the French lines. The Royal Navy's strength then lay in its 2 deck 74 gun line-of-battle ships, which were all concentrated in Europe and the Med.

The US navy though didn't become a global power until the 1880s and 90s, when they finally embarked on a battleship building programme in response to threats from Spain, in particular. By the end of World War One the US and Royal Navies were roughly equal, and remained so until World War Two, by the end of which the US navy was significantly more powerful.

24 August 2014 at 22:26  
Blogger IanCad said...

Sure, we didn't build very good ships, but we certainly had better guns and crew.

To quote Nelson: "Lay a Frenchman close and you will beat him"

Of course, the incredible training that the British sailors received during the blockades mustn't be overlooked.

24 August 2014 at 22:42  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

Why can't our PM take a similar line to this:
" If minorities prefer Sharia law, then we advise them to go to those places where that's the state law. Russia does not need minorities. Minorities need Russia, and we will not grant them special privileges, or try to change our laws to fit their desires, no matter how loud they yell 'discrimination' - Vladimir Putin.

24 August 2014 at 22:53  
Blogger Uncle Brian said...

Marie 1797

That's a great quote from Vladimir the Terrible. We need to spread it around a bit. Do you have a source or link?

Thanks
Brian

24 August 2014 at 23:33  
Blogger bluedog said...

Messrs Explorer & Darter Noster, there's an excellent book on the foundation of the US Navy, 'Six Frigates', by Ian W Toll. Outlines the very capable planning that lay behind the idea of the 44 gun frigates.

Darter Noster, the point is that the massive war-surplus fleets of DC3s and DC4s gave the US an unbeatable market position in post-war aviation. This was surely the US plan when taking the role as supplier of Allied transport aircraft. From a technical perspective it also seems that the big US radial engines were more economically efficient than the liquid cooled Merlin derivatives invariably used in British post-war airliners. I agree the Viscount and its successor the Vanguard were good aircraft, but where is Vickers Aviation today? There are no longer any solely British produced trans-Atlantic aircraft. For all its faults Airbus turns out great product and the A380 leaves the B747 for dead.

Manfarang @ 13.04 says, 'The Yellow Peril, eh?'.

Just saying what the Chinese are saying. If it suits you to call that the Yellow Peril, you will probably go on to underestimate Chinese ambition. They give every sign of seeking to settle old scores, in particular their humiliation by European powers in the 19th century. They continue to develop weapons that are intended to drive the US Navy out of the western Pacific. The recent friendship between China and Japan has faded as we know. It seems that whenever there is internal unrest, the CCP cranks up the xenophobic music as a substitute for democratic reform.

China keeps offering the US a G2 policy in which these two Pacific powers have their own hemispheric spheres of influence. As a resident of Thailand you will be looking forward to living in a Chinese vassal state, no?

24 August 2014 at 23:49  
Blogger Martin Marprelate said...

It's been a good year for caliphates, I notice.

Boko haram has just declared one in part of Nigeria.

You wait 90-odd years for a caliphate and then two come along together.

24 August 2014 at 23:58  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

IanCad

I didn't do too bad with that test. Some of the words and references were arcane. I would have been incapable of working with old units of measure without being able to look them up. I didn't know some of the geography. Nothing in US history jumps out at me from 1800 or 1849 but the others are obvious. The only question that put me totally at a loss was this:

Trigraph, subvocals, diphthong, cognate letters, linguals?

Ummm ... yeah. Can you take the first derivative of those? Because that looks suspiciously like Greek to me.

carl

25 August 2014 at 00:19  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

Uncle Brian
It seems it could be an adaptation by someone from this document:

Prime Minister Vladimir Putin takes part in an expanded meeting of the Board of the Federal Migration Service 26th Jan 2012

“Russia must not be a country that anyone can enter whenever and however he likes.”

In particular this paragraph:

“On the whole, the adaptation of guest workers is a separate and comprehensive issue. We must create the conditions for immigrants to normally integrate into our society, learn Russian and, of course, respect our culture and traditions and abide by Russian law. In this regard, I believe that the decision to make learning the Russian language compulsory and administer exams is well grounded. To do so, we will need to carry out major organisational work and introduce corresponding legislative amendments. I’d like to ask the Federal Migration Service and other departments to submit specific proposals to the government. These proposals should be openly discussed with ethnic minorities as well as public and religious organisations. This should be mandatory for all guest workers regardless of their future employment.”

https://web.archive.org/web/20130501091111/http://government.ru/eng/docs/17877/

25 August 2014 at 01:03  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

PS
Reading the whole document I think that Mr Putin is a very reasonable and intelligent leader.

25 August 2014 at 01:05  
Blogger Uncle Brian said...

Marie 1797

Thanks, Marie, that's an interesting document but it doesn't seem to address the specific issue of sharia law. I'll do some googling and see what crops up.

Your're up very late tonight, aren't you, Marie? Everything all right, I hope? Where I am, it's still only 9.20 p.m.

Regards
Brian

25 August 2014 at 01:20  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

How quickly some lose their believe that Christianity really is transnational and transcultural. However we arrived here, be it Masonic-Jewish intrigue, or CIA plotting, or whatever, we are here and have to deal with it.

Jack believes as a nation and member of the UN we should use force to repel IS and restore the lands they have taken to their rightful peoples. We should also look to our laws to ensure any radical sedition is eliminated and people accept our heritage and values.

Alas, the one time accepted Christian values are insufficient to bind us together. So we look to *race* or the *state* or *human rights* or some other force to weld us together to resist a perceived enemy that threatens us. Really, all the time, the greater enemy is within.

Jack agrees with Putin's words, regardless of what people say about him or his motives. In Russia you are welcome if you respect the Christian faith. Practice your own religion or be an atheist, you will be tolerated but your beliefs will not be accepted as 'equal' or 'equivalent' to Christianity. No religious indifference there, my friend. Do not bring your religious radicalism or liberal relativism with you if you want to make Russia your new home.

How do we recover without abandoning our Christian principles when our leaders are neither courageous or Christian? God knows. But we don't abandon our Christian values and principles because we are not called to evil.

The Book of Revelation is not an almanac to predict the future. It is a book of hope. It calls us to trust in Jesus' promise, "Behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age" - and to endure whatever happens. In the end, good triumphs over Satan because the victory has already been won. This book carries a message of hope for all who believe.

25 August 2014 at 02:05  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

Uncle Brian

I can't find the exact quote it might be a bit like the speeches and quotes on immigration attributed to Australia's Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard, adaptations or interpretations of things they said written up by someone else.


I'm a bit of a night bird, whereabouts are you?

25 August 2014 at 02:10  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

Well said Happy Jack

25 August 2014 at 02:25  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Jack

Jack believes as a nation and member of the UN we should use force to repel IS and restore the lands they have taken to their rightful peoples.

What's the UN got to do with anything?

carl

25 August 2014 at 02:43  
Blogger Manfarang said...

Bluedog 23:49
China has some territorial disputes with neighboring countries but regarding the European countries what happened in the nineteeth century has largely become history among the younger Chinese.There isn't much resentment towards westerners.
If the Inspector wants a nice Chinese wife I could fix him up.
Europe is looked upon by the Chinese today as a place to do business
Memories of the Japanese remain raw but their economies have become integrated to an extent.
Thailand is becoming part of Asean Economic Community in 2015 not a vassal state of China.
Burma opened up to the world to avoid dependence on China.

25 August 2014 at 03:12  
Blogger Manfarang said...

I should add a nice Catholic Chinese wife.

25 August 2014 at 03:16  
Blogger Manfarang said...

Also there is no democratic reform in mainland China.

25 August 2014 at 03:21  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Carl

"What's the UN got to do with anything?"

Jack doesn't know but it may offer some glimmer of hope if it truly moves towards making the world a better place. Presently, it is a dishonourable, relativist body with states just promoting their global interests.

What's the alternative? Bankruptcy and untold deaths for the USA and Britain if it attempts to restore order on its own? Or withdrawal into our *own* nations?

25 August 2014 at 03:48  
Blogger Ivan said...


Johnny, the men who ran Europe at that time were Catholics: Adenauer, deGaulle, deGaspari and on the side Franco. These men were not toadies for the Muslims. On the American side, the CIA and FBI were run by Catholics or their sympathisers. The reason is clear, Catholics were the most reliable of anti-Communists. It is instinctive for anyone who listens to the Pope. Had there been a Marxist or Trotskyite plot these men would have rolled it up in short order. So in fact, the conspiracy for a European Union such as it exists, seems to be a Catholic one. Which accounts for the bitterness of the Holy Father, John Paul the Great, when he was reduced to begging the modern masters of the EU to include some token reference to Christianity in their protocols.

25 August 2014 at 03:59  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Jack

Presently, it is a dishonourable, relativist body with states just promoting their global interests.

That's all it has ever been, Jack. That's all it can ever be. It was never conceived as a supranational authority. It would not exist today if it had been so conceived. It was conceived as a military hegemony of the victorious powers from WWII. That vision collapsed immediately under the weight of the emerging Cold War. It has always been and will always be an instrument of the nation states that compose it.

You will never get a resolution through the Security Council unless all five permanent members believe it is in their individual interests to do so. And then who is going to enforce the resolution?

carl

25 August 2014 at 04:55  
Blogger IanCad said...

Carl

I have to confess; it was pretty much all Greek to me.
OK on the math though.

It was my great privilege to know (in the late Eighties) some very ancient Kansans. Both just shy of the century mark.

They were taught Latin and Greek in their public (state) schools.

Truly, Midwesterners are the salt of the earth.

Ian

25 August 2014 at 08:20  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Ian Cad @ 22:42

Why bother to build ships yourself when you could capture the French ones?

You're right about the superior British gunnery.

Royal Navy advice with regard to the three American heavy frigates (after bad experiences) was to engage only if the odds were two to one.

In the 'Shannon'/'Chesapeake' encounter, where the firepower was roughly equal, years of experience fighting the French told in the 'Shannon's' favour.

25 August 2014 at 09:27  
Blogger IanCad said...

No doubt about it Explorer our navy was superb.
So much owed to the Carron Iron Works as well.

Of course Nelson, deservedly, is heralded as the master.
Hawke, Jervis and Anson pretty much forgotten.

I sure hope Carl dosen't bring up John Paul Jones.

25 August 2014 at 09:48  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Ian:

Don't give Carl ideas!

Anyway, while the thread continues, we ought to get back to its topic.

(I suppose the detour has been relevant in a way: past achievement compared with present.)

25 August 2014 at 09:59  
Blogger Len said...

Ivan
'The reason is clear, Catholics were the most reliable of anti-Communists'

Also probably the reason Hitler was never excommunicated (although he was baptised as a Catholic) and also the reason Hitler had the support of the Vatican?.

25 August 2014 at 10:15  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

I see Boris has joined in now, if you look at thr Sky News page. Unfortunately I can't copy and paste his words on my phone but it's worth a laugh having a look: bunker-busters, virgins, and prats in heaven. Heh.

I'm quite interested in this idea floating around by David Davis etc that British passports could be revoked to make people essentially stateless. I'm not sure how that works internationally but presumably it happens quite a lot when illegal immigrants here destroy their documents to prevent deportation, and their presumed origin country refuses to take them back on spec.

25 August 2014 at 10:31  
Blogger Ivan said...

Len probably since Hitler, by incarcerating and killing thousands of priests and nuns had already excommunicated himself. The Catholic religious were among the very first of his victims. You should be able to check this up.

25 August 2014 at 10:33  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older