Wednesday - February 03, 2010
THE POPE AND HARRIET HARPERSON
More on the pope because ....
I find it supremely interesting that while the pope is speaking about the religious rights of Christains and of course his own flock, the homosexual tide along with their allies are threatening to swamp his visit with protests and in fact want to have him banned. What bloody cheek.
Where are the four thousand the protest groups say they will raise, when it comes to muslims taking to the streets or these unholy islamic preachers spewing hate and calling for sheria law in a country that does not belong to them. Where are they then? What an easy target the pope is for these cowards. You know damn well and probably they have already thought of it, that if they protest muslims, they are likely to get a boo-boo. The pope on the other hand, won’t get physical.
Catholic adoption agencies will be forced to make a choice between what they believe religiously wrong, ie. adoption by same sex couples, and simply shutting their doors. One or two it’s been reported, already have.
Lets say the pope is wrong to begin with for stating his opinion. Lets carry it further. Let us say his position is all wrong from the getgo. He is not preaching hate. He isn’t calling for the UK to convert to Rome. He doesn’t even call for the death of ppl who deny god. In fact, he prays for them. Why then should his visit be blocked by these soreheads? These easily offended blockheads who look under their beds each night no doubt, thinking the odd one off insult might be lurking there. BTW ... although he talks otherwise, the leader of this queer group of folks does not speak for all homosexuals. There actually are some who agree with the pope on some major issues.
Here’s a quote and the link to the whole very interesting editorial is HERE
First, it needs to be asked loud and clear: why would any gay people hoping to adopt children go to a Catholic agency? They don’t need to.
Rightly or wrongly, these days gay couples invariably have first place in the queue for an adopted child from state-run agencies because politically correct local authorities are attempting to make up for the years when gays were barred by the law from being adoptive parents.
Pope facing protests in Britain over his attack on Labour’s equality lawBy Steve Doughty
Historians said it was the first direct intervention in British politics by a Pontiff in 300 years.
For centuries, Popes have avoided any comments on domestic politics to free British Catholics from the smear that they are loyal to a foreign power.
The National Secular Society yesterday signalled it would organise protests among gay groups, feminists, pro-abortion campaigners and victims of sexual abuse by priests.
‘He has already indicated that he will attack equal rights and promote discrimination.’
Prominent gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell said: ‘The Pope’s criticism is a coded attack on the legal rights granted to women and gay people.
Benedict XVI said in his lecture that the effect of some equality legislation ‘has been to impose unjust limitations on the freedom of religious communities to act in accordance-with their beliefs’.
‘In some respects it actually violates the natural law upon which the equality of all human beings is grounded and by which it is guaranteed,’ he said.
Miss Harman, in Cadiz for a conference of women’s ministers, said: ‘We have never insisted on non-discrimination legislation applying to religious jobs . . . however, when it comes to non-religious jobs, those organisations must comply with the law.’
This loony tune so badly wants EVERYONE to be her idea of equal, she is demanding that city councils and other bodies have numbers of women and racial minorities in jobs even where there aren’t the numbers to support her demand. For example, a town or village somewhere that just does not have the number or perhaps no muslims or black ppl and perhaps not a lot of females interested in office. No matter. They MUST by her lights be represented anyway. Even if it means going outside the area to find them.
Posted by peiper
on 02/03/2010 at 12:23 PM
Filed Under: • Big Brother • Gay Gay Gay! • Religion • UK •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Tuesday - February 02, 2010
The Pope has made an unprecedented attack on the Government … pay attention to this.
Not fit for much in the way of posting today. Must be the weather.
Then I read this. POPE & POLITICS. At first I didn’t pay it much attention. But after awhile, seeing the comments ppl were making and hearing the issue debated on radio, I got to thinking this was more important then I first thought.
There are some folks who claim the pope has no business making any comments re. govts. anywhere. I’m not Catholic and I’m not religious either but, I’m not too sure about that last opinion. Why shouldn’t the pope make his feelings known? It isn’t as though it’s the old days when he could galvanize an entire country to do Rome’s bidding. And I am not so sure he doesn’t have some valid points to make. You don’t like what he has to say fine. Then debate the issue without getting nasty.
The homosexual community have spoken out and many have even suggested that his planned visit here should be banned. And these are the folks always banging on about rights and freedom of speech. Oh right. Freedom to express their views but damned if they want others to have the same privilege.
Lets be very clear on something. The pope’s comments are NOT directed at that community solely. He has spoken on a number of issues.
Can anyone tell me why a Catholic school or a Baptist or Jewish school, should be bound by law to admit those who do not in any way share the faith or religion of a school? And btw, many a non Catholic has received a pretty good education at Catholic schools.
What most of this has to do with is that nut case Harriet Harperson (Harman) and her “everyone MUST be equal” crap. It is she and her agency and the govt. that seem intent on interfering in religious schools and dictating to them. And one really oddball thing about a lot of this is, many of them are not even religious themselves. But they’re quite willing to tell the religious how their schools should be run, all in the name of ‘equality.’
Pope’s intervention sparks equality bill row
That’s the headline at the link above. But what “intervention?” Is having an opinion and speaking out as head of a church, intervention?
Maybe it is. It appears to be open to debate among quite a few people.
This is just one of the issues.
By politics.co.uk staff
Catholic pastors are preparing for their biggest confrontation with the government in years after the Pope encouraged them to take on Harriet Harman’s equality bill.
Benedict XVI has warned the legislation, currently working its way through parliament, imposes “unjust limitations on the freedom of religious communities”.
It could strip the Catholic Church in Britain of its ability to discriminate against homosexuals in employment matters and even force them to allow women into the priesthood.
Here are a couple of reader comments on this I found at the Telegraph.
Of course the Pope should comment. I am not a Roman Catholic but this government law is just one more assault on our freedoms. How ridiculous that anyone could consider it reasonable that someone who rejects and even opposes Christian values should be able to insist on working for a Christian organisation. This is a direct attack on the freedom to believe and associate with others who believe the same. I would not find it at all objectionable for a Muslim organisation to insist that its employees should all be Muslim.
I am Reformed and certainly do not agree with Roman Catholic Doctrines; nevertheless, one must ask, why is it that the Archbishop of Canterbury fails to speak out on moral issues with clarity? Is it because he is so liberal and is happy with the staus quo? He certainly gives the impression that he is “wishy-washy” in his theology, and fails to make an impact on society as a whole, far less politicians.
In any event, as I posted elsewhere today in the DT, the Equality Bill is not merely Harriet Harman’s desire; rather, it’s an EU diktat.
But not everyone agrees of course.
If the church cannot stop discriminating it is not serving its purpose, not following the inclusive teachings of the bible but off on its own sick perverted dogma. In our society we need to stop discrimination and the church should be leading that, not continuing to insist of legal permission to discriminate.
“to drive religious belief and practice into the sphere of the private only” Isn’t that where it belongs anyway? Worship whatever you want but don’t try to push it on me. Gay is not a choice. You are born that way or not. So to discriminate against it is the same as discriminating against someone for having a different skin color. It doesn’t make them worse or better just different.
Naturally enough my favorite is this one, no surprise.
I wish the press would stop the misuse of the word GAY. If they mean homosexual or lesbian then say so .
The comments are quite interesting and can be found HERE
Posted by peiper
on 02/02/2010 at 11:35 AM
Filed Under: • Education • Nanny State • Religion • UK •
• Comments (4)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Wednesday - January 20, 2010
Holland … a place where your observations about a particular religion lands you in court.
Personally, I think Wilders is a hero. His mistake, if you want to call it that, was to be openly critical of the ROP.
This is the man who for a time was denied entry to Britain because of his outspoken views. Everyone and including the Dutch apparently, tip toe around muzzies and their religion like they’re walking on eggshells. I guess they are. But there is a solution to this insidious problem.
This is a VERY long article found at European News, and so I’ve cut it and the whole thing is at the link below.
The Wilders trial: Torquemada would be proud
International Free Press Society
By Arthur LeggerAny one who still claims that the trial against Geert Wilders MP, leader of the Party for Freedom (9 seats in Parliament and 27 in the polls), which starts on the 20th of January, is not a political process: get a grip.
Accused by the Dutch ‘Openbaar Ministerie’ exactly a year ago for insulting Islam, comparing the Koran to Mein Kampf and delivering hate speeches, the coming trial against Wilders suddenly got a Kafkaesque and potentially murderous twist. Finally, seven days before his first day in Court, all fangs were out and faces off.
“It is irrelevant whether Wilder’s witnesses might prove Wilders’ observations to be correct”, the ‘Openbaar Ministerie’ stated, “what’s relevant is that his observations are illegal”.
(So it’s come to that has it? The freedom loving Dutch govt. can now prosecute (and persecute) a person for their “observations.")
Unexpected and breaching court procedures the detailed indictment of 21 pages, which Wilders received on the 4th of December and sums up in verbatim all of his Islam and Koran critique in interviews and Fitna, was amended with new accusations of racism against muslims and Moroccans. On top of this, Paul Vellerman, the public prosecutor of the Amsterdam Court decided that the Wilders trial had to be regarded as “an ordinary trial open for public and with a normal procedure, which doesn’t deserve the Department of Justice’s highly secured bunker. His is a normal case and we’ll treat it as such”.
It’s sad to note that Mohammed Bouyeri, the murderer of Theo van Gogh, and Volkert van der Gaag, the assassin of Pim Fortuyn, were tried in this specially designed bunker, but that Wilders has to rely on his personal bodyguards and full metal jacket to ward of terrorists. No safe room for him, which recently secured Kurt Westergaard and his granddaughter, but for months on end the vulnerability of a sitting duck.
The demonized FortuynTo a connoisseur of the classic art of Dutch political murder, revived in 2002 with the assassination of the deliberatedly unprotected and demonized Pim Fortuyn, this twist of fate comes, however, as no surprise. The ‘Openbaar Ministerie’ had to do something. Presented with much aplomb in January, already on the 10th of March it turned out that the case against Wilders had one crucial weak spot: it might not hold in Court.
For in a comparable case the Dutch High Court acquitted a Dutchman of his earlier conviction of ‘Group-insult’ of Muslims. He had been sentenced to jail for hanging a poster in front of his window that stated: “Stop the cancerous growth named Islam”. The High Court ruled that “if one insults a religion, one doesn’t automatically insult its believers”.
Gerard Spong, one of the lawyers who lodged complaints against Wilders, was quick to stress, however, that the case against an MP was far more complex than a poster: “Wilders is certainly not off the hook”. But to most professors in Law the High Court ruling proved that Wilders would win with his hands down. Ybo Buruma, a highly influential professor in Criminal Law at Nijmegen University concluded on the 11th of January 2010 that “the prosecution of Geert Wilders is a very nice exercise, but is utterly pointless for it will not lead to a conviction”.
Traditionally with such a High Court ruling and severe scholarly critique the ‘Openbaar Ministerie’ wouldn’t fail to reconsider and dismiss charges. But already a year ago the Wall Street Journal had immediately grasped that “Muslim-immigration [was] eroding traditional Dutch liberties”, forcing Dutch Law into a radically new course of censorship. Observing that Wilders’ critique of Islam outraged muslims around the globe, the Journal chided: “If freedom of speech means anything, it means the freedom of controversial speech. Consensus views need no protection”.
The Wall Street Journal must have been either clairvoyant or hysterically well informed: Paul Vellerman, Amsterdam’s Court public prosecutor, and Birgit van Roessel, the Court’s second public prosecutor, who’re both heading the trial against Wilders, also both are working for the National Expertise Centre Discrimination. This Centre is the leading organization of the ‘Openbaar Ministerie’ to track down “crimes of expression and speech”. The Centre was responsible for lodging complaints against cartoonist Gregorius Nekschot.
Posted by peiper
on 01/20/2010 at 04:17 PM
Filed Under: • Big Brother • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Daily Life • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • EUro-peons • Government • Religion • RoPMA •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Friday - January 08, 2010
Christianity’s survival may depend on something as prosaic as immigration control
This is how the entire line is supposed to read. But you get the idea. And the article it comes from is quite interesting. You don’t have to be religious to appreciate this. Take a look.
Christianity’s survival as a mass movement may depend on something as prosaic as immigration control
The church fights back against Islamification
Lord Carey’s brave call to limit immigration is a timely defence of Christian values.
By Damian Thompson
08 Jan 2010We have had to wait decades for this moment, but it has finally happened. A leading British clergyman has said something sensible about immigration.
Lord Carey of Clifton, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, this week signed a declaration by the Cross Party Group on Balanced Migration calling for an urgent tightening of borders to stop the British population reaching 70 million by 2029. He also gave an interview yesterday in which he called for a tougher Church. “We Christians are very often so soft that we allow other people to walk over us, and we are not as tough in what we want, in expressing our beliefs, because we do not want to upset other people,” he said.
Tougher church … people walking all over us … controls on immigration: it really is not all that difficult to join the dots. Later in the interview, Lord Carey almost joined them for us, suggesting that there might be a “points system” based on respect for Britain’s Christian heritage.
Some of Lord Carey’s critics will accuse him of blowing a dog whistle to racists. That is nonsense. Lord Carey is a veteran anti-racist: he enjoys the sort of following among African evangelicals that Bill Clinton did among black Americans. But if Lord Carey were accused of whistling to Christians worried by the prospect of millions of dogmatic Muslims in Britain, then he would find it difficult to rebut the charge. Politicised Islam is at the forefront of his mind: he knows that Britain’s evangelical Christians are fed up with being told to develop ever closer ties with their Muslim neighbours.
These evangelicals see Muslim communities that are increasingly hard to distinguish from ghettos; whose young men are sympathetic towards Islamist insurgents; and whose elders enforce a Sharia law that bullies young British Muslim women at home and persecutes Christians abroad. (Nothing, not even the issue of homosexuality, has done more to damage the authority of Dr Rowan Williams in the conservative provinces of the Anglican Communion than his idiotic equivocation on British Sharia.)
Britain’s black and Asian Christian leaders will support Lord Carey in this controversy; many of them have seen Islamism at work in their home countries. Only one Church of England bishop has resigned his see in protest at Church leaders’ feebleness in the face of Islamism, and he is an immigrant: Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, the former Bishop of Rochester. In contrast, the rest of the hierarchy, together with all the Roman Catholic bishops of England and Wales, still adhere to the old orthodoxy that immigration is by definition a glorious blessing because it “enriches” our culture.
In Europe, however, many Catholic bishops never really subscribed to that orthodoxy in the first place, and now they are talking openly about the coming “Islamification” of Europe. Yesterday, just as Lord Carey was issuing his own warning, Cardinal Miloslav Vlk, the Archbishop of Prague, marked his retirement with a melodramatic prophecy. “Unless the Christians wake up, life may be Islamised and Christianity will not have the strength to imprint its character on the life of people, not to say society,” he said.
The Cardinal is right, but only up to a point. The Islamification of parts of Europe is indeed under way. As Christopher Caldwell says in his book Reflections on the Revolution in Europe, Muslims “vie for dominance” in Rotterdam, Strasbourg, Marseilles, suburbs of Paris and Berlin, Bradford, Leicester, the periphery of Manchester and east London.
Where Cardinal Vlk displays naivety is in his proposed remedy: he is optimistic that the Church can persuade the West to reject the empty secularism that has created a Europe-wide vacuum filled by people of another faith.
The message that “secularism” is the real enemy of Christianity is parroted by liberal bishops everywhere. Although they may be horrified by Cardinal Vlk’s talk of Islamification, they share his belief that the essential division in the world is between “people of faith” and rootless materialists. Pope John Paul II also subscribed to that world-view. But Pope Benedict XVI, significantly, does not. Benedict wants to convince secular-minded people that, in an odd way, they are already part of the Christian flock, because many of their ideals are rooted in the ethics of Christianity.
In other words, the Church’s respect for the dignity of the human person is broadly shared by those secular intellectuals committed to a free society. The Pope recognises this, which is why he has spent so much time talking to them; so does Bishop Nazir-Ali, whose friends include atheist thinkers whose respect for the West’s Christian heritage is far greater than that of Muslim community leaders or their multiculturalist allies.
In the long term, the future of Western civilisation can be secured only by an alliance between Christians and secularists against the totalitarian ideology of Islamism. That is a strange prospect; and even more uncomfortable is the realisation that Christianity’s survival as a mass movement may depend on something as prosaic as immigration control. But that is surely what Lord Carey is hinting at, and it is brave of him to do so.
Now the big question is , will anyone listen? This island’s immigration is a mess and worse, as LyndonB has commented on more then once. And he is someone in a very good position to know the truth of it.
The bleeding heart hand wringers on the left even find reasons not to deport those who are illegal if their home country is, they will claim, a danger to them. They didn’t even deport airplane hijackers a couple of years ago.
As a bystander here looking on, it does seem that like the USA, it’s the Christian community who bend over backwards and the Christian community who make allowances for others and the Christian community who MUST do all the understanding and finally, the Christian community must never be seen to offend anyone. EVER!
It has to be a frustrating experience being a devout Christian these days.
Posted by peiper
on 01/08/2010 at 09:01 AM
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Illegal-Aliens and Immigration • Religion • UK •
• Comments (8)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Tuesday - December 22, 2009
SOMETHING A LITTLE DIFFERENT TO END MY EVENING HERE. ALSO FITS THE SEASON.
I have visited this wondrous place on more then one occasion. For all my ranting and griping and complaining fits of temper with this country, I suppose I’m lucky living in a place with so much history. Not only that, but living in an age of digital cameras where I can record some of what I see. Which would mean not a lot if I couldn’t share some of it now and then. Still, these shots don’t quite convey what walking up that stairway to this ancient church is like. Or being inside it all alone. No tourists. Just myself. Darn. Almost makes me wish I were religious. Well think about it. I feel like I’m missing something. Maybe it’s the season.
ST. SWITHUN’S CHURCH, WINCHESTER, ENGLAND
St Swithun-upon-Kingsgate is a very special church, one of the medieval gems of Winchester, built over one of its city gates on the line of the foundations of the Roman City wall. The first surviving reference to Kingsgate occurred in 1148, that to the church itself in 1264, when it was burned down. St Swithun-upon-Kingsgate has therefore been a house of prayer for at least seven hundred and fifty years.
HERE’S ONE VIEW OF KING’S GATE. I don’t know if they actually still close it at night. Never thought about that till now. On the other side is the Winchester Cathedral Close. It houses buildings (olde) for retired clergy and anyone who’d been working for Winchester Cathedral.
Although common in medieval times, churches built over medieval city gates are now very rare. In those times, travel was dangerous, and it would have been common for travellers and pilgrims to give thanks for a safe journey in such a church. In the days before literacy was common, people would have used its wall paintings, statues, and other features as aids to their thanksgiving prayer.
NO SURPRISE HERE. THE CHURCH IS OVER THE ARCH.
AND HERE’S THE ENTRANCE, TO THE RIGHT OF THE ARCH UNDER THAT STEEP ROOF LINE.
THE PHOTO OF THE STAIRS GOING UP IS NOT MINE. IT WAS ON THE NET.
I TOOK THIS ONE COMING DOWN. I STILL CAN’T RECALL WHY I COULDN’T GET A SHOT GOING UP.
In the 1660’s, the porter of Kingsgate, Robert Allen, lived in the church and kept pigs in it. It is certainly possible that children were born here in something resembling the conditions of a stable. Also, as a very special upper room, the Parish is extremely fortunate to have this building as one of its churches. There could hardly be a better place to remember the incarnation and to celebrate the Last Supper. In these surroundings, it is not difficult to feel the thanksgiving, which is at the heart of any Eucharist. Many people come to sit here in silent thanksgiving. For the passing visitor or modern pilgrim, this is a great blessing but this building has much more to offer.
As we look at its features, it is not difficult to realise that they have a story to tell. We have put together some of these stories to help people on their own spiritual journeys. It is possible to do the same for churches and buildings in all our lives and we hope that this will encourage you to do so.
History
The Roman foundations of the city wall, of which Kingsgate arch is a part, can be seen near the river and also exist in the cellars of some houses in St Swithun Street. The arch is mentioned in the so-called Winchester Domesday Book in 1148. The first mention of St Swithun-upon-Kingsgate is in 1264 when citizens burned it down in a dispute with the Prior of the Abbey. The church was probably a chapel for lay people who worked for the Abbey in medieval times. Its walls were decorated with paintings, the statues removed by Cromwell’s reformers would still have been in the three niches, and there was glass in the windows.
HERE’S ANOTHER VIEW OF THE KINGSGATE: SMALL SAMPLE OF THE HOMES IN THE CATHEDRAL CLOSE AND OCCUPIED BY CLERGY (RETIRED) AND PPL ASSOCIATED WITH THE CATHEDRAL.
The Prior paid four shilling and eight pence to have the glass repaired in 1484. In 1660, the building was in a sad state of repair and misuse; Robert Allen, the porter of Kingsgate, lived in one end and kept pigs in the other. By 1677 it had been repaired and its bells re-hung. After the shrine of St Swithun in the Cathedral was destroyed in September 1538 and the Monastery dissolved in November 1539, it became a parish church and is now part of the parish of St Lawrence with St Swithun.
The church features in literature as Anthony Trollope’s St Cuthbert’s in his novel ‘The Warden’.
St. Swithin’s Day is 15 July, a day on which people watch the weather for tradition says that whatever the weather is like on St. Swithin’s Day, it will continue so for the next forty days. There is a weather-rhyme is well known throughout the British Isles since Elizabethan times.
‘St. Swithin’s day if thou dost rain
For forty days it will remain
St. Swithin’s day if thou be fair
For forty days ‘twill rain nae mair.
‘dost = doesthou =
younae mair = no moreSt Swithun was a Saxon Bishop of Winchester.
He was born in the kingdom of Wessex and educated in its capital, Winchester. He was famous for charitable gifts and building churches.Why do people watch the weather on St. Swithin’s day?A legend says that as the Bishop lay on his deathbed, he asked to be buried out of doors, where he would be trodden on and rained on. For nine years, his wishes were followed, but then, the monks of Winchester attempted to remove his remains to a splendid shrine inside the cathedral on 15 July 971. According to legend there was a heavy rain storm either during the ceremony or on its anniversary.This led to the old wives’ tale that if it rains on St Swithin’s Day (July 15th), it will rain for the next 40 days in succession, and a fine 15th July will be followed by 40 days of fine weather.
http://www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/customs/stswithun.html
St Swithun biography
(d. 862)
Very little is known for certain about the life of Winchester Cathedral’s first patron saint. Some biographies of Swithun state that he was once Prior of Winchester, but there is no evidence to support this belief. We do know that he was one of the chief advisors of Egbert, King of the West Saxons, and may have been responsible for the education of Egbert’s son, Ethelwulf. Egbert’s influence procured for Swithun the post of Bishop of Winchester, which he took up in 852.
When Swithun’s health failed in 862, and he lay near death, he is said to have asked that his body be buried outside his cathedral, rather than within it, as was customary. He wanted passers-by to walk upon his grave, and raindrops from the eaves of the cathedral fall upon his resting place. Although his wishes were granted, his grave did not long lie undisturbed. In 931 Bishop Ethelwulf had Swithun disinterred and reburied within the walls of the new church.
Shortly after, miracles were reported at Swithun’s tomb, which became a popular attraction for pilgrims. So clamorous were the voices reporting these miracles that Swithun was canonized, which further added to the allure of his shrine.
Yet, still his bones could not rest, for in 1093 his remains were once more dug up and reburied with great ceremony within the new cathedral built by Bishop Walkelin. There they remained until the Dissolution of the Monasteries in 1538, when the shrine wa destroyed by Henry VIII’s men. Once more the saint’s bones were dug up, this time to scattered and lost for good.
ABOUT A BLOCK AWAY FROM THE CHURCH OR A FRACTION MORE BUT NOT MUCH, ON JULY 18, 1817, JANE AUSTEN SADLY DIED, TOO YOUNG AND WITH AN UNFINISHED BOOK.
SHE PASSED AWAY IN THIS HOUSE.
Posted by peiper
on 12/22/2009 at 11:27 AM
Filed Under: • Art-Photography • History • Religion • UK •
• Comments (4)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Monday - December 21, 2009
Thou Shalt Not Steal
A clergyman has been criticised as ‘highly irresponsible’ after advising his congregation to shoplift following his Nativity sermon.
[Anglican] Father Tim Jones, 41, broke off from his traditional annual sermon yesterday to tell his flock that stealing from large chains is sometimes the best option for vulnerable people.
It is far better for people desperate during the recession to shoplift than turn to ‘prostitution, mugging or burglary’, he said.
The married father-of-two insisted his unusual advice did not break the Bible commandment ‘Thou shalt not steal’ - because God’s love for the poor outweighs his love for the rich.
But the minister’s controversial sermon at St Lawrence Church in York has been slammed by police, the British Retail Consortium and a local MP, who all say that no matter what the circumstances, shoplifting is an offence.
Delivering his festive lesson, Father Jones told the congregation: ‘My advice, as a Christian priest, is to shoplift. I do not offer such advice because I think that stealing is a good thing, or because I think it is harmless, for it is neither.
‘I would ask that they do not steal from small family businesses, but from large national businesses, knowing that the costs are ultimately passed on to the rest of us in the form of higher prices.
This bit of modern moral relativism brought to you by
Next week: adultery - is it really that big a deal after all?
Um, why can’t the po’ brits get some of those £1000 a week handouts like the muzzie terrorists religious leaders seem to latch onto left and right?
Posted by Drew458
on 12/21/2009 at 04:45 PM
Filed Under: • Miscellaneous • Religion • UK •
• Comments (7)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Tuesday - December 08, 2009
on the run from a taliban death threat. try living like this for awhile. stone age mfs.
Still trying to get caught up on stories I’ve had for a week. Keep getting sidetracked with other things. But this is quite a story no matter how far behind in the Q.
H/T COMPASS DIRECT
Pakistani Christian on Run from Taliban Death Threat
Islamic extremist sermonizing leads to altercation at barbershop in South Waziristan.
LAHORE, Pakistan, November 27 (CDN) — A young Christian man is in hiding in Pakistan from Taliban militants who seek to kill him for “blasphemy” because he defended his faith.In February Jehanzaib Asher, 22, was working in a barbershop his family jointly owns with his cousin in Wana, South Waziristan – a Taliban stronghold in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas in Pakistan’s northwest – when the Islamic militants showed up to try to convert him to Islam.
It was not the first time the Taliban’s Noor Hassan had delivered strident sermons to him and his relatives, and this time Asher decided not to listen silently. He defended Christianity by citing verses from the Bible, and Hassan and another Islamic militant viciously beat him – breaking his left leg and some ribs and leaving his left hand non-functional.
He told Compass that he only defended Christianity and did not comment on Islam.
“One can bear the death of one’s father or mother, but can we keep listening to insults of our religion?” Asher said.
Nearby Muslims helped him and two cousins ward off the attack. Soon the Taliban militants began spreading the word to local residents that Asher and his cousin Christopher Masih had blasphemed Muhammad, the prophet of Islam.
Before the Pakistani military’s recent offensive against the Taliban stronghold in South Waziristan, Asher said, his picture was posted at check-points in an attempt to help the Taliban and other Islamists identify and kill him.
Posted by peiper
on 12/08/2009 at 11:01 AM
Filed Under: • Religion • RoPMA • Terrorists •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Tuesday - December 01, 2009
Muslims who have settled in Switzerland should not confuse culture with creed
While the mostly white liberal, left wing loony tunes and a few muslims are bitching about the loss of freedom of religion by those evil Swiss,
there are a couple of muslim voices that sound another call and have another opinion on the subject.
The Swiss vote does not infringe Muslim religious rights
Minarets are not an essential part of Islam
Taj Hargey
From The Times December 1, 2009Switzerland’s referendum vote to ban minarets is needlessly xenophobic but it does not infringe the religious liberty of Swiss Muslims. Minarets remain emblematic of mosques in the Muslim heartlands but there is no theological reason why houses of worship in the West have to incorporate such towers.
Their original purpose was to relay the prayer call with the unamplified voice. Today this is done by modern technology, so minarets are not integral to contemporary mosque design. European mosques should stop mindlessly mimicking Eastern design and create prayer halls that blend into the landscape.
Muslims who have settled in Switzerland (and elsewhere in Europe) should not confuse culture with creed. To become integrated into their surroundings, they must relinquish the cultural baggage of their ancestral homelands. They should practice a Swiss Islam that is rooted in the society in which they live.
Although the Swiss have been convinced by right-wing zealots that minarets are a problem, local Muslims should not embrace a victim mentality. They must confront the toxic radicalisation of their faith that is imported from overseas.
The Wahhabi denomination (and its kindred sects), which has unlimited petrodollars and exclusive jurisdiction over Islam’s holiest mosques, engenders rampant misogyny, anti-democratic obscurantism and an archaic legal code, which includes an un-Koranic prohibition on non-Muslim religious buildings in Islamic lands. Switzerland now joins Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan in banning the buildings of non-dominant faiths.
When European Muslims unthinkingly endorse this warped theology by desiring medieval Sharia, defending honour killings, stoning to death, forced marriages, Muslim exceptionalism and a separatist society, they only invoke fear and exacerbate anti-Muslim sentiment. When Europe’s Muslims extol such un-Koranic doctrines as the niqab (face veil), they exclude themselves from the mainstream.
Only when Muslim immigrants and converts in Europe reject the twisted ideology of a fundamentalist male clergy will the chief causes of anti-Muslim prejudice in Europe recede. Meanwhile, despite the Islamophobic minaret ban, the religious rights of Swiss Muslims remain intact. They do, however, have a rare opportunity to cut the link with the dominant theology of the East and to restore Islam’s pristine beliefs.
Dr Taj Hargey is the chairman of the Muslim Educational Centre of Oxford and the imam of the Summertown Islamic Congregation in Oxford
Sad to say however, that there is far more of this:
Muslim protesters pelt Tory peer Baroness Warsi with eggs during walkabout in Luton
By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 8:00 AM on 01st December 2009
The country’s most powerful Muslim woman was pelted with eggs by a group of young Islamists yesterday.
Baroness Warsi, the Conservative shadow minister for community cohesion and social action, was visiting Luton with one of her party’s election candidates.
But during a visit to the Bury Park area, she was confronted by protesters who shouted her down before throwing several eggs, one of which hit her and another landed on a supporter.
With egg yolk running through her hair, the Baroness attempted to reason with the members of outlawed extremist group Al-Muhajiroun - only to be harangued.
The young men of Al-Muhajiroun, which in March this year took part in protests against soldiers from 2nd Battalion the Royal Anglian Regiment during a homecoming parade, accused her of not being a proper Muslim and supporting the deaths of civilians in Afghanistan.SOURCE: http://www.dailymail.co.uk
Posted by peiper
on 12/01/2009 at 08:40 AM
Filed Under: • Politics • Religion • RoPMA • Terrorists • UK •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Monday - November 30, 2009
The Swiss say no to minarets, as muzzies and europe left and vatican wring hands and cry foul.
Well, it isn’t any surprise that a number of oh so politically correct freekin idiots, The Vatican, The Times of London and of course the usual suspects,
The muzzies, are up in arms. Again.
The Swiss voted NO to minarets. Now there’s this howl of righteous indignation, this moral outrage mouthed by donkeys. No, Donks are smarter.
The charge made by all these holier then tho fools is, that the Swiss are violating freedom of religion. The Times editorial says the vote was an attack on religious liberty and even went to far as to say, and I quote exactly here, “ An attempt to restrict freedom of worship.”
“Intolerance of islam “ says the Times. (The Times spelled islam with a capital ‘I’ which will not do in keeping with the late Skippers dictum)
The Swiss vote DOES NOT restrict freedom of worship in any way shape or form. Nice of the Vatican and the Times tho, to continue the suck up tradition and comment on the inner workings of someone else’s country. Wouldn’t you think the Vatican had enough problems on its plate at the moment, or has not the latest boy love scandal made news in the states?
Of course the French had to add their worthless two cents .... once again sounding retreat.
Earlier on Monday the French foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner, said he was “scandalised” by the Swiss decision and said it represented a “show of intolerance” by France’s neighbour.
He said it was a “negative” move because banning the construction of Muslim mosque towers amounts to “oppressing a religion”.
He told France’s RTL radio: “I hope that the Swiss will go back on this decision rather quickly.”
And further word is that there is “criticism throughout Europe.” That may be. Most likely from the thumb sucking liberal left. That jerk is sandalized?”
Sure he is. Like so many he’s playing a PC role and letting the mudslimes know he’s a fair guy and not anti anything.
Naturally the left in Europe is calling for another vote. That figures.
As the Swiss say no to minarets, I vote we have many more referendums
Why is making decisions for the nation a right of the government and not one of the people, asks Melanie McDonagh.
By Melanie McDonagh
The Swiss have spoken and, oh dear, the government isn’t best pleased. Against all the approved advice, from churches, politicians and business, the people have voted to ban minarets.
The outcome of yesterday’s referendum was entirely unexpected, given that Swiss manufacturers, pallid at the thought of Abu Dhabi saying no to Swatches, had lobbied vigorously against a ban. The government wasn’t keen on reprisals from excitable Islamists. But notwithstanding all the high-level advice, the people were having none of it.
Actually, the notion of building minarets in Switzerland is pretty redundant. They couldn’t be used to call the faithful to prayer because noise regulations, this being Switzerland, don’t permit it. Small Islamic communities all over Switzerland just wanted to make their presence felt. On the skyline.
It was interesting, the nature of the coalition against the minarets. The campaign was led by the populist Swiss People’s Party, but it was supported, unexpectedly, by Swiss feminists because they have issues with Islam’s treatment of women. And – who knows – because of the phallic shape of the structures concerned. In fact, the most notable thing about the poll was that, in favour of the ban, women outnumbered men.
Personally, I blame the Turkish prime minister, Tayyip Erdogan. The opponents of minarets hardly needed to make an argument; all they needed to do was quote, out of context, his pronouncement that minarets are the bayonets of Islam and the job was done. Nice one, Mr E.
Actually, I felt rather cheered when I heard that the Swiss had voted as they did, for the simple and sufficient reason that I like it when people don’t do what they’re told by politicians. I was ecstatic when the Danes voted against the Nice Treaty; I felt a kind of subversive thrill when Ireland turned against the Lisbon Treaty, though it did vote the approved way second time round.
Referendums are brilliant, precisely because they give people a chance to consider what everyone says they ought to think and do, and then do just what they want anyway. It’s the nearest we get nowadays to the full-on democracy of Athens, unless you count reality television.
The sad thing, of course, is that it couldn’t happen here. Whenever anyone suggests having more referendums, politicians say, in a grand way: nope, we are a parliamentary democracy. Finis.
All very well, but it strikes me that we’re asking an awful lot of our general election vote. When we vote – those of us who can be bothered to – we’re required to cram into one little box the economy, Europe, assisted suicide, whether we like the look of Sarah Brown/Samantha Cameron, post office closures, hunting, and whether the local candidate seems an OK individual. In the event, most people simply go for the party that seems least likely to mess up the economy.
I think that’s too limited. I can see that for major issues in the manifesto, such as education and the economy, it’s pretty straightforward; you know how the parties stand, and you let them get on with it. But the party political box doesn’t do all those other contentious subjects justice.
In Ireland, I’ve seen abortion and divorce, two toxic issues, taken right out of the political realm by being put to the people in referendums in accordance with the constitution. It’s so much better that way. You get informed, interested public debate. I mean, I saw my aunt and her gentleman friend in Ireland arguing the ins and outs of the Lisbon Treaty. They knew more about it than I did.
Occasionally, there are local referendums here on matters other than devolution – a few decades back there was one in Wales about Sunday openings for pubs – but they’re tragically few.
So I don’t think we should turn up our noses at the Swiss. Whatever you think about the result, at least they were asked what they think. More than the Brits ever are.
Posted by peiper
on 11/30/2009 at 10:43 AM
Filed Under: • Illegal-Aliens and Immigration • Politics • Religion • RoPMA •
• Comments (9)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Wednesday - November 25, 2009
Minarets could be banned this weekend as Swiss voters go to the polls.
The Swiss get referendums? Wow.
Be nice if they did. I guess we will wait and see if their left wing pc crowd manages to stop this very worthwhile cause.
Good luck and good wishes to The Swiss People’s Party. Maybe if successful, they can go after the mosques as well. Bottom line, this group is on the outs with the UN. It therefore follows that this must be a splendid group of fellows and ladies. I hope.
Personal Note:
Feeling as bad as the weather again. This damn bug seems to be doing a rebound, so my posts today are likely to be few. Just can’t shake this thing fast enough. Feel like I cracked a rib as well. Not saying I did. Just feels like it even when not coughing or sneezing.
Will the Swiss vote for a ban on minarets?By Alexandra Williams
25th November 2009Minarets could be banned this weekend as Swiss voters go to the polls for a controversial referendum.
The Right-wing Swiss People’s Party argues that the distinctive mosque features are a symbol of Islamic intolerance.
The party has led an emotive campaign to outlaw them. Posters depicting a woman in a burkha in front of minarets shaped like missiles, against the background of a Swiss flag, have been put up around the country.
Ulrich Schüler, an SVP parliamentarian and leading member of the anti-minaret movement, says the towers are political rather than religious.
‘They are symbols of a desire for power, of an Islam which wants to establish a legal and social order fundamentally contrary to the liberties guaranteed in our constitution,’ he said.
In 2007 elections his party won its largest ever share of the vote after mounting an anti-foreigner campaign denounced by the United Nations as racist.
One of its campaign posters showed a flock of white sheep kicking a black sheep out of Switzerland.
In 2007 elections his party won its largest ever share of the vote after mounting an anti-foreigner campaign denounced by the United Nations as racist.
The debate is particularly sensitive in a country with a large immigrant population and where 20 per cent are considered foreign.
About 400,000 - 5 per cent - of Swiss residents are Muslims.
If the majority of the electorate and states vote Yes on Sunday, the words ‘The construction of minarets is forbidden’ will be added to the country’s constitution.
Existing minarets will not be torn down.
The vote was triggered when almost 115,000 signed a people’s initiative handed to parliament last year in favour of the ban - 100,000 is enough to force a referendum.
And according to the latest opinion poll, support for the proposal is gaining momentum.
It is popular among residents of rural areas and towns in the German-speaking part of the country, a survey of 1,200 citizens showed earlier this month.
German is the most common language in Switzerland.
The latest figures show that 37 per cent would vote in favour of the ban, while 53 per cent said they would reject it. A further 10 per cent were undecided.
Both the cabinet and parliament are recommending voters turn down the initiative, with Foreign Minister Micheline Calmy-Rey describing it as ‘dangerous for foreign policy and Switzerland’s relations to other countries’.
Controversies have erupted in Switzerland over Muslims’ place in society in recent years. In 2004 two supermarket chains banned employees who deal with the public from wearing headscarves.
There are an estimated 160 mosques and cultural centres in Switzerland, but only four with a minaret.
They are normally used by religious leaders to call Muslims to prayer.
Posted by peiper
on 11/25/2009 at 07:51 AM
Filed Under: • Illegal-Aliens and Immigration • News-Briefs • Politics • Religion •
• Comments (5)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Tuesday - November 24, 2009
Ark unto this!
And God said to Noah, “The end of all flesh has come before Me, for the earth is filled with violence through them; and behold, I will destroy them with the earth. Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch. And this is the fashion which thou shalt make it of: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits. A window shalt thou make to the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above; and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; with lower, second, and third stories shalt thou make it. And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die. But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons’ wives with thee. And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female. Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive. And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shall be for food for thee, and for them.
Thus did Noah; according to all that God commanded him, so did he.”
- Genesis 6:13-22
This one isn’t exactly to scale. It’s only 150 cubits long and a mere 20 cubits wide, but it’s the proper 30 cubits tall. No word on whether it’s pitched within and without either. But it’s still really impressive. Noah’s original would have had about 5 times the volume of this model. That’s a whole forest full of gopher wood, no matter how you slice it.
4/30/2007 SCHAGEN, Netherlands — The massive central door in the side of Noah’s Ark was thrown open Saturday — you could say it was the first time in 4,000 years — drawing a crowd of curious pilgrims and townsfolk to behold the wonder.
Of course, it’s only a replica of the biblical Ark, built by Dutch creationist Johan Huibers as a testament to his faith in the literal truth of the Bible.
Reckoning by the old biblical measurements, Johan’s fully functional ark is 150 cubits long, 30 cubits high and 20 cubits wide. That’s two-thirds the length of a football field and as high as a three-story house.
Life-size models of giraffes, elephants, lions, crocodiles, zebras, bison and other animals greet visitors as they arrive in the main hold.
“The design is by my wife, Bianca,” Huibers said. “She didn’t really want me to do this at all, but she said if you’re going to anyway, it should look like this.”
A contractor by trade, Huibers built the ark of cedar and pine — biblical scholars debate exactly what the wood used by Noah would have been.
Huibers did the work mostly with his own hands, using modern tools and occasional help from his son Roy. Construction began in May 2005.
Visitors on the first day were stunned.
“It’s past comprehension,” said Mary Louise Starosciak, who happened to be bicycling by with her husband while on vacation when they saw the ark looming over the local landscape.
“I knew the story of Noah, but I had no idea the boat would have been so big.”
In fact, Noah’s Ark as described in the Bible was five times larger than Johan’s Ark.
But that still leaves enough space near the keel for a 50-seat film theater, where kids can watch the segment of the Disney film “Fantasia” that tells the story of Noah.
Another exhibit shows water cascading down on a model of the Ark. Exhibits on the third level show ancient tools and old-fashioned barrels, exotic stuffed animals, and a wax model of an exhausted Noah reclining on a bed in the forecastle.
Under sunny clear skies Saturday, Huibers said he wasn’t worried about another biblical flood, since according to Genesis, the rainbow is the sign of God’s promise never to flood the world again. But he does worry that recent events such as the flooding of New Orleans could be seen as a portent of the end of time.
Huibers said he hopes the project will renew interest in Christianity in the Netherlands, where churchgoing has fallen dramatically in the past 50 years.
“If You Need Help, Ask God. If You Don’t, Thank God” says Huibers.
If you wrongly imagine the Ark looked like some of those little cartoon boats in children’s story books, with a couple of elephants’ trunks and giraffes’ necks sticking out the top, think again.
...
Noah’s Ark was three stories high (Genesis 6:16). Its total deck area was equivalent to the area of about 20 standard college basketball courts or 36 lawn tennis courts. The world had to wait until AD 1884 before the Ark’s size was exceeded, when the Italian liner Eturia was built.The rectangular dimensions of the Ark show an advanced design in ship-building. Its length of six times its width and 10 times its height would have made it amazingly stable on the ocean. Remember it was made more for floating than sailing, because it wasn’t headed anywhere. The Ark was made to withstand a turbulent ocean voyage, not to be at a certain place at a certain time.
I think Huibers’ Ark is mighty impressive, even if it’s quite a bit smaller than the biblical one. There are a whole pile of websites on this thing, with lots of pictures. I don’t think the ship actually floats on it’s own; it was built on a metal barge to begin with. And I’m not 100% that Huibers’ pole barn construction is what you’d want to use to build a sturdy ship ... I’d make the walls about 6 times thicker too, to better withstand the tempest.
A very nice photo page can be found here, where Paul the Dane reminds us that the capacity of the original was about equal to 570 modern railroad boxcars. Another link here, to a bible study page that looks at the displacement, volume, and deck area of the fabled boat, and realizes that it’s dimensions were proper for a well built ship:
The displacement tonnage of the ark, which is the weight of water it would displace at a draught of 15 cubits, would be more than 22,000 tons. By comparison the U.S.S. Salem, a 716-foot-long heavy cruiser commissioned in 1949, has a displacement tonnage of 21,500 tons. The ark’s gross tonnage which is a measure of cubic space (100 cubic feet is one gross ton) would be 15,100 tons. The ark’s total volume would have been 1,518,000 cubic feet. This would equal the capacity of 569 modern railroad stock cars. The standard size for a stock car is 44 feet long and a volume of 2670 cubic feet. This would make a train more than 5 ½ miles long. The floor space for the ark would be over 101,000 square feet. This would be more floor space than 21 standard college basketball courts. By comparing the measurements of the ark it is easy to see that it would be comparable to today’s ocean going vessels. It was probably the largest vessel of its type built until the late 1800’s when metal ships were first constructed.
The ark was built on a 1:6 ratio (50 cubits: 300 cubits). The science of naval architecture reveals that the most stable ratio for an ocean going vessel is 1:6. All modern day ocean going vessels use this same length to width ratio. It is estimated that the ark could easily have survived even the largest of ocean waves. If the ark were equipped with a dragging stone anchor, it would have been properly positioned to meet any size ocean wave. The design of the ark would have made it almost impossible to turn over.
Thanks once again to Carol for the tip. This was a fun post to delve into.
Posted by Drew458
on 11/24/2009 at 12:56 PM
Filed Under: • Religion •
• Comments (5)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Monday - November 16, 2009
Support The President
Yes, this bumper sticker is real. You can get it at Zazzle. $4.45 + S&H.
In case the words don’t spring to mind, here’s the link to the Psalm.
Posted by Drew458
on 11/16/2009 at 11:17 AM
Filed Under: • Humor • Obama, The One • Religion •
• Comments (4)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Tuesday - November 10, 2009
American muslim says … No Pity for victims at Ft. Hood.
My thanks to LyndonB for this .... I don’t often get to boot this early or check my inbox but did today.
This is audio only and is only one minute. But it shows a mindset among these life forms.
Lyndon had this to say, and he speaks for me so I’ll not add anything.
I came across this on a site called Biased BBC
The enemy within.......
I know this may sound a bit off the wall but in the not too distant future, certainly sooner in Britain than the US we are going to be in open war with these people and their barbaric death cult. There has been hardly any mention of the victims of this mad mullah atrocity just bleating about a backlash against all the “peace loving” muslimes. It makes me sick. One of my friends has a son who is based at Fort Hood. Fortunately he was visiting family at the time, but it brings it home to you when it’s people you know that may be involved. I seriously think we will have to have a voluntary repatriation system for these people before it’s too late.
Posted by peiper
on 11/10/2009 at 06:14 AM
Filed Under: • Military • Religion • RoPMA • Terrorists • War On Terror •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Friday - November 06, 2009
Judge rules believers in gorbal warming have same protection under religious laws
Think it’s a joke? Nope.
A few days ago I ran across a story that beggars belief and lost the damn article. Tried to find it in Google and failed but fortunately Richard Littlejohn brings it up here in his column today in the Mail.
I have edited the article to this subject but really do suggest you use the link to read his entire column. This guy is spot on .
By Richard Littlejohn
Daily Mail
Nov. 6, 2009This column has long argued that ‘man-made climate change’ is a new religion. So I suppose it was only a matter of time before that status was conferred upon it by law.
A judge has just ruled that a ‘global warming’ fanatic, made redundant by a property company after refusing to fly on business, can seek unlimited damages for religious discrimination.
Mr Justice Burton said that ‘a philosophical belief which is based on science’ is entitled to receive the same legal protection as a sincerely-held religious conviction.
The trouble with ‘man-made climate change’ is that it isn’t based on settled science, despite what the alarmists and their allies at the BBC would have us believe.There is a welter of countervailing evidence that, far from warming up to boiling point, the Earth is actually getting cooler and the ice caps thicker.
More than 300 eminent, reputable scientists and research fellows in America have signed a declaration that ‘man-made global warming’ is a myth and dispute the link between carbon emissions and so- called ‘climate change’.
The founder of the Weather Channel says that Al Gore should be sued for fraud over his movie, A Convenient Lie
The founder of the Weather Channel, a meteorologist who can be fairly assumed to have some idea what he is talking about, says that self-righteous hypocrite Al Gore should be sued for fraud over his scaremongering movie, A Convenient Lie, which British judges have already agreed contains a number of obvious distortions of the truth.(Incidentally, it has just been revealed that Gore is on course to become a billionaire off the back of his stake in a number of eco-related enterprises. It’s an ill wind...)
Look, I don’t know for sure which side is right, maybe neither of them, but my natural inclination is always towards scepticism.
What does seem patently apparent is that when you look at the assorted vested interests lined up on the ‘man-made’ side of the argument, you can’t help concluding that if all these opportunist politicians, madwomen, social engineers, sexual inadequates and quasi-communists agree then they are almost certainly wrong.
Politicians, in particular, love the great ‘climate change’ scare because it takes them a step nearer their fantasy of global government and allows them to impose an exciting array of new taxes, punishments and controls upon the peasants who pay their wages.
It has spawned a vast, self-perpetuating industry worth a fortune, of which the great ‘carbon offset’ scam is the most exploitative and ridiculous incarnation.
Paying someone conscience-money to plant a tree every time you fly? I wish I’d thought of that. .
President Obama back-pedals, China opens another coal-fired power station every day, India pollutes with impunity and tinpot African states demand cynically that the West pays them hundreds of millions of dollars to play ball.
Posted by peiper
on 11/06/2009 at 12:15 PM
Filed Under: • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Environment • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Religion • Stoopid-People • UK •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Five Most Recent Trackbacks:
Once Again, The One And Only Post
(4 total trackbacks)
Tracked at iHaan.org
Thｅ advantage to having a guide with you is thɑt an expert will haѵe very first hand experience dealing and navigating the river with гegional wildlife. Tһomas, there are great…
On: 07/28/23 10:37
The Brownshirts: Partie Deux; These aare the Muscle We've Been Waiting For
(3 total trackbacks)
Tracked at head to the Momarms site
The Brownshirts: Partie Deux; These aare the Muscle We’ve Been Waiting For
On: 03/14/23 11:20
Vietnam Homecoming
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at 广告专题配音 专业从事中文配音跟外文配音制造，北京名传天下配音公司
专业从事中文配音和外文配音制作，北京名传天下配音公司 北京名传天下专业配音公司成破于2006年12月，是专业从事中 中文配音 文配音跟外文配音的音频制造公司，幻想飞腾配音网领 配音制作 有海内外优良专业配音职员已达500多位，可供给一流的外语配音，长年服务于国内中心级各大媒体、各省市电台电视台，能满意不同客户的各种需要。电话：010-83265555 北京名传天下专业配音公司…
On: 03/20/21 07:00
meaningless marching orders for a thousand travellers ... strife ahead ..
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Casual Blog
[...] RTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPL [...]
On: 07/17/17 04:28
a small explanation
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at yerba mate gourd
Find here top quality how to prepare yerba mate without a gourd that's available in addition at the best price. Get it now!
On: 07/09/17 03:07
DISCLAIMER
THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.
Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:
It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.
- Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
- Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
- Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
- Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere
THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.
Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner
Oh, and here's some kind of visitor flag counter thingy. Hey, all the cool blogs have one, so I should too. The Visitors Online thingy up at the top doesn't count anything, but it looks neat. It had better, since I paid actual money for it.
RSS 2.0 
Atom 
