|Original design: Faizan Dawood|
Anonymous comments for publication must include a pseudonym.
They should be 'on topic' and not involve third parties.
If pseudonyms are linked to commercial sites comments will be removed as spam.
The blog owner is unable to ‘unfollow’ Followers.
Monday, 30 June 2014
Thursday, 26 June 2014
Tuesday, 24 June 2014
|Welcome to Great Britain, saved by "The Few" for an alien few to do what Hitler couldn't do.|
But Muslims are encouraged to lie if necessary to advance their cause even to those who have welcomed them, schooled them and cared for them when in need. Welcome to jihad!
In wartime Britain we used to huddle around radios waiting to hear our fate. Reassuringly Churchill said "we will never surrender " but "our native soil" is being surrendered by politically correct do-gooders who have welcomed the very people Churchill warned us against. Now we are paying the price. A former MI6 Director has been reported as saying that the security services will be able to monitor only a few of the 500 or so "Britons" who return to the country after fighting in Syria.
Three of the four ring leaders in the propaganda video shown by the BBC are from Cardiff in the Diocese of Llandaff where its bishop, the Archbishop of Wales and leader of 1% of the population, has been busily engaging with Muslims and anyone else he can find other than adherents of the Catholic faith creating a religious vacuum to be exploited by the unscrupulous.
In Great Britain Christians struggle to maintain their churches. When closed, mosques often replace them. According to the Mosque Directory there are 33 Mosques in Cardiff. It is unclear where these 'innocent boys' were radicalised.
Two of the four are brothers. According to a report on the BBC News they lied to their parents about their intentions when they left home. It is difficult not to sympathise with parents when their children have been led astray. But have they? If lying is a religious duty how do we know if they are speaking the truth? In the Middle East, armed to the teeth, ISIS warriors were filmed handing out copies of the Koran in the street. It would be naive to assume this was to convince locals that Islam is the religion of peace. Apologists should read here what the religion of peace is doing in the main Christian stronghold of Mosul in the province of ancient Nineveh.
This should come as no surprise. Christians are the "most persecuted group in world" (read here). Back in February, 'a jihadist group in Syria' demanded that Christians pay a levy in gold and accept curbs on their faith, or face death (here). ISIS is now said to control funds of $2bn.
On Newsnight last night there was a piece about three more "lovely boys" who had travelled to Syria to join other jihadists (story here). The local Imam was blamed by a parent for radicalising them but the Imam denied it. A representative of the Muslim Council of Great Britain on the programme complained about the demonization in the media of young Muslims. Lord Carlisle agreed that demonizing young Muslims must be avoided because "99.9% recurring" of Muslims in this country are "totally opposed to this type of action". That misses the point. It takes just a few to create havoc while the majority simply claim it is wrong when asked but where are the protests about Islamist excesses to match those in the lead picture?
It is not 'Muslim men' but the basis of their beliefs which needs to be examined and discussed openly without charges of Islamophobia. Of course it would be wrong to demonize all young Muslims but if the faith of "99.9% recurring" of Muslims in this country is as shallow as it has become for many new Anglicans, do they really understand the implications of their belief? How can a 'Religion of Peace' be sending them to war? Answer: Peace will occur when Islam dominates the world but that seems to be lost on the warring factions in the Middle East.
Evidence from abroad is clear. Some Islamic states do not tolerate other religions. It has been estimated that Islam will be the dominant religion in this country within ten years. The outlook for non-Muslims (the Kafir) is bleak. It is the expansionist religious ideology that must be exposed before it uses more impressionable people to perform evil deeds against humanity in the name of their religion.
Lord Carlisle blamed "religiously heretical violent extremism" for jihad but added that we are "trying to do our duty to protect our own country and our citizens". That involves awareness of the dangers of cultural jihad which is gradually changing the face of Britain. If only there were 'the few' in government prepared to defend our native soil instead of making excuses and displaying their ignorance. They need to get to the route of the problem while there is still time.
And now for some good news:
KHARTOUM, Sudan (AP) — "A Sudanese woman [Meriam Ibrahim] on death row for apostasy had her sentence canceled and was released by a Khartoum court on Monday, her lawyer and state media said."
|Meriam Ibrahim with her newborn baby girl she gave birth to while shackled in jail|
(AP Photo/Al Fajer)
Tuesday, 17 June 2014
|Battle of Vienna on 12 September 1683|
|Talking with Iran Vienna 2014|
At last governments seem to have woken up to the threat posed by Islamists, even to Islamist governments by other Islamists who want their own brand of Islam imposed on the world. So grave is the threat that talks with Iran, ironically in Vienna, may be used to work out a strategy to counter the threat. It is as though planet Earth were under attack by Martians in the War of the Worlds.
While the threat by ISIS dominates the headlines other Islamist atrocities continue around the world. "At least 48 people have died after al-Qaeda-linked militants attacked hotels and a police station in a Kenyan coastal town" (here). "Gunmen killed at least 22 people at a village market in remote northeast Nigeria, a security official said on Monday, in what was likely the latest attack by the militant Islamist group Boko Haram" (here). Looking at 'Wars in the World' (here) the results are chilling. Not all conflict is Islamist based but 'religious' fanaticism is a real problem.
A list of some of the major Islamic terrorist attacks from 1990 to Sept 2013 can be found here. The response of the British government has been to dismiss the Islamist threat as the work of fanatics who do not represent the majority of Muslims. Perhaps not but they all have in common a religious ideology in which ALL should be subject to Sharia laws which permit death by stoning, amputations and public floggings. Whether achieved by armed jihad or cultural jihad the result is the same.
Monday, 9 June 2014
|'Sending out' in the new Church in Wales Photo: Church in Wales|
Like it or not the Church in Wales is moving with the times to be more relevant to society, or to put it another way, as directed by Barry and the bench sitters to secure their future in the new Church Uniting in Wales. Here are some recent examples.
For more information read 'Teulu Asaph' HERE
Friday, 6 June 2014
"The bishops ... have approved the Declaration that will provide acceptable pastoral and sacramental ministry to parishes that are unable to receive the ministry of women as priests and bishops, and also most importantly that this will only be able to be changed with a two-thirds majority in each of the three houses of the Synod."
So simple! Compare that with the approach of the Church in Wales AFTER women bishops were approved by their Governing Body. First, written contributions about the shape of a Code of Practice were invited. Then diocesan meetings were held before the matter was discussed at their Governing Body. The overwhelming desire expressed at the Diocesan meetings was for similar pastoral and sacramental provision to be restored in the Church in Wales but the suspicion remains that the Bench will use the voices of a vociferous minority to justify no change.
Proposing the amendment which enabled women to be consecrated bishops in the Church in Wales from 12 September 2014 the Jackson/Wigley duo said: "Our amendment would bring Church in Wales legislation more closely into line with other churches in the Anglican Communion who have passed legislation to enable the consecration of women bishops - in particular the Scottish Episcopal Church and the Church of Ireland. In none other of the churches of the Anglican Communion so far has provision been made for conscientious dissent in legislation, but only in Codes of Practice. We do not believe that Wales should be the one to set a new precedent on this matter."
At the April meeting of the Governing Body Archdeacon Jackson was busy pouring cold water on the argument she used to get the legislation she wanted. In direct opposition to what is required she said, "the concept of a Provincial Assistant Bishop should be resisted, as this role would set up a two-tier episcope” indicating that she is still stubbornly wedded to the feminist position that impeded progress in the Church of England. The Church of England has moved on. Peggy Jackson has moved backwards.
The impression given is that the women's lobby will say or do anything to advance their agenda then backtrack when they have what they want. If the bishops of the Church in Wales validate this scheming by back-peddling to deny loyal Anglicans what they thought they were being offered "in line with other churches" they will deserve the opprobrium of the whole Church of Christ for their duplicity.
Tuesday, 3 June 2014
|Karen Bradley on her "ordination as a canon" Photo: Derby Telegraph|
It is not unusual for hacks to confuse the facts but clerics should know better than to misrepresent Holy Scripture as in this piece of self-justification:
"The Rev Jean Burgess, who leads St Alkmund's Church, in Derby, is the Dean of Women's Ministry. She sees the reasons behind the unwillingness ["to accept women"] as being ingrained in thousands of years of tradition. She said: 'The tradition in the Church states that Jesus chose men. The reality is that, in the New Testament, it is very clear that it only highlights 12 men but that there were women disciples in his party. It is argued that most of the people in the Bible are men leading churches, but Paul clearly talks about women leading churches. The Bible we use is a translation from Greek and Hebrew. Greek is a very diverse language and one word can mean a number of different things. It seems to me, as a woman, that those scriptures are mistranslated and misunderstood. For me, it is about being equal under God and serving him as best we can."
There is a world of difference between serving and self-serving. St Paul used to be held up as the arch-misogynist. Here he is used to justify the ordination of women.
The article continues with what seems to me to be an odd contradiction: "Despite that opposition, women now make up a third of the Church of England's clergy and approval may soon be given for women to have the opportunity to be ordained as bishops. But for all the column inches in the press that the issue has generated across the country, people outside the Church are still surprised to see a woman in a collar."
Women have won their battle to become accepted as vicars in the Church of England. Their constant complaining about alleged inequality brings the Church into disrepute as does trying to convince outsiders that opposition to the ordination of women is simple prejudice rather than a question of theology.