Search This Blog

Thursday 27 December 2012

Oh do put a sock in it, you atheist Scrooge | Melanie Phillips

Oh do put a sock in it, you atheist Scrooge | Melanie Phillips

You really would need to have a heart harder than the five-pence piece in the Christmas pud not to feel sorry at present for Professor Richard Dawkins.
Christmas must be such a terrible trial for the planet’s most celebrated — and angriest — atheist. All that cheerfulness and pleasure associated with Christianity’s main celebration seems to drive him simply nuts.
Indeed, just a few days ago he lunged into yet another wild denunciation of religious faith. This time, the Chief Inquisitor of Unbelief declared that raising a child as a Catholic was worse than subjecting it to sexual abuse.
His view of religion is as cheerless as it is unbalanced. As countless others prepare for an enjoyable and — dare one say it — even spiritually uplifting holiday, Professor Dawkins seems to become all the more miserable.
If Charles Dickens were writing A Christmas Carol today, surely he would have replaced Ebenezer Scrooge with the figure of the joyless, rage-fuelled Dawkins spitting out ‘Bah, humbug!’ at families sitting down to the Christmas turkey.
After last week’s census details which showed that Christianity in Britain is in decline, Dawkins rejoiced that it was ‘on the way out in this country’.
Well, this is tantamount to rejoicing that Britain and western civilisation are on the way out. For Christianity underpins their most fundamental moral values — ones that both believers and non-believers hold dear, such as the difference between right and wrong, respect for other people and doing good things rather than bad.
It is also woven into Britain’s literature, art, music, history and national identity.
What’s more, despite the decline in believers, nearly two-thirds of the population still describe themselves as Christian. If Britain stops being a mainly Christian country, then it will stop being recognisably Britain.
It is not just Dawkins and his followers, however, who are dancing prematurely on Christianity’s grave.
In the eyes of just about the entire governing class, cultural milieu and intelligentsia, belief in Christianity is viewed at best as an embarrassment, and at worst as proof positive of imbecility.
Indeed, Christianity has long been the target of sneering comedians, blasphemous artists and the entire human rights industry — all determined to turn it into a despised activity to be pursued only by consenting adults in private.
As it happens, I myself am not a Christian; I am a Jew. And Jews have suffered terribly under Christianity in the past.
Yet I passionately believe that if Britain and the West are to continue to be civilised places, it is imperative that the decline in Christianity be reversed.
For it is the Judeo-Christian ethic which gave us belief in the innate equality of all human beings, the need to put others’ welfare before your own and the understanding of absolute truth.
Without this particular religious underpinning, our society will lose the moral bonds that instil respect and care for other human beings. Without a belief in absolute truth, it will succumb to the dominance of lies.
And it will also lose the understanding, embodied in both Judaism and Christianity, that government should be distinct from religious rule — a belief which eventually helped pave the way for democracy.
Lose Christianity, and what remains will be a vacuum which will result in religious, secular and ethnic groups fighting each other — and with the most brutal and ruthless filling the void.
Of course, non-believers can be good people, and believers can behave atrociously.
But non-believers who subscribe to the basic moral tenets of western society are subscribing — whether they like it or not — to the values given to the world by Judaism and Christianity.
Such people may not believe in God, but they were not born with these moral values encoded in their DNA. They are inescapably shaped by the Judeo-Christian culture in which such unbelievers have grown up.
Without that culture, our society would be a savage and uncivilised place, governed by selfishness, self-centredness and narcissism.
Indeed, I would go even further. Rather than religion and reason being diametrically opposed to each other — as non-believers contend — it was, in fact, the Hebrew Bible which gave us reason in the first place, by introducing the then revolutionary idea that the world had been created by a rational intelligence in linear time.
It was this belief that gave us the idea that the universe was governed by natural laws, which in turn gave rise to science and modernity.
It is not surprising, therefore, that the alarming slide in Christian belief has gone hand in hand with both the relentless coarsening and brutalisation of our culture and the progressive flight from rationality — as demonstrated by the prevalence of conspiracy theories, resistance to factual evidence, and belief in the occult. In other words, people who stop believing in God start making religions of other things.
For the religious instinct seems to be hard-wired in us. Some 70 per cent believe in a soul, and more than half in life after death, and these numbers are rising.
Although many no longer go regularly to church, some 85 per cent go at least once a year — perhaps to the Christmas carol service. Despite its regrettable over-commercialisation, Christmas may be the one time when some people are exposed to the Christian message.
Many would like that message to be stronger; and not just at Christmas. But for religion to thrive, there has to be strong leadership. And both in the political and religious spheres, that has been sorely lacking.
Christmas is quintessentially the time when people get together with their families. And families are at the very heart of the Judeo-Christian tradition.
But for years, political leaders have done everything in their power to undermine the family by promoting nihilistic sexual licence. Even David Cameron’s supposedly ‘family-friendly’ but in fact socially liberal policies hardly correspond to Judeo-Christian principles.
Of course, we don’t expect our politicians to be religious leaders. But if society is to adhere to basic moral principles, politicians have to uphold them. Yet so much of the political class is now governed by the desire for power for its own sake, rather than to make a better world.
The leadership of the Church itself has hardly been any better. But there are high hopes of the incoming Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, who appears to have a more robust and muscular understanding of Christianity than did his predecessor.
The challenge he faces, however, is much more profound than the divisions over women or gays in the clergy. These are but symptoms of the real malaise afflicting the Church of England — which is nothing less than a loss of belief in its own Scriptural doctrines.
This deep demoralisation can be traced all the way back to the birth of modernity itself, in the 18th century.
In contemporary times, it is why the Church has grovelled on the one hand to godless liberalism, and on the other to Islam. Desperately trying to appease both to stave off its own demise, the Church has succeeded instead in creating a vacuum which has only hastened it.
The single most urgent task for Bishop Welby is surely to find a language with which the Church can reach out to all those millions who are searching for something outside themselves in which to believe but who no longer find it in Christianity.
This is not just about saving the Church of England. It is about saving the culture, identity and civilisation of Britain and the West.

Friday 21 December 2012

COLUMBINE SHOOTINGS STUDENT'S FATHER 12 YEARS LATER !!

COLUMBINE STUDENT'S FATHER 12 YEARS LATER !!
Guess our national leaders didn't expect this. On Thursday, Darrell Scott, the father of Rachel Scott, a victim of ...the Columbine High School shootings in Littleton, Colorado, was invited to address the House Judiciary Committee's subcommittee. What he said to our national leaders during this special session of Congress was painfully truthful.

They were not prepared for what he was to say, nor was it received well. It needs to be heard by every parent, every teacher, every politician, every sociologist, every psychologist, and every so-called expert! These courageous words spoken by Darrell Scott are powerful, penetrating, and deeply personal. There is no doubt that God sent this man as a voice crying in the wilderness.. The following is a portion of the transcript:
"Since the dawn of creation there has been both good & evil in the hearts of men and women. We all contain the seeds of kindness or the seeds of violence. The death of my wonderful daughter, Rachel Joy Scott, and the deaths of that heroic teacher, and the other eleven children who died must not be in vain. Their blood cries out for answers.

"The first recorded act of violence was when Cain slew his brother Abel out in the field. The villain was not the club he used.. Neither was it the NCA, the National Club Association. The true killer was Cain, and the reason for the murder could only be found in Cain's heart.

"In the days that followed the Columbine tragedy, I was amazed at how quickly fingers began to be pointed at groups such as the NRA. I am not a member of the NRA. I am not a hunter. I do not even own a gun. I am not here to represent or defend the NRA - because I don't believe that they are responsible for my daughter's death.

Therefore I do not believe that they need to be defended. If I believed they had anything to do with Rachel's murder I would be their strongest opponent.

I am here today to declare that Columbine was not just a tragedy -- it was a spiritual event that should be forcing us to look at where the real blame lies! Much of the blame lies here in this room. Much of the blame lies behind the pointing fingers of the accusers themselves. I wrote a poem just four nights ago that expresses my feelings best.

Your laws ignore our deepest needs,
Your words are empty air.
You've stripped away our heritage,
You've outlawed simple prayer.
Now gunshots fill our classrooms,
And precious children die.
You seek for answers everywhere,
And ask the question "Why?"
You regulate restrictive laws,
Through legislative creed.
And yet you fail to understand,
That God is what we need!

"Men and women are three-part beings. We all consist of body, mind, and spirit. When we refuse to acknowledge a third part of our make-up, we create a void that allows evil, prejudice, and hatred to rush in and wreak havoc. Spiritual presences were present within our educational systems for most of our nation's history. Many of our major colleges began as theological seminaries. This is a historical fact. What has happened to us as a nation? We have refused to honor God, and in so doing, we open the doors to hatred and violence. And when something as terrible as Columbine's tragedy occurs -- politicians immediately look for a scapegoat such as the NRA. They immediately seek to pass more restrictive laws that contribute to erode away our personal and private liberties. We do not need more restrictive laws. Eric and Dylan would not have been stopped by metal detectors. No amount of gun laws can stop someone who spends months planning this type of massacre. The real villain lies within our own hearts.

"As my son Craig lay under that table in the school library and saw his two friends murdered before his very eyes, he did not hesitate to pray in school. I defy any law or politician to deny him that right! I challenge every young person in America , and around the world, to realize that on April 20, 1999, at Columbine High School prayer was brought back to our schools. Do not let the many prayers offered by those students be in vain. Dare to move into the new millennium with a sacred disregard for legislation that violates your God-given right to communicate with Him. To those of you who would point your finger at the NRA -- I give to you a sincere challenge.. Dare to examine your own heart before casting the first stone!

My daughter's death will not be in vain! The young people of this country will not allow that to happen!"

- Darrell Scott
Do what the media did not - - let the nation hear this man's speech. Please send this out to everyone you can.
God Bless

Thursday 20 December 2012

Sunday 16 December 2012

Sandy Hook elementary school shooting , a Suspicion!

 By Horwich Nationalists

As concerning the Sandy School shootings ,This is awful and a tragedy! innocent blood spilled!
And what I write will be as most likely be treated at first with revulsion, and duely noted as I suspect I would also normally do so say this was 1976.
But! I have a strange and suspicion in my mind, the same thing happened at Hungerford and Dunblane over here in the UK .
With the perpetrator been found dead by committing suicide. And apparently the same profile of the shooter white socially isolated male. .
And in both cases was then followed by draconian gun laws.that severely restricted the publics accessibility to fire arms. on the grounds that stopped any threat to the public.

I am sorry but I am  very suspicious about such heartbreaking tragedies now. 
As they never happened as i recall, before the clamour for gun control both here and the USA. As in both cases soon after you get the liberal elitist politicians with fake sympathy , I am sorry but I rely do think it is so, to them it is an opportunity to forward their agenda of slavery!

I put this forward as something to consider that is all . As I do not put anything past a govt that will bomb a wedding party in Afghanistan to get there one objective.When the overall objective achieved here and especially desired in the USA by the Liberal elites is to remove the 2nd amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America. In which it's citizens have the right to bear arms, in case of a tyrannical government.
One only has to see how helpless we the people in the UK  are against our own tyrannical Government of elitists, with their heavily armed political police force. Who are determined on an agenda on racial and cultural genocide of the indigenous British people.To realise the awful quote of Lenin " One man with a gun can control a hundred with out one." And then concerning gun laws and the no access of firearms to the responsible adult population to a nation, one can only be suspicious now about these all to common events that seem to happen ONLY WHEN CALLS FOR GUN CONTROL ARE BING PUSHED FOR BY THE ELITE!

Tuesday 11 December 2012

Common Purpose exsposed Inside the Rotherham Bunker with the S.S. (Social services)

Latest video of the real face of rotherham Labour (marxist) Party in their attempts on Political kidnapping of political opponents children!

Wednesday 5 December 2012

Well BooHoo to a Response on BooHoo Pork Issue and Animal Welfare

Well after waiting for a proper response from BooHoo the On-line Shopping outfit on their problem with Britain's piggy products. After contacting their HR (Human Reppressor ?) on the issue of BANNING any non islamic employees from eating any pork products as seen in my original article.
I am sorry to say that after the customary notification of receiving my email on the matter and questioning the issue that may be a breach of their non islamic employees Human rights. Their has been no response as yet. I therefore would like to ask all readers of this article to contact BooHoo.
And formaly request an explanation as to why Most likely British workers are being forced to submit to the intolerance of there islamic co workers. After all we have to be tolerant of there ritual slaughter of animals? by the slow unstunned slitting of the animals throat.
 ARE BooHoo are endorsing that method of slaughter? By preferring their employees to submit to eating only non pork islamic foodstuff that are ritually slaughtered.
So lets take a look at what BooHoo  maybe endorsing as recommended slaughter methods for employees by submitting to islamic demands on enforcement of sharia practices in the workplace. 
!st is the British way of slaughter secondly maybe is the BooHoo preferred method? I don,t know we will let you make your own mind up on that issue, I know I have reached my own opinion on BooHoo. 
And that is to NEVER EVER SHOP WITH THEM OR RECOMMEND THEM TO ANY ONE AT ALL!!!!!!



A Big F Off to You And Your Culture from Sumaiya Karim

LET'S HOPE THIS DOESN'T CATCH ON BECAUSE IT WILL MEAN MUSLIMS RUNNING THE COUNTRY. 

Sumaiya Karim, Wokingham’s Member of Youth Parliament (MYP), led a winning debate in the chamber on Friday, November 23. The 16-year-old is believed to be t...he first person to wear a hijab while speaking at the despatch box in Parliament. “It was absolutely brilliant and a fantastic experience for all of us,” Sumaiya said. “This was one of the best things I’ve ever done – something I’ll never forget for the rest of my life. “I was feeling a bit nervous, but I’ve been told that didn’t come across.” The Maiden Erlegh School Year 12 pupil, who is hoping to study medicine at university, has decided to wear a Muslim headscarf for most of her time at secondary school. “It was a decision I arrived at myself,” she said. “I did a lot of reading when I was growing up and decided it was time to start wearing the headscarf. “It’s such an honour [to be the first to speak in Parliament wearing a hijab] and I’ve been humbled by the response from everyone. I’ve been getting loads of emails and phone calls. “Parliament should be representative of the population and there are so many Muslim women in the UK. I want to show we are into politics and are part of the future of the UK.” Sumaiya, from Lower Earley, opened a debate calling for the national curriculum to be overhauled to include wider life skills. “This is something I feel really passionate about,” she said. “I think it’s really important we address this and it’s the perfect time to do it. “It’s really important we have access to education and diverse cultures have the same opportunities. It’s about engaging young people and getting them involved in these issues and engaging them for later in life. A lot of our education makes us the people we are and we are the future.” The A-level pupil was greeted with applause at the close of her speech, after she asked why her favourite chocolate bar had risen in price from 10p to 20p. The national curriculum motion was one of five debated by the UK Youth Parliament at the event, chaired by the Speaker Rt Hon John Bercow MP, and received 154 of the 295 votes cast. Sumaiya will step down as Wokingham’s MYP after deciding not to reapply for December’s election. -C-

Post Script From The Horwich nationalists
As a matter of rules is it not illegal for anyone to sit in the Parliamentary chamber who is not an fully Elected MP?
Also this example of creeping sharia, is another example of the Islamics just sticking 2 fingers up at the British People it,s Traditions and Values. And also is not the silence of the femminista deafening at this spectacle of the way women is the cult of islam are treated as mere chattels and forced to be second class in walks of life. Despite all this objects claims of choice, I have the feeling it was the choice of wear it or else!

Friday 30 November 2012

Mugged: Racial Demagoguery from the Seventies to Obama,

Mugged: Racial Demagoguery from the Seventies to Obama, by Ann Coulter


Mugged: Racial Demagoguery from the Seventies to Obama
by Ann Coulter
336 pages, Sentinel, $16

For many years, the subject of race has been so carefully tinged with the trauma of the past that we did not even pretend we could discuss it. Most generation X+ citizens grew up under a regimen of teachers, politicians, media and entertainers telling us the one right way to think on this issue.
Recently this taboo has fragmented in light of the shocking polarization of American voters. 60% of white people vote Republican; everyone else votes Democratic. The white people who vote Democratic tend to be the lost: single mothers, scared post-collegiate children, the neurotic and the miserable. This tells us that among the healthy, representation is exclusively a racial question. Whites vote Republican, and everyone else votes against them.
Ann Coulter takes on this challenging topic in her latest book, Mugged: Racial Demagoguery from the Seventies to Obama. As a writer and a product, Coulter has a foot in both worlds, embracing a witty mainstream conservatism but also exhibiting a challenging realism that might even be called Nietzschean, or Machiavellian. Coulter may write for the mainstream middle class audience, but she is aware of the dark underworld of realpolitik that manifests itself in all that we do. For most of her career, this duality has created ambiguity about what she actually believes. Her books often come on strong, make some really good points, and then spent the next 200 pages creating a fog of non-disclosure so she doesn’t get too close to the really dangerous parts of reality and politics.
With this current book, Coulter resolves the duality by keeping her points clinical. She doesn’t read into her own thesis beyond the provable and documented, but she lets us draw our own conclusions with ample amounts of accurate but hyperbolic liberal-bashing. In this book, her goal is to explore the use of race by liberal parties as a kind of “get out of jail free card” and a limitless credit card on which to charge their own wealth redistribution agenda. On top of that, she explores the history of racial denial in the American media and then seeks to prove how no one, black or white, is benefiting from this situation. As Coulter might say, the only people profiteering from this situation are liberals and their media lapdogs:
It produced a destructive welfare state that was untouchable for decades. It got us anxiety, anger, fear and a major political party incapable of making an argument more sophisticated than: “You racist!”
And then it got us the most left-wing president America has ever seen.
When there were so few cases of white-on-black hate crimes that liberals had to start making them up, wasn’t that a clue that the Klan wasn’t preventing black progress anymore? If white people could be shorn of all racism overnight, it’s not clear how that would improve the black condition. (261)
The way this book approaches race is reminiscent of Colin Flaherty’s White Girl Bleed a Lot: The Return of Race Riots to America, a book which similar takes a non-judgmental view of the failure of American racial policy as a policy and not as an indictment of any ethnic group. Coulter goes out of her way, as Flaherty did before her, to make it clear that her book is not about black people. It’s about white liberals and the racial policies they advocate and the consequent failure of those. Much of this book, like Flaherty’s, involves research into historical events and current news items in which there is a disconnect between reality and the way the liberal media and liberal politicians have chosen to explain the situation. Coulter’s greatest vitriol seems to be reserved for WASPy journalists, politicos and public figures who keep beating the tin drum of “racism” while ignoring the fact that liberal racial policies do not work for anyone, black, white or other.
The thrust of the book is on white-black relations, not the broader question of race as a whole and the Democratic intent to replace the white majority with a third-world majority and thus secure a permanent demographic majority for Democrats. As said above, Coulter stays within the immediate and clearly linked because this book is like all of her books an introduction both to a mainstream conservative position, and the underlying reason behind it which may be more complex than most people are willing to undertake.
Among the first hundred pages, Coulter repeats a disingenuous argument about how Republicans fostered racial equality through rule of law, while Democrats opposed it. This is a complex area involving the flip-flop of both parties from previous positions, moving Republicans from the left-ward position toward a right-wing one. She does better when she focuses on the difference between liberal views and rational views of the situation, instead of trying to rally the troops toward loyalty to a party name. It is this type of mainstream argument that loses Coulter readers among the quiet educated and thoughtful types who would like solid logical reasoning behind their positions. They are a minority with a huge trickle-down effect on those who recognize their wisdom, so they are important in the long-term but less important to product success.
Like Flaherty, Coulter approaches the African-American crime statistics with fairness. She points out numerous times that most victims of black crime are black, and that the permissive “rehabilitation” policies of liberals are to blame, in that they not only fail to discourage crime but effectively incentivize it.
Based on their having no understanding of human nature, the smart set turned American cities into petri dishes for crime and degenerate behavior without punishment. Thousands of Americans died, were raped and disfigured in criminal acts made possible by the Warren court, the ACLU, liberal professors and activists, whose single-minded policy objective was to return criminals to the street. (94)
For any faults she has, including the aforementioned prole drift of one of her arguments in the first part of this book, Coulter breaks new ground by opening up the issue that we’re afraid to look at here in the West. Both the USA and Europe are awash in internal division, complexity and cost from their policies of diversity. While Coulter does not argue against diversity itself, she shifts the argument away from racism toward criticism of liberal pluralism and its effects in the context of diversity. This is a huge first step toward having an issue we can discuss sensibly again, and leaving behind the Soviet lock-step with liberal ideas that has prevented that discussion until now.