The Spectator's Notes

The Lahore attacks reflected hatred of Christians. Why must we deny it?

2 April 2016

9:00 AM

2 April 2016

9:00 AM

You might expect that the murder of Christians would excite particular horror in countries of Christian heritage. Yet almost the opposite seems to be true. Even amid the current slew of Islamist barbarities, the killing of 72 people, 29 of them children, on Easter Day in Lahore, stands out. So does the assault in Yemen in which nuns were murdered and a priest was kidnapped and then, apparently, crucified on Good Friday. But the coverage tends to downplay such stories — there has been much less about Lahore than Brussels, though more than twice as many died — or at least their religious element. The BBC correspondent in Lahore, Shahzheb Jillani, was at pains to emphasise that the victims were not solely Christians but ‘simply Pakistani citizens enjoying a day out in the park with their children’, as if that made it worse. Western European politicians rarely protest about the plight of Christians in Muslim lands or offer to help them. Such Christians are perhaps regarded as a bit of a nuisance in countries Islam dominates. The Jewish experience should warn us how insidious this way of turning the victims into the problem can be. Hatred of Christianity — as of Judaism — is central to the Islamist creed. In our secular societies in the West, we congratulate ourselves on our lack of zeal, and think that if we stay out of religious disputes, the angel of death will not select us. But the events in Brussels are a reminder that studied neutrality makes you weaker, and no safer.

Anna Soubry, the minister concerned, keeps pleading on air for Tata to give the government ‘more time’ before deciding to close its Port Talbot steelworks. I think she should specify the date more exactly: she means ‘not before 24 June’.


Our latest council tax bill states, without explanation, ‘The council tax attributable to East Sussex County Council includes a precept to fund adult social care.’ So do lots of other authorities’ council tax bills for 2016/2017. Behind this lies a tragi-comedy of modern government. In 2011, the Localism Act gave ‘communities’ the right to demand a referendum if their council tax rose beyond the limit central government had decided to impose. This is a near-absurdity, since voters have the power to eject councillors who have put up tax too much, in things called council elections: why would they need a referendum as well? After the Conservatives won the 2015 general election, George Osborne realised that he had to get more money somehow. He thought he could get it with fewer squeals of indignation if he made local government raise it. So he made an exception to his own referendum rule (and his own 2 per cent limit on council tax increases) to make councils find more money for adult social care. Even with the increase, so much money has been taken out of local government that a council like ours, where there is an ever-growing number of old people, has to reduce itself to providing only ‘severe’ and ‘critical’ adult social care, and will gain less than it needs. And this week, along comes Mr Osborne’s National Living Wage, which is brilliantly targeted to make adult social care even more unaffordable.

Last week, I had the honour to be installed as president of the South of England Agricultural Society at its famous showground in Ardingly. It is an unfamiliar and happy experience to be president of anything, but I feel unworthy of this role. Despite being brought up on a small, mixed farm of the type that no longer exists, and spending a lot of my boyhood ‘helping’ with milking, sitting on the combine harvester and piling up hay bales, I remain shockingly ignorant of what farming really is. The late Bill Deedes told me that when he first stood for Parliament in Kent in 1950, a man at a public meeting asked him, ‘Does candidate know whether cow’s horns come before or behind cow’s ears?’ Even now, I find I give the answer (behind) with imperfect confidence. I would be a useless member of the Pig, Sheep and Goat or the Bees and Honey Committees. My motive for accepting the post, apart from local patriotism, is to learn. It is surprisingly hard, in modern Britain, to answer the question ‘What is farming for?’ Related to that is the question ‘Why does anyone do it?’, given that the number of farmers roughly halves every decade and that, in our part of England at least, only a small percentage can expect to make a living out of farming alone. The industry is such an odd mixture of wealth and poverty (often lots of capital value, almost always tiny incomes), of tradition and innovation, of hardheadedness and romanticism and of subsidy dependence and sturdy entrepreneurism. Public ignorance is widespread, yet farming still shapes our idea of what our country is. Its internal differences are fascinating. The phrase ‘as different as chalk and cheese’ is supposed to come from my own county, where never the twain — downland farmers and Wealden ones — would meet. I hope to report further as my year in office continues. This year’s theme for the society, by the way, is sheep.

On Monday, on BBC Radio 4, I heard a business commentator being invited to ‘dimension’ a problem. This verb born from a noun was new to me. Someone should trace — dimension, indeed — how long it takes for a new usage, having been invented, to become general. I remember, in the 1980s, everyone laughing when the verbs to ‘nuance’ and to ‘impact’ were invented. Today the former is common and the latter virtually universal.

Watching Robert Hardman’s enjoyable documentary Our Queen at Ninety on ITV, I realised one of the more surprising facts about Elizabeth II is that she must be the longest-serving broadcaster in history. She has been at it since she addressed the Empire on Children’s Hour on 13 October 1940: ‘God will care for us, and give us victory and peace.’ She makes David Attenborough (who started more than ten years later) look a rank novice.

You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10


Show comments
  • Australian Inquisitor

    “the events in Brussels are a reminder that studied neutrality makes you weaker, and no safer” (sic)
    Non sequitur.
    It’s as silly as writing “the events in Syria are a reminder that being sectarian makes you stronger”

    • JabbaPapa

      The absence of neutrality is not called “sectarianism”.

      • Australian Inquisitor

        The article suggests that it is Europe’s “neutrality” towards the religions of its citizens, particulary religions which are themselves intolerant, which has been its undoing.
        The opposite of religious “neutrality” is sectarianism.

        Or do you have a different view of what the author meant?

        • davidshort10

          I confess I have been trying to understand your original point since I first read it this morning. I wasn’t going to say anything until I saw this exchange. I’m not even sure that Moore’s sentence makes much sense. If the Belgians had ploughed in to the ghetto mob-handed, there would have been a lot more ‘events’ in Brussels and around the world. We will have this problem for 20 years or more and stoking the fire is not the answer.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Moore has joined the ranks of those who think that our tolerance of others who are intolerant has caused us to be victims. It makes no sense and is pretty easily disproved by looking at the countries which supposedly “stand up to the fundamentalists”.
            France and Belgium both passed laws banning muslim veils. Denmark has banned halal butchery. All three have suffered serious Islamic terror attacks. Israel is the least Islamo-friendly country in the world and yet they are attacked on a daily basis.

            His article is simply a fig leaf for his personal dislike of someone else’s religion.

          • JabbaPapa

            All three have suffered serious Islamic terror attacks

            As has the “studiedly neutral” UK, both at home and at sundry holiday resorts.

            And the list of countries that have, regardless of attitudes towards Islam, is depressingly lengthy.

            You might be saying that it’s a false distinction, but that’s exactly the point of the author himself — they’re targeting us regardless of whether we reject them or try and be welcoming. Except that not standing up to Jihadi extremism is blatantly irrational.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            So you agree that being targeted for attack seems to have feck-all to do with how “neutral” you are.

            That Moore’s observation is a non sequitur.

          • investigator

            You seem to be squealing just for the sake of squealing.
            Moore was making a good point; that when we name our enemy we can take action against him.

            We are mostly Christian and the Muslims are very anti-Christian. The most important point to be made at this stage.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            We have named our enemy. It is violent extremists who commit serious crimes in the name of their ideology.
            It isn’t The Religion of Islam, however convenient that argument may be for those who can’t be bothered to separate the good from the bad.

          • Ipsedixit

            There are certainly Moslems who are good people. However there is no good in Mohammedanism.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            There is no good in any religion

          • JabbaPapa

            Your atheist bigotry is utterly repellent.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            You should probably pray for me. That ought to fix it.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            You could do what ever it is you do.
            Are you just anti Christian or anti all religion.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            All religion.
            Re Ligio means “to bind back, to limit, to prevent”.
            All religions are essentially lists of rules. Once you try and impose those lists on people who don’t want to comply, trouble is ensured.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            I agree, but I’m sure you live by a list of rules, moral or immoral. So how are you any different. You just label it differently.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Yes, but I don’t try to enforce my or morality on others.

            I don’t rely on pointing to words in a magic book.

            Those are massive differences.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Neither do I. I can’t say I’ve walked around seeing droves of Christian men and women forcing their views on anyone else., have you?

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Are you kidding:

            http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/12176301/Church-leaders-unite-against-new-Sunday-trading-laws.html

            The UK laws on polygamy, public nudity, drunkenness and prostitution all have their roots firmly in what Christians think people should or shouldn’t do.

            Blasphemy was a crime right up until 2008

          • Yorkieeye

            Largely supported by the population I should think

          • Australian Inquisitor

            So you’re saying that if a religiously-based law is “largely supported by the population”, then it’s hunky-dory.

            Sure you want to go down that road mate???

          • JabbaPapa

            So you’re saying that if a religiously-based law is “largely supported by the population”, then it’s hunky-dory

            You’re the one who said : “Yes, every society has laws and rules. If you don’t like them, then you strive to change them or you go somewhere else”

          • Yorkieeye

            And what do Muslims think of your list? Not ‘for’ I shouldn’t think.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            I don’t care what they think and nor do you. We have found some common ground.

          • JabbaPapa

            Are you a polygamous drunken streaker with an open account at your local bordello ?

            No wonder you hate Christianity.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            And you disagree with those laws?

            Like a typical liberal progressive it is a race to the bottom on morality stakes. You prefer hedonism?

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Doesn’t matter if I agree with them or not. They are based on Christian ideas of morality and I am forced to comply if I want to live here.

            Your society is no more tolerant than the ones you hate.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            I’d hazard a guess you’d complain whatever the source of the laws to which we are held. It just sticks in you craw that the western world based their basic laws on Christian values and morals.
            Ah well, suck it up pal!

          • Australian Inquisitor

            So you can’t really morally defend why non-Christians are obliged to obey your Christian-based laws other than just to tell us we must comply – or else!

            Scratch the surface of the “compassionate, tolerant Christian” and you find the authoritarian bigot.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Here’a a little light reading for you

            http://www.bishop-accountability.org/AtAGlance/data.htm

            looks like my morality is a bit better than these guys

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Ok chum
            “The U.S. bishops have reported receiving allegations of abuse by 6,427 priests in 1950-2013, or 5.9% of the 109,694 U.S. priests active 1950-2002, according to the John Jay report. Including the 5,356 priests ordained since 2002 brings the total to 115,050, of whom 5.6% have been accused of abuse.”

            100k victims. Abused by 5.6% of the total clergy in the US in 63 years, a shocking figure and indeed a problem. 5.9% of the U.S. clergy abused
            0.03% of the US population. Yet you seem to be prepared to tar all Christians with the same bigoted brush you wield.

            I seem to recall you spouting some claim that Islam shouldn’t be judged as Islamic terrorists make up such a small percentage of the Muslim community. So we shouldn’t tar a whole religion with the same brush.

            You can’t have it both ways pal.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            “Yet you seem to be prepared to tar all Christians with the same bigoted brush you wield.”

            That’s the same brush you use to tar all Muslims then

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            That’s fine. Just as long as you realise you are Just like me chum 😉

          • JabbaPapa

            Including the 5,356 priests ordained since 2002 brings the total to 115,050

            Is THIS where “Australian Inquisitor” got his 100,000 figure from ?

            /face-palm/

            Utter functional illiteracy on a stick !!!

            The 100,000 number is the total number of all US Catholic priests ordained since 1950.

            This isn’t even like having an argument with a brick wall — it’s like having one with a pile of bricks.

            The man is a complete cretin.

          • Australian Inquisitor
          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Just like your argument, an error 404 page not found.

            And before you say it Jehovah s witnesses, annoying as they care do not go around threatening people.

          • Yorkieeye

            Yes you do. The rule of law in any country is based on rules. I assume you want tax evaders punished and rapists incarcerated?

          • Australian Inquisitor

            LittleRed’s question was about MY rules, MY morality. Keep up if you’re going to chip in.

            Yes, every society has laws and rules. If you don’t like them, then you strive to change them or you go somewhere else. Simples.
            This works for Islamic countries just as much as for Western ones.

          • Yorkieeye

            Forgive me, I’ve heard of Aussie Rules but didn’t realise it was a whole legal system.

          • JabbaPapa

            Re Ligio means “to bind back, to limit, to prevent”

            No it doesn’t.

            All religions are essentially lists of rules

            No they aren’t.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Are you back for more? Which of your accounts are you using today?

          • JabbaPapa

            I only use one account, you posturing twit.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            No you don’t.

          • JabbaPapa

            You’re a bad joke.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Yes, I have more knowledge than you. That’s not magical.

          • JabbaPapa

            You are in fact extremely ignorant as far as I can tell.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            It’s pretty clear that using “what JabbaPapa can tell” isn’t a good barometer.

          • JabbaPapa

            Thick as two short planks, to boot.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Indeed you are.

          • Yorkieeye

            No, just arrogance

          • Yorkieeye

            What, like not killing or stealing? Outrageous!

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            From an atheist extremist.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Violent Muslim extremists or islamists in other currency.

            You seem to be an expert in Islamic theology. Would you care to enlighten us why what we see is not the religion of islam and also what is the religion of islam.

            We’ve had decades of so called moderates telling us it’s nothing to do with islam when there is clearly a distinct link.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            “Violent Muslim extremists or islamists in other currency”

            Correct – for now at least. 20 years age the death fetishists were Irish nationalists, 40 years ago they were student anarchists.

            What you see is an interpretation of Islam based on the Koran. It takes certain passages literally and enacts them literally. For some (the western islamophobes and the Islamic bigots included), that is enough. That’s the “gotcha” which proves that Islam signifies hatred and death.

            You can find similar verses of violence, intolerance and misogyny in the Bible:

            “If a woman is found not to be a virgin on her wedding night, “she
            shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death.”

            “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence”

            “If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death”

            Trouble is, in the Koran just as in the Bible, those hard-charging instructions are contradicted by other instructions of love and tolerance and other nice stuff – they are pretty much ignored by the VAST majority of Christians and Muslims.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Problem with that is, you don’t see it happening do you in society. Quote the OT all you like it is rarely enacted. Whereas in Islamic culture it is prevalent. Even in this country with honour killings etc.
            Inconvenient truth eh?

          • Australian Inquisitor

            So you admit that the Bible has specific instructions to maim and kill people who do not follow religious laws, but you want to give that particular magic book a free pass because those words are “rarely enacted” – even though I’ve given you a stack of examples where they are enacted.

            “oh, that’s the Old Testament” doesn’t wash.

            Your hypocrisy is self-evident.

          • JabbaPapa

            Your hypocrisy is self-evident.

            Your own posturing hypocrisy is stunningly grotesque.

            Which part of the fact that Christians follow Christ and His Commandments, and not Ancient Hebrew Law, did you fail to comprehend ?

            As for 1 Timothy, your quote is simply Scriptural evidence supporting the Catholic & Orthodox doctrine that the priesthood is reserved to men. Your translation is partially erroneous, as it is clear in the Greek that this context of silence and submission refers ONLY to matters of preaching.

            There is nothing “hypocritical” about this, or “misogynistic”, because neither Catholicism nor Orthodoxy accept the modern propaganda of the interchangeability of men and women in all things. You can disagree with it if you want, but no faithful Catholic or Orthodox men and women will do so.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Christ’s commandments were to follow the words of the Prophets and “Ancient Hebrew Law” – didn’t you know??

            “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfil them”

            Matthew 5:17

            “I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not
            the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law
            until everything is accomplished”

            Matthew 5:18

            “Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices
            and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of
            heaven”

            Matthew 5:19

            “But it is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for one dot of the Law to become void”

            Luke 16:17

            Which of this part of THE NEW TESTAMENT do you fail to comprehend?

            ” it is clear in the Greek that this context of silence and submission refers ONLY to matters of preaching”

            Oh, well if it’s only PARTLY subjugating women in the name of Christianity, that’s OK then.

            Here’s the kicker though (I saved it for last)….

            “You can disagree with it if you want, but no faithful Catholic or Orthodox men and women will do so”

            THAT ONE SENTENCE demonstrates perfectly your hypocrisy, your smug Ipse Dixit . Simply replace the words “Catholic and Orthodox” with “Muslim” and your outrage and frothing hatred would be revealed.

            I’m done with you. Conversing with religious bigots like you makes me feel sick, even if I’m handing them a theological and moral thrashing.

            Here Endeth Your Lesson

          • JabbaPapa

            Christ’s commandments were to follow the words of the Prophets and “Ancient Hebrew Law” – didn’t you know??

            One is hardly surprised that you understand not an iota of the Sermon on the Mount.

            THAT ONE SENTENCE demonstrates perfectly your hypocrisy, your smug Ipse Dixit . Simply replace the words “Catholic and Orthodox” with “Muslim” and your outrage and frothing hatred would be revealed.

            You’re a joke.

            WHY would a statement that is true of one particular doctrine of a religion be transferable to an entirely different one ? Muslims don’t even have priests in the first place.

            And you understand nothing of Christianity.

            There is much that I don’t understand about the detail of Islamic teaching, but you don’t catch me pretending that I do by making long lists of quotes from their teaching sources for the purpose of hate speech — but that’s EXACTLY what you’re doing here with the Christian sources, for the purpose of expressing your own bilious hatred.

            HOW many posts, exactly, of rancid religious hatred have you dumped into these forums ?

            theological

            Oh stop pretending you even know what the word means.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            “WHY would a statement that is true of one particular doctrine of a religion, and of the actual members of that religion, be transferable to
            an entirely different one ?”

            because in that one sentence, you abandoned all claims to morality and logic and switched to Ipse Dixit – AKA “that’s just how it is” AKA “the followers of my magic book all give ourselves a free pass”

            “And you understand nothing of Christianity”

            I understand that it is as hypocritical and flawed as any other religion. That it attracts hateful dickheads like you.

          • JabbaPapa

            I’m not the one who barged in here and decided to subject everyone to massive amounts of atheist hate propaganda.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            No, you are the one who has decided to subject everyone to massive amounts of anti-Islam hate propaganda. Maybe you thought a Speccy forum would be an echo-chamber, a “safe space” for bigots to express their bigotry. Sorry to burst your bubble there.

            I can see you have trouble in grasping things like Ipse Dixit and Non Sequitur, but you’ll have to educate yourself in order to see that I’m right and you are wrong (again).
            PS – argument from authority can be another logical fallacy.

          • JabbaPapa

            massive amounts of anti-Islam hate propaganda

            A statement that’s as objectively false as it is stupid.

            Maybe you thought a Speccy forum would be an echo-chamber, a “safe space” for bigots to express their bigotry

            Your atheist bigotry is only matched by your clear hatred of Christianity.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Oh, now I see that you just want the last word.

            I couldn’t understand why you kept coming back for more, but maybe you think that there is merit in just being the last bigot standing?

            knock yerself out

          • JabbaPapa

            Idiot

          • Sanctimony

            Gratuitous insult !

          • Sanctimony

            Insulting, as well as being semantic !

          • Yorkieeye

            Oh God save us from the cleverest boy in the class

          • Yorkieeye

            Mmmm, bit hateful there Aussie

          • Yorkieeye

            And he said ‘Love one another’. Do you have anyone to love Aussie?

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Not at all. No church of England, catholic or Presbyterian minister would preach that those passages be followed and you know it. Not in the western world at least.
            Name one Muslim country where some violent passages in the Koran are not enacted in some way or another as part of sharia jurisprudence.

            You are mistaking war and the causes of war including the fall out involving Christians with everyday Christians.

            Islam in the other hand is in a constant state of war and the sooner our leaders realise that the sooner it can be addressed.

            Admit it you just have a special hate for Christianity.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            “No church of England, catholic or Presbyterian minister would preach that those passages be followed and you know it”
            That doesn’t mean they aren’t there.

            There are lots of moderate Imams who preach that similar elements in the Koran should also not be followed, but apparently you don’t want to listen to them.

          • Yorkieeye

            Yep, that’s because those ones don’t want to eliminate all Kaffirs. They aren’t the worrying ones, it’s the ones who subscribe who are the problem. Surely a person so au fait with Internet horror has seen women being stoned to death.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            I have seen those images and if you want me to defend them, you’re out of luck. I’m on the record as saying that no good comes from ANY religion.
            At least you seem to admit that there are, in fact, moderate Muslims who don’t want to kill everyone. All we have to do now is agree that people should be punished for what they do, not punished for what others do.

          • JabbaPapa

            Q: Who is being punished for what others do ?

            A: Australian Inquisitor’s latest strawman.

          • Yorkieeye

            I agree, we have some Muslim friends but they aren’t terribly religious. But my region has produced several bombers and prints inflammatory literature. I feel sorry for Muslims who came here to escape religious nutters and are faced with, usually lefty (Livingstone et al) apologists for extreme views and life styles. My friends come under pressure for not covering their hair and allowing their daughters some freedom etc. in other words, they are not Muslim enough. There is huge pressure to conform and in my opinion progressive people should be trying to support moderate people and not propping up religious maniacs for political reasons.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Yeah, I’ll go with that

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Provide evidence they are there. There is plenty of evidence of imams preaching hate

          • Australian Inquisitor
          • LittleRedRidingHood

            And you believe it. Fantastic. You see the face for public consumption. Their other face is for behind closed doors.
            Wake up son. You’re not another one of these sheeple are you?

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Closing your eyes to a reputable news source doesn’t make you right – it makes you stupid.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            The BBC just like the rest of the msm will report anything that promotes the cultural Marxist agenda. Run by lefties, believed by lefties.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Oh yes – the “run by Lefties” myth.

            Have you seen Laura Kuenssberg’s work recently? The rabidly Tory Political Editor of the BBC, who makes no attempt to hide her pro-Conservative leanings?

            Seen John Humphrys jaw-droppingly right wing documentaries about welfare Britain, one of which had a complaint upheld on the basis that “the programme failed to back up controversial views with statistics”?

            Did you know that the chairman of the BBC Trust is former Tory cabinet minister Chris Patten?

            Did you know that Andrew Neil is also chairman of that well-known Lefty rag The Spectator?

            Know that the BBC’s economics editor is Kamal Ahmed, a former Sunday Telegraph journo – beloved by Pinkoes and Commies across the land

            So that leaves you with a problem – either the BBC is correct or the Tory stooges who run it are lying to you.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            The Tories are all part of the liblabcon establishment. All sing from the same sheet, your labels are no longer relevant as Tory could be blairite Labour or libdumb, they all sound the same.

            Question time, Andrew Marr, Radio 4, hardtalk, etc etc ooze with left wing, PC establishment bias.
            The interviewing/chairing style prevents anyone from straying from the establishment narrative. If guests do stray they are spoken over constantly or asked inane questions about personal issues.

            Funny only lefties think it is a myth.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Ah, so the Tories are so far to the left of your fanaticism…as you fail to notice the differences…

            As you show your ignorance of the left wing, whine about the press…blame “lefty” Tories…

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            What fanaticism is this. Another label you won’t explain?

          • Leon Wolfeson

            More common English words you don’t understand, check.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            So common you can’t define them in the context of my comment. You are a fraudulent troll Leon.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            I don’t pander to you, as you claim I’m you, showing your raging arrogance…

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            A simple request to define what you mean Leon is far from arrogant. Man up and say you don’t know and I’ll leave you be.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Screaming demands over and over, trying to reject facts is arrogant, as you admit your bullying agenda, as you try and hide your obvious extremist…

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            It’s a simple request which you appear incapable of servicing.
            I really hope you are not in customer service.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            It’s a rejection of who you are.

            And I’m not after your job, no.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Good lord! You are a tiresome troll.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            No, I am not you.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Magical marxism, in your mind, as you show your PC. As you whine about the 99%, those lefties…

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            A nonsensical jumble of words Leon.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            “A nonsensical jumble of words Leon.”

            Then why post it?

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            The school bell goes in an hour. Have you got your packed lunch?

          • Leon Wolfeson

            So you hate children, check.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            You and only you could make that leap Leon.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            So you say that I’m the only logical person in the world…how odd.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            No one could ever associate you or your comments with logic.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            So you, nobody, are saying I’m logical? Neat-o.

          • Yorkieeye

            The Messiah was Jesus Christ. Quote me him on vanquishing his ‘enemies’.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            “The Messiah was Jesus Christ”
            says who?

          • Copyright101

            Christians.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            So what?

          • JabbaPapa

            If you weren’t interested in the answer, why ask the question ?

          • Copyright101

            You asked the question, you don’t get to duck out when you get an answer.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            It was a two part question. I’m not ducking out, I’m pointing out that you already need to be a Christian to accept Christian ideas. If you aren’t, it all means diddley squat. Hence :”so what?”

            The words in your magic book are irrelevant to people who don’t believe in magic books

          • JabbaPapa

            I confronted an Australian Inquisitor yesterday in Disqus. I asked him to explain his questions. He said “nothing to do with me”. A mealy mouthed reply.

          • Yorkieeye

            The Bible

          • JabbaPapa

            I do too.

          • Yorkieeye

            Okay, tell us the last time a non virginal Christian bride was stoned to death. We grew up and stopped with the voodoo

          • Australian Inquisitor

            But your magic book gives you explicit instructions to do so, doesn’t it?

          • Yorkieeye

            Oh I do hope I can watch when you extend the hand of friendship to ISIS. Why don’t you offer yourself up as a special envoy?

          • JabbaPapa

            I see — so your issue with complex statements of opinion is that you simply lack the ability to actually follow the thread of an argument.

            As for “non sequitur“, you should avoid using “clever” words or phrases when you don’t understand what they mean.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Expain to me what you think non sequitur means and how Moore’s arguments – and your own, fail to be labeled such.

            Actually I am very good at following the thread. I’m not impressed by people who flip-flop their arguments and write 3000 word posts in an attempt to obfuscate once they have been rumbled.
            I can stay on-topic however much you try and divert.

            Moore is wrong and so are you.
            There is no correlation between the idea of “neutrality” and weakness in the face of terrorism.

            That’s all there is to it.

          • JabbaPapa

            Moore is wrong and so are you.

            There is no correlation between the idea of “neutrality” and weakness in the face of terrorism.

            Simply saying so doesn’t make it true, and your clear misrepresentations of what I wrote in your “response” to it does not support the notion that you understood either my contribution, or the article.

            people who flip-flop their arguments

            Your failure to comprehend the original points in comparison to my restatement of those points with different words is not a “flip-flop”.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            I’m not simply saying so.
            I demonstrated clearly how silly it was in my very first post.
            I have demonstrated it clearly innecery post since.
            That fact hasn’t changed despite your protestations.

          • JabbaPapa

            Your delusional interpretations are not “facts”.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            My facts are not delusional nor are they interpretations.

            They are simple, easily verifiable facts.

            If those facts piss you off…tough luck.

          • JabbaPapa

            They are simple, easily verifiable facts

            Yes, the facts of what I mean, why I wrote it, and how you have either deliberately misrepresented or failed to understand what that was.

            The fact that you are just using this “discussion” purely as a pretext to publish some anti-Christian propaganda into the internet.

            The fact that your personal beliefs appear to enjoy no meaningful link with the contents of reality.

            The fact that your hatred of Christianity is so strong that you’re happy to mitigate your criticism of Muslim death cults that are responsible for the clear majority of all terrorism in present times so as to be able to continue expressing that hatred unhindered.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Take a look back at your unfounded statements about “weakness”, “Britishness” and all of your self-righteous, fact-free ramblings.
            Take a look at your hypocrisy about why your pet religion is the “nice” one and the other is a “nasty” one.
            Take a look at how I have called you on all your assumptions and logical fallacies.
            See how you have run out of road and ended up stamping your feet like an angry toddler.

            You really aren’t cut out for debate, are you?

          • JabbaPapa

            your unfounded statements about “weakness”

            I am not the author of this article.

            fact-free

            YOU are the one who has been posting falsehood as if they were “facts”. They’re not.

            Take a look at your hypocrisy about why your pet religion is the “nice” one and the other is a “nasty” one

            One of them has religious leaders preaching hatred, world conquest, and genocide ; the religious leaders of the other one uniformly condemn such barbarity.

            One of them has at least 4% of its membership overtly supporting terrorist barbarity ; the other has a smattering of tiny fringe element groups that are “religious” in no meaningful sense of the word.

            Only gross atheist bigotry such as your own or incoherent lefty PC multiculturalist utopianism could fail to spot the difference.

          • Yorkieeye

            Oh Lordy please shut up

          • Australian Inquisitor

            LOL six posts from you and not a shred of content in any of them.

          • Yorkieeye

            You call your diarrhoea content

          • Australian Inquisitor

            seven…

          • Yorkieeye

            You are being disingenuous if you don’t accept that Israel is a ‘special’ target.

        • JabbaPapa

          Neutrality would be the abandonment of all religious principles, except that every attempt to implement such policies in the past has led to unmitigated disaster, in the State Atheism of the Soviet bloc, the Spanish Republican atheism that led to the Red Terror and instigated Civil War, and so on … because there’s really no such thing as political neutrality, so that “religious neutrality” really only means State Secularism or State Atheism, which is really just the repression of religious freedoms in the name of the State.

          But these religious freedoms will be taken no matter what the State might dictate, no matter whom might be repressed, or oven oppressed, in the name of this false “neutrality”.

          But the attempt to guarantee religious freedoms in law via multiculturalism cannot succeed either, simply because the morals, ethics, and laws of countries are, no matter what people might think, clearly grounded, historically, in the religious history of those countries ; so that here again, “neutrality” is a pipe dream.

          The absence of neutrality that’s known to be actually functional is a grounding in the religious history, and in the ethics, morals, and laws of each national custom and tradition (*), without any ludicrous bending-backwards accommodations with their ideological competitors, plus a sensible attitude of “live and let live” ; instead of frantically trying to legislate a bizarre chimaera of intrinsic cultural incoherence into a fantasy New Order utopia, and expect everyone to magically start behaving like characters from Star Trek just on the Establishment’s say-so, regardless how much propaganda they might finance for purposes of cultural indoctrination.

          I will never abandon my Catholic principles, no matter what may come, including if or when they should be overtly criminalised, nor would I expect Muslims, or atheists, or Protestants, or Sikhs, or anyone else to give up theirs — but everyone in the UK is being asked to abandon their Britishness, for the “needs” of a utopian cause that is completely unrealistic and is blatantly dysfunctional, as well as being a direct cause of civil disorders and the ruination of the social contract.

          (*) Which is NOT Nationalism — I’m talking about core values here, many of which are transnational

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Who is being asked to give up their “Britishness”?

            You might want to define “Britishness” while you’re at it.

            I don’t accept that neutrality must be the abandonment of all religious principles, but even if it were, the idea that abandoning religious principles is the cause of Europe’s problems is also a non-sequitur.
            It is also debunked by the observation that countries which hold on tenaciously to their religious principles are either brutal, oppressive regimes or in a state of civil war.

            “the attempt to guarantee religious freedoms in law via multiculturalism cannot succeed either, simply because the morals, ethics, and laws of countries are, no matter what people might think, clearly grounded, historically, in the religious history of those countries”

            You think that those morals, ethics and laws can’t evolve and change?
            When was the last time you saw an Inquisition? Saw a Catholic burn a heretic? Saw an English monarch expel Jews or send an Army of Christ to butcher a few million unbelievers?
            Those things were all done in the name of your pet religion, all part of your history, but funnily enough they don’t happen any more, do they?

            Of course lots of horrible things do still happen in the name of Christianity, but I’m guessing they don’t count, right?

          • JabbaPapa

            Who is being asked to give up their “Britishness”?

            Everyone who’s being asked to support the ideology of multiculturalism, which, whatever the British cultural identity may be, is necessarily antithetical to it.

            I don’t accept that neutrality must be the abandonment of all religious principles, but even if it were, the idea that abandoning religious principles is the cause of Europe’s problems is also a non-sequitur.

            That’s not what I said, and I’m not sure you completely understand what a “non sequitur” is — You certainly can’t describe a proposal as a non sequitur just because you personally disagree with its starting statement of position.

            I certainly didn’t suggest that multiculturalism; or the abandonment of religious principles, “is the cause of Europe’s problems”, I said that it wasn’t the solution to Britain’s, because of its inherent structural flaws I might add.

            It is also debunked by the observation that countries which hold on tenaciously to their religious principles are either brutal, oppressive regimes or in a state of civil war

            You haven’t read what I said closely enough.

            If I had wanted to say “we must establish religious principles as the principles of government”, I would have just written that down, unambiguously — the reason I didn’t say that is because I wrote something else entirely.

            The native traditions and customs of a people are informed by their religious history, but they are most certainly not one and the same thing as religion itself.

            You think that those morals, ethics and laws can’t evolve and change?

            Where on EARTH does this come from ?

            Now you’re just putting stuff into my words that simply isn’t there in the first place. You’re letting your anti-religious prejudice cloud your judgment and affect your ability to simply read what it is that I actually wrote.

            You see — that is what a “non sequitur” looks like, your decision to start ranting on in anti-Catholic zealotry in relation to nothing at all that I wrote.

            Of course lots of horrible things do still happen in the name of Christianity, but I’m guessing they don’t count, right?

            bla-bla-bla, and now you’ve just switched your brain off and have gone into automatic atheist bigotry mode.

            Oh well.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            “Everyone who’s being asked to support the ideology of multiculturalism”
            Britain has been multicultural for at least 100 years. If you don’t like that, go live somewhere else.

            “whatever the British cultural identity may be, is necessarily antithetical to it.”
            Another non sequitur. Really . Look it up

            “You certainly can’t describe a proposal as a non sequitur just because you personally disagree with its starting statement of position”
            If yours was a proposal then it was cleverly disguised as a (false) statement of fact.
            And yes, I can absolutely disagree with any starting position which isn’t axiomatic. Sorry.

            [Next three paragraphs skipped as it’s just you backpedalling]

            “Now you’re just putting stuff into my words that simply isn’t there in the first place”
            No, I asked a simple question about how the social mores of Christian western society have changed and evolved and why you think it can’t or mustn’t change any further.

            Please try an be more succinct.

          • JabbaPapa

            Britain has been multicultural for at least 100 years. If you don’t like that, go live somewhere else.

            a) I already do, and

            b) multiple ethnicity is not multiculturalism

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Once you stop stating non sequiturs, I will stop calling them.

            Once you stop trying to backpedal out of things you presumably regret writing, I’ll stop accusing you of backpedalling.

            Deal?

          • JabbaPapa

            Once you stop stating non sequiturs, I will stop calling them.

            Once you stop trying to backpedal out of things you presumably regret writing, I’ll stop accusing you of backpedalling.

            I see that you’re not very good at thinking.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            I see that you can’t or won’t strike a deal on those terms.

          • JabbaPapa

            Because they’re bollocks “terms” based on a fantasy that you have which is disassociated from reality.

          • Yorkieeye

            Let me guess, you don’t live in somewhere like West Yorkshire, you don’t have any real Muslim friends. Boy would you be in for an education if you did Ivory Tower Boy.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Well I don’t live in West Yorkshire, but I do live in central London, I have many “real” Muslim friends and have spent time in Muslim countries.
            Infidels FTW

          • Yorkieeye

            Hmm, I’m always a bit suspicious of central London media types. Unless you live in Tower Hamlets you are probably friends with a couple of great guys called Raj (who are Hindus anyway) and think ‘Asians’ are very misunderstood. Have you ever tried to talk to a woman in a burka, complete with net eye visor? No, because she wouldn’t talk to you anyway (I’m assuming you’re a man). Girls are banned from playing sports (by their parents), all our school meals are halal and Asian girls won’t mix with white girls in school. Easy to be Mr Wonderful on the multi front when you aren’t faced with the apartheid.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            “Unless you live in Tower Hamlets you are probably friends with…”

            Assumption doesn’t make a good basis for debate I’m afraid.

            “Girls are banned from playing sports (by their parents)”
            That will come as a shock to the Egyptian girl who plays in my kid’s U12 soccer team – her mum even has a veil and everything.

            “all our school meals are halal”
            Really??? The sausages and beefburgers on the menu must be Halal ones then…

            “Asian girls won’t mix with white girls in school”
            So the Iraqi girl who had a sleepover last week was imaginary?? Got it.

            You really don’t have a clue, do you?

          • Yorkieeye

            It’s a pity there aren’t more Egyptian mums involved with the Dewsbury hockey team who had shards of glass planted on the pitch to prevent them playing.
            As I said you live in the sort of multiculti suburb is absent in northern towns

          • Australian Inquisitor

            There are intolerant arseholes everywhere if you look hard enough. If Yorkshire has so many more of them as you claim, maybe the problem is Yorkies rather than Muslims?

            Do you have a link to the hockey club incident from a local or national news source (not an anti-islamist page please, I take that all with a fistful of Kosher salt)?

          • greencoat

            ‘Of course lots of horrible things do still happen in the name of Christianity, but I’m guessing they don’t count, right?’
            What are those things? Where are they happening? I think we should be told.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Google the Antibalaka.
            Google Lords Resistance Army
            Google the NLFT
            Google The Covenant, the Sword and the Arm of the Lord

            etc etc

          • greencoat

            Etc etc yourself.

            Do these these lunatics and savages ‘love their enemies’ as Christ instructed?

          • Australian Inquisitor

            You’d have to ask them.
            Do Islamic terrorists “forgive him who wrongs you” as Mohammed instructed?

          • greencoat

            You’d have to ask them, but enough sophistry.

            Christians are being persecuted and murdered by Islamic savages all round the globe, seven days a week.

            That’s all that matters.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            And Christians themselves persecute and murder all round the globe, seven days a week.

            You looked up those Christian groups I showed you, right?

            All busy slaughtering and maiming in the name of Jesus.

            Let me guess – those Christians don’t count.

          • greencoat

            You clearly live in some kind of mental fantasy.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            So you can’t defend the actions of Christian fundamentalists? Thought not.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            I did for Antibalaka and you are yet to respond.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Let me guess you have not read anything about the circumstances surrounding those groups you have mentioned. All the while skirting around the issue of wholesale global Christian persecution.

            You appear to be one of those useful idiots.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            You guess wrong

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            It was a 50:50 chance.
            I suspect if you looked into it far more people are being persecuted by Islamic culture than Christianity persecuting others at present. It was different in the past when Christianity was dominant, but now Islam is making its play for dominance. It is perfectly justified to highlight and fight that push for dominance.

          • JabbaPapa

            Google strawman.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Those pesky facts again.

          • JabbaPapa

            You truly are a moron if you think any of those groups are motivated by or have anything meaniningful to do with Christianity.

            http://www.irinnews.org/report/99634/briefing-who-are-anti-balaka-car

            According to Human Rights Watch (HRW), “the anti-balaka militias are increasingly organized and using language that suggests their intent is to eliminate Muslim residents from the Central African Republic.”

            “At this rate, if the targeted violence continues, there will be no Muslims left in much of the Central African Republic,” Peter Bouckaert, emergencies director at Human Rights Watch, said in an emailed statement.

            “People whose families have peacefully lived in the country for centuries are being forced to leave, or are fleeing the very real threat of violence against them.”

            A self-styled spokesman for the anti-balaka, Sebastien Wenezoui, has said that the movement is fighting to defend Christians. Most of its recruits are from Christian or animist communities. But Christian and Muslim leaders have insisted that the neither anti-balaka nor ex-Seleka can credibly claim to represent either faith.

            An “anti-Muslim” organisation is not a Christian one, especially when so many of its members are animists. The French wikipedia page about them doesn’t even **mention** Christianity.

            The Lords Resistance Army is about as Christian as Genghis Khan. It is common knowledge that they are completely irreligious in nature.

            http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/states/tripura/terrorist_outfits/nlft.htm

            The purported objective of the NLFT is to establish an ‘independent’ Tripura through an armed struggle following the liberation from ‘Indian neo- colonialism and imperialism’ and furtherance of a ‘distinct and independent identity’.

            Nothing to do with Christianity then. What a “surprise”. Not.

            http://global.britannica.com/topic/The-Covenant-the-Sword-and-the-Arm-of-the-Lord

            The Covenant, the Sword, and the Arm of the Lord (CSA), [was a] white supremacist militia group based in Arkansas, U.S., that was active in the late 1970s and the ’80s. The Covenant, the Sword, and the Arm of the Lord (CSA) was connected to a number of crimes and terrorist plots in the 1980s. It dissolved after U.S. federal agents besieged the group’s compound for four days in 1985.

            It was founded by some nutjob Millennialist hate preacher who predicted the End of the World was nigh. Lunatic cults like that one have exactly nothing to do with Christianity as such.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            I like it when people get angry and throw around insults.

            It means they don’t have any arguments left and that I have won.

          • JabbaPapa

            they don’t have any arguments left

            I see, so factual evidence contradicting your rubbish claims is “having no argument left”.

            Fool.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Or means you can’t be bothered to read the arguments refuting your wild anti Christian assertions.

            You won nothing friend. It is right for people to point out your ignorant bigotry.

          • Yorkieeye

            Not

          • Australian Inquisitor

            eight…

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            See above. Those pesky facts eh?

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Let’s take the first.

            “The anti-balaka militias originally formed in the 1990s as village self-defense forces.[6][7] Some militiamen are animist.[6]

            In March 2013, President François Bozizé (a Christian) was overthrown in the Central African Republic Civil War by a mostly-Muslim rebel coalition known as Séléka. The leader of the Séléka, Michel Djotodia, then became the first Muslim president of the country.[8]

            Djotodia announced the dissolution of the Séléka in September 2013,[9] but most of the militias refused to disband.[10] The Séléka and the anti-balaka engaged in a cycle of increasing violence,[10][11] including reprisal attacks on individuals believed to be civilians by many.[who?]

            As many Christians had more settled lifestyles and many Muslims were nomadic, claims to the land were yet another dimension of the tensions.”

            So a Muslim dimenion involved where they overthrew the government and started a land grab. Are people not allowed to defend their country, land and property.
            I am sick of this revisionist history and whataboutery.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            So you found the Wiki page. Well done. I’m curious as to why you stopped quoting at the bit where the actions of the antibalaka gets more hardcore:

            Let me fix that for you:
            “Early 2014 marked a turning point; hardened by war and massacres, the anti-balaka committed multiple atrocities.
            In 2014, Amnesty International reported several massacres committed by anti-balaka against Muslim civilians, forcing thousands of Muslims to flee the country”

            So once they had defended themselves, all of Jesus’s exhortations to love and forgive went out the window and they got down to some Old Testament wet work, didn’t they?

            Pesky facts FTW

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Because war always gets more hardcore. But ultimately someone starts it before it escalates…don’t they chum.

            It’s all fluffy bunnies isn’t it … War I mean, no one ever gets hurt.

            That’s why we need strong leadership now to prevent it escalating to war.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            So you admit that the Antibalaka are a Christian extremist group who murder people in the name of ideology.

            Well done.

            Now you can read up on the next group of Christian fundamentalist killers following the words of God.

          • JabbaPapa

            So you admit that the Antibalaka are a Christian extremist group who murder people in the name of ideology

            How much more evidence would be needed for you to admit that this is bollocks ? They are a paramilitary group originally formed as a response to radical Islamic violence and mass killings. That they’ve moved beyond that to start committing atrocities themselves is of course atrocious, but there is nothing actually “Christian” about them. Nothing.

            Silly question of course — you never will, because it’s a notion that is informed solely by the atheist anti-Christian bigotry that you’re intellectually incapable of budging from.

            The Antibalaka is an anti-Muslim group, that hates Muslims, because Muslims started killing and pillaging and stealing from them, which engendered hatred and violence in return.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            And how much more evidence do you need for you to admit that ISIS and Al Qaeda are paramilitary groups who do the same thing under a different banner?

            That all use ideology as excuses for brutality?

            That they don’t represent the vast majority of decent, peaceful people who supposedly share the same religion?

            Silly question of course- you never will because that would require critical thinking which you are intellectually incapable of…

          • JabbaPapa

            And how much more evidence do you need for you to admit that ISIS and Al Qaeda are paramilitary groups who do the same thing

            Were they too “originally formed as a response to radical Islamic violence and mass killings” ?

            Cripes, you’re a non-stop joke — you clearly lack the ability to think before you type.

            1) ISIS is not a “group”, it is a quasi-state having a system of governance, its own laws, military, education system, and etc etc.

            2) Al Qaeda is vaguely similar to the Antibalaka in some minor respects, insofar as they are both groups having used terrorist methods, but then I cannot remember saying otherwise. But Al Qaeada is overt in its claims to be religiously motivated, and that its attacks have religious purposes.

            http://www.reuters.com/article/us-centralafrica-inquiry-idUSKBN0KH2BM20150108

            The mostly Christian or animist “anti-balaka” militia took up arms in 2013 in response to months of looting and killing by mostly Muslim Seleka rebels who had toppled President Francois Bozize and seized power in March the same year.

            http://www.jamestown.org/single/?tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=41926&no_cache=1#.VwELv_l96iM

            Following Séléka’s seizure of power in Bangui in April 2013, the organization’s leader, Michel Djotodia, was elected as the CAR’s interim president. Séléka, although officially disbanded by Djotodia, is accused by several international organizations of perpetrating systematic killings, rape, torture and the destruction of over 1,000 homes throughout the country.

            In response to Bozize’s ouster, and the human rights abuses and killings conducted by Séléka fighters, anti-balaka (balaka = “machete” in the CAR’s official Sangho language) militias, first organized by the deposed president as village-level, anti-Séléka forces in the northwestern CAR, have emerged as major combatants in the communal fighting that is ravaging the country (AFP, January 2). A significant number of anti-balaka fighters report that they joined their militias out of a desire to protect themselves and their families from Séléka, which they associate with the rule of Djotodia. Djotodia’s removal from power was one of the key and consistent demands of the anti-balaka militias (Jeune Afrique [Paris], December 21, 2013). The announcement of Djotodia’s abdication from power was reported to have been met with widespread celebration in areas of Bangui where anti-Séléka and anti-balaka militias are believed to have the strongest social base (BFMTV [Paris], January 12).

            Anti-balaka fighters are reported to be a mix of local militiamen and former CAR soldiers of the Forces Armées Centra-africaines (FACA – Central African Armed Forces) who were supporters of former president Bozize (AP, December 15, 2013; al-Jazeera [Doha], December 5, 2013). Currently, anti-balaka militias are believed to have varying levels of organization, with some of the fighting groups receiving military training from former FACA soldiers (ITELE [Paris], December 16, 2013).

            The anti-balaka militias in the CAR represent a complicated challenge for peacekeepers as the country moves towards a political transition from the rule of Djotodia. Anti-balaka militias do not appear to have a centralized leadership structure, and anti-balaka fighters are driven as much by a desire for revenge against Séléka and its sympathizers for the group’s attacks against civilian communities, as by disagreements over political power. Rising communal tensions, a worsening humanitarian crisis and uncertainty over the ability of international peacekeepers to prevent more widespread violence amongst the country’s combatants, particularly in the rural northwest of the country, are taking on a sectarian overtone. If this sectarian combat in the CAR continues, it could draw other regional actors, such as militant Salafist groups tied to al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) and Nigeria’s Boko Haram and Ansaru groups, into a war over control of the country’s abundant natural resources – including oil, uranium, diamonds and gold – that could fund militant Salafist insurgencies throughout the African continent.

            It is ludicrous to try and portray these people as “Christian terrorists”, given that the FACTS of the matter show extremely clearly that the anti-balaka’s motivations are NOT religious in the slightest.

            Unless you’re so thick as to believe that “a war over control of the country’s abundant natural resources – including oil, uranium, diamonds and gold” is “religious”.

            Contrast with Al Qaeda, whose entire motivations are explicitly and overtly based on Islamic religious extremism.

            Silly question of course- you never will because that would require critical thinking which you are intellectually incapable of…

            LOL, you’re incapable of even coming up with original attacks.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            1) Claiming to be something – be it a state or a caliphate or whatever, doesn’t make you something. ISIS is a group of like-minded death fetishists.

            2) So in the space of one sentence you the group you claim is not a group is now described by you as a group….and you admit that its methods are similar to the Christian fundamentalist groups like Antibalaka.

            You’re not very good at this, are you?

            “Unless you’re so thick as to believe that “a war over control of the country’s
            abundant natural resources – including oil, uranium, diamonds and gold”
            is “religious”

            ….what do you think ISIS is trying to do in the Levant? Are they also not also claiming that theft of resources is religiously justified?

          • JabbaPapa

            You really don’t know how to read, do you.

            I said ***ISIS*** isn’t a “group”, but that ***Al Qaeda*** is.

            PS you are utterly hopeless. Blinded by bigotry, you’re incapable of accepting ANYTHING that disagrees with it.

          • Sanctimony

            Rather like you, then …

          • Sanctimony

            More gratuitous insults and long-winded garbage !

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Did I say that? Or did I say that people fight war and then the causes of the war. Try as you might you are not going to be able to avoid the fact that one group agitated until it blew up into conflict.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Try as you might, you can’t get around the fact that some people do horrible things in the name of Jesus. Stop being an apologist for these arseholes

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Lots of people do horrible things, even atheists. Do you agree?

          • Australian Inquisitor

            I’m sure you could find some horrible atheists if you looked hard enough.

            You won’t find any Atheists killing others on the basis that an invisible, magical sky wizard demands that other people behave in a certain way tho.

            which is what most religion ends up doing

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            There will be plenty. Atheists kill for self, lust, money or whatever your belief is. Label it however you want, we are all pretty vile.

          • Yorkieeye

            Look it all up in Conspiracy Weekly folks.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            nine….

          • lightindesert

            Lots of horrible things happened in the name of religions and ideologies including Christianity. However, Christianity as defined by its New Tastement and central holy figure Jesus is not calling for violence. To keep things simple and not enter an endless argument about the Old Tastement and what it means, let’s just make this comparison: How many people were killed by Jesus or for that matter by his disciples? Compare this with the Prophet and all of his followers. This is a simple comparison which shows what these religions stand for and expect their followers to behave like.

            That there were evil people who used Christianity for their own worldly and political ends isn’t debated. Nor anybody is talking Christians are better than Muslims. The issue at the heart of what is going on is Islam as a system of values which govern people’s behaviours and moral standards. And it is evil and demeaning and it brings the worst in any human being. You can tell that from observing what happens and correlating it to verses in the Muslim holy book, to hadiths from the prophet, to actions from his biography and to historical precedents throughout history.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            “The issue at the heart of what is going on is Islam as a system of values which govern people’s behaviours and moral standards. And it is evil and demeaning and it brings the worst in any human being”

            So explain why, of the 1.6 billion Muslims, only about 0.01% choose to behave in a way you would consider “evil”.
            What about the 99.99% of Muslims who don’t conform to your prejudices? The ones who are just “normal” people who get upset when others insult their religion just like Christians and Jews do?

            Who moralise against adultery, homosexuality, drink and drugs just like Christians and Jews do?

            Who claim that their magic book is a better magic book that the other magic books, just as Christians and Jews do?

          • PaD

            And who shelter a mass murderer in Belgium? cheer the t.v news on 9/11…100,000 at funeral of the killer of gov of punjab for daring to defend a christian woman.. Lee Rigbys murderers and their associates around London.. Choudary?
            Come off it mate..

          • Dacorum

            “So explain why, of the 1.6 billion Muslims, only about 0.01% choose to behave in a way you would consider “evil”.
            What about the 99.99% of Muslims who don’t conform to your prejudices? The ones who are just “normal” people who get upset when others insult their religion just like Christians and Jews do?”

            The Nazis said that if you told a lie often enough, people will believe it. in your case however, I think you even believe your own propaganda which is even worse!

          • JabbaPapa

            At least 4% of Muslims overtly support ISIS, to say nothing of the much larger % of those declaring they “don’t know” if they support it or not.

            The Nazis said that if you told a lie often enough, people will believe it

            Well, his 99.99% figure is just such a lie.

            I don’t think he’d recognise the truth if it came into his house and twisted his nose …

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Your 0.01% has already been debunked. In the UK we have only 5% Muslims population. Yet they have applied what is condoned by their ideology to devastating effect. The wholesale abuse of thousands of underage non Muslim girls across the whole country. This is not an odd few, this is rampant throughout the Muslim community regardless of nationality.
            Not to mention the prison population of which 1 in 8 is a foreign national and 13% is Muslim. How can that be if they are so peaceful?

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Debunked by whom?
            Not by the Ministry of Justice:

            “Ministry of Justice data shows that between October 2012 and January
            2015, there were 104 Muslims out of 178 prisoners who’d been jailed for
            “terrorism-related offences where the motivation stemmed from extreme
            ideology” – less than 1% of the total Muslim prisoner population”

            Note that these are terrorism RELATED offences – a draconian catch-all whereby Googling how to make a bomb will now get you jail time.

            Over the past 50 years,, Islamic terrorist action in the UK has claimed 256 dead in Lockerbie, 56 dead in the 7/7 bombings, and Lee Rigby
            That’s 313 from a murder total of about 27,000 over the same period, which makes a figure of 1.1%
            Compare that to the 1,829 sectarian murders over the same period – all good Christians busily murdering each other in the name of religion, following the Bible and claiming an eye for an eye.

            And then we get to Rotherham – appalling acts which are dwarfed in both number and severity by the horrific abuse meted out by Catholic priests and the Christian staff of UK childrens’ homes.

            Let me guess – they don’t count, right?

          • JabbaPapa

            Debunked by whom?

            See LittleRedRidingHood ?

            This is the basic problem of “discussion” with these online atheist bigots, you can directly demonstrate the falsehood of this or that claim they may make, but they’ll just completely ignore anything and everything that is in the slightest bit incompatible with any smallest detail of their idiotic dogmatism. It’s like trying to talk to a brick wall.

            Then of course seek to change the “conversation” back as quickly as possible to their comfy zone litany of hate speech against Christianity and Catholicism.

            They are completely pathetic.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            ” but they’ll just completely ignore anything and everything that is in the slightest bit incompatible with any smallest detail of their idiotic dogmatism. It’s like trying to talk to a brick wall plastered
            with photocopies of atheist cliché”

            ….said the closed-eared dogmatist who has refused to answer or even address any of the key flaws in his Islamophobic rant.

          • JabbaPapa

            closed-eared

            That’s a case of the pot calling the yellow metal black.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            I listen to arguments supported by fact. You’ve yet to deliver anything but rhetoric

          • JabbaPapa

            I listen to arguments supported by fact. You’ve yet to deliver anything but rhetoric

            A risibly false statement.

            When presented with facts that contradict your atheist prejudice, you listen to not a word of them.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            You wouldn’t know as you haven’t presented any facts yet.

          • JabbaPapa

            You wouldn’t know as you haven’t presented any facts yet

            Viz. “This is the basic problem of “discussion” with these online atheist bigots, you can directly demonstrate the falsehood of this or that claim they may make, but they’ll just completely ignore anything and everything that is in the slightest bit incompatible with any smallest detail of their idiotic dogmatism. It’s like trying to talk to a brick wall plastered with photocopies of atheist cliché” passim.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            let me know when you intent to actually demonstrate anything and we’ll test your theory

          • JabbaPapa

            You have shown yourself to be willfully blind to every demonstration of fact so far — I no longer believe that you can be persuaded of anything contrary to your anti-Christianity.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Less than 1% of the Muslim pop was for extreme ideology……why are you focusing on terrorism. The Islamic system condones much of what we find reprehensible, child brides, fgm, honour killing etc etc.

            I’m a little intrigued to know how these 1829 murders were related to the bible. In assuming you are referring to the IRA. That wasn’t about religion was it? You are quite frankly, dishonest to suggest it was religiously motivated.

            You actually think the grooming and systematic abuse of underage girls by Muslim men is dwarfed in number and severity by the catholic church in the UK. Incredible! 1400 in one town alone. That is only the tip of the iceberg. How many catholic priests nailed the tongue of their victim to the table or doused them in petrol, or threatened to kill their family.
            You really should read the Jay report.

            Sexual abuse is reprehensible regardless of who does it. The church related incidents got an awful lot of coverage in minute detail. Care to hazard a guess why the muslim community isnt attracting the same focus?

            And yes they do count. You seem to want to put words in my mouth.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            “The Islamic system condones much of what we find reprehensible, child brides, fgm, honour killing etc etc.”

            All of which is against the law in the UK, correct?
            You understand that Muslims are required to obey the law just like the rest of us?

            Mahatma Gandhi was married at 13 btw – what a monster he was, right?

            “I’m a little intrigued to know how these 1829 murders were related to the bible”

            Catholic vs Protestant sectarian killings. Killing in the name of religion. Take away the magic book and most of the problems go away.

            “You are quite frankly, dishonest to suggest it was religiously motivated.”

            And you are deluded if you think it wasn’t.

            “You actually think the grooming and systematic abuse of underage girls by Muslim men is dwarfed in number and severity by the catholic church in the UK”

            Yes. Catholic priests are responsible for hundreds of thousands of cases of abuse over the years. Hardly a day goes by when one of them isn’t exposed for what they are. Their level of abuse dwarfs Rotherham.

            You just don’t want to hear how vile and corrupt your own religion can be.

          • JabbaPapa

            Take away the magic book and most of the problems go away

            Tell that to the hundreds of millions slaughtered in the name of atheism in the Soviet bloc and China …

            Catholic priests are responsible for hundreds of thousands of cases of abuse over the years

            Yet another ludicrous bollocks claim based on exactly NOTHING.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            All of which is against UK law, yet I’m out parallel justice system, a blind eye to such activity allows it in a certain minority group in this country. I’m sure if I tried to take a second wife I’d feel the full weight of the law.

            IRA Catholic v protestant fought over religion? Really shows how little you know. Having Northern Irish relatives I can tell you it wasn’t over religion however it may seem. The republicans were largely Catholic and the loyalists protestant. If the loyists had been atheists the troubles would still have happened.

            Re Catholic priest abuse, abhorrent though it was, you are plucking random numbers out of thin air. Is that 100s of thousand in the UK or the world.
            Not to mention your wild claims that hardly a day goes by without another being outed. I’m not sure what sort of news feeds you follow.

            Fyi my own religion what ever you think that may be is my business.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            “I’m sure if I tried to take a second wife I’d feel the full weight of the law.
            As would any other religion – unless you have proof to the contrary.

            “If the loyists had been atheists the troubles would still have happened.”

            Because they weren’t Catholics. Thanks for proving my point for me

            “Catholic priest abuse, abhorrent though it was, you are plucking random numbers out of thin air”
            You portray it like it was something in the past. This vile behaviour happens every day. At least you DO agree that priests regularly rape and sodomise young boys in their care. Good.
            This US site lists 17,000 confirmed cases and estimates 100,000 in total – and that’s just the mostly Protestant USA
            http://www.bishop-accountability.org/AtAGlance/data.htm
            Take all the Catholic countries in Europe and South America and 100,000 is probably a very conservative estimate.
            Priests ass-rpaing boys in the name of Jesus, defended by apologists like you,

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            The UK authorities turn a blind eye to polygamy.
            http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11715461/Muslim-Sharia-marriage-in-the-UK-is-not-toxic-polygamous-men-are.html

            They are certainly not tried for bigamy and operate in a parallel system.

            On NI. If the the republicans weren’t. Catholic there would still have been the troubles. You proved nothing chum.

            On abuse. I’m defending no one. I’m just pointing out your obvious bias and bigotry. Sodomy is prevalent throughout Islamic culture, you find it in all cultures. There are plenty of peado atheists, chum who like young boys bottoms.

          • JabbaPapa

            So you DO agree that priests regularly rape and sodomise young boys in their care

            You are a despicable liar.

            This US site lists 17,000 confirmed cases

            Jay Report : 10,667 allegations against 4,392 priests — 9,281 victim surveys had information about an investigation. In 6,696 (72%) cases, an investigation of the allegation was carried out. Of these, 4,570 (80%) were substantiated; 1,028 (18%) were unsubstantiated

            n.b. for idiots : — the word “substantiated” means that that some degree of credibility existed in the accusations, NOT that the accused would necessarily have been found guilty by a Court of Law

            HOW on EARTH do you jump from 4,500 credible accusations to an imaginary “17,000 confirmed cases”, and from there to a ludicrous completely fictional bollocks “100,000”, given that it is based on NOTHING WHATSOEVER ?????!!!??

          • lightindesert

            These are legitimate questions and lie at heart of Western and liberal misreading of Islam and the tendency to draw parallels with other religions. Perhaps you should live in a village in Saudia Arabia or Pakistan to understand how Islam drives every Muslim to act violently and to hate others. To judge others and to execute such judgements. To abuse women, children and other peoples. You may also learn how, many decent Muslims, try to resist that through denial and through inventing versions of Islam that contradict the genuine one. Alas such versions cannot be substantiated and the fundamentals of the religion will not support them. This is why it takes a half wit Wahabi Imam coming from Arabia to “radicalise” swathes of Muslims be it in Lahor or Luton

          • Australian Inquisitor

            So you don’t really have an answer, do you?
            You just want to ignore the reality that the death cultists represent a miniscule minority and pursue your all-encompassing fanatical hatred of something you claim to understand but don’t.
            I have spent time in Egypt, in Pakistan, in Turkey and have first-hand experience of real muslim culture.

            Have you?

          • lightindesert

            I am a Christian Arab. I was born in one of the most tolerant Muslim countries in the World. I lived in Muslim neighbourhoods, has had numerous Muslim colleagues and friends. I studied the Koran and Sirah at school and spent a lot of my time afterwards studying Islam.
            If you read my posts carefully you will see I talk from knowledge and experience. You should also be able to conclude that I suggest, the problem isn’t with Muslims, many of whom are decent, generous people, but In the Islamic teachings themselves, at source and in their authentic form.
            The problem for many people, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, who do not speak or understand Arabic, is that they cannot appreciate the power (and unfortunately the clarity) of the Islamic teachings and the unequivocal messages they send.
            Thus I dispute the concept of “moderate” Muslims. Such Muslims simply do not exist. What we have instead are people who chose and (as long as they are allowed to ) choose to ignore real Islam and invent a superficial version that is compatible with human decency. Such version cannot be substantiated or withstand scrutiny. If such people are forced or motivated by one reason or another to incur more Islam they will transform to the typical Muslim stereotype we all recognise.
            Studying Islam for any body particularly those who do not speak Arabic is a tough task. This why I believe the easiest way to understand what it is all about, is to read about the Prophet life “Sirah” and his Sahabas ( Companion equivalent to Jesus’s disciples in Christianity). It will be come soon apparent to anybody that there is nothing ISIS fighter doing now that wasn’t done, advocated and promoted by Muhammed and his companions.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            “You should also be able to conclude that I suggest, the problem isn’t with Muslims, many of whom are decent, generous people”

            this contrasts with

            “I dispute the concept of “moderate” Muslims. Such Muslims simply do not exist”

            If many Muslims are “decent, generous people” then clearly they do exist. If you want to claim that, despite self-identifying as Muslims, they aren’t in fact Muslims because they are decent and generous, then that smacks of the “No True Scotsman” fallacy.

          • lightindesert

            I am afraid you missed the point. Nice, decent Muslims of course do exist and I would say a large proportion of the Muslim population can be characterised as such. However, it is wrong to call them “moderate” Muslims, since, they have not managed to come up with a credible version of Islam that is coherent, compatible with some of the basic tenants of Islam and consonant to the long history of Islamic behaviour over the 14th centuries since its inception, that can withstand some scrutiny and provide a credible alternative to the one and only authentic version of Islam. This is why in any Muslim community, left to its own devices, the so called extremist (i.e true and authentic) version of Islam dominates.. This is why at present as the case has been throughout history only dictatorships which oppressed true Islam, succeeded in building peaceful and at times civilised societies.Decent Muslim mean there is less Islam in them. More Islam and one loses not only their decency but their humanity. The problem is that Islam is an intense religion as can easily seen from having to follow certain codes of dress grooming as well praying 5 times a day. It always demands to have more of you.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Thanks for the measured response but this is still the “No True Scotsman” fallacy.

            You have pointed out that lots of Muslims are “decent”. These decent Muslims consider themselves Muslim in every way, are led by moderate Imams who also consider them Muslims, so clearly those Muslim communities HAVE come up with a credible, working version of Islam – just as most Christians have taken a pick-n-mix approach to the Bible, ignored most of the Old Testament and come up with a credible, working version of Christianity which doesn’t require stonings.

            Whether the extremists are “true and authentic” or not is really beside the point. True and authentic Christianity requires brides who aren’t virgins to be stoned. It’s right there in the magic book. If we suddenly had some extremist Christians who did just that, would you also claim that the decent Christians were not true Christians and that only oppressive dictatorship would lead to a peaceful society?

          • JabbaPapa

            most Christians have taken a pick-n-mix approach to the Bible, ignored most of the Old Testament and come up with a credible, working version of Christianity which doesn’t require stonings

            So — which Christians don’t do “pick-n-mix”, then, and frequently have people put to death for breaking some 2500-3000 year old rules ?

            Come on — link please.

            True and authentic Christianity requires brides who aren’t virgins to be stoned

            WHAT. A. LOAD. OF. POLE-DANCING. COD’S. WALLOP.

          • lightindesert

            Your reasoning is right and we should have been able to conclude moderate Islam and Muslims are a reality. Where things go wrong is in the clarity of the Muslim message and its inability to reform. This is best appreciated when you consider that the Koran is supposedly the literal word of God, word for word, letter by letter; is the utterance of god, made in clear and unequivocal language. Add to this an abundance of examples how Muhammad put these teachings in practice providing stark examples that are difficult to ignore.

            Muslims deal with all this in different ways. Many do so through simply sweeping all this under the carpet and not think about it. Many Muslims struggle to accept how Muhammad could “get wed” to Safyiah bent Huyay, a pretty Jewish woman on the night of him/his troops killing her father, husband and brother, or how he could marry Ayshah at the age of 9 etc. As nice and decent people they reject all that and erase it from their consciousness. This is why they can violently react if they are reminded by it by an article in a newspaper or cartoons in a
            satire magazine.

            Some enlightened Muslims scholars simply deny that all the Hadiths and biography of Muhammad are true. They call to stick to only the Koran where the room for manoeuvring is a bit bigger. They are called the Koranians. Many have been killed and assassinated.

            Other Muslims reason that, as part of Islam’s greatness, it is a flexible religion and thus it will demand of them only the things that are possible and conducive toits cause at any given time or place. Thus while living in communities where
            and when hostility to others will be futile and disadvantageous to the cause of Islam this should be abandoned. This is why ISIS successes proved so effective in recruiting Muslims (many from moderate families living in the West). These Muslims felt the times were changing and their time has come.

            There are numerous ways where one can see how Muslims cope with the uncompromising
            message of Islam.

            To draw any comparisons with Christianity and its teachings is simply unfair,
            artificial and ignores the most central point. What the essence of these 2
            religions are and what messages they convey.

            It is interesting you provide the example of stoning adulterous women as being promoted by Christianity when possibly the most famous saying of Jesus is the one explaining why no one is without sin and thus no one can have the moral authority to carry out such act.

            I know people with grudges against Christianity (for whatever reason) would love to draw these parallels with Islam, but a fair examination of extremism in both religions will quickly show that the message of Christianity had to be twisted and misinterpreted in order to use Christianity as an ideology of war. On the other hand, it is only through twisting and deliberately misinterpreting the Muslim message that Muslims can exist in peace among themselves and with others.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            You make some very good points.
            Wouldn’t life be better if we threw away the magic books with all their instructions and just got on with things?

          • JabbaPapa

            What “magic books” ? Did you think that religious teachings all come out of Hogwarts ?

          • lightindesert

            These are legitimate questions and lie at heart of Western and liberal misreading of Islam and the tendency to draw parallels with other religions. Perhaps you should live in a village in Saudia Arabia or Pakistan to understand how Islam drives every Muslim to act violently and to hate others. To judge others and to execute such judgements. To abuse women, children and other peoples. You may also learn how, many decent Muslims, try to resist that through denial and through inventing versions of Islam that contradict the genuine one. Alas such versions cannot be substantiated and the fundamentals of the religion will not support them. This is why it takes a half wit Wahabi Imam coming from Arabia to “radicalise” swathes of Muslims be it in Lahor or Luton.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            “Those things were all done in the name of your pet religion, all part of your history, but funnily enough they don’t happen any more, do they?

            No one is denying that but by the same token it did not change overnight did it? The speed at which change and different cultures are being introduced it can only end in conflict.

            “Of course lots of horrible things do still happen in the name of Christianity, but I’m guessing they don’t count, right?”

            There is a distinct anti Christian tone to your comments. Please feel free to provide some references to these horrible things that are still happening, then we can judge whether or not they count.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Plenty of people deny the actions of the far right.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            You and australian inquisitor should get together. Peas in the same pod.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            So I and some person in your head…

            Right. Anyway, as you keep up your denial…

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Ever seen black adder?
            I’d grab a pair of underpants and two pencils if I were you.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            And that’s why a sense of humour is a good idea when watching Blackadder!

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            ??

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Yea, again, sense of humor. An literally foreign concept to you.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Your English leaves a lot to be desired chum.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Yes, for instance I use English, not your Hatese, shark-man.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            That’s not what I saw.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Yes, I agree you don’t read my posts.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            With regret I do. Nothing to be proud of.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            So you claim you lied…

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            The claim is yours sunbeam.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            So you claim I wrote your posts, Mr. Sunbeam…

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Your claims are your claims Leon. I wouldn’t want to take that away from you.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            So you lied in your post. I see.

          • TartanTerrier

            Hatese…….the language of hate…….clever.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            You constantly spout it, and are spewing it here.

          • TartanTerrier

            Paranoia is an illness. You are sick.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            “UR SICK, JEW”

            I see. So, how’s your treatment, Jewhater, going for your paranoia?

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            What is this far right that you seem so infatuated with leon?
            I’m intrigued.
            Do you have a definition?

          • JabbaPapa

            “far right” = “anyone that Leon disagrees with politically”

          • Leon Wolfeson

            So you’re “intrigued” with hiding your fanatics. What a surprise! Your excuses roll on, proving my point.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Proof?
            You’d be laughed out of court…..

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Oh yes, this court here…

            As you make more excuses.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            I’d look up the word excuses while you’re at it.

            You are still unable to define the term far right.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            You think you magically control my mind, check.

            As you repeatedly show exactly how far right you are.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            It’s a kind of magic Leon.

            Define far right please. I’m guessing you can’t.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            So you scream hate as you want to try to wriggle out of being who you are, as you do your failed voodoo or whatever…

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Definition.
            It’s all that is required. You accuse me of being something, then at least provide a definition of what that is.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Pandering. All that is requited. As I state a fact, and as you refuse to accept who you have stood with.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Definition of the term. The label you so easily assign to me. Please. I’m your own time, starting now.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            You have odd ideas about time, as you whine on about how you you’re so afraid of having a moral backbone you won’t acknowledge your political stance!

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            You labelled me. Define it and I’ll tell you if I hold the same political view.
            Otherwise it is nothing more than an empty accusation.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            I used a fact, as you try to wriggle out of it, as you show your lack of moral backbone for even supporting the very views you’ve espoused.

            Then again, highly unlikely you’ll bother voting given that, so…

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Wriggling out? Me?!
            You labelled me. Define the term. If you can’t or won’t then you are a vaccuous fraud.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            I used a fact. You make demands, as you scream I’m like you.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            A simple request for you to qualify your assertion with a definition. You are not man enough to do so. Some would call it cowardice.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            A simple rejection of the facts of your espoused ideology, as you call it cowardly now to work for free, bowing to bullying and hate…

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            No it really is a simple request. Not subject to payment. It’s a little sad that you think you are owed payment for explaining your assertion.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Keep whining, as you say work shouldn’t be paid for, as you say it’s sad that workers… as you reject who you are…

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            A simple request. You label me but cannot tell me what it means. You and you inane comments are therefore, insignificant.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            A whining request for work. A fact, which you reject, as you spew hate at me for daring to describe you.

          • TartanTerrier

            Whine jew hate spew hate etc etc

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            To describe me you need to define the term. Go on give it a go girlie.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            No, I can and will and do use normal English, woman-hater.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            I can and will Labour the point Leon. You assert that I follow a particular ideology. You must then define what that is Leon.
            I’ll ignore the rest of your childish rambling.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            I comment you hold certain views. You then rant for ages on about how I must work for you for free because of your lack of basic knowledge.

            You’ll ignore anything but your childish rambling, as ever.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Back up your comment with a definition. Of what you mean. Define the term Leon. It’s a perfectly reasonable request.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            No, I am not an ESOL teacher.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Define the term you ignoramus.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            “U LIKE ME”

            No. As you refuse to admit your enemy, English…

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            No Leon. I really DON’T like you.
            I can write english and speak english as opposed you your repeated sorry attempts.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            So you refuse to admit your enemy… as you spit hate because I post English…

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Your interpretation of term hate is a little simplistic. Did you hate your teachers at school when they told you your written english needed work?

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Ah, so you don’t think hating Jews like me… as you make random excuses…

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            I’m sure a great many people dislike you Leon maybe even hate you, but not because you are jewish

          • Leon Wolfeson

            So you make excuses for you and your fellow far right, check.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Define far right Leon.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Yet you are unable to define to which you refer.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Yea, how dare I use the common English definitions, which are well known rather than pander to your whining, extremist.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            You are quite clearly using words which you do not understand.
            So define your far right clever clogs.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            That’s right, you keep demanding you control what I think and do, showing exactly how fanatical you are, Orwellian.

            “Play silly work games”

            No.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Then suck it up and define the term chum.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Ah yes, surrender to your whining and pander to your extremism, blah blah.
            You just show your fanaticism…

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Just one little definition. Is it really that hard?

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Just one huge massive pandering, to surrender to you..

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            It’s because you dont know what you’re talking about. You use words you don’t understand.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Ah yes, wild accusations from you as you whinge on.

            Fact; You’ve stated clearly a few days ago you were so far right that the main parties looked the same to you. That means you’re so extreme that…

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Define far right. I’ve been asking you to do that for days.
            It obviously means something to you.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Can’t admit common definitions, check.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            So common you are unable to define it. You label me. You define that label.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            I don’t pander to you, as you scream facts are a “label”, and demand free work,

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            If you cannot qualify what you assert your opinion is worthless.
            Typical leftist, thinks society owes him a living.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            “If I can’t bully you one way. I’ll use another”

            As you claim to be a leftist now… lol

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Your Comprehension deficiency surfaces yet again. Alternatively you are just an ignorant troll.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            No, not pandering to you is not a “Comprehension deficiency”. And I’m not you, Mr. Alternative, either.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            I’m bored now. Until next time troll.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Yes, run away from yourself!

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            If you are unable please just say. I can then disregard your assertions on that front.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            You can ignore common English words because of your whining? Right.

          • PaD

            So very well written..and spot on!

          • JabbaPapa

            Thanks.

    • Copyright101

      Events in Belgium and Syria remind us that a greater degree of ethnic and religious homogeneity, including rigorous border control will insulate a country from inter-communal strife.

      • Australian Inquisitor

        LOL. Are you stalking me to other forums mate?

        In the UK we had 40 years of religiously based “inter-communal strife” well before Schengen and the EU, let alone Syria.

        • Copyright101

          In the UK we had 40 years of religiously based “inter-communal strife”

          Why it’s almost as if it wasn’t a good idea to have those communities in the same country.

          So since everyone is the same as everyone else why isnt everywhere already the same as everywhere else? You know, since we can’t make any broad based observations about groups of people.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Trouble is, they both thought it was “their country” and both sides had pretty good points. Your idea of insulation wouldn’t have solved anything.

          • Copyright101

            Really? So if English/Scottish Protestants had not been settled in Ireland we’d still have the same conflict? Fascinating.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            The Protestants were installed in Ireland before the Europeans were installed in America. Both subjugated the indigenous population through violence. If you want to call foul on one you have to call foul on both – your “Insulation” idea would require America to still belong to the natives who were most certainly NOT WHITE.

          • JabbaPapa

            wikipedia : From 1609 onwards, “British” Protestant immigrants arrived in Ulster through direct importation by Undertakers to their estates and also by a spread to unpopulated areas

            Extensive European colonization began in 1492 .. Spain was the first European power to settle and colonize the largest areas, from North America and the Caribbean to the southern tip of South America. Spanish cities were founded as early as 1496 with Santo Domingo in today’s Dominican Republic.

            How, exactly, is 1609 “before” 1496 ?

          • Copyright101

            If you want to call foul on one you have to call foul on both – your
            “Insulation” idea would require America to still belong to the natives
            who were most certainly NOT WHITE.

            That’s a reasonable position to take, as a result all the blacks and browns in Europe would be getting their marching orders of course.

            Also thanks for the implication that the US was founded by conquest, none of that ‘nation of immigrants’ nonsense.

            (One should point out that in the light of certain archaeological discoveries its possible the first inhabitants of N. America were European and not related to the current native American population. In other words they are the squatters – one-way tickets to Asia all round!)

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Of course the US was founded by conquest. Last time I looked, the Indians fought you tooth and nail to stop you stealing it.
            Hand it back to the natives or recognise your hypocrisy

          • JabbaPapa

            Did the American Natives attempt to fight off the invaders “in the name of their religious beliefs” ?

          • Copyright101

            Hypocrisy? I agreed with you that it was a reasonable position.

            First we need to clear all the non-white invaders out of Europe to make room of course.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            but the non whites didn’t invade – they were invited.

          • ossettian

            Weren’t the Normans first invited into Ireland by a king who wanted to use them against a rival?

            But I bet he no more consulted his people than our rulers did.

          • sonofseawolf

            Invaders out now 14 5

          • ossettian

            I’m descended from people who didn’t settle in the USA, Canada, Australia or New Zealand.

            Exactly why is it hypocritical of me to oppose Third World colonisation of my ancestral homeland?

          • Australian Inquisitor

            because you have vocalised your support of conquest through violence in other countries.

          • Copyright101

            You understand that you, in your state of SJW moral perfection, will be destroyed along with the rest of us?

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Don’t ascribe your bedwetting Fear of Other to me.

          • sonofseawolf

            Nice sunday punch 14 5

          • ossettian

            Vocalised? By typing?

            But you’re saying that we’re not experiencing conquest by violence.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            One nitpick point to you.

            No, unless you live in Syria or Iraq, you are not experiencing conquest by violence.

          • JabbaPapa

            No, unless you live in Syria or Iraq, you are not experiencing conquest by violence

            How comforting for the inhabitants of Afghanistan, Nigeria, Cameroon, Niger, Chad, Somalia, Kenya, Libya, Yemen, and Ukraine to know that they are free, by the Fiat of Australian Inquisitor, from the threat of conquest by violence.

            How comforting that of the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims, only 0.01% (160,000) are living in anything other than peace-loving harmony, even though nearly 10 million Muslims have been killed by sectarian Muslim warmongering, Jihad, and other such peace-loving acts of NTDWI since 1948 ( http://www.danielpipes.org/4990/arab-israeli-fatalities-rank-49th ) (shurely shome mishtake, Ed.)

            As the violence amongst Muslims increases, most Muslims prefer denial or look for scapegoats. Those in denial believe no such violence exists and the entire issue is made up by the western-controlled media. Others blame it on scapegoats – Indians and Americans are the most frequently blamed. The overwhelming evidence, however, suggests that the sectarian and tribal divisions amongst Muslims and justifying violence in the name of religion are the primary causes of why Islam is at war with itself.

          • ossettian

            Desperately silly: the settlement of what is now the USA happened, and involved a more advanced people occupying the lands of primitive peoples.

            The Third World settlement of Europe has barely begun and involves civilisation being swamped by barbarians.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            by “more advanced”, you mean in greater numbers and with more guns.
            Might makes right.

          • ossettian

            Nope: more advanced economicaly, scientificaly, agriculturally, technologically, artistically and on and on and on….

          • Australian Inquisitor

            …which was the line that the Nazis used when they headed East.

            They couldn’t make it work without having lots of guns either, and once outgunned themselves had to reflect that the Untermensch had knocked the paste out of them.

            There is no moral obligation for anyone to respect the subjective idea of “superiority”, only practical ones

          • ossettian

            More desperate silliness: you deny that the English settlers were more advanced in all the ways I described than the indigenes?
            The Germans were also more advanced, if only slightly, but outnumbered by people whose rulers cared nothing for them

          • Australian Inquisitor

            I like how you keep moving the goalposts and stubbornly ignore the fact that taking land from other people by force isn’t OK, even if you consider yourself to be “advanced” when using violence against others.

          • JabbaPapa

            taking land from other people by force isn’t OK

            It isn’t ?

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_To-cV94Bo

          • ossettian

            So the Protestant settlement of Ireland was bad for the natives – but let’s not mention the Irish settlement of West Central Scotland several centuries earlier – and the European settlement of the Americas was bad for the natives, but the Third World settlement of Europe is different.

          • JabbaPapa

            Multiculturallahu Akbar and down with the Christians !!!

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Third world residents of Europe are here through the permission of host countries, who have final say on who does or doesn’t enter.
            I don’t recall the history lesson where Cromwell had his blokes fill in visas or the Europeans were subjected to an immigration panel of native Americans before being allowed in.

            Maybe you could tell us all where that happened?

          • JabbaPapa

            Third world residents of Europe are here through the permission of host countries

            Yeah, right — http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-UDnc8yIWiFU/VVG7DxhPI3I/AAAAAAAAOf0/aAWD0JFNhDo/s640/Refugees%2BRL.jpg

          • ossettian

            “Third world residents of Europe are here through the permission of host countries, who have final say on who does or doesn’t enter.”

            The people have never, ever, been consulted.

          • Copyright101

            Third world residents of Europe are here through the permission of host countries

            I was never asked whether I agreed to that. No one was asked. It was never put to the vote. No party in Europe has ever made it part of it’s election platform.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            So vote for UKIP or whoever…

          • ossettian

            He points out that we don’t live in a democracy.

            You say: “Engage with the fake democracy”

          • Australian Inquisitor

            Of course we live in a democracy.
            The fact that we don’t have a public referendum on every issue of government doesn’t mean it isn’t a democracy.

  • sreeram krishnaiah challa

    If the same article is published in India,it will be termed Anti Islam,Anti Secularism and Hindu communalism.God bless the writer.He has written some facts which will not be palatable to our secularists in India.

    • D J

      Interesting and heartening to see that we can have so much in common with educated Indians. We all have our faults and criticise each other with justification. There are even brave muslims defending Christian ‘blasphemers’ in Pakistan, but sadly they are good in spite of Islam rather than because of it.

      • sebastian2

        Yes indeed. My own experiences accord with your view about Indians.

  • deeps

    Charles, through the identification of victims of the Lahore bombing 14 of the roughly 70 victims seem to be Christians. The majority were Muslims. Stop framing this attack as Muslims against Christians. This is terrorists against humanity. After all did being Muslim stop the schoolkids in Peshawar from being massacred?

    • Alltaxationistheft

      You are either deluded or a fool

      • JabbaPapa

        Most likely both.

        • AlexanderGalt

          Just happened to be Good Friday and the terrorists very deceitfully claimed they were attacking the crusaders. All intelligent people will see through this hamfisted attempt to deceive and identify Muslims as the true victims.

      • Ipsedixit

        Not to mention morally complicit.

    • Australian Inquisitor

      Quite. And 99% of killings in the name of Islam are committed against other Muslims.
      But you only need to read the comments to see that some people don’t care about facts. They only want to hear things which support their prejudice and bigotry.

      • JabbaPapa

        There are no reliable statistics about the religion of victims.

        What we have is basically a breakdown by nationality — but not all Iraqis, Nigerians, Egyptians, etc are Muslims.

        However, it is blatantly obvious when the target is clearly a Christian community, at Easter, that the Muslims who died were collateral damage, even though they outnumber the Christian victims.

        • Australian Inquisitor

          In the past 20 years, tell me how many Muslims have been murdered by other Muslims in Iraq under Saddam and after Saddam?
          How many in Afhganistan?
          How many have been executed in Saudi? In Libya? In Syria? In Iran? In Pakistan?
          How many Muslims has ISIS killed?
          How many of of that grand total were done in the name of Islam?

          To claim that Islamic fundamentalism is primarily against the West or against Christianity means that you have to overlook the massively disproportionate numbers of Muslims killed.

          Only ignorant and bigoted people like you have the ability to do that.

          • Dacorum

            Given what you posted, would you not agree that the only conclusion that can be drawn is that Islam is a death cult with no believe in the sanctity of life for anyone they do not regard as a true believer?

            Would you not agree that the widely held extremist Sunni version of the so called “religion of peace and harmony” is a real and present danger to everyone including fellow Sunnis who do not share their view of Islam and that they reserve a special hatred for Christians?

            Take Pakistan, for example, where in March an estimated crowd of more than 100,000 people attended the funeral of Mumtaz Qadri, in a massive show of support for the convicted murderer of a leading politician who had criticised Pakistan’s blasphemy laws. They thought that what he did was not a crime. And in this country, a leading Imam described the killer as a martyr.

            Qadri’s lawyer, Sajjad Akhtar Abassi, condemned the supreme court for upholding Qadri’s death sentence last year. “It is a court of law, not a court of justice,” he said. “Islam is a religion of peace and harmony but it does not allow anybody to use wrong words against the prophet or any other holy character.”

            By these words, the true nature of the “religion of peace and harmony ” are revealed as being anything but a religion of peace and harmony. What possible chance is there of living together in mutual respect when they kill their own and Muslim lawyers think that is the right thing to do?

            And nobody should think those same ideas don’t exist or aren’t widespread here in the UK. The murder of Mr Asad Shah, a member of the persecuted Armadi sect, is just the latest example of how the so called religion of peace and harmony works in practice. Mr Asad Shah’s family are now living in fear for their lives and, why, because useful idiots like you not only don’t see the danger but do your best to silence anyone pointing out the danger to us all.

          • Australian Inquisitor

            The style of your writing is very similar to someone else who recently lost their cool…
            Sock accounts need to be handled better 😉

            “that the only conclusion that can be drawn is that Islam is a death cult with no believe in the sanctity of life”
            No. I wouldn’t agree. The death fetishists commit brutality in the name of Islam. The other 99.99% of the world’s Muslims live peacefully and quietly in the name of Islam.
            Yours isn’t a conclusion, it’s a prejudice that requires you to ignore the 99.99%.

            “Would you not agree that the widely held extremist Sunni version…”
            Ah, so in the space of a sentence you have moved from “muslims” to “this particular type of muslim”.
            You can’t have it both ways. Either Islam is evil or it isn’t. If it is, then you can’t have special pleading for one group.

            “Take Pakistan, for example, where in March an estimated crowd of more than 100,000 people attended the funeral of Mumtaz Qadri”
            So don’t live in Pakistan.
            Take the USA, where state laws are passed insisting that children are not taught the science of evolution, but that God created the world in seven days, where hundreds of thousands of people want a President who endorses torture and murder and wants to jail women who have abortions. It’s not just Muslims who can be narrow minded bigots y’know.

            “It is a court of law, not a court of justice,”
            Ask any lawyer or judge in the UK and he will also tell you that law trumps justice.

            “And nobody should think those same ideas don’t exist or aren’t widespread here in the UK”
            Please cite some reliable data on how widespread violent extremism which is undertaken contra to UK law is in the UK. Numbers rather than gut feelings or personal opinion.

            “because useful idiots like you not only don’t see the danger but do your best to silence anyone pointing out the danger to us all”

            You aren’t “pointing out the danger”. You are promoting fear and hatred because, presumably bevause you are fearful and hateful. You are free to be as ignorant and bigoted as you like, but when you use phony facts, twisted logic and bald faced lies to try and make others hate and fear, I will call you on it every time.

          • JabbaPapa

            The other 99.99% of the world’s Muslims live peacefully and quietly in the name of Islam

            Wikipedia : As of December 2015, [ISIS] has control over vast landlocked territory in Iraq and Syria, with a population estimate ranging between 2.8 million and 8 million people

            http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/nigeria/11337722/Boko-Haram-is-now-a-mini-Islamic-State-with-its-own-territory.html

            Boko Haram’s fighters have now achieved mastery over 11 local government areas with a total population exceeding 1.7 million people, according to the official 2006 census.

            There are 1.6 billion Muslims — 0.01% of that figure is 160,000

            You are therefore objectively mistaken, given that in Iraq, Syria, and Nigeria alone, there are between 4.5 and 9.7 million living under the “Caliphate” régime, so between 0.28% and 0.61% of the world’s Muslims directly support the régime through taxation and military and material support, which is to say nothing of the total 63 million + supporters of ISIS worldwide — http://www.infowars.com/pew-poll-63-million-muslims-support-isis-in-eleven-countries/ — which amounts to ~4% of the world’s Muslim population (and it’s as high as 14% in Nigeria — and Muslim support for ISIS outside those 11 countries wasn’t even polled).

            Muslim support for ISIS is at least 400 times greater than you alleged. You are spectacularly wrong.

          • Dacorum

            Followed correctly by adherents, Islam is a death cult. There are over 100 verses in the Koran calling for Jihad that call among other things for death to blasphemers, those who leave the faith, do not follow sharia law, Jews, Christians and non believers. The Koran even says that able bodied Muslims who do no follow jihad are hypocrites who won’t go to heaven. And Muslims are expected to follow sharia law.

            ISIS adherents and other Muslim extremists can and do justify their actions by the Koran and therein lies the problem – they can say that they are the only true Muslims and every Muslim who doesn’t support their views is a hypocrite and not a true believer, and that explains the killings of fellow Muslims. Muslims who are not fanatics and are peaceful are saddled with a religion that gives those are fanatics the right under sharia law to kill them! That is why it is correct to call Islam a death cult, not least because any one of those peaceful Muslims or the children of peaceful Muslims, can be persuaded by the words in the Koran to become a Islamist fanatic. The problem is that there is very little in the Koran to counter the 100 verses calling for Jihad.

            JabbaPapa has already destroyed your ridiculous lie that 99.9% of the world’s Muslims live peacefully and quietly in the name of Islam so I won’t add to what he said expect to say that fear dominates and controls what is commonly called “moderate” Muslim thought, that is, those who are not proper Muslims who do not follow the teachings of the Koran on jihad etc. We see that in this country and they are right to be afraid.

            You are the one who uses phoney facts like “99.9% of the world’s Muslims live peacefully and quietly in the name of Islam” and who ignores the fact that the Koran is a call to arms for terrorists against the rest of us including Muslims who ignore the call to arms. You are the one spreading lies and who is ignorant and bigoted against views you do not agree with, And it is true believers of the words in the Koran who are spreading fear and hatred, not me or anyone like me. And I will call you out on it every time.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            99.99% peaceful? Do you have any evidence at all to back up your opinion.
            What level of violence are you talking about? It ranges from death through terrorism, through mob lynching through to sexual violence of women, young girls and boys, through to misogynistic beating of women and children in madrasses and abuse of children through brainwashing, I.e. hamas and that’s before we even get into the subject of how non Muslims are treated.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Ah yes, excusing all other crime…

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            How so? Have you ever really made a concerted effort to address any points that anyone posts….ever?

          • Leon Wolfeson

            So you admit you don’t read my posts, as you frantically try and excuse a lot of crime…

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Unfortunately, to my detriment I do read your posts. I didn’t realise there was a comedy section.
            Quite how my comment excuses crime is something you may have to explain.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Yes, the “detriment” of reading the views of someone not just like you, as you try and suppress those views with random whining.

            As you expect me to pander to your lack of education.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Or you could explain how my comment excuses crime.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            I could pander to you, or I could just go with the facts. Hmm.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Still waiting for some. Lol!

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Yes, you reject anything outside your bigotry, I hear you.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Still waiting.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Proving my point.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Still

          • JabbaPapa

            In the past 20 years, tell me how many Muslims have been murdered by other Muslims in Iraq under Saddam and after Saddam?

            Which part of “there are no reliable statistics about the religion of victims” did you fail to comprehend ?

          • Australian Inquisitor

            there are also no reliable records on the religion of holocaust victims, but we can be pretty sure the vast majority were Jews, right?

            Gunnar Heinsohn has compiled a list based on religion of victim.

            He states that 11,000,000 Muslims have been violently killed since 1948, and that over 90 percent of the 11 million who perished were killed by fellow Muslims.

          • JabbaPapa

            there are also no reliable records on the religion of holocaust victims

            That is a false statement.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Are you hoping it evens up or something?
            What is happening now?
            What is happening to Christians now in Muslim lands?
            It’s clear you are unable to recognise genocide when it is happening before your very eyes.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Good God. Why is the fact that more Muslims die even relevant, bad as it is?
            The simple fact is that Christians are systematically being perscuted to extinction in Muslim lands.

            You are the bigot sir.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            So you have no idea about the extent of “Muslim lands”, for starters.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            You reach that conclusion from what exactly….. No seriously…. Exactly what.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            So you claim I can’t read your posts, Mr. NoSerious.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Leon the bot with its stock answer. I didn’t realise troll bots were so widely used.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            You don’t realize you’re projecting, you say?

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            If you say so chum

          • Leon Wolfeson

            So you deny your post instead. And round it goes!

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Like a merrygoround Leon.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            No, your po-faced whining…

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            ???

          • Leon Wolfeson

            And there you go again!

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            ???

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Irrelevant bs

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Yes, your post is, I agree, Mr. Projector.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            He he.

      • LittleRedRidingHood

        Ah so Christianity isn’t being persecuted in Muslim majority countries.?
        Is it prejudice and bigotry to point out clear truths?
        Forget dementia…. I think our care homes are going to be full of people suffering from advances stages of progressive leftism in the coming years. It is surely a disease that needs recognition

        • Leon Wolfeson

          Yes, of course you see holding other views as a “disease”.

          Your plan to institutionalize those with other views is no better than those you supposedly decry.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            I’ll not need to do anything Leon. Gibbering idiots will be sectioned of their own volition.
            I love the way you ambled past my first point without even raising your head.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Ah yes, not being just like you is to be a “Gibbering Idiot”, and your actions are magically mine as you scream onwards your fear and hate of all other views, and as you ignore my posts relevance in your blindly ideological whining…

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Unfortunately the evidence against you speaks for itself.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Hate is not evidence.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Edt, your own words not mine chum. Keep digging that hole.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            See, the hole you’re digging and want to put me in…

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            A predictable response Leon. You’ll be screaming blue murder next.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            So who will you have murdered, for reference?

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Like I said. Predictable!

          • Leon Wolfeson

            So you won’t answer. Well well.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            What do you want me to answer?

          • Leon Wolfeson

            So you didn’t read my post, check.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Sorry, it’s this…… “So who will you have murdered, for reference?”

            You must be a lunatic if you think you’d get anywhere with that.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Well of course not, it’s a good mock and to prove how poorly thought out your views are.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            A good mock? That well known English turn of phrase. Note to Leon, must study English and colloquialism in the UK.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Mr. Leon, as you call yourself, your lack of humor is noticeable.

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            I’m afraid you are the joke my friend.

          • Leon Wolfeson

            Why are you talking to yourself?

          • LittleRedRidingHood

            Righto.

  • Sgtsnuffy

    “WHY MUST WE DENY IT” ????? BECAUSE IT IS NOT POLITICALLY CORRECT TO RECOGNIZE THE EXTERMINATION OF CHRISTIANS THAT IS GOING ON IN THE MUZZY WORLD . WE ALL HAVE TO BE MULTI-CULTURALLY INCLUSIVE DONCHA KNOW !!!!!

    • davidshort10

      Calm down, dear.

      • greencoat

        We are calming ourselves into the grave.

    • Read some history

      After WW2, 850,000 Jews were persecuted and then ethnically cleansed from Muslim states in the Mideast. Jews (and then Christians) preceded Muslims by many centuries, but that did not stop the Muslim invaders from taking over the region and persecuting both groups at various times over the ensuing centuries.

      Unlike European Jews during the early 1940s, Mideastern Jews were fortunate in having a safe haven to go to. They lived in tent cities in Israel for up to a decade, until the country was able to construct sufficient housing. Today, more than half of Israeli Jews are refugees (and their descendents) from Arab states.

      The absence of a western reaction to the expulsion of Jews told Muslims that they can persecute other minorities amongst them with impunity. So it was only a matter of time before Arab Muslims turned their attention to Christians and Yazidis, while the Turks persecute Kurds, and Iranians persecute their own minorities (including their Zoroastrian predecessors).

      Whenever a minority anywhere is being threatened with genocide, it is the duty of other countries to offer them a safe haven. These minorities will not present an internal threat in years to come. When will the West drop its political correctness and start prioritising those from the Mideast who face an immediate threat?

    • Jacobi

      Stop shouting sarge. Have had to switch off my new hearing aid!

  • Kandanada

    The complete destruction of Britain’s steel industry would greatly help our EU puppet politicians comply with the the EU’s demand for us to reduce our emissions.

  • Kasperlos

    We must not deny anything. To deny is cowardly, the stuff of the ‘go along to get along’ gang of thieves, poltroons, hacks we have serving in Number 10 and Westminster. They are tools, stooges in the growing pan-global elitist movement to render the planet into a plantation. Exercising one’s own mind, thoughts, opinions, to stand for justice runs counter to the ‘movement’ – and their fat envelopes. The destruction and decay in the West has been a long running affair, but its end is only, too, a matter of time.

  • sebastian2

    We deny it because the myth of “The Religion of Peace”, the fallacy of a benevolent ideology and altruistic founder, is more convenient than the truth. The truth – that mohammedism is an aggressive, duplicitous, intolerant, imperialistic manifesto for Arab supremacy – would cause instant conflict were we to confess it and highlight the many excellent reasons why. It would also demolish the entire liberal/multicultural mohammedan narrative so established now. There would be, at least, a sizeable law and order problem as mohammedans took to the streets (and Saudi Arabia threatened economic penalties).

    Christians are more expendable. Middle Eastern Christians, long discriminated against and now martyred in their hundreds (it would need a very big stained glass window to commemorate them with), are powerless. So we can safely ignore them along with the Yazidis. We should have offered them sanctuary and refugee status first. We didn’t. We don’t.

    This is a deplorable attitude given that we are a Judeo-Christian nation with Bishops in the House of Lords and a Royal Head of the Anglican Church. But what kind of “Christian” nation swaps difficult truths for easy falsehoods? The Christian facts for mohammedan hogwash? The awkward actualities for palatable RoP delusions? One that eagerly takes the accommodating line of least resistance?

    What kind of nation? A nation that has lost courage, traded its moral compass, and sold its birthright for a mess of pottage.

    This is a road to nowhere.

    • Dacorum

      You’re right about the danger posed by the so called “religion of peace” and how it has always been ignored by the entire establishment.

      Take Pakistan, for example, where in March an estimated crowd of more than 100,000 people attended the funeral of Mumtaz Qadri, in a massive show of support for the convicted murderer of a leading politician who had criticised Pakistan’s blasphemy laws. They thought that what he did was not a crime. And in this country, a leading Imam described the killer as a martyr.

      Qadri’s lawyer, Sajjad Akhtar Abassi, condemned the supreme court for upholding Qadri’s death sentence last year. “It is a court of law, not a court of justice,” he said. “Islam is a religion of peace and harmony but it does not allow anybody to use wrong words against the prophet or any other holy character.”

      By these words, the true nature of the “religion of peace and harmony ” are revealed as being anything but a religion of peace and harmony. What possible chance is there of living together in mutual respect when they kill their own and Muslim lawyers think that is the right thing to do?

      And nobody should think those same ideas don’t exist or aren’t widespread here in the UK. The murder of Mr Asad Shah, a member of the persecuted Armadi sect, is just the latest example of how the so called religion of peace and harmony works in practice. Mr Asad Shah’s family are now living in fear for their lives and, why, because our leaders have lost their courage, traded their moral compass and sold our birthright for the mess of potage.

  • “The Lahore attacks reflected hatred of Christians.”

    Whose hatred? Why Marxists of course, as the following proves…

    The following are two discoveries I made in April 2015 regarding the Yugoslav ‘civil wars’ and ‘collapse’ of the USSR, and what they prove about the institutions of the West…

    (I) Communist control of Yugoslavia ‘civil wars’ gone unnoticed for quarter century.

    Secessionist Yugoslav Orthodox, Catholic and Muslim factions waged dirty wars against each other, neglecting to first wipe out the 9% of the population that attempted to do away with religion in Yugoslavia, proving the wars were orchestrated and controlled by the communist faction. That 9% constitutes members of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia, the Marxist party that subjugated Yugoslavia from 1945 until the party’s dissolution in January 1990. Before any religious sectarian strife, first there would have been massive reprisals against the reviled Communists who implemented policies to wipe out religion in Yugoslavia. The fact that no such reprisals took place proves that the breakup of Yugoslavia, during the Yugoslav Wars (1991-2001), was manufactured and controlled by the Communists; and

    (II) When Soviet citizens were liberated from up to 74 years of horrific Marxist-atheist oppression on December 26, 1991, the day the USSR officially ended, there were ZERO celebrations throughout the USSR, proving (1) the ‘collapse’ of the USSR is a strategic ruse; and (2) the political parties of the West were already co-opted by Marxists, otherwise the USSR (and East Bloc nations) couldn’t have gotten away with the ruse.

    ZERO celebrations, as the The Atlantic article inadvertently informs us…

    http://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2011/12/20-years-since-the-fall-of-the-soviet-union/100214/

    Notice, however, the Kremlin staged anti-government demonstrations that took place in Russia (and other Soviet republics) in the years immediately preceding the ‘collapse’, yet ZERO celebrations after the ‘collapse’!

    For more on this discovery read the article, ‘The Marxist Co-Option Of History And The Use Of The Scissors Strategy To Manipulate History Towards The Goal Of Marxist Liberation’ …

    https://sites.google.com/site/deanjackson60/the-marxist-co-option-of-history-and-the-use-of-the-scissors-strategy-to-manipulate-history-towards-the-goal-of-marxist-liberation

    We now see that the so-called ‘War on Terror’ is an operation being carried out by the Marxist co-opted governments of the West in alliance with the USSR and other Communist nations, the purpose being to (1) destroy the prominence of the West in the eyes of the world, where the West is seen (i) invading nations without cause; (ii) causing chaos around the globe; and (iii) killing over one-million civilians and boasting of torture; (2) close off non-Russian supplies of oil for export, thereby increasing the price of oil, the higher price allowing oil exporting Russia to maintain economic stability while she modernizes and increases her military forces; (3) destroy the United States Armed Forces via the never-ending ‘War on Terror’; the ultimate purpose of the aforementioned to (4) bring about the demise of the United States in the world, opening up a political void to be filled by a new pan-national entity composed of Europe and Russia (replacing the European Union), a union ‘From the Atlantic to Vladivostok’;** which will (5) see the end of NATO.

    My blog…

    https://sites.google.com/site/deanjackson60/

    • JabbaPapa

      I’m reporting you to the KGB.

      • “I’m reporting you to the KGB.”

        Don’t be silly…the fact I’m still here means the KGB’s employers are confounded; they’re checkmated into inaction. In fact, they have to make sure that even a real accident doesn’t happen to me!

        • JabbaPapa

          You should expect a shipment of Polonium forthwith.

          • “You should expect a shipment of Polonium forthwith.”

            I’ll mark the package ‘Return to Sender’!

  • amir

    Sham on international Media more than 85% killed are Muslims. As we use to go to this park on weekends with our families it is nothing to do with christian. I school attack all 100% were Muslim. It is just like an example to tell you that on EID OF Muslim Festival of there is bomb blast in Park on Sunday and 85% Christian Killed and only 15% Muslim then you will say it a target of Muslim Community No. Because Parks are a not religious Place it is neither a church nor a mosque. 99% ATTACK BY THEM ARE ALL EITHER ON MUSLIM CHILDERN SCHOOLS OR PUBLIC PLACE OR MUSLIM FESTIVALS OR ON MUSLIM RELIGIOUS PLACE. This is totally unjustice and bias behavour of all international media. These Talibans are agents of RAW of Indian Intelligence that is why one Indian Army Officer was arrested in Pakistan for doing these horour things. We hat these tabliban. These are dogs

    • JabbaPapa

      more than 85% killed are Muslims

      As are most of the perpetrators of these atrocities.

    • LittleRedRidingHood

      Sorry, are you trying to suggest there is not wholesale persecution of Christians throughout the Muslim world? Christianity in the middle east is on the verge of extinction thanks to Islam.
      And no one lifts a finger to help, whereas when Muslims are persecuted in syria we are expected to open our doors to ALL Muslim refugees “fleeing persecution” wherever they are from.
      Does it not strike you as strange?

      • amir

        Please see the Topic. When we discuss a specific matter it is about that particular matter. Because these dogi Talban has killed mostly innocent school childern and in APS School all were muslim. This is about a Park killing and it is holiday and every one came into this Park. You know my family is also just close to the park when this happen and she came back to whom. This is family Park every one goes on weekend into this Park. But very shameful that international media depicts it as it was on christian. Because you know one newly wed muslim couple and 16 members of same family included childern those were muslim were also killed. But International Media present it as attack on christian. This biased reporting make difference in communities. This was not attack on church but in Park where every one goes. Very surprised those killed were muslims but said otherwise a bias openion. When should be honest enough and bring harmony between all religion. We should live and help each other and report honestly.

        • Hybird

          “bring harmony between all religion. We should live and help each other…” says amir.

          “Fight the unbelievers until there is no religion but Islam” says Allah.

          • Well, amir is a muslim, so according to his koran, that was written by the pedo mohammed, he must lie to us kaffirs.
            I really wish amir does not live in Europe, as I do not want islamists in my beautiful continent.

          • amir

            Dear do not be fanatic be united against these cruel who kill innocents. They are dogies.

          • I am waiting for the day all you muslims fight each other. After that, we’ll kill of this heinous ideology once and for all.

          • amir

            Brother we should work for harmony

          • I’m NOT your brother.

          • amir

            All human beings have blood relation because they are born by one male and one female

          • ah, and how far back will you go for that? in Christianity it is Adam and Eve, what does your religion tell us about our origins?

    • Adrian Wainer

      You’re posting rubbish.

    • Sarony

      Er, how do you explain this? Shortly after the attack, a faction of the Pakistani Taliban named Jamaat-ul-Ahrar, meaning ‘Assembly of the Free,’ claimed responsibility, admitting that the attack was ‘aimed at killing members of Pakistan’s Christian minority gathered at the park to celebrate Easter Sunday’.

      • amir

        They have killed first School Children 150 their female teacher then killed innocent citizen who came to celebrate Pakistan Day and now they attack in Park were all gone. It is a prove that they kill in-indiscriminately and want dis harmony amount different religion. They are bull dogs and they borne to kill the innocents. We should be aware of the facts not of their claims because they are killer and if we trust them then we will quarrel what they want a propoganda to hire more people for their dirty game.

  • mikewaller

    “Anna Soubry, the minister concerned, keeps pleading on air for Tata to give the government ‘more time’ before deciding to close its Port Talbot steelworks. I think she should specify the date more exactly: she means ‘not before 24 June’.”

    To my mind this guy piles idiocy upon idiocy. Two weeks ago it was his confident assurance that, should there be a post-Brexit, the UK could readily morph into something like Canada, Switzerland or Norway or some composite thereof. To me, this is about as plausible as me morphing into a George Clonney look-a-like. Then, last week we were told that what is for the most part anti-Israel, and not anti-Jewish, sentiment is all about currying favour with Muslims. Yet my experience, in a variety of settings, is that many people distinctly unhappy with Muslims, adopt such a stance because of the way in the Israeli government and the right-wing of its citizenry treat the Palestinians.

    And now the above. Surely, all but the most purblind fools can see that what is happening to what was British Steel gives a rock-solid reason for staying in the EU, not leaving. For years we have listened to economists who have assured us that globalisation is good for everyone, indeed I heard one such idiot on the Today programme this morning. Sadly, what they skate over is that this only applies when all participants have from the outset broadly similar income levels. Change that parameter – and I have read that in 2012 someone on £15,000 p.a. was, globally, in the top 4% in terms of income – and the outcome is radically different. As an American commentator put it rather provocatively in 1997, although those with rare skills may do extremely well, “if you are doing a coolie job, you’re going to get coolie wages”. Worse, you cannot even rely upon your trading partners to play fair. Thus China breaks the rules by pumping billions of State funding into keeping its massively over-expanded steel industry afloat, floods the world markets to dispose of its surplus output at knock-down rates, and then, as now, once there is any kind of revelatory response, itself imposes punitive trade barriers. And what role has the UK played in this sorry saga? Because it is so desperate for Chinese cash to fund grandiose projects like Hinckley Point and HS2 and to capture the kind of share of the Chinese import market that British Industry (that Great White Hope of the Brexiters) has so far conspicuously failed to secure, it actually sabotaged attempts at EU level to impose import tariffs that might have had some serious impact on Chinese dumping.

    Three things stand out from this. First, the Chinese government cares for nothing beyond keeping itself in power. Like Britain in the nineteenth century, it does not have friends, only interests. Second, the UK on its own has nothing like the critical mass to stand up to China’s huge over-dominance. The net effect of this will be our inability to resist the importation of low cost goods of increasing sophistication from China and other comparatively low cost economies. Third, the initial casualties of this progressive overwhelming of our economy, will be the poor buggers who used to make the stuff now being imported. And let it not be forgotten, these people have votes.

    As far as I can see, our only hope if we are to maintain something like our present standard of living across the piece, is to remain within the EU which at least has the numbers and scale to risk facing down the Chinese. In short, were I in the Chinese leadership cadre, I would see Brexiters – Moore included – in much the same way as Lenin saw supportive Westerners: “useful fools”.

    • livnletliv

      The eu parliament sabotaged attempts, not the UK you fool.

      • mikewaller

        You are talking absolute male genitalia. Herewith a quote from the Daily Mail as I judged that more serious journals might challenge your comprehension:

        “Revealed: Britain ‘blocked’ EU bid to raise China steel tariff that could have protected the industry from cheap imports (but Cameron STILL spends billions on foreign aid)

        Ministers opposed EU plans to put 66 per cent tariff on cheap steel imports

        Stayed at nine per cent and China flooded the market with cheap products

        Ministers accused of putting relations with China above British industry

        But they argue decision was made to keep price down for consumers

        By DANIEL MARTIN CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT FOR THE DAILY MAIL”

        PUBLISHED: 00:41, 1 April 2016 | UPDATED: 13:08, 1 April 2016

        Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3518278/UK-blocked-EU-bid-raise-China-steel-tariff-protected-industry-cheap-imports.html#ixzz44qmIDahf

        Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

  • Yorkieeye

    The prophet Mo bragged that he has personally beheaded 600 Jews.

    • JabbaPapa

      uuurgh — despicable

  • Tickertapeguy

    One of the most telling aspects of Muslim hatred of the Western world is in their homelands
    The Christian Western way has been systematically PURGED from all Muslim nations
    especially
    Muslim nations that once were under European Empires. NOT a trace of the European world exists in these Muslim nations.
    That entire time has been WIPED OUT. Sharia Law put in its place.
    In the Muslim world they are indoctrinated to HATE the Western world. Then they come to Europe still HATING THE WESTERN WORLD.

  • Andrew Morton

    The older I get the more I hate islam and our government for allowing the proliferation of islam which in turn makes me hate all the more. I wouldn’t be so bitter if the government along with the media didn’t ignore the plight of Christians in muslim countries. But they do bend over backwards to fill us up with muslim refugees and immigrants from outside the EU. And it’s not only with increasing muslim numbers on our shores and Europe but also financially. They want London to be the centre of islamic finance. And that means sharia law is attached to islamic money transactions.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bH6QO9MfaH4

  • Minstrel Boy

    Oddly, Mr Cameron is on record on Youtube proclaiming that there are far too many white Christian faces around Westminster and elsewhere. Prince Charles is said to be an avid Islamist, is descended directly from Muhammed, and wishes, in the future, to be entitled ‘Defender of Faiths’.
    The motte appears to have surrendered, while the commoners are scuffling in the bailey. What’s the betting on the ‘bashi bouzouki’ winning the day?
    When hempe is spun, England’s done.

  • samton909

    You didn’t have enough babies. You wanted to goof off and have fun all your life. So now there are not enough people..So Islamists decided to take over your country. Have fun with your contraception – while it lasts. I hear Italy is the same way. Once upon a time, there used to be a place called Europe.

    • JabbaPapa

      Well, the French have managed to start reversing that trend, so not all hope is lost …

    • Alex Williamson

      There are more than enough people. At the height ofthe empire the UK population was only 20 to 30 million. I would say that is the optimum level. The only reason why western countries require ever expanding populations is to pay for the unfunded state welfare ponzi scheme. It would be better to abolish all state welfare, including healthcare and pensions, than to see our country become part of the third world, at which point welfare will inevitably end anyway.

  • Sargon the bone crusher

    The west has drowned in self-hating socialist garbage for decades. There is no sense of values, no sense of goodness, no sense of what is acceptable and what is evil. Our civilisation is at an end.
    Civil war will break out if the cultural marxists are not confronted and reversed.

    • JabbaPapa

      Yep, and the attempt to Balkanise the UK by splitting it up into micro-territories, promoting massive population displacements, and attempting to destroy its religious identity is particularly moronic.

    • mikewaller

      Cobblers! The free-traders have one hands down and we are all now engaged in the famous race to the bottom! That is why, across the piece, the little guys are getting crosser and crosser.

      • Sargon the bone crusher

        Firstly, you meant ‘The free traders have WON hands down’. Big standard comp I assume,
        Secondly, you seem unaware of social and economic theory that explains the presently observed mechanisms that are by no means a ‘race to the bottom’.
        C-. Must try harder.

  • Jacobi

    Well Christians are the last acceptable target in our secularised Western press. Also the press and police are a bit scared, whether they admit it or not, of not being nice to the Muslims. So what do you expect?

    The attack in Lahore was heinous by our standards although not by Muslim standards, in that children were deliberately targeted. They, the Muslims, did it to make a point, that all non-believers, regardless of age, are at the whim of Islam.

    On other question of strategic industries such as steel, farming should also come into this category also .

    History has not come to an end you know. Far from it!.

  • Sue Smith

    The answer to your question is “because it’s politically correct to support muslims no matter what they do”. It’s called ‘equivalence’ and it mostly exists in a moral vacuum.

    What hope is there if Germans don’t even support their own compatriots who were raped in Cologne:

    http://slippedisc.com/2016/04/singers-in-anti-hate-event-at-frankfurt-opera/

    • Germainecousin

      Well said Sue, what else needs to take place is a thorough examination of what constitutes a ‘minority.’ It seems that any group who uses the word ‘minority’ are automatically excused from the rules and regulations of normal society.

      • Sue Smith

        It’s insidious, isn’t it!!! But it does need to be called out loudly, and often!! Here’s one man who continues to do it: only he doesn’t seem to regard them as a ‘minority’!!

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxGUkbsdCk4

  • Hippograd

    Because Christianity is an evil religion with a long and shameful history of anti-Zoroastrianism. It must be swept away before we can create a truly tolerant and flourishing society under the wise guidance of the Zoroastrian community, as in the Russian Revolution. That is why Muslim immigration must increase and high Muslim birth-rates must continue to be funded.

    This website is designed to be a one-stop shop for those who want to get involved in supporting refugees and asylum seekers both in the UK and abroad. Support Refugees was set up and is managed by The Zoroastrian Council for Racial Equality (ZCORE) and West London Temple of British Zoroastrians. Special thanks to ZLGB, who helped get the website off the ground and to the Zoroastrian Social Action Forum, where the idea for such a website first arose.

    It is supported across the community, including the following organisations:

    AJR Alyth Gardens Temple Board of Deputies BODSA – Board of Deputies Social Action Group Finchley Progressive Temple ZLC Zoroastrian Volunteering Network JW3 League of Zoroastrian Women The Liberal Zoroastrian Temple Liberal Zoroastrianism Masorti Zoroastrianism New North London Temple Movement for Reform Zoroastrianism Northwood and Pinner Liberal Temple Office of the Chief Priest Pears Foundation Priestly Conference of Liberal Zoroastrianism United Temple World Zoroastrian Relief

    Support Refugees!

    • JabbaPapa

      There is nothing “antisemitic” in the doctrines of Christianity, and one has no regard for the attitudes of certain fringe sects of Protestantism, nor for those individual Christiand who might hate Jews.

      The rest of your post though simply amounts to an attempt at cultural and demographic vandalism/suicide, for the seeming purpose of harming Christianity.

      And really — “Christianity is an evil religion” / “antisemitism” ???

      So your religious hatred is justified because you allege religious hatred in others ? Good old bigoted double standards and hypocrisy !!!

      • Jacobi

        H is pulling your leg JP!.

        • JabbaPapa

          hmmm — OK, just there are so many real nutters in here, it’s not always easy to calibrate one’s sarcasm-detector

          • Jacobi

            Actually that’s me trying to be funny. He’s a genuine nutter. Now I really have you confused. My wife says I really ought to stop it.

          • JabbaPapa

            I’m sure the wheat will be separated from the chaff one way or other.

      • Hippograd

        There is nothing “antisemitic” in the doctrines of Christianity…

        You are not God (or the Pope). You cannot lay down the law about what is in or out of the doctrines of Christianity. You can only express your highly fallible opinion. Christianity has a very long history of hostility towards Jews and Judaism and Christian teachings have undoubtedly contributed towards antisemitism.

        But of course Jews are also hostile to Christianity and have been right from the beginning. Christianity is a Jewish heresy and when Jews have the chance they have always attacked Christianity right back.

        There is nothing “antisemitic” in the doctrines of Christianity, and one has no regard for the attitudes of certain fringe sects of Protestantism, nor for those individual Christiand who might hate Jews.

        Yes, individuals like Martin Luther, Torquemada and the author of John’s Gospel. Don’t pretend that Christian antisemites have acted as “individuals”. If antisemitism wasn’t accepted by the church, they would never have been able to behave as they did.

        So your religious hatred is justified because you allege religious hatred in others ? Good old bigoted double standards and hypocrisy !!!

        You don’t seem to have much of a sense of humour.

        • JabbaPapa

          You cannot lay down the law about what is in or out of the doctrines of Christianity. You can only express your highly fallible opinion.

          Catholic doctrine is not something so vast and mysterious that only God or a Pope can understand it. It has for instance been collected in one medium-sized volume called “The Catechism of the Catholic Church”.

          You will not find a single example of antisemitism in that volume. I have otherwise pointed out the exceptions of “certain fringe sects of Protestantism”, that do in fact preach Jew-hatred, so I’ve no idea what your problem is here.

          Martin Luther was excommunicated for Heresy and Apostasy, Torquemada was an Inquisitor and the Courts of the Inquisitions had no legal jurisdiction at all over any unbaptised non-Catholics.

          The author of John’s Gospel is, unsurprisingly, someone called John. There is not one expression of Jew-hatred in that entire book. There are descriptions of some Jews persecuting Christ and/or the Christians, and there are descriptions of other Jews believing in Him and following Him. This is an accurate representation of the religious History.

          • Hippograd

            You will not find a single example of antisemitism in that volume.

            You will not find wolves living wild in modern England. This is proof that wolves have never lived wild in England.

            Oremus et pro perfidis Judæis: ut Deus et Dominus noster auferat velamen de cordibus eorum; ut et ipsi agnoscant Jesum Christum, Dominum nostrum. Amen.

            “And let us pray for our beloved brothers, sisters and genderqueers in the Jewish community, that they may flourish in their faith and be ever a blessing unto the world despite the abominable darkness spread by the evil Catholic church, which is fortunately dying out fast in the West. Amen.”

            Courts of the Inquisitions had no legal jurisdiction at all over any unbaptised non-Catholics.

            Yes, the Inquisition was scrupulously fair about the people it could torture and then hand over to be burnt alive in the name of the Lord Jesus, wasn’t it? The Inquisition hunted down crypto-Jews, i.e. people baptized as Catholics who hid their real religion out of fear of the consequences.

  • trobrianders

    Charles Moore is so dumb. We have to deny it because we are fully paid-up members of the socialist self-hate club. We have traded Reason, upon which all our prior success was based, for Correctness. Mr Moore you simply don’t have the courage to take off your self-imposed shackles. You are pitiable. But not you alone. The Cult of Political Correctness is all over us.

  • Notice anything odd about the picture?

    (1) ZERO tears on the actors’ contorted faces; proving

    (2) yet another Marxist false flag operation.

    Recall Malala Yousafzai? The young Pakistani girl supposedly shot in the head because she championed formal education for females. Well, she pretends to be a Muslim, but is a Marxist, and when she traveled to England for cranial reconstruction, after the surgery she still had all her hair!

    On October 11, 2012 International Marxist Tendency (IMT) published an article denouncing the attempted assassination of Malala Yousafzai two days earlier, affirming she is an IMT sympathizer and showing a picture of her speaking at an IMT school in Swat, Pakistan earlier that year…

    http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2012/10/501143.html

    Not being able to attend the 9 March 2013 congress of the Pakistani section of the IMT due to the ‘shooting’, Malala sent greetings instead…

    “First of all I’d like to thank The Struggle and the IMT for giving me a chance to speak last year at their Summer Marxist School in Swat and also for introducing me to Marxism and Socialism. I just want to say that in terms of education, as well as other problems in Pakistan, it is high time that we did something to tackle them ourselves. It’s important to take the initiative. We cannot wait around for any one else to come and do it. Why are we waiting for someone else to come and fix things? Why aren’t we doing it ourselves?

    I would like to send my heartfelt greetings to the congress. I am convinced Socialism is the only answer and I urge all comrades to take this struggle to a victorious conclusion. Only this will free us from the chains of bigotry and exploitation.”

    http://www.marxist.com/historic-32nd-congress-of-pakistani-imt-1.htm

    Here’s Malala in February 2013 ‘recovering’ from her cranial reconstruction surgery at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Birmingham, England…

    https://www.google.com/search?q=malala+pictures&es_sm=93&biw=1440&bih=809&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=3R9lVI_vOYmcyQSdxILwCA&ved=0CB0QsAQ#tbm=isch&q=malala+titanium+plate+nails&facrc=_&imgdii=TQUBuWBJ8xje7M%3A%3BtVYScNraWQwl8M%3BTQUBuWBJ8xje7M%3A&imgrc=TQUBuWBJ8xje7M%253A%3BAjmAYguIEgGa0M%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fi.dailymail.co.uk%252Fi%252Fpix%252F2012%252F10%252F19%252Farticle-2219509-1594D24B000005DC-905_306x423.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%252Fnews%252Farticle-2220862%252FMalala-Yousafzai-First-picture-Taliban-shooting-victim-hospital-bed-doctors-say-able-stand.html%3B306%3B423

    and

    http://www.smh.com.au/world/malala-speaks-for-the-first-time-since-shooting-20130205-2dv4u.html

    Notice anything odd? Yeah, Malala (1) still has all her hair on BOTH sides;* (2) isn’t wearing hospital pajamas (she simply hopped into bed with her cloths on!); (3) has no bandage; (4) has no swelling; (5) isn’t hooked up to the intravenous tube lying near her arm; (6) has long sleeves that obstructs intravenous tubes, which is one reason why patients wear short-sleeved hospital-issued pajamas; and (7) is still wearing her scarf! Huge gaffs, but the Marxists that control the political parties in Britain probably didn’t care because they know nobody in Britain thinks any longer.

    In fact, the wound to Malala’s head magically shifted by the time she reached Britain…

    http://www.itv.com/news/2013-01-30/doctors-to-fit-titanium-plate-over-hole-in-malalas-skull/

    Here’s a quote from Malala after the cranial reconstruction surgery…

    “And because of these prayers God has given me this new life . . . and this is a second life. And I want to serve. I want to serve the people. I want every girl, every child, to be educated.”

    The Marxist Malala is invoking God, because she knows you’re ignorant of the fact that she’s a Marxist, your ignorance based on your credulity to believe anything the co-opted media/government tells you, even when the facts contradict the co-opted media/government. This also proves that (1) the Taliban are Marxists playing along with the official Malala narrative; and (2) that Pakistani political parties and political parties in the West are co-opted by Marxists.

    The so-called “War on Terror” is a Marxist operation being carried out by the Marxist co-opted governments of the West (in cooperation with Marxist governments across the globe), the purpose being to (1) destroy the prominence of the West in the eyes of the world, where the West is seen (i) invading nations without cause; (ii) causing chaos around the globe; and (iii) killing over one-million civilians and boasting of torture; (2) close off non-Russian supplies of oil for export, thereby increasing the price of oil, the higher price allowing oil exporting Russia to maintain economic stability while she modernizes and increases her military forces; (3) destroy the United States Armed Forces via the never-ending “War on Terror”; the ultimate purpose of the aforementioned to (4) bring about the demise of the United States in the world, opening up a political void to be filled by a new pan-national entity composed of Europe and Russia (replacing the European Union), a union “From the Atlantic to Vladivostok”;** which will (5) see the end of NATO.

    The fraudulent ‘collapse’ of the USSR (and East Bloc) couldn’t have been pulled off until both political parties in the United States (and political parties elsewhere in the West) were co-opted by Marxists, which explains why verification of the ‘collapse’ was never undertaken by the West, such verification being (1) a natural administrative procedure (since the USSR wasn’t occupied by Western military forces); and (2) necessary for the survival of the West. Recall President Reagan’s favorite phrase, “Trust, but verify”.

    It gets worse–the ‘freed’ Soviets and West also never (1) de-Communized the Soviet Armed Forces of its Communist Party officer corps, which was 90% officered by Communist Party members; and (2) arrested/de-mobilized the 6-million vigilantes that assisted the Soviet Union’s Ministry of the Interior and police control the populations of the larger cities during the period of ‘Perestroika’ (1986-1991)!

    There can be no collapse of the USSR (or East Bloc nations) without…

    Verification, De-Communization and De-mobilization.

    The West never verified the collapse of the USSR because no collapse occurred, since if a real collapse had occurred the West would have verified it, since the survival of the West depends on verification. Conversely, this proves that the political parties of the West were co-opted by Marxists long before the fraudulent collapse of the USSR, since the survival of the West depends on verification.

    Conclusion:

    The West will form new political parties where candidates are vetted for Marxist ideology, the use of the polygraph to be an important tool for such vetting. Then the West can finally liberate the globe of vanguard Communism.

    ———————————-

    *The entire left side of Malala’s head would have been shaven, since the entire left side of her head was fitted with a titanium plate…

    http://www.itv.com/news/2013-01-30/doctors-to-fit-titanium-plate-over-hole-in-malalas-skull/

    “Her doctors will shave her head and drape back the flap of skin covering the hole…”

    http://abcnews.go.com/International/malala-yousafzai-receive-skull-made-titanium/story?id=18351502

    http://www.scotsman.com/lifestyle/books/jk-rowling-honours-malala-yousafzai-at-book-festival-1-3520271

    ** ‘Russia is an inalienable and organic part of Greater Europe and European civilization. Our citizens think of themselves as Europeans. We are by no means indifferent to developments in united Europe.

    That is why Russia proposes moving toward the creation of a common economic and human space from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean – a community referred by Russian experts to as “the Union of Europe,” which will strengthen Russia’s potential and position in its economic pivot toward the “new Asia.”’ – Vladimir Putin (2012).

    https://www.rt.com/politics/official-word/putin-russia-changing-world-263/

Close