Friday, April 06, 2012

More on the Samantha  Brick furore

The furore seems to be ramping up rather than dying down so I thought I might put up an email from a lady who read my comments yesterday
I have just read your response to the widespread ridicule and damnation of journalist Samantha Brick.

Bless you; I could not agree more wholeheartedly. My husband and I were dismayed at the vitriolic response.

Mrs Brick described herself as attractive; her confident assertion was clearly a taboo.

Many people would indeed be drawn strongly to those classic style indicators of attractiveness: tallness, slimness and blondeness. Add a high heel and a pretty skirt and hey! Presto. Plenty of colour and movement abounds, attracting ample male attention.

As a tallish, slimmish, blonde woman who often dons heels and red lipstick, I understand and agree with Mrs Brick’s points. I have had many similar experiences (to those she described).

I submit Mrs Brick’s crime was to break the unspoken pledge of sisterhood by referring to herself positively. We women bond by exposing our own flaws, together… we compare and contrast. And nothing creates a sense of solidarity as rapidly as joining forces to rip a pretty woman to shreds. Observe, if you will, a table of women being served by a gorgeous young waitress. The more wine that is consumed, the ruder and more hostile they become to her.

Should some men be present at the table, the waitress will likely be left a generous tip, motivated in part by a sense of apology. I have watched a number of times, though, as the men leave the table first in order to arrange taxis and so forth. And I have seen the last lady at the table look around furtively, scoop up the notes and shove them in her purse before skittering away.

There are a trillion examples. Anyway, I just wanted to thank you for defending Mrs Brick.

British PM  calls for a 'Christian fightback' over attempts to ban wearing crosses and town hall prayers

David Cameron has issued a rallying call for a 'Christian fightback' against attempts to ban the wearing of crosses and town hall prayers.

The Prime Minister – who joked that he had felt like he 'needed someone to pray for me' during  the recent rocky period for the Government – used a pre-Easter meeting with church leaders to say Britain needed the values of the Bible more than ever.

He issued a public plea for them not to 'fall out' with the Government over plans to allow gay marriage.

Mr Cameron quoted from the Gospel of St Luke to suggest Christian values could create a happier and better society for everyone. He also signalled that he wants a big expansion of faith-based education, saying he would 'celebrate links between churches and schools, indeed mosques and schools and synagogues and schools'.

His celebration of the religious and moral code of the Bible is notable, as leading politicians have shied away from using religious rhetoric and arguments in recent decades.

Tony Blair, for example, was talked out of doing so by spin doctor Alastair Campbell, who told him: 'We don't do God.'

Mr Cameron's decision to 'do God' so overtly will be seen in part as an attempt to reach out to the Christian Right in his party after the most difficult period of his leadership, including a badly received Budget and the petrol crisis.

His intervention is also an attempt to defuse a row with church leaders over plans to allow gay marriage in civil ceremonies. He told church representatives gathered at Number Ten: 'I hope we won't fall out too much over gay marriage. There'll be some strong arguments and some strong words.'

Mr Cameron sought to reassure his audience that the proposals would 'change what happens in a register office, not what happens in a church'.

Addressing recent attempts to ban crucifixes and public prayer, Mr Cameron said, pumping his fist in the air: 'I think there's something of a fightback going on, and we should welcome that.

'The values of the Bible – the values of Christianity – are the values that we need.'

Former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey has warned that Christians face gradual marginalisation, after Bideford council in Devon was banned by a court from opening its meetings with prayers.  Mr Cameron cited the case yesterday, pointing out that the Government had responded by amending the law.

He is also insisting the law will be changed if necessary to allow Christians to wear crosses at work.

In a case due to be heard by the European Court of Human Rights, BA check-in clerk Nadia Eweida and nurse Shirley Chaplin claim they were discriminated against when their employers barred them from wearing crosses.

The claims of both women that they have a right to wear a cross – under European human rights rules – have been rejected by British courts.  But a source said: 'The Prime Minister has made it clear that his view is that people should be able to wear crosses.

'The Government is obliged to pass on the judgment of the UK courts, but that does not mean we agree with it and if the ECHR does uphold the ban we will consider what further action we must take.  'We could potentially change the law, though our view is that the existing Equality Act gives people the right already.'

Mr Cameron and his family are regular churchgoers, although they do not worship every Sunday. They send their older children to a Church of England school in London that requires parents to be active in the church community.


Retired British man  is thrown off his beloved gardening plot by council in case he hurts his hip and sues

Health and safety has become a pretext for a huge torrent of bureaucratic oppression of people in Britain

Carefully tending his runner beans was one of the greatest pleasures of his twilight years.  But now the local council has banned pensioner Arthur Martin from his beloved allotment – in case he breaks his hip and sues.

Councillors say allowing the 73-year-old to look after his vegetable plot would pose too great a health and safety risk.  They have given the grandfather of nine just three weeks to give up his allotment.

Last night Mr Martin, who has been tending the plot for six years, said: ‘The allotment is one of my great pleasures in life. I can manage the gardening just fine.’

The former miner received a ‘bullying’ letter from Eastwood Town Council, in Nottinghamshire, earlier this month ordering him off the plot. The extraordinary note stated the council were ‘aware’ he had hip problems and demanded a medical assessment to prove he was fit enough to garden.

‘It’s ludicrous,’ said Mr Martin. ‘I’ve not been given any information on the health and safety rules that I have supposedly broken.’  Mr Martin uses his plot to grow potatoes, runner beans, peas, onions, cucumbers and strawberries with his wife Jean, 72.

‘The allotment gives me a great deal of pleasure,’ he said.  ‘After I retired, it gave me something to do with my hands and my mind.’

Mr Martin, chairman of the local allotment society, had a hip replacement in 2007, which was replaced again 18 months ago.  He added: ‘I struggle a little at the end of the season when you have to turn all the soil over, so I asked a friend to help me.  ‘But apparently that is a problem – it’s just pure petty-mindedness.’

On Monday night, the leader of Eastwood town council David Bagshaw said he had told Mr Martin to get off his plot.  He added. ‘I don’t want this guy’s hip to pop out again due to neglect from this council.’   Mr Bagshaw was unavailable for further comment last night.


Truth Be Told

Amil Imani

Are you fed up with numerous daily horrific acts that are clearly committed under the banner of Islam throughout the world? Are you tired of hearing it? Well, so am I. However, I have to inform you that it is only going to get worse before it finally disappears into the dustbin of history. The savagery and variety of actions of Islamic extremists are seen daily around the globe committed under the banner of Islam, have become so commonplace that the world has come to view them as the normal part and parcel of a troubled humanity. And, from time-to-time, the world is shocked into a passing and momentary realization of the evil deeds these Islamist robots commit and quickly gets over it and does nothing to seriously address this affliction of humanity.

Numerous criminal acts are also committed on a daily basis, by non-Muslims. The critical difference is that non-Muslim criminals do not hoist a religious banner to justify their misdeeds, while Muslims proudly claim that they commit their heinous acts in obedience to the dictates of their religious faith.

Humanity is facing a deeply troubling dilemma. On the one hand is the desire of enlightened people whose aim it is to forge a world of diverse people into one universal society ruled by peace and justice for everyone while, on the other, Islamists are hell-bent on imposing their Stone-Age system on everyone. Tellingly, the Muslims themselves are at one another’s throat regarding which of dozens of Islamic sects’ dogma should rule.

Right from the start, violence served as the engine of Islam under the command and supervision of Muhammad himself. For one, the Prophet’s son-in-law cousin, Ali, was titled the Commander of the Faithful for his unsurpassed feats of butchery. Ali with the assistance of one or two of his thugs, beheaded some seven hundred captives, most of them Jews, in only one day. This man, highly esteemed by the prophet of Allah, had a sword that had its own name—Zolfaquar. Ali’s portrait, holding the menacing sword, adorns the homes and shops throughout Shi’a’-lands. And the Shiites, at the same level as Muhammad, revere Muhammad’s executioner, Imam Ali.

On the Sunni side, Muhammad’s co-revered is Umar, another unabashed killer of untold numbers. And of course the choice weapon of these champions of the religion of peace was the sword. And to this day, a sword adorns the flag of the birthplace of the religion of peace, Saudi Arabia.

And Islam, by the nature of its very doctrine, appeals to man’s base nature. It promotes intolerance, hatred, discrimination, and much more:

Qur’an:61:2 “O Muslims, why say one thing and do another? Grievously odious and hateful is it in the sight of Allah that you say that which you do not. Truly Allah loves those who fight in His Cause in a battle array, as if they were a solid cemented structure.

Truth be told as bitter as it may be. Islam is a violent ideology. Islam is anything but a religion of peace. Violence is at the very core of Islam. Violence is institutionalized in the Muslim’s holy book, the Quran, in many suras:

Qur’an:9:5 “Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.”
Qur’an:9:112 “The Believers fight in Allah’s cause; they slay and are slain, kill and are killed.”

Qur’an:8:39 “So fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief [non-Muslims]) and all submit to the religion of Allah alone (in the whole world).”

Qur’an:8:65 “O Prophet, urge the faithful to fight. If there are twenty among you with determination they will vanquish two hundred; if there are a hundred then they will slaughter a thousand unbelievers, for the infidels are a people devoid of understanding.”

Truth is not always welcome and can often be greatly disturbing. But truth is the best weapon against evil and falsehood. When I point out the horrific teachings of the Quran, I don't make them up. I cite surahs from their holy book, surahs that exhort Muslims to carry out all kinds of evil deeds against non-Muslims. This book of Allah is a license to kill. When I point out that Muhammad set terrible examples for his followers by his own deeds, I cite from their own sources to document my assertion.

Is there anyone in this messed-up world who doesn't read, see, or hear about the daily Islamic atrocities performed by these savages, with every act justified on the basis of Allah's holy book?

Qur'an 8:12 "I shall terrorize the infidels. So wound their bodies and incapacitate them because they oppose Allah and His Apostle."

Self-described doctors of Islamic ideology universally practice sugarcoating the cult of Islam. They keep ranting about the importance of accepting things on faith, denigrate reason, dangle carrots and sticks, and demand unconditional surrender in return for guaranteed bliss and salvation. The masses toe the line, support the clergy’s lavish parasitic lifestyle and the charade continues. It works like a charm. Use the Jihad of the sword when it can and use the “Soft Jihad” until the sword can be unsheathed to finish the job. And don’t forget, the end justifies any and all means, Islam apologists keep on preaching to the hordes.

Islam apologists never present the naked face of Islam. They never speak of the Islam that thrives on hate, throws acid in the face of women who fail to don the hijab or girls going to school; flogging people for sporting non-Islamic haircuts,  stoning to death, violators of sexual norms and other forms of Islamic brutalities such as Honor Killing. They never talk about institutionalized pedophilia in Islam.

Moderate Muslims' dilemma

In my opinion, cultural Muslims (Muslims in name only), or better known in the west as “Moderate Muslims” are a wavering segment who are caught between their imprinted belief in Islam, their disillusionment and problem with many aspects of the secular society, and their personal fantasies.

These people will continue wavering and reach for any straw to balance themselves. Not an easy task. Being a Muslim, no matter how little a Muslim, gives these vast number of people, many bewildered and overwhelmed by modern life's complexities and contradictions, a kind of refuge. They yearn for safety, for immortality of the soul if not the body; they want all the pleasures of physical life, yet they want to make sure that they are also providing for the life after death by pleasing Allah. So, as you can surmise, this whole thing is extremely complicated. It is a most difficult task to give up the concocted and imaginary life vest that Islam seems to provide for these people. They have nothing else to grab onto.

Another religion? Would it be any better? Would it serve them both in this world and the next? Would it relieve their personal existentialistic crises? These are all tough issues. Most humans need to believe in something. Something bigger than themselves, something that would give them, or at least hold the promise of granting them, their wishes at little cost.

Religion of one form or another seems to be the most attractive source for the masses to turn to. Of course there are other sources. Many to be sure. Yet, all exact a price. Becoming a nihilist, for instance, and not believing in anything and leading life on a moment-to-moment basis is one way to go. A life that is akin to a rudder-less ship that drifts in circles until it sinks. This kind of life is extremely disturbing to the person and may lead him to resort to auxiliary activities such as excessive drinking, use of mind-numbing drugs, sexual promiscuity, and much more.

Yet, for one and all, there is a price to pay. Humans seem to be unable to exist in a psychological and spiritual vacuum. They need to believe in something to maintain a degree of sanity and stability. Islam provides a degree of this highly sought stability and security. For this reason, leaving it altogether, even for the highly educated and for a person who knows better, and is extremely difficult.

It is indeed baffling to me that a particular tyrannical group of fanatics claim to represent the Creator of all and pass judgment who is to live in peace and who is to suffer horrific treatments. This mentality is the ultimate form of arrogance and the world must confront and erase it by a united effort. Enough is enough. This is the 21st century and people all over the world must be afforded the freedom to lead their lives, pray as they like, and be protected under fair laws.

It is truly sad that these people are driven by a horrific lower nature trait of hate. Love is alien to them, justice only limited to their own, and tolerance is something that they have nothing to do with. Sad, very sad indeed. They are like bats — beasts of darkness. They hate the light of love. How sad, indeed. We should do what Christ said: Pray for them, for they do not know better.

In short, Islam is busy with what it did from the time of its birth, fighting non-Muslims and infighting. Truth be told: Violence is the animating force of Islam. Islam is a religion born through violence, raised by violence; it thrives on violence and dies without violence.



Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the  incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.

American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of  other countries.  The only real difference, however, is how much power they have.  In America, their power is limited by democracy.  To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already  very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges.  They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did:  None.  So look to the colleges to see  what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way.  It would be a dictatorship.

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH,   EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, GUN WATCHAUSTRALIAN POLITICSDISSECTING LEFTISM, IMMIGRATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL  and EYE ON BRITAIN (Note that EYE ON BRITAIN has regular posts on the reality of socialized medicine).   My Home Pages are here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here.  For readers in China or for times when is playing up, there is a mirror of this site  here.


No comments: