hat tip: bobal and doug
__________________
BROWN SLAPS DOWN ARCHBISHOP'S CALL FOR ISLAMIC SHARIA LAW TO OPERATE IN BRITAIN
The Archbishop of Canterbury caused consternation yesterday by calling for Islamic law to be recognised in Britain.
He declared that sharia and Parliamentary law should be given equal legal status so the people could choose which governs their lives.
This raised the prospect of Islamic courts in Britain with full legal powers to approve polygamous marriages, grant easy divorce for men and prevent finance firms from charging interest.
His comments in a BBC interview and a lecture to lawyers were condemned at a time when government ministers are striving to encourage integration and stop the nation from "sleepwalking to segregation".
The Prime Minister rapidly distanced himself from Dr Williams's view. Gordon Brown's spokesman said: "Our general position is that sharia law cannot be used as a justification for committing breaches of English law, nor should the principles of sharia law be included in a civil court for resolving contractual disputes.
"The Prime Minister believes British law should apply in this country, based on British values."
Dr Williams's words opened a chasm over Islam between senior leaders of the Church of England, who are already trying to deal with an Anglican war over gay rights which broke out after he was appointed archbishop.
The Bishop of Rochester, Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, is facing death threats following his warning last month about Muslim "no-go areas" in Britain.
And the Archbishop of York Dr John Sentamu, who has been fiercely critical of Muslim extremists, said last year that "the imposition of sharia law, Britain as a Muslim society - that will never happen".
In his lecture, 57-year-old Dr Williams said that "we have to think a little harder about the role and rule of law in a plural society of overlapping identities". More if you can stand it.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJPOST COMMENT SECTION:
ReplyDeleteAnother example of religious ecumenicism, encroaching on secular law and pandering to the ignorant. We did not forge through the age of enlightenment only to return to the dark ages. Leo - Israel (02/08/2008 02:20)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletefrom the article--
ReplyDeleteTory backbencher David Davies, an Anglican, said: "I am astounded. Dr Williams is a nice enough man, very intellectual, but he has clearly lost the plot.
:)
Or, in other words, a fool that is converted to Druidism, or a fool that is converted to Christianity, is still a fool, be he ever so holy.
ReplyDeleteCan't find the article now, but I saw a mention today of Sweden talking about funding imams, so as to have some influence and promoting the 'moderate' ones. A better idea would be to fund a permanent trip out of the country.
ReplyDelete"..but he has clearly lost the plot."
ReplyDeleteMr Rowan William is no simpleton.
Deuce,
ReplyDeleteHow did you spot Habu?
If you're right, that must be one of his finest works.
Amazing.
"It's amazing really, thinking how elaborate of a machine like that can keep going. Sure, it sputters some runoff like McCain once he no longer matches the gram-stain of the bandwagon. But its been running ever since Reagan terrorized Berlin with threats of annihilation and layed flowers on hitlers grave.
ReplyDeleteI can only pray that the next shadow I pass does not hide a snarling Richard Perle, that the next alley I walk down in a gentrifying urban area is not blockaded by Wolfowitz, tossing a dagger back and forth with the finesse of a trained road-agent.
A shame Blackwater doesnt cell offsets for human suffering. Maybe you all could chip in and pay for mine ahead of time, before McCain turns us into fuel for his 100 year war machine."
He whipped it out so fast he didn't even polish up the Grammar:
ReplyDelete---
"It's amazing really, thinking how elaborate of a machine like that can keep going."
Poor Fiddler spent all that effort!
ReplyDeleteRemember the indignant "Our time has come" crowd that protested the brother's unjust treatment by the law in Jena? The six black thugs beat the living shit out of a white student. Of course they were innocent, except maybe for 6'6" Purvis, who besides being innocent is also a creature of habit:
ReplyDeleteJena Six" Member In School Arrest
Cops: Bryant Purvis choked, slammed fellow student's head on table
FEBRUARY 7--One of the "Jena Six" defendants was arrested yesterday for allegedly assaulting a fellow student at a Texas high school. Bryant Purvis, 19, was busted on the misdemeanor charge following an 8:30 AM altercation at Hebron High School in Carrollton, where his family relocated from Louisiana. According to the below arrest warrant affidavit, Purvis assaulted a male student he apparently suspected of vandalizing his auto. Along with choking the 18-year-old victim, the 6' 6" Purvis allegedly slammed the teenager's head on a table. Purvis, pictured in the mug shot at right, was briefly jailed before being released on $1000 bond. Purvis and five codefendants were originally charged with attempted murder in connection with the December 2006 beating of a white high school student in Jena, Louisiana. The case, which triggered protests over the severity of charges brought against the so-called Jena Six, remains pending, with Purvis scheduled for a March trial on reduced charges of aggravated battery and conspiracy. If convicted of those felonies, Purvis could face a maximum of more than 20 years in prison.
England is dead
ReplyDeleteMcCain would, there is no question, be a lousy leader of an ideological movement. But the Republican party is not an ideological movement. It is a political vehicle for the American right-of-center. Those who confuse the Republican party with the conservative movement are indulging in a fantasy — that there is purity in politics and that there is something immoral about ideological impurity.
ReplyDelete- John Podhoretz
Commentary
The desire to be morally correct at all times has its dangers. "The [individual] who sincerely believes himself to be defending righteous action in a just cause," Grant Hugo writes, "is still guilty of cant if he is more concerned with his own virtue than with the predictable and concrete results of his action."
- Martin Mayer
The Diplomats
That happens when you develop a taste for Kool-aid.
ReplyDeleteEver listened to the tape recording of Jim Jones that last, hideous day?
ReplyDeleteYeah.
Just say no to the Jim Joneses.
All of them.
ReplyDeleteGlenn Beck, Dr. Dobson
ReplyDeleteGLENN:
But you know, I don't understand, quite honestly I don't understand Mike Huckabee. I really don't. I have had delightful conversations with Mike Huckabee; I've had tense conversations with Mike Huckabee because I think he says things like -- what was it yesterday, Stu, where he just kind of just -- oh, yeah. He just said, well, you know, I think maybe this whole Romney thing is just because all of the talk show hosts, they all work for Clear Channel and, you know, Romney's company is involved with Clear Channel.
First of all, Romney's company is not involved with Clear Channel. It's one of the companies that wants to buy Clear Channel. Romney's not even involved. And most, it's me and Rush that work for Clear Channel. That's it. But he just, he's a smear artist. Last night on television I asked him, I said, why aren't you attacking the frontrunner? Why are you going after Mitt Romney? And he admitted to me that it was a blood sport. And I don't even under -- I don't even begin to understand that.
---
Such a bigot, such a jerk.
Huckster for Veep!
(I'm biting TWO Bullets, Trish!)
Haven't heard from 'Rat, have you?
ReplyDelete...I finally heard from the kid, now that he's departing Vegas.
Glenn Beck was on CNN the other night, put opposite Larry Elder - the former saying let the WH go because there's certain disaster coming and having a Dem in the WH would position Republicans well for mid-terms and beyond.
ReplyDeleteWe were slack-jawed.
I haven't heard from him.
ReplyDeleteI ardently hope that all is well, or will be.
Not simply because he is sincerely missed here.
Picture of the Day
ReplyDeleteYeah,
ReplyDeleteI was instantly brought back to reality when I saw inside Barry like I believe I see inside the Huckster.
It was a shallow pool.
ReplyDeleteBeck:
ReplyDelete---
February 6, 2008 - 15:24 ET
GLENN: Glad we can all rally around John McCain. It's great. We've got amnesty right around the corner, we have the closure of Guantanamo Bay, we have less information from terrorists, we have a 50-cent a gallon gas tax coming thanks to McCain/Lieberman, more assaults on the First Amendment, possibly the fairness doctrine although I don't know how we could make a case for the fairness doctrine because the media today is going to start to make the case that Rush Limbaugh and everybody on talk radio's completely irrelevant.
---
I'm banking on people like Kevin James, us, and the rest can stave off amnesty as before.
Here's someone we can get get behind now:
Duncan Hunter Junior, back from two tours, running for Senate. (his dad's seat)
Re: Barry
ReplyDeleteI have a young son (SPQR) no naive multiculturalist he, who gravitates toward him. Not on issues, but on personality and a certain inspired nationalism.
But he will tell you that between "Barry" and McCain, it's a tossup.
I have a recording of 15 minutes of Obama in which he says NOTHING.
ReplyDelete(and boys and girls are having a case of the vapors)
If I can find it, I'll send it to you.
Barry's for Open Borders and licenses for illegals.
ReplyDelete...a different kind of nationalism, indeed.
Inspired Nationalism to Barry means what he has learned in his life that sells.
ReplyDelete...Barry.
Given his life, it wasn't hard.
Doesn't even have to try for the white folks feeling good just for pulling his lever.
Doug,
ReplyDeleteDon't underestimate that case of the vapors.
Because you're going to have to create one.
Unless some of us get vaporized between now and then.
ReplyDeleteBUT,
ReplyDeleteBoth Hillary and McShanesty got here on the AARP vote, so maybe if it's that whippersnapper vs Mac, Mac will rise again!
But you won't, so you're still stuck with the prosaic task.
ReplyDeleteOf being one of the AARP for Mac?
ReplyDeleteYeah.
My fantasies of who I REALLY am will carry me through.
...you don't want to know.
ReplyDeleteBut then, you knew tha.
"t"
ReplyDeleteI think it was Aspergers Gentleman in disguise, out for a little fun and to leave some knickers in a twist.
ReplyDeleteIt was a good effort.
ReplyDeleteand Knickers were twisted.
...a good lesson in relaxing the Knickers.
You won't be vaporized, that was my point.
ReplyDeleteHow much does the present American right borrow from the earlier Communist left?
In the end, they lost almost everything.
Trish,
ReplyDeleteHas your son read
"Radical Son?"
That might be as stimulating for him as
"Brave New World"
and
"1984"
were for me.
Political professionals are leery of saying, publicly, that she is losing, because they said it before New Hampshire and turned out to be wrong. Some of them signaled their personal weariness with Clintonism at that time, and fear now, as they report, to look as if they are carrying an agenda. One part of the Clinton mystique maintains: Deep down journalists think she's a political Rasputin who will not be dispatched. Prince Yusupov served him cupcakes laced with cyanide, emptied a revolver, clubbed him, tied him up and threw him in a frozen river. When he floated to the surface they found he'd tried to claw his way from under the ice. That is how reporters see Hillary. Peggy Noonan
ReplyDelete:)
Regardless, I'm still a Senior, except in my dreams, which are REALITY!
ReplyDeleteExactly, al-bob, I fell hook line and sinker for Hillary winning Super Tu.
ReplyDelete...until it turned out she didn't.
The power of the MSM Clinton non-conspiracy.
You never asked what my son's been reading, Doug. You simply assumed you knew.
ReplyDeleteHuh?
ReplyDeleteI just asked if he had read Radical Son.
What did I assume?
ReplyDeleteThe Sun Also Sets
ReplyDeleteI for one am uncertain what's going on. The idea that all the stuff we are putting in the atmosphere must have some effect seems logical enough, and so does this.
If the winter we're having here is any indication of anything, which it isn't, we're cooling.
That he's reading Orwell and Huxley.
ReplyDelete"The kid" doesn't like assholes, mean people, period.
Doesn't matter to what they subscribe.
Who are the Meanies?
ReplyDelete"That he's reading Orwell and Huxley. "
ReplyDeleteHuh? again.
Fuck, I told myself not to do this AGAIN!
ReplyDeleteHere go the Trish Dozens again.
English not spoken here.
You may not be mean,
ReplyDeletebut you are one difficult
BITCH!
That might be as stimulating for him as
ReplyDelete"Brave New World"
and
"1984"
- Doug
Okay. So I skimmed over the "for me." My apologies.
What did you have your son read when you were homeschooling?
Yeah, Bob,
ReplyDeleteBut you CANNOT DENY that the Climate is changing!
(actually, it's NOT: the climate is the climate)
ReplyDeleteThe Weather is changing.
...as always.
See your Farmer's Almanac.
Untold numbers of Kids books.
ReplyDeleteBennet's 1-6.
Some books my wife got in her Ed classes before she quit.
...actually before we both declared them Garbage.
Christian School Materials,
Used schoolbooks,
Then came the Internet, and away he went!
Only thing I am proud of on that is teaching by example when I found an academic version of learning HTML online and showed him by example how beneficial systametized content is.
Learned day by day.
Now he can learn almost anything, almost instantly!
(by this Senior's standards)
"systematized "
ReplyDeleteWe had to battle the Belgians when it came to homeschooling. No SOFA that favored us. Worked out thanks to a persuasive fuck-off-or-else minor bureaucrat we owe much to. To this day.
ReplyDeleteAnybody read "Radical Son" in the family?
ReplyDeleteDon't know, if someone posted this already:
ReplyDeleteJohn O'Sullivan (the other British die-hard):
"In the debates on and outside “The Corner” about whether conservatives should support John McCain if he becomes the GOP’s nominee, there is a palpable sense of exasperation emanating from those who think McCain deserves such support. Appeals to other conservatives not to sulk, be negative, or walk away from the field all reflect this very understandable emotion.
If someone—say, Mark Levin—replies that his disagreements of principle with McCain are so deep that he cannot be reasonably expected to forget them and rally round his standard, then the would-be party unifiers point out that Obama and Hillary are separated from him by an even deeper ideological gulf. So Mark should swallow his differences with McCain in order to avert worse from the Democrats.
This is the logic of political coalitions—which national parties are in a two-party system—and most of the time it’s valid. But it’s not always valid.
Many conservatives believe that the key question in this election is: Are there to be two multiculturalist open-borders parties or one? If McCain’s election were to make the GOP fundamentally similar to the Democrats on immigration, bilingualism, racial preferences, and all the National Question issues, that would be a resounding historical defeat for conservatives.
The willingness of a President McCain to cooperate with the Democrats would give such issues as an immigration amnesty a better chance of passage than under a President Hillary or Obama even against strong GOP resistance in Congress. Opponents of such policies, despite enjoying majority support among the voters, would find themselves politically marginalized. On the other hand, a united Republican opposition might well stop a Democratic White House from passing these measures because its party would be nervous of finding itself on the wrong side of a popular issue in the next midterm elections.
And there is another factor this time. Any bill similar to the senator’s “comprehensive” immigration reform would accelerate the GOP’s relative demographic decline by creating new voters overwhelmingly likely to vote Democrat in a quicker time scale. This dominant Democratic majority would emerge fully only after a hypothetical President McCain left office, but its approach would cloud the future of every other Republican incumbent.
All these fears lie at the root of conservative reluctance to endorse Senator McCain. Fortunately for him there is a simple way to dispel them. He can give an unequivocal assurance that he will not support such a bill, and that, if one is passed despite his opposition, he will veto it. No ifs, buts, or maybes. Thus far he has refused to do so."
And it isn't coming.
-
With regard to John Podhoretz, I think he'd sell out a lot at home to win the war abroad. He also doesn't disagree with McCain on a number of the issues, to begin with, so it is easy for him to wag his figure as if merely 'ideology' is at stake and not potential negative effects.
The British Tories and Canadian "Conservatives" are in the background.
"With regard to John Podhoretz, I think he'd sell out a lot at home to win the war abroad."
ReplyDeleteBut the entirety of western civ is at stake. What price too high, I ask you? (Now you'll have to ask the contemporary conservatives what warm feelings they have for western civ, which horribly enough they feel quite alien from.)
In any event, he's right about the Republican Party.
The Republican Party isn't a vehicle for anything but the Republican Party. What that is, is up in the air. The apparatchiks, for their part, will adapt regardless.
ReplyDelete"The apparatchiks, for their part, will adapt regardless."
ReplyDeleteSo you aren't voting for them.
Undecided. I think the VP selection matters a lot, since it may determine the presumptive nominee next time and give a hint toward the future.
ReplyDeleteIn either case I'm going to be giving McCain shit for every mis-step along the way, not rationalizing why to support it because he's my guy, cause he's not.
Also waiting to see what happens in the general.
ReplyDeletePutting my thoughts entirely out there and realizing that I am not saying anything extraordinarily original, the biggest reason I feel to vote for McCain is the court and socialized health care. I don't expect anything great from McCain here. But probably better than what we'd get otherwise.
ReplyDeleteI also think his national security bona fides are heavily overrated and he isn't very bright.
In catagories he's still better than the opposition. In the short-term, I think he's a jump in Checkers. But there's also more in play than grabbing one piece. Unfortunately, the rest of the board is open to everyone's interpretation.
*most catagories
ReplyDeleteOh, and he's a prick.
ReplyDeleteBut I do my best not to let that in isolation affect my vote.