Chris Hall quite rightly brings up the question of whom this Koran burning pastor’s actions affect elsewhere in the world:

You can bet that the Copts, Assyrians and other groupings will have yet more misery inflicted on them because of the actions of this idiot, not his beliefs.

JD preceded this with:

There used to be a bumper sticker in the South saying, “What would Jesus do?”  So is Rev. Terry Jones a Christian?

The question of appeasement is one which has never gone away – Chamberlain was a case in point.  Before getting onto that, as to the question of who is a Christian and who is not, one needs to go back again to “you’ll know them by their fruits”.  I’ve serious reservations about the Southern Baptists and various other groups there, those reservations coming through the DID and SRA material, in which many churches, it was stated, giving names and pack drill, were infiltrated by the other side.

The Georgian peanut farmer was a good example.   The damage that man did, his very strange affiliations and his actions vis a vis the sovereignty of the United States are an area of study in themselves.

I can’t see any logical reason why churches would not be infiltrated.  Businesses and nations are infiltrated, security services are infiltrated, why not churches?  The effect could be, of course, to turn people off Christianity in the long run but in the meantime, it provides a good cover for their activities, moneymaking and otherwise.


The Copts are an interesting study.  How do they survive in a brutal Islamic climate?  The answer is threefold – firstly, Egypt has a long and honoured history and sets itself apart from the rest of the Arab world, secondly, the Copts are quite ancient and have an established tradition themselves and thirdly, they are around 8% of the population, not insignificant by any means.

It’s not quite the same thing to murder Copts as it is to murder Christians in, say, Indonesia, in terms of world outcry.  By the same token, they’ve had a history of oppression over the centuries, as well as more enlightened times.

Having said that, it’s odds on the throat-slitters would attack Coptic churches and individuals and thus the Copts themselves have this issue of why they’ve remained there, under Arab duress.  They’re on a hiding to nothing, especially as the Muslim-Them-Us issue is likely to blow up if Them have anything to do with it.  Them need conflagration in the middle-east to further the next part of the agenda.

Leaving aside the Florida pastor for one moment, do we stay silent in the face of Islamic oppression or do we block the bstds, knowing that it’s odds on that there will be reprisals?  In a similar way, should the Resistance in WW2 have done as they did, whole towns being taken out by the Germans and hanged, by way of reprisal?  Does one remain silent, for fear of reprisals?

It’s easy, from an armchair, to pronounce on this but not so easy on the ground.


Just looking at the Copts and what, to me, are ridiculous theological niceties which only served to split their church, what on earth is the reason to split over this?

Cyril excommunicated anyone who followed the teachings of Nestorius. For example, “Anyone who dares to deny the Holy Virgin the title Theotokos is Anathema!”

Does it really matter if the Holy Spirit is a person or a force or a nectar or whatever?  Does it matter if there is consubstantiation or transubstantiation in the Eucharist?  Now, if theologians wish to coop themselves up in monasteries to study and debate the finer details, all well and good but to split the church?

Hardly what JC himself had in mind, I should have thought.

In Sicily, I’d go into the churches for a number of reasons – I’m a Christian, I was down and out at that time, the architecture and aura of those places was magnificent and lastly, they were very cool [temperature-wise] to sit and have a chat with G-d in.  There was no concept in my mind that these were the worshipping places of the enemy, the Catholics.

In the same way, when in the supermarket or cafe and the cross was on the wall, I couldn’t see it as a Coptic cross or a Catholic cross or as an Orthodox cross – it was just the cross, end of story.  To me, they overdo the Mary stuff and venerate the saints way beyond what those good people probably even wanted for themselves and yet I believe in the notion of purgatory.

What’s the problem?  You worship in the way that’s fit for you, as long as it doesn’t contradict the gospels, the centre of the whole faith.  And if you do worship outside the gospels, then good for you, except that you can’t call yourself Christian.  And if you still do, then IMHO, you are wrong.  End of story.

I’ve been inside mosques and synagogues and what?  The average person has a right to be there, worshipping the One G-d.  Similarly, the idiot Dawkins can close his mind off and make his illogical pronouncements and it’s sweet, as far as I’m concerned.  Why should he be forcibly shut up, just because his views are insupportable?


There was most certainly something very fishy in the way those buildings came down.  Unlike people who always have to label others with pejorative words like birthers, truthers and teabaggers, some of us have open minds and wish to see the whole of the evidence on all sides.

Again – there was something very fishy in that and also in 7/7 further down the track.  None of which compensates for the horror of the loss of life at that time – to all Americans today, I take my hat off and stand with you in remembrance.

2 comments for “911

  1. September 13, 2010 at 04:10

    There was most certainly something very fishy in the way those buildings came down.

    I was working as an engineer in an engineering consultancy when the towers came down on live TV. None of us could understand how it happened, including the senior structural engineers in the room.

    A few months later, a somewhat geeky documentary explaining the failure mechanisms of each tower was broadcast and we all huddled in the conference room and watched it (somebody had vidoed it). The explanations given in the documentary were clear and made sense to everyone in the room, including the structural guys. When the towers collapsed things did look very strange, but when explained in a technical manner, their collapse was not anything extraordinary. What made it most interesting from an engineering POV was that the failure modes of each tower were quite different.

Comments are closed.