So much unrighteousness in a land! Error so wanton and unrestricted! Infamy so exalted and universal… It was once remarked that Britain, alone of nearly all nations, had for centuries been blessed not to see the campfires of an enemy army upon its shores. But I am afraid that almost every night, Britons huddle by their television sets, and in their light see just as much the glowing announcement of dreadful peril to come. The horizons of our very rooms smoulder with reports of advancing enemies, missives of conquerors, manifestoes of tyrants. The only thing that does not hold true, is that they are not often foreign, not anymore. It is instead our establishment, preaching disestablishment - the powers that be, loosing anarchy. The news is desperate, and regular, in this vein. I suppose it is so across all of the English-speaking nations - the whole world, even. But it seems worse here.
It has happened again most notably, just a few days past, with the Scottish Executive
releasing the Lockerbie mass murderer - a man responsible for one of history’s most prolific dynamite outrages, accomplished in the air above a quiet Scotch town.
Whilst one of Scotia’s fair kings had Mr Fawkes and his conspirators hung, drawn and quartered, so heavily was felt their heavy wickedness, one of modern Scotland’s Arbitrary Democrats (ruling by divine right of the aggregate of those who can be bothered to vote) had other ideas. “The Scots are a compassionate people. We are different. We are better.” So they released him. He had served 11.56 days per victim slain. There were over 250 such souls he drowned in flame and fire in the heavens. He expressed, and expresses, no sorrow - no remorse.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e3d7c/e3d7c56f79f8b07bcf3273c536e2028909a65f91" alt=""
And so Scotland died something of a death earlier this week. Or rather, the corpse, which one suspects has been decomposing some time, had at last more than just its ankle coyly displayed to the world. She was rumoured to be and has become a monster. Everything vital in her is evidently gangrenous; and honest men must be in a terrible division of mind. Either we would be well to conduct some engineering experiments as to the viability of pushing this cankered country (with the highest murder rate in Europe, incidentally) out into the north Atlantic, there to drift with whales and Greenland fishermen, the society of whom she could less readily corrupt. Or plans ought to be drawn up, or perhaps recovered from some 18th century archive, for her capture and subjugation.
Reports say that the Saltire of St Andrew was flown in Tripoli to welcome the unrepentant mass murderer home. Every British flag is less, now, for having this newly dirtied symbol as part of it. I do not advise split on the back of it. I advise the judicious repositioning of an aircraft carrier just off the Firth of Forth, and its solemn employment.
Indeed. I noticed on television watching the arrival of said enemy of humanity in Tripoli a very large and prominent Scottish flag waving amongst the Libyan green. The commentators watching on this side of the pond were unanimous that this was an outrage of injustice, an insult to the victims and their families and that the reputation of Scotland has fallen considerably because of this in the eyes of the world.
ReplyDeleteI vote for capture and subjugation. It worked wonders on us Welsh. The English even put us to work upon their lands - as their slaves. You see Sir Walter, the Scotch never really had the full English treatment. Your paying dearly for it now.
ReplyDeleteJust to add.
ReplyDeleteI've just checked my e-mail.
I have received this message that was sent this afternoon from a friend in the States - it reads:
"We think the Scots are crazy this week (or crazier than we thought before). What is with releasing the Lockerbie guy? I was astonished."
Pretty much sums it up.
I think this ludicrous action by the Scottish Executive does sad justice to all the Scots who would have or did oppose the release.
ReplyDeleteIt is craziness, to be sure, but I think it is more a commentary on the state of the 'English-speaking nations' as was mentioned.
I am not so sure about the entire world, the one thing you have to admire about the Islamic nations is that they have backbone (Not that it makes up for their other faults to be sure).
I agree, though I would say it is more fundamental. Compared to Europe in particular and the rest of the west in general the Islamic nations (shock) actually want to survive, they put their own interests first, they have an agenda and a faith that they adhere to and want to see victorious. Most of the west on the other hand don't seem to care if their own people and culture disappear from the earth and certainly don't want to be seen as triumphalist in any way. We appreciate the history and accomplishments of others while apologizing for our own.
ReplyDeleteSuch an obscenity is worthy of a spittle-flecked tirade. Very well written as usual, and not an ounce overdone. This is despair properly articulated.
ReplyDeleteSir Walter,
ReplyDeleteCertainly the rage is understanble. This creature should have been executed, plain and simple. I'm generally skeptical about the death penalty because I believe all governments to be incompetent to a greater or lesser extent. There is no doubt here and the hangman should have been called out of retirement. We would not be in this situation now if he had.
As for carpet bombing Scotland, this is a painful thought. I have spent some time researching the history of Canada in the 19th century. Canada, the bits that worked anyway, was founded and run by Scotsmen. These were men of such profound common sense and moral probity they built a great nation out of wilderness. What would they say of this? Indeed what would the typical Scotsmen of forty years ago have said of this?
I find it hard to believe that the typical Scot in the street condones this. This must be some mad act by a mad politico? Where are the protests? Please tell me this is an aberration! Is there still a Scotland worthy of the name?
I can only agree with what has already been said. However, I felt the indignant howls of protest from America were also rather obscene, when they are the first to whine, moan and complain when there is (just) criticism of their absurd legal system. You can not refuse to accept criticism of your own system but feel it is your god given right to criticise that of another ostensibly democratic nation.
ReplyDeleteNone of this lessens the stupidity of the Scottish justice system, but a little less hypocrisy, please.
Millions marched to stop The Iraq War.
ReplyDeleteThere protests were ignored too.
Wonder if the Americans have taken a slice in some of these oil and gas deals that are alleged to have been done to secure the bombers release.
It's an outrageous thing to think, let alone do.
However, anything goes in America these days. :-)
Kipling, Best: hear, hear.
ReplyDeleteI've just been doing some more online reading. Now don't laugh. This is my latest new theory.
ReplyDeleteWhat about that Saltire of St Andrew in Libya? Do you think it could be CIA agent? Would USA do this to create smokescreen to divert attention? I wonder how many Saltires are on sale in Libyan shops. It could have been home made - in America.
Scots get blame - Yanks get gas and oil.
Gets you thinking.
Anyway, don't bomb Scotland. Hang the MSPs, burn down the Parliament and then shoot the rioters. Our English Masters are good at doing things like that. They'd probably get Welshmen to do it. Indeed, even some Scots - and we'd do it. :-)
Excellent post, Sir Walter.
ReplyDeleteNeil...It is true that we former colonists are on the same general trajectory as Europe, Britain, Canada, - which I list n order of progress towards full departure from Christendom. But we really are the caboose bringing up the rear. We still retain the death penalty in many states and properly executed one of our own citizens, Timothy McVeigh, for a similar murderous act.
This man deserved the death penalty. Under the milquetoast system in the UK, he was allowed to live on at the taxpayers expense and at least he should have died in prison. I fear that this is further evidence of the incursion of Islam into Europe and the UK.
Even 30 years ago, one could not have imagined such an event, but one also could not imagine the Church of Scotland allowing for practicing homosexuals to serve as ministers. Both of are the same cloth.
As to the CIA creating a smokescreen....our current administration would not have a clue as to how one would do such a thing....and I don't mean that as a compliment. They are much too busy apologizing for our existence.
Quite right too - keep apologising to the world.
ReplyDeleteIslam is tough on crime and also the causes of crimes, that's why most Muslims hate America.
I thought you'd support radical Islam's tough anti-homosexual and anti-crime policies. They don't suffer oddballs. Explains your Twin Towers.
Of course, that is not to dismiss our own decline and 9/11 was certainly a warning shot over the bow by the Almighty ala Habakkuk.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.crechurches.org/infofiles/2005memorialsrev.pdf
See item G.
Islamic strictness on matters moral is a very thin veneer. What goes on behind the scenes in the strictest Islamofascist nations would make the most libertine Western hedonist blush. The objectification of women has been perfected by their tyrannical brutish men, under the protection of their Sharia law, with the warlord pedophile Mohammad himself being their role model.
ReplyDeleteAnd oh by the way....the pilots of those planes often frequented local strip clubs so please don't lecture me on how they brought down the towers out of righteous indignation at American decadence, the existence of which I readily acknowledge.
Who said anything about decadence? I was talking about freedom. People and nations like to lead their own lives - that's why your Twin Towers.
ReplyDeletePeople want to be free of judgmental America and your corrupt Jews. They'll will get you in the end. Bang! Who will nuke you all? Islam or your own leaders - don't take bets if I were you.
America seems confused. Need to make your mind up. Islam - liberal horror or fascist madness.
Funnily enough, both sound like America. The politicians are liberal and the people are fascist. Or is that the other way around?
America's always gotta have an enemy. Keep's the yokels in their place and happy. Can't help but sense that - whenever I talk to some Americans.
I think Neil is joking. I certainly hope he is, with talk of "corrupt Jews". There is no place for such infantile conspiracy; least of all at a Christian blog.
ReplyDeleteI do concur with those who commend the death penalty in this and similar cases. So long as a nation has a standing army, and is prepared to 'execute' mortal enemies by fighting them on a battlefield, heinous evil in our midst ought to be dutifully, lawfully, prudently purged. Enemies of order and the law ought to feel once more something of the old terror of its long arm.
Blast, I have been rumbled by Sir Walter. Why can't you keep out of it? I have Jeff in a fit.
ReplyDeleteI like to get you all going by pushing your buttons. Have you noticed? It works a treat.
Hello Master Walter. You speak a lot of sense but then you are a true and proper English gentleman, unlike me. Something I can never fully be. Do you know I am jealous and I long to be English? It's crazy I know but that's how I feel. A Welshman who wants to be English. I think I might have a complex. A nationalist once said I had a complex. He said until the day I die, I could never be what I truly wanted to be - English. To resolve the complex, he added, I should accept that I am Welsh and that I should become a nationalist. He said switch sides and (paraphrasing) go and work for The Dark Side - as in Star Wars. I buzzed him with my lightsabre and said no way! What have you English done to me? I am Welsh but feel English. Anyway, keep posting, posts are class, rhagorol (wonderful).
While my opinion of the SNP and the pertinent Minister concerned in this affair is not flattering, I feel I must interject after the rather impertinent remarks about Scotland and the Scots on many blogs concerning this topic.
ReplyDeleteWhile I do not condone the compassionate release aspect of Scots justice, I am nonetheless not too displeased with this decision. There is an underlying suspicion in Scotland, including among some of the victims' families, that Libya had little or nothing to do with this atrocity. Couple this with the fact that Al Megrahi never received Scottish justice from the moment he was arrested, as he was arraigned and convicted by a pseudo Court of the Realm which met in secret, without a jury, in a hastily constructed compound in the Netherlands. The conviction ultimately rested on the sketchy testimony of a clothes retailer in Malta, for whom the eventual conviction proved rather profitable, as the $2 million reward he received for his testimony allowed him to resettle in Australia. Much of the trial evidence remains secret to this day.
Many Scots, including myself, feel that this charade of a trial has done more to undermine the standing of Scottish Justice than the decision to release him. Had the trial taken place in a real Scottish Court, many here feel that he would have returned to Libya many years ago. While none of this condones the circumstances of his release, and we are certainly irked by the waving of Saltires in Tripoli, the context of this affair goes some way towards explaining why we have not become as exercised about this as some of the American authorities, who incidentally, have still not placed the IRA on their list of proscribed terrorist organisations.
Incidentally, is there a reason why the Arms of England are shown on this thread? This has confused me slightly.
If injustice occurred, it was made worse by the deeper subsequent contempt for the system expressed in the release.
ReplyDeleteThe arms of England are on this thread, because like Neil I commend something along the lines of: 'Hanging the SNP, burning down the Parliament and then shooting the rioters.' Perhaps only for rhetorical effect, though.
Jeff, it seems to me, has been quite informed and wise. It is very true and often overlooked that behind the scenes of strict Islamic states, as in some of the severe Roman Catholic countries of the past (e.g. Mexico), private conduct is horribly compromised with all manner of license and barbarism. It was ever thus, and ever thus will be, where the true gospel of God has not its rightful seat in the hearts of men.
Touché, Mr. Welton. :-)
ReplyDeleteWelcome back, Dundonald, it's been a very long time.
ReplyDelete"Hang" on, I had better point out that I don't actually want to see MSPs, SNPs or some Scottish and Welsh MPs hanged. I was, as Sir Walter says, only saying all that for "rhetorical effect". I must be very careful now because New Labour are still in power and I might be arrested under the new anti-terror legislation for speaking my mind.
ReplyDeleteOh, by the way, don't confuse my tolerance for other religions, including Islam, for anything else. You tolerate something without actually believing in it yourself. I am a Christian not some Sikh or Muslim who wants to create a Super State in Britain. I am not in the business of condemning people. I just like to convince them over time. I think people just switch off if you insult them and don't offer "substance". Same is to be said for my own views on homosexuality.
I had terrible disagreements with Dr. Rowan Williams. He doesn't even believe in Monarchy. However, I will leave all that for another post.
The problem is that "tolerance" does not mean what it once did. Now, it means "acceptance" or "viewing as equally valid". You will not be allowed to merely tolerate Islam or homosexuality in the original sense of the word.
ReplyDeleteI would agree with you that in personal interactions, cultural transformation is brought about by through compassionate conversation and living the Gospel.
In the public sphere, we need more men with chests, who believe in Antithesis and in speaking prophetically when needed.
Who said anything about "acceptance" or "viewing as equally valid"? Only you, I never have. I adhere to the original meaning of "tolerance". It is why I oppose economic immigration into Britain (a disaster socially and culturally). This is a Christian country. I'd fight and die to keep it that way. People like Rowan are well-meaning, particularly with the Islam, but they are mistaken. However, you'll never convince him or them. Believe me. I tried it.
ReplyDeleteTrouble is, in reference to this blog, is we have referendums to win on The Monarchy. These referendums could be won by a few votes. Either way. We will not do that by insulting sections of the electorate. Whether we like it or not Muslims, gays, transsexuals, single parents and former jailbirds all have the vote. Sections of the electorate who, in the main, mean and do no real harm to our society - outside of their own (kept small) groups. This is why I'm "tolerant".
Anyway, I've got man boobs, will they do? :-)
"The problem is that "tolerance" does not mean what it once did. Now, it means "acceptance" or "viewing as equally valid"."
ReplyDeleteSadly, that is very true.. It, like the word 'racism' and many other descriptive words that have been twisted to meet modern demands. I wish instead of calling it 'tolerance', which is a deception, the world in general would call it what it is, 'equally worth whatever your current beliefs are.' (Even if it isn't, but at least it would be an honest statement on their part.)
I wish our opponents would play fair instead of trying to dress it up as much less than it really is, as to be frank, we should be tolerant, in the old description, we should not have to treat them as at all equal.
Quite, that is my own position - up to a point.
ReplyDeleteFor it depends on how you define "we should not treat them as equal". It has different meanings to different people. You'd need to define that.
If, for example, being "not treated as an equal" means being gassed, shot or being discriminated against in wider "secular" society, forget it.
Equality in terms of justice before the law - yes.
ReplyDeleteEquality in terms of economic status or hierarchical distinctions - no.
Agree with you on justice.
ReplyDeleteNot sure what you mean by "economic status" and "hierarchical distinctions". Could you clarify? You see, flowing from equality (in terms of "justice before the law") would come these numerous legal judgements on "economic status" and "hierarchical distinctions". These are written in Law. Law enacted in Parliament.
My own views on the economic immigration laws are now clear. I sense we agree on this aspect of "economic status". Beyond that I'm not sure.
Quite right, and equality before the law goes both ways - at times I feel that the 'regular' people (Caucasian Christians, in the broad terms, its not so regular any longer though the opposition is loath to give up the 'minority' card which they clench tightly to their chests) are discriminated against more than the other races and creeds.
ReplyDeleteFor example, the original article, the other groups get let off easier in terms of the law, yet we are the one's constantly being titled racist! I will not say this is altogether common, but it is more common than I am comfortable with.
It is understandably frustrating, and it is a mockery of any one of our countries fine institutions..
They are equally precious in the eyes of God, equally in need of a Saviour and so on and so forth. But their systems in regards to justice, most obviously Islam but many others too, are not equal to ours and any system based faithfully on Islam cannot ever achieve that, nor any other religion, in my opinion! So while our systems have disintegrated, to an extent as the article shows, it can be, and I hope will be revived, as nothing else can measure up to it on this earth, human justice at any rate, and as it is very much our nation[s], I get easily exasperated at the people who pretend that other systems of justice are in any way equivalent.
Not that anyone here is saying that, but that is what I mean by 'not equal.'
And as Justice is one of the most important aspects of government, having a good justice system is extraordinarily important.
Again, at least Canada's need's a good overhaul, not so much to add anything new but to remove a lot of stuff that has been added in the last decades, but it is much more likely that we will re-find justice and good government than any other culture on the face of the earth.
Neil,
ReplyDeleteBy economic status and hierarchical distinctions, I was referring to the economic and social hierarchies that are normally established as part of the social order in a free society. This type of social order is something that a Monarchist embraces by definition and also something that the egalitarians constantly attempt to flatten and eliminate by governmental fiat.
I was not referring to prejudicial discrimination. Hence, a Buddhist, Muslim, Christian, man, and woman would receive the same pay for the same job, all other factors being similar. This type of equality flows naturally from equal justice before the law.
"By economic status and hierarchical distinctions, I was referring to the economic and social hierarchies that are normally established as part of the social order in a free society. This type of social order is something that a Monarchist embraces by definition and also something that the egalitarians constantly attempt to flatten and eliminate by governmental fiat."
ReplyDeleteNot necessarily.
In Law we would need to know the context in which you were seeking to prevent people from having economic or hierarchical status. For the Law concerning Monarchy is distinct and clear. As your idea means a lot to you, it would need to be defined in Statute. If it is not in Law, the uneducated masses might not follow or obey your law. In what context (in other words social situation) would you prevent a Sikh or gays from obtaining economic and/or hierarchical status?
I would support Law which allowed a private Christian counseling service to refuse to hire a practicing homosexual (or unmarried co-habitating heterosexual) as a counselor . I would support Law which allowed a private Christian school to not hire a Sikh as a teacher or administrator.
ReplyDeleteI would support these laws or legal guidelines. I cannot believe that is it. Are you sure you don't want to go any further? You could really protect us from the Sikhs, Muslims and gays who threaten the social order. Imagine - you could make counselors, teachers and the administrators (the whole State apparatus) do anything that you wanted. Any other ideas? What else would you suggest for a Counter Revolution? Hmmm. Together we could all create 'The Monarchist Manifesto'.
ReplyDeleteThere is more, but having recently been led down the garden path, I have difficulty in knowing when your are serious simply baiting a hook. :-)
ReplyDelete"...serious OR simply baiting...."
ReplyDeleteMe, baiting? What a thing to think. :-)
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I'm genuinely interested in your ideas and this ain't a joke. I have a lot of respect for you Jeff. I respect the fact you speak your mind. I won't always agree with you, nor will I always agree with the way that you say what you say. However, if you lived in Britain, I'd fight and die for your right to say all those things.
How can I put this. I admire the way you bear your chest rather than just flash your man boobs.
Hmm..... This is all getting odd.
ReplyDeleteWell, well...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6814939.ece
See Jeff, I am not that crazy.
ReplyDeleteWonder if the Yanks will get a cut - in secret.
Stranger things have happened.
Indeed, everyone knows that Bush and Cheney are joined at the hip with Big Oil. :-)
ReplyDeleteThe Big Oil - sounds like a description of Tony Blair.
ReplyDelete