Doesn’t Rees-Mogg always bang on about his christian ‘faith’?

Obviously not the bit in the bible that says that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of A needle than for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God

Like most things in the life of a Tory MP, even the word of god is taken as advisory rather than mandatory

There’s a few “Christian” Home Secretarys have struggled with that, to be fair.

I don’t think they struggled as such. Religion is pretty adaptable to this sort of thing. Take the Dutch Reformed Church in South Africa. You will never see a better example of supposed piety in theory combined with selectivity and utter hypocrisy in practice.

And the theory isn’t what matters. It is the practice.

Take the Dutch Reformed Church in South Africa.

I generally find that when religion and beards collide it turns nasty.

Is ^^ that a dig at Muslims?

Yes in the case of the South African Dutch Reformed Church Christian teachings were deliberately distorted to justify racism and injustice.

But it should also be remembered the deeply held religious commitment and religious motivation of someone such as Bishop Desmond Tutu who courageously devoted himself fighting racism and injustice.

Also Nelson Mandela claimed that during his darkest moments of incarceration it was his Christian faith which sustained him.

Plus for me the most inspirational fighter for justice and against racism, in modern times, was Martin Luther King, an American Baptist minister whose religious convictions went to the very heart of his being.

I think the issue with our clean-shaven Home Secretary is how can she behave in the manner that she does despite her stated religious beliefs, rather than whether her religion plays a part – it obviously doesn’t.

<dang it, double post>

binners
Full Member

Doesn’t Rees-Mogg always bang on about his christian ‘faith’?

Yeah but he likes fanfic jesus not canon jesus. Like Johnson and Churchill. Emulating the real thing would be hard, so just make up your own.

Rees-Mogg possibly doesn’t realise supply side jesus is satire

There’s something uniquely dispiriting about her crocodile tears yesterday, given that she and Sunak (and Patel before her) – all the children of immigrants – spend their time demonising these people as little better than vermin. All for their own personal political gain.

It’s an obscenity. Their casual inhumanity and complete absence of compassion really is disgusting to witness

The fact that they’re so enthusiastically pulling the ladder up behind themselves makes them even worse than the Farages of this world IMHO

That’s veering dangerously close to pre-ascribing views onto people because of their background, appearance etc.

A bit like the tendency for people to think the rotund chap in the pub is going to be ‘cheerful’ just because – then getting miffed when he turns out to be just as likely to be a miserable sod as anyone else.

On the flip side, though, I can obviously see what would lead the likes of Sunak, Patel and Braverman to over-compensate to be accepted (tolerated?) by the old skool Tory faithful. What does piss me off is that they give an easy out for the “I’m not racist, but” brigade.

Two more years of this shit. They’re going to take what’s left of the family silver, leave our international reputation even more shredded and **** off into the sunset laughing.

It makes me quite cross.

Is ^^ that a dig at Muslims?

Nope ,every single religion on the planet.

Like most things in the life of a Tory MP, even the word of god is taken as advisory rather than mandatory

A few pinpoint lightening bolts might make them reconsider….

Doesn’t Rees-Mogg always bang on about his christian ‘faith’?

The handy thing about pretty much every religion is they have accumulated quite a lot of documentation and so with a bit of picking and careful interpreting you can ensure pretty much any of your preconceived opinions has gods personal agreement.
When that fails eg his companies funds ownership of shares in a company which sold abortion pills it was quickly squared away in his mind and its time for the legal arguments.
Its a variation on Groucho Marx “Those are my principles, and if you don’t like them… well, I have others.”

“Those are my principles, and if I cant profit from them/stir up hate, well, I have others”.

A few pinpoint lightening bolts might make them reconsider….

Nah they would just declare her a heretic and terrorist.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/dec/19/asylum-seekers-rwanda-uk-plan-legal-high-court

The government’s highly controversial plan to send asylum seekers on a one-way trip to Rwanda is legal, the high court has ruled.

In a judgment that could have major ramifications for Rishi Sunak’s government, judges have dismissed an application from asylum seekers, aid groups and a border officials’ union to stop the Conservative government from acting on a deportation agreement with the central African country.

Under the deal, the UK would send some people who arrive in the UK as stowaways or in boats to Rwanda, where their asylum claims would be processed. Those granted asylum would stay in Rwanda rather than returning to the UK.

What a time to be alive…

Disgusting.

Pissing away millions to appease racists – and the horrendous thing is that their analysis of us as an electorate is that we would want this.

We are pariahs and we deserve it.

We are pariahs and some of us we deserve it.

I refuse to be dragged down to the point where I become one of them

Full judgement is a bit more nuanced. Looks like every case needs to be taken on merit… by the Home Secretary… which opens every attempted deportation (and denial of the right to begin a claim for asylum) up to a legal challenge. I think.

The High Court has found that the plan is lawful but quashed the decision to deport 8 people and said the Home Sec needs to consider each individual case. Appeals likely.

— sianushka (@sianushka) December 19, 2022

It says everything about this government that the single solitary consideration on whether they do something or not is ‘is it legal?’

Not ‘is it right?’ or is it morally defensible?’, simply ‘can we get away with it under international law?’

Brexit Britain summed up.

I note they still won’t commit to any of the logistics, numbers or timescales

I still don’t think more than a handful of people, if anyone, will ever end up being deported to Rwanda. This is simply the opposite of virtue-signalling, designed purely as a dog whistle to their racist base.

What I find the most depressing thing of all is seeing 2nd generation immigrants/refugees now committing all their efforts to denying to others all the advantages that this country has afforded them

And then there’s the obvious next question… how much is all this nonsense costing? Has anyone put in a Freedom of Information request to see the legal fees for the Home Office? It must be racking up quite significantly.

Ooof… this has given airtime to Jonathan Gullis… currently on Radio4 bashing bishops and telling us that this is all about honouring the Brexit vote and anyone talking against this policy should shut up because of that vote.

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/65244/forbidden-island

That High Court ruling means that no-one will probably ever be deported to Rwanda.

Doesn’t look like a success if every case has to be evaluated which will lead to every one going to appeal 😉 Oh deep joy to see the government fighting each one. Sadly we will be paying for the legal bill though for the government that is, even though I fundamentally disagree with it having refugee parents…

JeZ

Ooof… this has given airtime to Jonathan Gullis… currently on Radio4 bashing bishops and telling us that this is all about honouring the Brexit vote and anyone talking against this policy should shut up because of that vote.

Even by the ‘standards’ of the modern Tory party he really stands out as a planet-sized ****!!.

Its a reflection on Brexit and the chaos, nastiness and racism it has legitimised – which of course he uses as a justification for absolutely everything – that someone as vile as him wouldn’t have had a sniff at a parliamentary seat without it.

He makes Ian Duncan Smith look like Mother Theresa

A graceful come back to the bishop bashing…

Always grateful for feedback – look forward to advice on what we should be doing in the pulpit.

(Just to confirm: we’ll be continuing to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ.) https://t.co/YdkT9zMBhe

— Archbishop of Canterbury (@JustinWelby) December 20, 2022

To be fair Jonathan Gullis has some form when it comes to idiotic comments. Although he might have surpassed himself with his latest one.

Suella’s dream still a long way off becoming a practical reality.

She’ll have to content herself with letting out a squeal of delight whenever a child drowns in the channel.

And that Gullis bloke… Must have a criminal conviction for something in his past, just look at him. Football hooliganism maybe? Or posting s*** through someone’s letterbox or something?

What makes Gullis’s bishop bashing particularly bizarre is that he used to be a religious education teacher:

Jonathan Gullis – 2022 Speech on Religious Education in Modern Britain

So quite why he thought it would be appropriate to claim that bishops shouldn’t preach from pulpits is even more puzzling.

Edit: To be fair in his speech in the above link Gullis does openly confess to not being a “specialist”, despite teaching RE, quote:

“I declare an interest as someone who was an RE teacher—although not a specialist”

Perhaps he just never got round to finding out what pulpits are for.

Braverman is back on the old “keep them on cruise ships” nonsense. Are Lynton Crosby’s people involved?

So now we’ve had sending them to Rwanda, housing them in army barracks, housing them in holiday camps, housing them in student halls, and now housing them on cruise ships?

At some point they’re going to have to engage with reality and actually look at some proposals that are actually workable, rather than just being for the benefit of tomorrow mornings Daily Mail headlines

From the Guardian:

As for whether cruise ships could be used, Braverman just says that the government is talking to a “wide variety of providers and that “everything is still on the table and nothing is excluded”

Translation: We haven’t got a ****ing clue what to do about any of this, so we’ll keep banging on about Rwanda while flailing around hopelessly like the gang of morons we are

Maybe they could get Chris Grayling to source them some cruise liners? He’s a dab hand with ferries

our clean-shaven Home Secretary

too much information!

Gullis was briefly in my department and he is a ****.

Bloody good job he didn’t get chair of the Education Select Committee. Mogg/Johnson/Patel etc. voted for him though.

Braverman is back on the old “keep them on cruise ships” nonsense.

I think she has a nice little cruise planned for them.

Can’t she put them on Chis Grayling’s fleet of ferries?

That’s veering dangerously close to pre-ascribing views onto people because of their background, appearance etc.

I’m not sure what faith/religion Braverman subscribes to, but if she’s Hindu, then just a very quick look at Modi’s government in India shows where her attitude comes from. I also knew a girl from an Indian family, I think they were Hindu, and they were fine with her going out with a white English bloke, but when she announced she was getting engaged to him, she was threatened with being cast out of her family. She chose her fiancé, and they did.

Put them in cruise ships! Put them in army barracks! Drown them in the sea!

The actual answer is, process asylum and immigration claims sensibly, quickly and competently. Staff the departments adequately. Get it right first time rather than having failure-by-design swell the number of succesful appeals slowing the whole thing down. The total population stuck in application limbo is huge and rising not because of the number of people arriving but because the system has completely fallen apart, by design. Classic Theresa May, realised that her political goals would be best served by totally failing at her job so they could go “look at all the immigrants”

The lake isn’t flooding because it’s raining, it’s flooding because they’ve dammed the river that leads out of it. Really not happy with that analogy, but, it does the job.

“That’s veering dangerously close to pre-ascribing views onto people because of their background, appearance etc.”

I think the salient point here is not the ethnicity or the religion of Braverman, Patel and Sunak, it is the fact that their ancestors moved to British East Africa so they could be the administrators of an Apartheid regime, where they could enjoy political, employment, economic and freedom of movement rights that were denied to indigenous Africans, who they saw as a servant class.

They are beneficiaries of the British Empire, entirely and willfully complicit with the racial constructs that underpinned it.

Strange fact: When Kenya gained independence in the early Sixties, the indian population, (which was only 2%) owned 75% of the nations non agricultural assets, (and we know who owned the agricultural assets..)

The bit that makes me want to scream at the radio when these tory ministers are on is that they envoke brexit as an excuse for these mad schemes but don’t acknowledge that brexit caused us to withdraw from EU resettlement schemes and torched all the good will that’s required to solve these problems.

You can’t be unsure if France is friend or enemy and hope that they’ll be ever so kind and help us out of this hole of our own making.

The actual answer is, process asylum and immigration claims sensibly, quickly and competently. Staff the departments adequately. Get it right first time rather than having failure-by-design swell the number of succesful appeals slowing the whole thing down. The total population stuck in application limbo is huge and rising not because of the number of people arriving but because the system has completely fallen apart, by design. Classic Theresa May, realised that her political goals would be best served by totally failing at her job so they could go “look at all the immigrants”

Spot on and some of us realise that but many don’t think further than the headlines that are provided to them combined with years of it being acceptable to not like immigrants of any type.

Spend the money on fixing the process, employing right number and the right people to work the process etc. rather than Rwanda deals, planes, cruise ships, hotels etc,.

Strange fact: When Kenya gained independence in the early Sixties, the indian population, (which was only 2%) owned 75% of the nations non agricultural assets

And another strange fact is that Jews were historically, and disproportionately, involved in finance.

What does that tell us – that there is a genetic predisposition in the DNA of certain racial groups to behave in a particular manner?

Or that an oppressed people are forced to behave in a certain manner and grab whatever opportunities when they present themselves?

In the case of Jews thousands of years of oppression and denial of equal employment opportunities, combined with religious restrictions on Christians and Muslims to lend money, forced them into a particular area of economic activity which was open to them.

Here is another strange fact:

From the 1st century AD to the start of British colonisation in India in the 17th century, India’s GDP was between about 25 and 35% of the world’s total GDP, which dropped to 2% by Independence of India in 1947.

Before the arrival of the British, India, united by the Mughal Empire, had the largest economy in the world and was the global manufacturing powerhouse.

Britain systemically deindustrialised India leaving it in economic ruins and racked by reoccurring famines.

There remained, however, a highly educated and skilled population which the British Empire used for its own purposes outside India.

Like Jews Indians living in conditions of oppression and denial of equality grabbed what opportunities were available to them. For many educated Indians this meant immigrating to other parts of the British Empire.

Unsurprisingly this often proved to be highly successful in terms personal achievement. Areas such as East Africa were simply not as advanced technologically and educationally wise as much of India was.

The expulsion of African Asians by a brutal dictator such as Idi Amin wasn’t entirely surprising, what is more surprising imo is that role of Asians in Africa at the time of the British Empire should still be stigmatized 50 years later.

In the case of Braverman and Sunak their immigrant parentage does not have a predominantly business background, in fact it is mostly medical. Sunak’s father was a GP and his mother was a pharmacist, and Braverman’s father worked for a housing association and her mother was a nurse.

It should also be remembered that many Indians were highly involved in the anti-apartheid movement, as indeed were a great many Jews (despite Israel’s shameful support of apartheid) before they are dismissed as lackeys of white supremacists.

Double post

This is a couple of days old but I have only just read it and I haven’t seen it mentioned anywhere:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jan/06/suella-bravermann-plans-to-ditch-key-windrush-pledges

I am frankly appalled – I had thought even the Tories going back to Theresa May had accepted that the Windrush scandal was a total indefensible injustice that had to be righted.

It is one thing to lack decency and humanity towards illegal immigrants it is on a different level to deny it to legal immigrants.

“As a result of Home Office errors, thousands of UK residents who had travelled legally to Britain in the 50s and 60s, were told wrongly that they were immigration offenders, with catastrophic consequences.”

To add to my disappointment I don’t see the Labour front bench creating much fuss. What message does that send to British African Caribbean community? Presumably that it doesn’t matter much.

Bloody Labour front bench – grr!!!!!