Boris Johnson’s Phone Call of Support to Mahmoud Abbas, 14 July 2020


Setting the Scene

Mahmoud Abbas is a genocidal antisemite, which is quite normal amongst the world’s Arab leaders and Muslim leaders today, just as overt genocidal antisemitism was common in Christian Europe, and Russia (and later the Soviet Union) from the end of the 19th century until within living memory.

As we know, the ideology of genocidal antisemitism never ends well.  And neither does the political career or enduring reputation of politicians or clerics who appease Jew hatred.  PM Boris Johnson has written himself into a long history of appeasers including Neville Chamberlain, Édouard Daladier, Pope Pius XII,  and Archbishop Justin Welby and the other incumbent Lords Spiritual of the Church of England (as I wrote in my piece last week).

PM Winston Churchill, and our great wartime church leader Archbishop William Temple, would never have appeased Mahmoud Abbas.  Churchill and Temple knew that the ideology of genocidal antisemitism must never be appeased, and “peace” must never be negotiated with genocidal antisemites:  to do so harms everyone and everything, including and perhaps especially the hater, whose disease of mind and soul can only deepen.  This is why, following WWII, as the British and the Allies started to rebuild Germany – beginning with the industrial infrastructure of the Ruhr Valley that the Allies had bombed to rubble – the priority was what the British called “denazification” of the Germans and the Austrians. Denazification involved everythng from the re-education of German schoolchildren to the re-education of the lawyers and judges and the re-creation of a Christian and independent judiciary.  (East Germans on the other hand were subject to Stalinisation: merely exchanging the brainwashing of national socialism and veneration of Hitler for the brainwashing of international socialism and veneration of Stalin.)

The actors and the appeasers of genocidal antisemitism always find themselves on the eternal rubbish tip (or Gehanna) of history.  This seems to be a law of history, or, dare I say it, the Law of History (e.g. Genesis 12:3) on which global civilisation and the destiny of the nations is based.

And yet within the past week or so, PM Boris Johnson has been one of many world leaders queuing up to offer his solidarity with Mahhoud Abbas.  It’s a wonder that Boris managed to get through to Abbas.  The global queue of appeasers includes everyone from the President of the Communist Party of China, to Sinn Fein, to Cuba (and all the Socialist nations in fact), to all the Islamic nations, to Jeremy Corbyn MP, to Sir Keir Starmer MP (member of “Labour Friends of Palestine”) …

Suddenly, Abbas is the best thing since sliced bread to almost every nation apart from the USA.  Global antisemitism is resurging, and genocidal antisemites are, once again, as popular as they were in the 1930s. ‘Palestine’ has never been more popular, including in the UK:

I’m reminded of the mid 1930s when almost all world leaders, including even King Edward VIII, wanted to go to Berlin to meet Hitler.  I’m reminded of Henry Ford – the only American and the only Anglican to get a mention in Mein Kampf – proudly  accepting from Hitler in 1938 the swastika-emblazoned Grand Cross of the German Eagle.  Man can “revise” the history of all this, and Western and Eastern Europe have very much revised the history of their complicity with the Nazis.  But no man can revise the Book of History:  the Book of Life.

It seems not to matter how many millions of Jews that Mahmoud Abbas says he wants to eradicate; it seems not to matter that Abbas uses $billions of international aid to fund his “Pay for Slay” program; it seems not to matter that Abbas encourages children and youth to make themselves into human bombs to kill Jews.  The path of least resistance for every international leader is to support Arab Jihadist irredentism of the Holy Land because all the 22 Arab nations do, and all the 57 Islamic nations do, and most of these nations – including the Gulf States – do not accept that the state of Israel even exists.

The Arabs are extremely rich: they are sitting on the Black Gold.  And in our times, money speaks louder than God of Israel.

In the UK press this week there has been much talk about Russian funny money, but no-one has mentioned that Arabs also own the English football clubs and launder money in exclusive English properties, and sponsor the UK universities to ensure they support the Arabisation/Islamisation and anti-Israelist cause.  No-one has mentioned that an individual man from Qatar – which has the highest GDP of all nations of the world, and is the biggest international contributor for Palestinian Pay for Slay stipends –  has recently bought the Ritz hotel in London.  The Arabs rule over landmass twice the size of the landmass of the USA, and yet they apparently need Israel – the size of Wales – to bring about “peace in the Middle East”.  This idea is absurd of course.  If you think Syria, Yemen, Libya and Sudan are bad, imagine what Jerusalem would be like with the internecine Arab regimes fighting over it, let alone the Islamic Turks and the Islamic Persians who equally have their sights set on Jerusalem.  President Erdogan, for instance, who only this month has requisitioned the Hagia Sophia as a mosque – and is doubtless emboldened by the world’s pathetic Christian response – has announced he now wants to “liberate” Jerusalem (widely reported in the world’s mainstream media, but not, it seems, the BBC).

The Arabs are damned rich, and they have to be.  In our world of mass communication and the Internet, it costs a lot of money to keep the ‘Palestinian’ Arabs in deep ignorance and spiritual and moral poverty, whilst at the same time ensuring they are financially motivated enough by the promised rewards for murdering Jews.  And it costs a lot of money to do this whilst at the same time engendering worldwide support for a new Arab state in the Holy Land.  It costs a lot of money for the Gulf States to fund Western universities.

Muslim Arabs can afford to keep English football clubs that attract the world’s best players  with £1 million a week salary, but apparently cannot afford to use their oil wealth, or huge landmass, to help Muslim Arabs who claim perpetual refugee status (now into the fourth generation of descendants).  It all amounts to racketeering.  The Arab regimes don’t care about Arab peoples.  I have sojourned in enough Arab nations to see this.

None of this should surprise us.  Almost all the Biblical prophets, including Jesus, and the Psalmist, warned that as God Almighty pulls the world into God through His nation and His People Israel, the leaders of the world would take counsel together against God and His Anointed.  Such words will be gobbledygook to Chinese Communists and Jeremy Corbyn and other ideological atheists, but Boris Johnson is ostensibly Christian, invited to lead the UK Government by Her Majesty the Queen, Fidei Defensatrix and Supreme Governor of the Church of England.  (Boris chose to be “confirmed” – the Anglican equivalent of the bar mitzvah – into the Church of England at Eton.)

Boris Johnson MP might well have a direct line to Abbas – Chairman of the Jihadist revolutionary movement of Fatah – but Israel, in its very name, is the world’s direct line to God of Israel.  The Stone of Scone is nothing without the Stone of Jacob.  And the Houses of Parliament is the house of the “foolish builders” if it forgets the House of the Name (which is precisely why the opening verse of Psalm 127 is set in stone in the floor of the Central Lobby of the Houses of Parliament).

Any honest analysis of the United Nations tells us that the lowest-common denominator of the nations – religious and secular and Communist – is anti-Israelism.  A world that condemns the tiny Jewish state – a wonderful nation – more times than it condemns all the world’s nations put together is a profoundly antisemitic world.  In such a world, in such an epoch, it is a lot easier for every prime minister or president in the world to be anti-Israel rather than pro-Israel. It is easier to appease antisemitism than to fight it.  It always has been, and always will be until the end of Time.

The Member of Parliament for Cambridge University,
and his One LAW of History

As I have written elsewhere, the world’s obsession with Israel is a good thing.  The Lord of History is God of Israel.  But the world needs to be, and will be, turned upside:  Israel is now classed as the most dispensable nation.  In fact Israel is the only indispensable nation.

The tide will turn.  No matter how many “international laws” from the “international community” are written to the contrary, Israel is the inexorable Law of History.  There is no other History.  There is no alternative.  Or as PM Margaret Thatcher put it: “you cannot build Jerusalem in Brussels”.

Alas, antisemitism, or appeasement of antisemitism, is in our times the rule, the pattern, the flow.  And Boris Johnson has gone with the flow, the path of least resistance, the “broad way” to destruction: the anti-Law.

The 17th-century Member of Parliament for Cambridge University, Sir Isaac Newton MP, who gave the world its first universal Laws of Nature, certainly accepted the Israel-centred Law of History.  He knew they shared a common Author, the Lawmaker.

For Newton, Nature and History follow the Pattern of the single omnipotent Lawmaker, whom Newton referred to as “God of Israel” (including in the introduction, or General Scholium, of Principia Mathematica).  Indeed, when John Maynard Keynes obtained Newton’s unpublished writings at Cambridge University at an auction in 1936, he announced that Newton was not what we today call a “scientist”, but rather a “Judaic monotheist of the school of Maimonides”.

Newton, who spent much more time studying Judaism and the meaning of Israel and the Jerusalem Temple than the natural sciences, believed that the Jewish diaspora’s survival, despite a history of continuous persecution, forced conversion, and frequent deadly attacks, to be miraculous and “the work of providence”[i].  Newton was hopeful, if not certain (through his deep Biblical analysis in the original Hebrew and of New Testament Greek), that there would be a call to rebuild Jerusalem at about the end of the 19th century, and the Jews of the world would return to Israel after their “captivity of almost 2000 years” (the captivity beginning, according to Newton, in the reigns of Nero and Vespasian).

Newton wrote that the call “to restore and to build Jerusalem… may perhaps come forth not from the Jews themselves, but some other kingdom friendly to them”.  Newton would have been delighted that the call came from England (through the Declaration which carries the name of the Foreign Secretary and former Prime Minister Arthur Balfour) shortly before the British won the Battle of Jerusalem in 1917, liberating Israel from centuries of Turkish/Ottoman rule and general neglect.  (The Holy Land in 1917 was largely fallow and sparsely populated, with encroaching deserts and malarial swamps:  although there were heavy British casualities in the Battle of Jerusalem, most of the fatal casualities in the British Army were due to the malarial mosquito.)

And Isaac Newton was far from the only Zionist in English politics of the 17th century.  Since Oliver Cromwell in 1656 had readmitted Jews to England for the first time since the royal edict of expulsion of Jews in 1298, there was a scholarly and gentlemanly interest (following the Restoration) in all things Judaic.  Touring exhibitions of elaborate models of the Jerusalem Temple became popular in England and on the Continent.

Alas, the Law of History is as inexorable and unstoppable as the Laws of Gravity and Light, but which many personages of history (including self-hating Jews and anti-Israel Jews) have attempted – or are still attempting – to subvert.  Caesar’s anti-Israel understanding of History was false, as is the anti-Israel History according to Marx, Nietzsche, Lenin, Hitler, Stalin, Noam Chomsky, Norman Finkelstein, the Communist Party of China, contemporary Islam, the World Council of Churches, the European Union, etc. etc.

Although Newton lived before the word “antisemitism” was coined by the “League of Antisemites” in 19th century Germany, Newton would have accepted the term antisemitism for man’s attempt to subvert God’s History, because the Sem (or Shem) in anti-Shem-itism means the Name, or HaShem, or God.

Indeed, Newton (who was not a Trinitarian, despite being an Anglican) believed the true religion for mankind is what he called the religion of “the family of Noah”, Noah’s successor being his son Shem (or Sem: שֵׁם), meaning the Name of God.

Antisemitism is not, as Jeremy Corbyn keeps on saying, a “form of racism”, although there have been of course racist forms of antisemitism since the ideology of racism was invented in the 18th century.

Antisemitism is man’s rejection of God, HaShem, the Name.  There is a reason that the prayer Jesus gave to the world opens: Hallowed be thy Name, and that Jesus said the greatest of all commandments is the Shema Yisra’el.


The Law of anti-History

Once a society becomes amenable to killing or expelling its Jews – as almost all Arab nations have by now killed or expelled all their Jews – the killing and expelling and other forms of persecution never stops with the Jews.  Never.

The society soon becomes disillusioned that, even with the scapegoats gone, things have got worse, not better, and so new explanations for the society’s failures are sought, and new scapegoats are sought.  In the Arab nations, the scapegoats today are invariably Christians.  As Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt MP warned us in his report last year: the persecution of millions of Christians of the Middle East and North Africa has reached such a “vast scale” that it is coming “close to meeting the international definition of genocide”.  Hunt also tells us that some of these Christians are amongst the poorest people in the world.

And now that the Christians have been killed or fled (down to 5% of the Middle East from 20% a century ago according to Jeremy Hunt) Muslims are now the scapegoats, particularly the Sufis and other intellectual Muslims.  Tyrannies never like thinkers, and never give freedom to thinkers, or their books.  The Sufis were once the pride of Islam, with Sunni and Shia both disputing, until quite recently, this or that Sufi saint or poet genius as their own.  But in the past decade, Muslim Sufis have suffered mass murder everywhere from Pakistan to Iran to Libya; their mosques and shrines have been destroyed, making their cultural eradication complete.

Did Boris Johnson, in his cosy phone call with Mahmoud Abbas, tell him that the killing that begins with Jews never ends with Jews, and so please refrain from instructing, corrupting and brainwashing your people with genocidal antisemitism?   I doubt it. Genocidal antisemitism is now even the standard syllabus, and schoolbooks, for primary school children, a scandal that has been frequently acknowledged in UK Parliament [ii], including by Boris Johnson before he was PM, and so he cannot feign ignorance.  Throughout ‘Palestinian’ lands and regimes, children are trained to be insurgents and suicide ‘martyrs’.



Did Johnson chastise Abbas for paying people, even paying the parents of Muslim Arab children, to murder Jews, even Jewish children?  I doubt it.  Did PM Boris Johnson chastise President Abbas, directly to the president’s earpiece, for his “Pay for Slay” programme, which pays out over $300 million dollars per annum (mainly foreign aid, including from Britain) according to the very website of the Finance Ministry of Palestinian Authority?  I doubt it.

Who is Abbas, the Genocidal Antisemite?

“The only way to begin to puncture this moral depravity is to tell some inconvenient truths about Israel. To say the only indigenous people of Israel are the Jews and that the Palestinian Arabs are the colonisers. To say there is nothing illegal about extending Israeli sovereignty over Judea and Samaria, which on the contrary would uphold international law. To say Mahmoud Abbas is a Holocaust denier and his Palestinian Authority pumps out Nazi-style antisemitism.

Melanie Phillips, article on July 19 2020, Why Starmer Cannot Succeed Over Antisemitism[iii] (my highlighting).

Mahmoud Abbas is president of Palestinian Authority (PA) and the chair of his political party:  Fatah (formerly the PLO).  Fatah is a revolutionary movement whose declared, principles, goals and methods are the violent overthrowing of Israel, the Jews being the “invaders”, and the “occupiers” of “Palestine”.

Constitutionally, and psychologically, PA/Fatah cannot accept a “two state solution” because its very reason for being, its very meaning of life, is Revolution leading to genocide of the Jews of Israel in the name of Arab honour and Muslim honour and Islamism.  This is why the Trump deal – the so-called “Peace to Prosperity” – was doomed from the outset.  The idea that money will stop Abbas from exhorting genocidal antisemitism is as absurd as that money would have changed the minds of Henry Ford or Hitler, or the German people by the time they had begun to venerate Hitler.

In the goals of the Fatah Charter we read that genocide of the Jews of Israel is the prerequisite to achieving the “complete liberation of Palestine” and the “eradication of Zionist economic, political, military and cultural existence” (Article 12 of the Fatah Charter).

PA/Fatah lacks the military capacity to break Israeli defences, and the Arab nations have been defeated every time they have tried to conquer Israel.  And so PA seeks the support of its people in violent “Revolution” (Fatah uses the word “Revolution” with a majuscule “R” in its own English translation of its charter).  With Hamas, PA has long believed that vandalism, bombing, rockets, and fear of murder will make life intolerable and weaken Jewish resolve, and it sometimes does, making Jews fearful of visiting even their most holy places, and causing  deep psychological harm, particularly to children (in Sderot for instance, the closest town to the Gaza Strip).  Murder of Jews is encouraged, and is rewarded according to the number of lives taken and the personal sacrifice the murderer makes.  If the murderer is caught and imprisoned in Israeli jails, the reward is high (the longer the sentence, the higher the monthly stipend).  If the murderer is a ‘holy martyr’ (or shahid), the reward is higher still, and goes to the family of the Muslim Arab who was killed in the act or who perpetrated a suicide bombing.

The support of Arab nations for revolutionary Palestinian movements such as Palestine Liberation Organisation, Fatah, Hamas (Islamic Resistance Movement), and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, has waxed and waned over the decades.  Some international Arab support seems to be waning in our times mainly because the Arab factions are too preoccupied with fighting each other, such as in Syria, Yemen and Libya.  And the regimes in nations such as Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan are preoccupied with preventing revolution, so much so that Egypt has reinforced its border wall to keep out of Egypt the Arabs of the Gaza Strip (who voted into power the Muslim Brotherhood’s Hamas branch).  Egypt was once the main power base for the Muslim Brotherhood, which has been struggling to regain power since 2014, when the Egyptian government declared the Muslim Brotherhood to be illegal and executed over 500 of its members.  However, the Islamic Republic of Iran is now very much in the picture, with military manpower and matériel in Syria and Lebanon (in south Lebanon, Hezbollah, the Lebanese and Iran have placed up to 150,000 rockets [iv]).

Despite the overwhelming UN anti-Israel bias and the relentless UN demonization of Israel that appeases genocidal antisemites, Fatah sets its own charter above all international law and UN resolutions if those laws and resolutions forbid ‘Palestine’ from eradicating Israel from the map.  We read in Article 6 of the Fatah Charter:  “UN projects, accords and resolutions, or those of any individual which undermine the Palestinian people’s right in their homeland are illegal and rejected”.

Israel Sovereignty in Judea and Samaria does not, in any case, contravene international law

Boris Johnson tells us (on the UK Government website[v]) of the “UK’s commitment to the two state solution and our opposition to annexation proposals in the West Bank”. And this is why he phoned to support Abbas.

Elsewhere, recently Johnson has said that Israel’s plans “breach international law”, which in fact they don’t, but I hope that in any case I have convinced the reader that “international law” concerning Israel has no moral basis due to the prevalence of international antisemitism.  And furthermore, PA/Fatah explicitly reject the UN and international law where it accepts the existence of Israel.

The plan to increase sovereignty in Judea and Samaria is not annexation according to the definition of annexation, agreed internationally in modern times.   Legally, the land is disputed sovereignty, as are many other pieces of land in the world, including British land.  Annexation is the violent usurpation of the sovereign power of that land.  For instance, had Argentina won the Falklands War, and claimed sovereignty, that would have been annexation.

Therefore, legally, there is no such thing as what Boris Johnson calls Jordan’s “West Bank”.  “West Bank” of the River Jordan is the annexation term of Jordan, whose invading army entered this part of the British Mandate during the massive Arab-nation invasions (seven armies) in 1948, which went on to annex Jerusalem (which was de-Judaized, including the destruction of all 35 synagogues in the Old City).  There was no international mandate permitting Jordan to occupy this land.  In 1988, Jordan handed it to Arabs of the region, who, since the initiative of Egyptian terrorist leader Yasser Arafat, called themselves “Palestinians” and demanded an autonomous sovereign state of Palestine.

I can imagine that the reason PM Boris Johnson phoned Mahmoud Abbas to tell Abbas of Britain’s opposition to Israel planned extension of sovereignty in Judea and Samaria is to keep sweet the Arab nations, particularly the richest ones: the Gulf States, none of which accepts that the Israeli nation exists, and are the main financial contributors to the PA’s Pay for Slay stipends.  (The Saudi Wahhabis seem to have made diplomatic relations with Israel, perhaps because Israel is the region’s best defender against Iran, but Saudi Arabia remains a brutal state, whose clerics and scholars preach genocidal antisemitism, and, now all the Jews have gone, are severely oppressing the remaining Christians, as I have written elsewhere on my blog.)

I realise that every British Prime Minister has many things he or she needs to consider and balance, but overt appeasement of an overt genocidal antisemite will not bode well for Boris Johnson, for Britain, or for the wider world.  And Johnson’s frequent disingenuous appeal to the UN’s ‘laws’ and ‘resolutions’ on Israel is moral and spiritual cowardice.

There is a higher Law, the Law, the Name, the Kingdom Come.  This, we might say, is “Newton’s” Law on which the Houses of Parliament are built and Christian civilisation is founded.  The harder the nations resist the Law of History, the harder will be the equal and opposite reaction.

Good tidings to Zion.  Pray for the peace of Jerusalem: they shall prosper that love thee.


Further Reading:

Here is the sister piece (3000 words) to this one, that I wrote last week, directed at the spineless bishops of the Church of England:

And here is a a much longer piece (15000 words), with a deeper analysis of PM Boris Johnson’s 2020 baptism of fire:


[i] Professor Stephen Snobelen, of the Newton Project at Oxford University:

Coincidentally, just today (25 July) Stephen emailed me to inform me about his recent talk to the National Library of Israel, which he delivered from his home in Nova Scotia due to the pandemic.  For an excellent introduction of Isaac Newton’s work in theology and the Jerusalem Temple, I recommend this recent talk (about 1 hour) by Stephen, which is now on YouTube:

Isaac Newton and the Jerusalem Temple: Science, Religion and Prophecy:

[ii] UK Parliament’s discussions on antisemitic and Jihadist material:

[iii] Melanie Phillips article (19 July 2020)  on Sir Keir Starmer and Labour Party antisemitism:

[iv] Dame Louise Ellman MP, letter to the Foreign Secretary:

[v] UK Government website, PM Boris Johnson publishing that he made a phone call of support to Mahmoud Abbas:


And, finally, just to prove that I’m not sexist, here is a recent video (2 minutes) from a charming lady called Rajaa Al-Halabi, head of the Hamas Women’s Movement:

Posted in Antisemitism, Christianity, Great Britain, Israel, Judaism, Political philosophy, Science, Theology, Uncategorized | 2 Comments

The mawkish mush of the Church of England is far from harmless, especially for Israel

The mawkish mush of the Church of England in our times is not as harmless as my fellow English Anglicans seem to think.  Tedious and platitudinous, yes; harmless, no.

The mawkish mush has driven thinking people – such as me – away from the Church of England, returning only for births, deaths, marriages, Christmas carols, Remembrance Day (I’m a former NCO of the Royal Air Force), and perhaps occasionally to be uplifted by our wonderful and world-excelling Anglican choral tradition.

The fact that the Church of England management has turned intelligent people off the Church would be bad enough, but the mawkish mush (I will give an example at the end of this article) is invariably the “soft cop” of Anglican antisemitism/anti-Israelism.

The “hard cop” of Anglican antisemitism/anti-Israelism comes from the Land of Israel, from the writings and sermons of Anglican Arab clergy, some of whom were born in British Mandatory Palestine and absolutely refused to accept that they should suddenly end millennia of antisemitic preaching simply because Christians of western Europe were responsible for the Holocaust.

[ In Germany’s National Socialism, well over 90% of the people in Germany and Austria were Christian, of which Hitler approved, particularly of the denominations that had agreed to to come under the ecumenical Protestant Reich Church.  He strongly discouraged Atheism, which he associated with International Socialism, or Marxism. We know this from Hitler’s own written explanations of why he chose to describe his movement as National “Socialism”, or Nazism for short. ]

This Anglican-Arab antisemitism is relayed back to the mother church in England, and to the bishops and politicians in Parliament.  It is used to recruit many British Parliamentarians to the legions of politicians in almost every nation that are united in their attempt to extinguish the Light unto the Nations.  All nations today apart from the USA are united in their attempt to hide from God by destroying the Apple of His Eye.


My recent op-ed[i] in The Algemeiner gives a succinct summary of Anglican antisemitism today, explaining how Arab Christian Jihadism (or “Palestinian Liberation Theology” as the Arab Anglicans describe it) hooks into the implicit antisemitism of the Church of England, whose smiling assassins are the archbishops and the bishops in the House of Lords.

Thankfully, there are some Christians in the Holy Land who relay back to us the truth about the unreconstructed antisemitism of the Anglican clergy in the Holy Land.  Rev Dr Petra Heldt is a Protestant preacher, Christian historian, and Dead-Sea-Scrolls expert at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.  She suffered life-threatening injuries to her face and leg by a Muslim suicide bombing in the Machane Yehuda Market in Jerusalem in 1997, perpetrated by two science students from Birzeit University in Ramallah, and which injured 178 people (including teenage tourists) and killed 16.

In a published interview[ii] with Dexter Van Zile (a Christian writer and Middle East media watcher), Dr Heldt speaks of the:

“… growing hostility toward Israel in the ecumenical community, much of it promoted by Rev. Dr. Naim Ateek, an Anglican priest in Jerusalem… For many years, Ateek had been at the forefront to delegitimize the Jewish state in liberal Protestant churches in Europe and North America”.

Rev Dr Heldt tells us that Ateek’s Blood-Libel preaching “invokes anti-Judaic passages from the Gospels to demonize Israel during the Second Intifada, declaring, for example, that the Israeli ‘crucifixion machine’ operated daily in the disputed territories”.   Rev Dr Ateek is a frequent guest speaker in churches and cathedrals of England, Europe, Canada and the USA.  He explains to his congregations and political audiences that the Christian population in parts of the Holy Land is rapidly dwindling.  What he doesn’t explain is that this rapid dwindling happens only in the Muslim-Arab controlled areas, and that Christians in all the Arab nations, nay almost all Muslim nations, are rapidly dwindling.

Last year the former Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt ordered the Church of England to report on what Hunt calls the “near genocide” of the “millions of Christians” in the region who have been “uprooted from their homes … killed, kidnapped, imprisoned and discriminated against.”  Hunt says this is “the greatest story never told of the 21st century”, and that, “What we have forgotten in this atmosphere of political correctness is actually the Christians that are being persecuted are some of the poorest people on the planet. In the Middle East the population of Christians [a century ago] used to be about 20%; now it’s 5%.”

Jeremy Hunt MP tells us that even Christian clergyman in the West turn a blind eye.  Hunt thinks that one reason is “political correctness”.


I’ve sojourned in the ancient (and Biblical) port city of Jaffa several times.  Jaffa, or Joppa, is where the Prophet Jonah famously boarded ship, only to soon find himself thrown overboard, and it is where Saint Peter, staying at the house of “Simon the Tanner”, had his vision explaining that non-kosher foods are acceptable for us Gentiles.  Under Jewish administration and governance Jaffa is surely the most diverse, tolerant and multicultural city in the Middle East and North Africa (a good half of whose nations I have visited over the decades).  Jaffa is perhaps the most overtly-religiously plural place on earth, with a cacophony of church bells from Western and Eastern denominations, the Muezzins’ frequent call to prayer, and men with flowing tzitzit muttering psalms in Hebrew.

In fact, Israel is the only place in the Middle East and North Africa (if not the whole continent of Africa) where all these groups live peacefully, able to display signs of their worship and religion, or, indeed, able to publicly challenge the existence of God and challenge all religion per se.  Throughout Arabia – and in fact in almost all Muslim-ruled lands – atheism is illegal and punishable by death, as is trying to preach Christianity.  This Islamic persecution of Christians goes almost wholly unreported in the West.  The only reason the Asia Bibi ‘blasphemy’ case in Pakistan became widely known is because during the General Election in 2018 it became a key election issue.  The Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP) party, and others, fearing the supreme court was going to acquit Asia Bibi, promised the people that the nation of Pakistan would keep its Muslim honour by decapitating or hanging this poor Christian woman who had been on death row since 2010[iii].

Christian-Muslim rule in the Middle East is no better than Muslim rule, and no less antisemitic, as we can see in the case of Lebanon.  Lebanon is now on the verge of revolution, if not another civil war.  And the nation is so addicted to the philosophies of genocidal antisemitism that the Hezbollah coalition government has placed up to 150,000 rockets, some long range (100 km) and with precision (GPS) warheads imported from the Islamic Republic of Iran, hidden amongst the civilian populations (or human shields) of south Lebanon.  The retired Colonel Richard Kemp, who has headed the British Intelligence Committee in Afghanistan, and who has chaired COBR meetings for the British Government, tells us that many Lebanese homes have a “missile room”, i.e. a room whose sole purpose is to store, and launch, a missile. And Dame Louise Ellman MP, who is equally well-informed, wrote on 22 October 2019 to Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab MP, regarding the posturing of Hezbollah in Lebanon, and its accumulation of high-tech rockets from Iran.[iv]


Historically, for several centuries, the Church in England was arguably the most antisemitic in all Christendom.  England invented the myth of the accursed and menacing “Wandering Jew”.  The Blood Libel – the libel that Jews steal and kill Christian children to consume their blood – was first preached by the Church in England in Norwich in 1144.  In 1218, the Archbishop of Canterbury Stephen Langton persuaded Henry III to proclaim the Edict of the Badge, a yellow badge of shame to identify the Jew. In 1289, King Edward I – convinced by the Blood Libel – issued the royal Edict of Expulsion of all Jews from England.

The Blood Libel is still preached verbatim throughout the Middle East.  But even Parliamentarians, including Christian Parliamentarians, in the UK perpetuate forms of Blood Libel.  In the House of Lords, Baroness Jenny Tonge (a former patron of the charity Christian Aid) called for an “independent inquiry” into her blood-libel claim – that she learned from Palestinian media – that the soldiers of the Israeli Defence Force who were deployed to Haiti in 2010 to help with the earthquake relief were there to “harvest the organs” of the victims.  The Haiti blood libel was published in the English-language online newspaper Palestine Telegraph, of which Tonge was a patron, but it seems that it was first reported on the Lebanese Hezbollah TV channel Al-Manar.

It didn’t surprise me, then, that of the 1000-plus European Parliamentarians sending a joint letter[v] earlier this month (July 2020) challenging the restitution of parts of Judea and Samaria to the sovereignty of Israel, the biggest contingent (23%) were of the UK.

245 UK Parliamentarians signed, including Church of England bishops, almost half of the Labour Party, and 6 out of the 7 Sinn Fein MPs (‘Parliamentarians’, who refuse even to take their seats in Parliament.)

Our whining Archbishop Justin Welby wrote to Prime Minister Boris Johnson of his disapproval of Israel’s plans to “annex” the “West Bank”, because annexation is an infringement of “international law” according to Welby.  But Judea and Samaria are not Jordan’s “West Bank”.  As I wrote in my last piece:

The seven Arab armies that invaded British Mandatory territory in 1948 failed in their aims to destroy the nascent State of Israel.  However, the Transjordan army annexed and occupied Judea and Samaria, which, being west of the River Jordan, they called “West Bank” (an annexation term I refuse to use), proceeding to Jerusalem, which the Jordanians de-Judaized by killing or expelling the Jews, destroying the 35 synagogues in Jerusalem Old City, and using ancient Jewish gravestones as latrines.  Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria were liberated during 1967 defensive war, when the forces of Jordan, Syria, Egypt and Iraq, expecting to overwhelm Israel with vast numerical superiority, were repelled back through the Sinai in the west and back across the River Jordan in the east.  Therefore, since 1947, the territory that is now east of Israel’s Green Line, has been “disputed territory”, because it was never, in international law, granted to Jordan, who invaded, annexed and occupied it[vi].

However you want to dispute Israel’s plans to increase sovereignty in Judea and Samaria, you cannot condemn it in international law as Israeli annexation and occupation, because it is already illegally annexed by the Arabs, who some time after 1967, through the initiative of the Egyptian terrorist Yasser Arafat, started to call themselves “Palestinians”.

Archbishop Welby and the craven bishops he leads always disingenuously appeal to “international law”, by which they mean resolutions agreed by the United Nations.

But since shortly after World War II, whenever the nations have come together to unite in forums, they have united only on their antisemitism.  Every year at the UNGA and the UNHRC, Israel, the sole Jewish nation, receives more country-specific condemnations than all the other nations of the world put together.  All the 57 Muslim nations consistently condemn Israel, as do the 100-plus Christian nations (including Britain), as do the Socialist/Communist nations.

Apart from the USA (and a handful of small nations) all the nations of UN unite in agreement on the international scapegoat.  And so the United Nations are rendered incapable of addressing the world’s great problems, crimes and sins.  The leaders and diplomats of nations such as Pakistan, China, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Russia, Sweden, Uganda, United Kingdom, France, Indonesia, Venuzuala, South Africa, etc. etc. seem to enjoy coming together in international forums where, annually, they can avoid and defer scrutiny by, as a matter of protocol and routine, scapegoating Israel, letting themselves off the hook for another year, avoiding the risk of being economically and culturally boycotted, and of exposing what is happening in their nations.  The founding purpose of the UN Human Rights Council, which was largely the initiative of President Idi Amin –(when he was Chair of the Organisation of African Unity in 1975) and the other ideologically-antisemitic Muslim leaders was not to defend human rights but to defend the leaders of the nations that abuse human rights[vii].

In my view, of all the evil Muslim geniuses of the 20th century, Idi Amin, the genocidally-racist and ideologically-antisemitic “Butcher of Uganda” was the greatest.  Somehow, he managed to become the darling of the United Nations (see footnotes).  Suffice it to say that, since the formation of the UN Human Rights Council, Uganda (with Pakistan, and Cuba, and Venuzuala, and Saudi Arabia, and Turkey, and Zimbabwe…) has received ZERO human rights condemnations, whereas Israel has received 62, which is more human rights condemnations than ALL the other nations of the world combined.  (Statistics from UN Watch, from the formation of UNHRC up to 2015.)

Here is a recent tweet from Hillel Neuer, Executive Director of UN Watch (an accredited NGO which has a seat at the UN):

Israel – 68 UN human rights condemnations
Iraq – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Cuba – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Qatar – UN human rights condemnations
China – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Russia – UN human rights condemnations
Turkey – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Somalia – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Pakistan – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Venezuela – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Zimbabwe – 0 UN human rights condemnations … etc. etc.

Many, including the clergy of the Church of England, have been deceived by Idi Amin, and the antisemitic “international law” he helped put in place.  Justin Welby appeals to “international law” against Israel at least as often as Jeremy Corbyn.

In 1975, Idi Amin convinced the UNGA (to a standing ovation) that the greatest threat to the world is “the Zionist-American conspiracy”.

So long as the only thing the nations can unite on is the vilification and demonisation of Israel, then no nation, anywhere, can be at peace, and the world cannot even begin to solve the real problems.  You might hope that Archbishop of Canterbury would appeal to the Law (with a majuscule L) rather than the laws that come out of the UNGA’s Gaderene swine.  But no, Justin Welby leads the Church into Legion with everyone from Uganda to Sinn Fein, to Hezbollah/Lebanon, to Pakistan, to China…

God of Israel wills the world to be like Israel, not to be like France or Pakistan or Uganda or any other nation that has explictly detached itself from God of Israel.  Only Israel is “the Apple of His eye”.

The whole of the Bible is Israel-focussed, from the first book to the last, i.e. the last book of the Jewish Bible (II Chronicles).  Although the Church re-ordered the “Old Testament”, the last book of the Christian Bible (Revelation) is also Israel focussed.

The Peace of the nations, the blessing of the nations, the “swords into plowhares”, comes from “Mount Zion”, and nowhere else.  Jerusalem is “the City of the great king”, said Rabbi Jesus, quoting Jewish Scripture in his vows following his Sermon on the Mount.  And “salvation is of the Jews”, Jesus said.  There was no “Christian” supersessionism or replacement theology in the teachings of Jesus or the Twelve.  And even Saint Paul begrudgingly acknowledged that God’s eternal covenants with the Jews cannot be broken.

Alas, Isaiah, Jesus’ favourite prophet – the prophet, with Micah, who promised swords into plowshares – did promise that nations would first rage furiously together against Israel, and that the leaders of the world would take counsel together against the Lord and His Anointed.


Jews form a very small minority of the world’s population: 0.2%, half of whom live in Israel, the majority of whom are refugees or descendants of refugees from around the world.  Over 50% of the population of Israel are refugees or descendants of refugees from the Arab nations.  The writer Lyn Julius in her powerful book Uprooted, tells us of the sudden uprooting of Jewish communities that had been continuous for up to 3000 years in Arabia, and nations of the Middle East and North Africa long before they were Arabised, let alone Islamised.  Lyn was invited to Parliament a year ago by Theresa Villiers MP, who managed to get Parliament to discuss, for the first time ever, the 850,000 Jewish refugees who fled or were expelled from the Arab nations in the 20th century.

Historically, the most serious antisemitism for much of the past 2000 years has been Christian antisemitism.  This ideological antisemitism was exported into North Africa and the Middle East by the French colonies in the Third Republic (not least during the time of the Dreyfus Affair).  Since World War II, genocidal antisemitism was exported (intentionally and actually by the surviving Nazi Germans) to Syria and Egypt, from where it has been transmitted throughout the Muslim world by the Muslim Brotherhood, who translated European antisemitic texts into Arabic, and dreamed up some of their own, such as Sayid Qutb’s Our Struggle against the Jews, which Islamises Mein Kampf.

The Muslim nations (in cahoots with Christian Arabs) are now the antisemitic hard cop, no better expressed than by the recently retired elder statesman of Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), the Prime Minister of Malaysia, Mahathir bin Mohamad, who said, on his visit to Cambridge University last year, he is happy to be known as an antisemite.  He said to the OIC, when it was hosted in Kuala Lumpa in 2003:

“Jews still rule the world by proxy… but 1.3 billion Muslims cannot be defeated by a few million Jews. There must be a way. And we can only find a way if we stop to think, to assess our weaknesses and our strength, to plan, to strategise and then to counterattack…The Europeans killed six million Jews out of 12 million”.

The Prime Minister of Malaysia, Mahathir bin Mohamad, addressing the OIC in 2003. 

The Church of England today, encouraged by the Anglican Arabs, is the perfect antisemitic soft cop: perfect because mawkishness is not generally associated with antisemitism or any other kind of deep prejudice.  Browse through the leaflets in any English church today (Anglican, Methodist or Quaker or whatnot) and you will find resources encouraging you to help bring about “Palestinian Liberation”, and to support the Arab Jihadists and irredentists who, the church insists, are suffering from Jewish “occupation”.  You are much less likely to find (I never have) information on the plight of Christians (and Druzes, Yazidis, Sufis, Baha’is, atheists, homosexuals, etc.) throughout the Middle East.

Today there are hundreds of independence movements in the world, with activist separatist, autonomist, secessionist, and irredentist groups (including in the United Kingdom).  One only has to work through the alphabet of nations and peoples, from Afghanistan and the Pashtun, to Zimbabwe and the Matabele to see separatism and irredentism, all with a history of violence.  But supporting Palestinian-terrorist irredentism – anti-Zionism in other words – is popular because it is the acceptable face of antisemitism in our times, just as every other age has had its acceptable face of antisemitism, and reasons for oppression, scapegoating, ghettoisation, forced-conversion, and killing, of Jews.  Whereas every Christian nation has a millennia-long history of condemning the Jews in their midst, today these very same nations condemn the sole Jewish nation in the midst of all nations.

The Church of England doesn’t even realise that it is antisemitic/anti-Israelist.  Here is an example from last year, from a Church of England vicar I have known for some years (he’s an Anglican Franciscan who a few years ago invited me to join him on an overland – by train – pilgrimage to Assisi):


Whereas the madrasas in Pakistan teach Jihadist anti-Israelism, the seminaries of the Church of England teach mawkish mush that encourages its audience to wash its hands of Israel, and allow the Jihadists to finish the job.  The Church of England has come to think it can worship God of Israel without associating Him with the Holy Land, the Land of His all-centring presence.

Last week, 10th July 2020, the Church of England’s Ann Memmott, broadcast on BBC Radio 4  “the Prayer for the day”.  She opened:

“One of my favourite Bible passages is in Deuteronomy 32, which talks of God protecting us [sic] as the apple of his eye…. The phrase has come to mean [sic] a loving gaze, but the ‘apple’ originally meant the pupil of the eye, the bit through which we see and which is vital for vision.”

Memmott then goes on to talk about autism, and eye contact.  For all the merits of improving our understanding of autism, the passage she has appropriated from the Lawmaker to make her point does not mean in the slightest what she says it means.  What she is broadcasting on British-state radio is not Biblical exegesis, it is theological illiteracy.

There are numerous “apple of His eye” passages in the Tanakh, and they all refer, explicitly, to God’s protection of Israel, for His Chosen People, through whom God promised to pilot the destiny of the nations to their blessed fulfilment.  Israel is the light unto the nations, without whom the world is blind.  “Israel is my son, even my firstborn”, God instructed Moses to tell the Pharaoh.

And so Israel is protected by God (including from the idiots in the Church of England) like the pupil of the eye, just as the human eye has all kinds of anatomical protections, from extremely strong eye sockets to protective eyelashes.  There are many Biblical passages of God’s love for all mankind, and for God’s omnipresent ‘gaze’.  For instance, the King of Israel in his Psalms says there is nowhere in the world, nowhere in land, sea or sky, where God is not.  But that doesn’t give any Christian the right to say that God has broken His eternal covenants with the Jews, and the Land.

God will not be mocked by the United Nations General Legion of Antisemites (the UNGA), or the Church of England.

For a much longer and deeper read on these and similar themes, see the piece (15,000 words) I wrote last week, titled, “The Biblical Proportions of Boris Johnson’s Baptism of Fire”:



[i] Antisemitism in the Church of England, Op-Ed in The Algemeiner, Mark Pickles, November 2019:

[ii] ”.  “Out of the Snare”, article by Dexter Van Zile, based on his interview with Rev Dr Petra Heldt

[iii] Pakistanis demonstrating following the acquittal of Asia Bibi (AFP News Agency):

[iv] Dame Louise Ellman’s letter to Dominic Raab MP on the Iran-sponsored threat from Lebanon:

[v] Jonathan Hoffman – former Vice Chair of the Zionist Federation – short explanation of the letter from European Parliamentarians, including disproportionate number of UK Parliamentarians:

[vi] Annexation versus Sovereignty – words matter, Op-Ed in The Algemeiner, Arsen Ostrovsky and Colonel Richard Kemp, June 2020:

[vii] It is time to destroy the United Nations General Assembly:


Posted in Antisemitism, Christianity, Great Britain, Israel, Judaism, Political philosophy, Theology, Uncategorized | 3 Comments

The Biblical Proportions of Boris Johnson’s 2020 Baptism of Fire

Why Britain must now look to Israel for the protection
of Judeo-Christian civilisation, and the healing of the nations

[ This essay is quite long, at 15,000 words.  I have made it available as a 30-page document PDF, which you can download here: Boris Johnson Baptism of Fire ]

This essay calls for better British support of Israel, the Holy Land.  The world depends on the Jewish state of Israel for the protection of Judeo-Christian civilisation, and, ultimately, the healing of the nations. 

I make the case for Israel temporally and spiritually.  Whether or not Britain supports Israel, Israel will come out on top: “the head nation not a tail nation”, the lawmaker said. 

The first section of the essay – “About me” – conveys something of my background, and sets the scene for the whole discursive piece.  I am a not a politician or a priest.  I earn a living as a scientific technical writer.  Nevertheless, I explain in the About me section why I am better placed to write about Israel, and philosophical theology, than the personages in Westminster, from both sides of the House, and in both Chambers – including and especially the bishops of the Church of England (my own faith community).

Westminster is entrenched in what Dr David Deutsch rightly describes as “institutionalised nonsense”.

***     ….

1. About me, and how I have come to be a defender of Israel

“But of the things in the heavens man knows nothing except a few mathematical calculations, and you see how far these go.  I say in the words of the poet, ‘The heavens are the Lord’s, but the earth He hath given to the sons of man’ (Psalm 115:6)”.

The Guide for the Perplexed, circa 1190, Moses Maimonides
(Friedländer translation, 1881)

I am a Yorkshireman.  I was born on 6th January 1961 to an English father and an Asian mother whom my father met in his National Service with the RAF in Singapore.  My father saved up his income in the Far East in order that – shortly after he arrived back in England on a troop ship – my mother could make the 8000-mile flight to London.  She arrived in the bleak midwinter in a flimsy dress:  naturally, there is no winter on the equatorial island of Singapore.  

I was raised in the pit village of Lofthouse Gate, above the rich coal seam between Leeds and Wakefield extending out under the North Sea.  We were a good, tough, volunteering (“bob-a-job”) Christian community that played cricket and rugby, and music.  Yorkshire has world-beating brass bands and choral societies, but I took up classical training on the piano, which I still love.  

Our community pulled together in hard times, such as when the “Yorkshire Ripper” was on the prowl, and during a fatal colliery disaster that made the national headlines for six days in 1973.

My childhood heroes were the RAF aces of World War II, such as Bader and Tuck, and the Dambuster crews.  I was an avid reader of their derring-do.  I impetuously left full-time education at age 16 to join the British Forces, eager to see the world.

I became an avowed atheist at age 10, and remained so until a series of religious experiences in my mid 30s.  Now in my 60th year, I am a technical writer for science and engineering corporations.  In my long writing career to date, I have worked in the UK and on the Continent in English and French languages.  I write material that helps keep us safe: everything from pilots’ manuals to scientists’ guides to mass spectrometry.

As an ex-RAF avionics engineer, I have written in various sectors including aerospace, electronics, and the life sciences.  Apart from my technical writing since leaving the RAF, I worked for a decade as an IBM software developer. I’m attracted to codes, numbers and languages, including Biblical Hebrew, with its deep logic, wisdom, poetry, music, song, and harmony, not least in the divinely-revealed geometry of the Temple. The Jerusalem Temple is the Cosmos in micro-cosmos through which Sir Isaac Newton MP (and FRS), a scholar of Biblical Hebrew (and of Maimonides), discovered the universal inverse-square geometry of gravity – which, we now know, is also the geometry of electromagnetism, light, and sound.

A deep and ever-curious study of electromagnetism, I believe, enables a good understanding of everything – not least what is militarily defensible in the Holy Land.  Apart from gravity[i] (on which I am now writing a book), there is nothing in the universe – the “music of the spheres” – that is not electromagnetism.  By everything I do not mean God, because God, the uncreated Creator of every thing, is not a thing.

Our engineering of electromagnetism is a kind of magic that has made the modern world possible.  A radar engineer (Francis Crick) even discovered the DNA molecule, and, quite by accident, radio engineers realised that the annoyingly omnidirectional and omnipresent spurious “white noise” they were trying to suppress is in fact the evidence for “Big Bang”:  the single point, the single voice, of Creation.  Albert Einstein’s interest in a special narrow band of electromagnetic frequencies – visible light – and his explanation of the photo-electric effect resulted in the modern age, and ultimately the word processor into which I am now typing, and the World Wide Web on which you are now reading.

Writing about electromagnetism, and its engineering applications, is my day job.  In my spare time I write philosophical theology because in the Church of England – my own faith community – no-one else can.  I also spend much of my spare time campaigning against antisemitism, and I challenge the antisemitism in the Church of England, because no-one else will.  The Church of England is top heavy with craven and grey men.  We, the laity, have suffered under Pompous Primates who write and speak in politically-correct platitudes, and propose petitionary prayers that are never answered.  The source of these petitions is often the Jihadist-supporting Arab Anglican bishops in Israel, whose deep and unreconstructed antisemitism (Arab Christians never accepted guilt for the Holocaust) seems to blind their seeing the malignant and anti-Christian nature of Islam in the Middle East and North Africa today, including Muslim-Arab irredentism in the Holy Land.

Our Bishops’ petitionary and supersessionist prayers for Israel will never be answered, but that doesn’t stop our Lords Spiritual in the Houses of Parliament from offering Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s Government spurious and dangerously ill-informed advice on Israel.  The Church of England is riddled with antisemitism as I have exposed in a long report[ii] (55,000 words), some of which is based on material I gathered when I was one of a handful of moderators for an online “Anglican Communion” forum with thousands of members, mostly clergy, theologians, and academics of the global Anglican Communion.

PM Boris Johnson and I actually have quite a lot in common.  We were both raised on rugby union and cricket at grammar school (although mine was a state grammar school). Like Boris, I became fluent in French by working as a writer in south Belgium.

Boris says that, in his spare time, he likes to paint buses on used wooden wine crates with “passengers enjoying themselves”. Here is an image of a metre-wide painting I did of the Thames Pageant: the “thousand ships” for the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee on 3 June 2012, on one of which Boris was bobbing up and down as a passenger enjoying himself.  I composed the painting from an imaginary point and have left out the long line of vessels and pontoons permanently anchored on the centreline of the Thames between Waterloo Bridge and Blackfriars Bridge.  (I was later approached by the event organiser for the lead vessel, the royal barge Gloriana, who described the painting as a “splendid representation of the culmination of 3 years work for me and the Thames Alive team”, but I had already sold it to a bank in the City.)

Stat crux dum volvitur orbis

“Saint Paul’s must be saved at all costs”, 
Prime Minister Winston Churchill, speaking during
the “Second Great Fire of London” in December 1940

In our extraordinary times, we need exceedingly good theology to keep us safe:  safe from bad religion and safe from secular philosophies that convince their apologists they can be as God.


2. Thesis and Introduction

“Justice, justice shalt thou follow, that thou mayest live, and inherit the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.”  Deuteronomy 16:20

There are two ways for we civilised Brits to look at the world:

The FIRST WAY is the way of France, our closest neighbours.  We might call it the French Way, or the Horizontal Way.  For followers of this way, the Hebrew Bible and the Christian Bible are just books like any other:  take them or leave them.  And you must leave them out of politics.

You must, according to the laws of the Frenchman, avoid theology altogether in the politics and public institutions of France, and therefore of the EU.

The French Way is the way of man, and his own devices and desires.  Jihadists and Caliphaters observing the French Way of Europe must surely think their prayers have been answered because the French Way is defenceless against the growing Islamic threat to Christian civilisation.  The Islamists play the French Way like a fiddle, and undermine its democracy from the inside out, such as inventing the term “Islamophobia” (as I explained in two short essays[iii] earlier this year), a term whose currency makes criticism of Islam, even its most malignant contemporary forms, taboo, if not a sackable offence, particularly for academics.

The French Way censors and sanctions Western Christians, but invites Islamists to write whatever they like, in any language.

Even the Ayatollah has European Twitter accounts through which he can broadcast to the West with impunity.  A few days ago (27 June), the Ayatollah tweeted in English about “the evil US and the evil UK”, and, on his French-language Twitter account: « États-Unis et du Royaume-Uni maléfiques ».  In explaining how the US and the UK is evil, he invokes the human rights of the US and the UK, i.e. human rights that no Muslim nation recognises, especially not the Islamic Republic of Iran.  30% of murders in Iran (according to UN Watch statistics) are state-sanctioned ‘honour’ killings of girls by the men of their family.  In Iran, homosexuals are executed in public, and women who remove head-covering in public are arrested by the religious police, and jailed.  And in Saudi Arabia, the largest and most holy Muslim nation, and one of the most ‘advanced’, children are subject to capital punishment, as are women accused of witchcraft.  Christians are persecuted throughout Saudi Arabia (as in all Arab nations today in fact):  most are migrant workers with no meaningful human rights (all Saudi citizens are Muslim by law, imposed by religious police). Jews, who lived in Arabia continuously for over a thousand years before the birth of Islam, are today prohibited from entering Arabia.  Saudi Arabia is also one of the Gulf States in which many Western universities are in the pay.  This is why the four-coloured Pan-Arab or ‘Palestinian’ flag has become ubiquitous in many of our universities, the same universities that ban the Israeli Ambassador to the UK from setting foot on campus.

My friend the historian Dr Richard Landes describes this method of attacking Western democracy – by persuading its own members to attack it from within – as “cognitive warfare”.  And he describes its strategists as “demopaths”.  I cannot improve on Richard’s own definition:

“Demopaths are people who use democratic language and invoke human rights only when it serves their interests, and not when it calls for self-criticism or self-restraint. Demopaths demand stringent levels of human “rights” but do not apply these basic standards for the “other” to their own behaviour”.

Somehow, our own thought police on the French Way (including in California’s Silicon Valley) cannot allow criticism of other cultures.  To do that would be to betray the philosophies of “inclusion and diversity”.  Hence the French Way allows only criticism of the Christian civilisation from which it has guillotined itself.  However, you can, as always, demonise Jews with impunity, not least because, as in the minds of Marx and Nietzsche, Jews are to blame for laying the foundations of Christianity and producing its “Old Testament”.

In the meantime, the whining bishops of the Church of England, having revived the tradition of self-flagellation into a kind of intellectual onanism, are now equally incapable of robustly challenging the malignant nature of contemporary Islam.

There are Muslim thinkers who agree with me on all these issues, and are appalled at the pusillanimity of Western academia and the Church that will not put up an intellectual fight against Islamism:  the Islamism which harms, above all, the world’s Muslims, and corrupts the children, conditioning them to hate.  And so Islamism is allowed to spread unhindered, despite its overt contempt for human rights, especially the human rights of the world’s Muslims, and especially the human rights of girls and women.

Haris Rafiq (who advises the Government on “Prevent”), and Ayaan Hirsi Ali – both of whom I heard talking last year at a conference at Oxford University – are two courageous Muslim thinkers who are highly critical of Western academia for allowing itself to be duped by, if not in the pay of, the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafism.

The French Way is Secular Humanism, or Laïcité, and this has formally been the way of the European Union since the Treaty of Lisbon in 2007 at the express wishes of France, the largest nation in Europe and its philosophically dominant voice. (The European Community was itself formed in France.)

Of course, not all French people are atheists, despite the Humanism of French constitution and Government, just as not all Brits are Christians, despite England’s being a Christian state with an established Church.

The SECOND WAY is the way of Israel, that we might call the Holy Way, or the Vertical Way.

This is the way of God and, dare I say it, the will of God:

Thy Kingdom Come, thy will be done, on Earth as it is in Heaven,

or, better:

Que ton règne vienne, Que ta volonté soit faite sur la terre comme au ciel.

I say the French “Lord’s Prayer” is better because ciel – like shamayim in Hebrew – means both sky and heaven, as it did in the original prayer that Jesus of Nazareth, Rabbi and scholar of Hebrew, gave to the world.

Yes, the Almighty, the Creator, transcends the whole of Creation, the heavens and the Earth, but God, the Being of all being, is right in front of our noses, nay in our nostrils, and in whom “we live and move and have our being”, according to Paul the Apostle.  God is with us, or “Immanuel” in the transliterated Hebrew of Isaiah.  This is very different to Platonic and Neo-Platonic philosophies (which seem to me to have had too much influence on the Western Church) in which god was separated from Creation, which was left to a corrupt lesser god, or “Demiurge”.

For the Israelites, and for Jesus and his followers, the sky – the clouds, and the very atmosphere we breathe – is heaven, or at least the first heaven.  Heaven touches the chaos of the seas, as implied in the very word sham-mayim.  We are called to repair Earth, not to pollute and neglect Earth.

We live in the first period of history to witness an exponential rise in human population.  There are four times as many people in the world today as a century ago.  Population has more than doubled since I was born in 1961. Our technological power to destroy the natural systems of Earth was not something that previous generations needed to consider.  As much of the world comes to realise that we urgently need to tackle pollution of sea, land and air (including the upper atmosphere), I think we need to restore the sense of the immanence of heaven, and the immanence of God, that has always been there for the Jews, and for Eastern Christianity.  God is transcendent, but God is also in all things.  “Where can I go where you are not?” asks the King of Israel (Psalm 139), concluding there is nowhere we can go where God is not.

If some thing exists, God who created everything is there.  God is everywhere, in the holy and in the unholy.  However, God’s Holy of Holy presence (or Shekinah) is to be centred and ‘housed’ in Jerusalem, the City of David, where David’s son, King Solomon, was to build the Temple.  This is the House of Prayer for all nations.  This was also the place – behind the veil of the Temple’s Holy of Holies – that the Name, the most holy word of the holy language was housed.

Over the centuries, the West became preoccupied with only God’s transcendence, and lost the understanding of God’s immanence due, it seems, to Catholic and Reformed theologies that dismissed visible Creation as “fallen” or even, according to the Scots and other Calvinists, “totally depraved”.  Worse, the transcendence of God was reduced to absurd images of an old man with a long white beard, such as Michelangelo’s Creation of Adam in the Sistine Chapel, ignoring the divine imperative to create no such images.  Our future king, HRH The Prince of Wales, makes just these points about the loss of God’s immanence in his excellent book Harmony: A New Way of Looking at Our World (2010), although the Prince diligently avoids theology (perhaps wisely).

To forget God’s immanence in the world and to forget God’s all-centring presence in the House – and to dismiss everything as relative and nothing as holy – is the French Way.

In the French Way, nothing is sacred.  The very word “holy” is merely a word contingent on other words.  There is no Holy Language.  There is no Holy Name to hallow, in fact the very notion of holiness is to be attacked as a “social construct” because its sole purpose is to hold up the old oppressive structures and systems that, now we are fully ‘enlightened’, must be “deconstructed” in the name of progress (as in the philosophies of French neo-Marxism that have now infected the humanities in all Western academia).

The result of course is that everything falls apart.  Language cannot convey truth.  “What is truth”?  The centre cannot hold.  There is no centre.  Every ‘ology is denied its Logos.  Deafening chaos ensues, leaving us with Gilet Jaunes and Black Lives Matter and neo-Fascism other forms of anarchy, often finding intellectual justification by philosophers who call themselves anarchists or neo-anarchists or post-modernists.

To forget the House of the Name – and to cease to connect to it – is to labour in vain.  It is to lose the key, the Key of David.  It is not – or should be not – the English way.  Indeed, the words of King David (in Latin) are inscribed into the Central Lobby of the Palace of Westminster, in a large star-shaped mosaic that our leaders walk across on their way to work in either of the two Houses of Parliament:

“Unless the Lord builds the House its builders labour in vain.” (Psalm 127)

As well as losing the understanding of God’s immanence in land, air and sea, the Church has generally neglected to accept that the restitution of the world – according to the Prophets (including Jesus) – begins with the restitution of Israel by the Jews.  This is the prerequisite to peace and harmony in the world.  God pilots the history of the world through the Jews, or as Jesus put it (according to John), “salvation is of the Jews”.  You cannot build Jerusalem in Rome, or Moscow, or Berlin, or Athens, or London, or Canterbury.  And as Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher – the most overtly Christian PM since Gladstone – famously said: “You cannot build Jerusalem in Brussels”.

There is a recollection, perhaps apocryphal, of PM Thatcher taking the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Lords Spiritual to dinner.  Thatcher ordered a rare-cooked pavé de bœuf.  The waiter asked, “what about the vegetables?” to which she responded they would have steak too.

I would like to be able to say that the Holy Way, the Vertical Way, is the way of the Church of England.  But it isn’t.  The Church today is still as caught up in anti-Israelism as severely as the antisemitism that has cursed almost the whole history of the Church.

Historically, the Church, the Western Church in particular as it grew in size and power, condemned Jews who would not convert as not only irredeemably part of the “fallen” world, but metaphysically responsible for keeping it there.  Indeed, there are still many Christians, including in the Church of England, who still think like this, and therefore direct their animus, sometimes obsessively, at Israel, often in cahoots with Arab Anglican clergy in the Holy Land.

Christian communities in the Holy Land are invariably as antisemitic as they have always been: they were contemptuous of the Second Vatican Council, through which Western churches came to take responsibility for the role Christianity had played in the millennia-long history that made the Holocaust possible.   Indeed, as I have written on my blog, Christian Arabs now even side with Islamic Arab genocidal irredentists and Jihadists, and Iran’s Quds Force, all of whose stated political and theological aims are to wipe Israel off the map, and to take Jerusalem for Islam.  The idea of a Jewish-led state on the Holy Land is intolerable for Arab clergy of the Anglican Communion, who will accept anything but a Jewish-administered Jerusalem.  They would prefer Jerusalem to be renamed “Al-Quds”, and de-Judaized, as the Jordanian Arabs de-Judaized Jerusalem in 1948, destroying all but one of the Old City’s 35 synagogues.  The Church never complained about that.

In the meantime, today, the Islamic Arab regimes throughout the Middle East and North Africa are de-Christianizing lands that have the oldest continuous Christian communities in the world.  Israel is now the only nation in the Middle East and North Africa where it is safe to be a practicing Jew, Christian, Sufi Muslim, Bahá’í, or Druze.  It also the only place in the Middle East where it is safe to be openly atheist, and to criticise Islam or criticise any religion.  And as we know from the history of the Church, religion goes very wrong, and perverted, when it doesn’t allow itself to be criticised from within and without.

The Church of England knows all this, because last year the Bishop of Truro was ordered by the former Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt to report on what Hunt calls the “near genocide” of the “millions of Christians” in the region who have been “uprooted from their homes … killed, kidnapped, imprisoned and discriminated against.”  Hunt says this is “the greatest story never told of the 21st century”, and that, “What we have forgotten in this atmosphere of political correctness is actually the Christians that are being persecuted are some of the poorest people on the planet. In the Middle East the population of Christians used to be about 20%; now it’s 5%.”

Historically, Muslim nations have been safer for Jews than Christian nations, even the Islamic regimes that occupied much of Europe, as the British historian and Jew Sir Martin Gilbert noted:

“Under Muslim rule [in Medieval Europe] the Jews found greater toleration than under Christianity. Thus the Jews of Toledo opened the gates of the city to welcome their Muslim liberators. There were nothing like the frequent massacres and expulsion that were the curse of Jews living in Christendom.”     Atlas of Jewish History, Sir Martin Gilbert

What today we call “antisemitism” is certainly not new to Islam.  Even the Quran records the Muslims’ murdering – on the instructions of Muhammad – of about 700 Jewish men in Medina (as part of the “punishment” of the Banu Qurayza community).  But the politics and theology of genocidal antisemitism in contemporary Islam is in fact an export of the genocidal antisemitism from the Christian West.  It was exported from the Nazis (over 90% of whom in Germany were Christian, Roman Catholic and Protestant Reich Church), and broadcast in Arabic from Berlin on powerful shortwave radio throughout the Arab world by the so-called Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Muhammed Amin al-Husseini.  But before that the Arab colonies of the French Third Republic, and even the British Empire, exported Christian forms of antisemitism.  And if the history of Christendom teaches us anything it is that antisemitism is a kind of madness that curses everything.  Killing often begins with the Jews, but it never ends with the Jews, at which point war becomes necessary and the murderous antisemites themselves need to killed or forced to surrender and de-Nazify.


Alas, the world’s focus on Israel is a good thing.  It makes the Vertical Way possible.  The challenge is to turn the world upside down: i.e. to turn the world’s negative obsession with Israel into universal support for Israel.  If you want to be Biblical about it:  those who bless Israel will be blessed, those who curse Israel will be cursed, as in the great Abrahamic covenant.  And most of us, I think, would like all nations to be blessed.

We are now half-way through Anno Domini 2020, an extraordinary year, to date, in an extraordinary era in which the world is trying to come up with extraordinary solutions to all our extraordinary problems.  In this essay, which is as earthy as it is heaven-focussed, I make the case for the Holy Way, the Vertical Way, rather than, for all its good intentions, the French Way, the Horizontal Way, the broad way, in which, like sheep astray, each turns to his own godless way: or the flock is led astray by the putative shepherds of the Church of England and the World Council of Churches:  the blind leading the blind:  the wolves in sheep’s clothing.

The Horizontal Way is always more popular, and might well come up with the convincing slogans and mottos.  But behind a godless Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité always lurks the spirit of Terreur, and no Holy Spirit to protect the people from it.  Napoléon Bonaparte at least realised this, which is why he remarried France to the Church:

Arrival of Napoléon Bonaparte at Notre-Dame Paris for his coronation as Emperor.
Percier and Fontaine

However, France was to definitively cut itself loose from the Church once again at the turn of the 20th century, largely because the Church’s antisemitism brought disgrace on the whole of France, which had allowed the Church to lead the nation into various antisemitic conspiracies, the worst being the Dreyfus Affair.  Most of the antisemitic articles published in France at the time were published by churchmen.

French Secular Humanism means well, in the mind of its apologists today.  But the French have a popular and apposite expression:  L’enfer est pavé de bonnes intentions.

President Macron, on his election victory speech in 2017, after offering his “respect” to those who voted for his second-round opponent Marine Le Pen, and promising to heal the divisions in France, said that France would come together as one to teach the world a new humanism, and new hope.  This, he said, is what the people of Europe, and the whole world, expect of France.

Macron, whose Hebrew name “Emmanuel” means “God with us”, chose to deliver his presidential victory speech by the Pyramid of Louvre, congratulating himself for his “audacity” in doing so.  The French Moses of Secular Humanism stood before the Pyramid because, he said, as Europe and the world looks to France, “the audacity of this Pyramid” symbolises the Humanist audacity of France.

« Et ce lieu dans lequel nous nous retrouvons dit cela, il est parcouru par notre Histoire, de l’Ancien Régime à la Libération de Paris, de la Révolution française à l’audace de cette pyramide. C’est le lieu de tous les Français, de toutes les Françaises. Ce lieu, c’est celui de la France, que le monde regarde, car ce soir, c’est l’Europe, c’est le monde qui nous regarde ! »

Emmanuel Macron’s inaugural speech by the Pyramid, 7th May 2017

Perhaps this is why the nearby ground consecrated to Our Lady was subsequently to light up the skies of Paris with rage, on the evening of 15th April 2019, at precisely the time when the Humanists, the Anarchists and the Socialists and the Gilets Jaunes and the National Front’s Marine Le Pen (France’s second democratic choice for president) switched on their TVs to watch President Macron.

Macron was to give his major address to the nation with words of comfort and political compromise.  Instead, the people of France witnessed the ground consecrated to Our Lady of Paris lighting up les cieux.

The Lady’s not for turning.  Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.

Feu !  A pillar of smoke accompanied Pharaoh Emmanuel’s
televised address to France in 2019

Meanwhile, in London in the spring of 2019, Britain’s would-be Moses was making his own Pharaonic pitch.  Boris Johnson MP used the national media (beginning with his column in The Telegraph), to challenge Prime Minister Theresa May:

“It is time for the PM [Theresa May] to channel the spirit of Moses in Exodus, and say to Pharaoh in Brussels – LET MY PEOPLE GO.”

Boris likes to use Biblical metaphors and analogies, but I found this one directed at Theresa May somewhat ironic.  Theresa May is overtly Christian whereas Boris is an overt Pericles-venerating Pagan.


In our extraordinary times, in which we need extraordinary blessings, it all comes down to a tale of two cities:  the two cities that we find quite early on in the history of Christian theology:  the vertical City of God versus the horizontal City of Humanism, or as Augustine of Hippo put it: Dē cīvitāte Deī contrā pāgānōs. 

Augustine wrote his tale of two cities as the Vandals beat the forces of General Bonifacius and laid siege to the city of Hippo, during which Augustine would perish, along with much of the Roman Empire.

I suggest that Brexit allows Boris of London – having now been freed from the cultural and intellectual vandalism of the French Way – to put Christian Europe (including France) back on track for the good of all nations:  back on the Vertical Way.

We cannot build Jerusalem in Brussels.  We must look to Mount Zion, the Holy City, the only city in the world that exists both on Earth as in Heaven:  the axis mundi.

I write this essay in the hope that Boris will turn around and face the right way, the one true way, the one Holy (whole-making) Way for all nations.  Repent.  Turn and face the right way.

Only within living memory did we first come to see planet Earth.  Seeing Earth anew, as a whole, was surely a giant leap for mankind in our working with God to bring the world into wholeness, or holiness.

This photograph, pointing up to Sinai and the Red Sea and the Holy Land, was one of the first of the “blue marble” photographs, taken from Apollo 17 in 1972.
God Bless America.


3. True British and Christian Sovereignty needs the Vertical Way

“I expect that the Battle of Britain is about to begin. Upon this battle depends the survival of Christian civilisation.”

Prime Minister Winston Churchill’s “Finest Hour” speech, 18th June 1940

“Français! C’est moi, Churchill, qui vous parle. Pendant plus de trente ans, dans la paix comme dans la guerre, j’ai marché avec vous, et je marche encore avec vous aujourd’hui.”

Prime Minister Winston Churchill’s broadcast to France, 20th October 1940

“Zadok the Priest, and Nathan the Prophet anointed Solomon King.
And all the people rejoiced, and said:
God save the King! Long live the King!
May the King live for ever,
Amen, Alleluia.”

Coronation anthem – based on 1 Kings – sang at every anointing of a British monarch since the days of our great Court composer George Frideric Handel

2020 was never meant to be like this.  Things were looking good at Christmas 2019.  The “Zombie Parliament” was brought back to real life with the startling victory of the Conservative Party in the General Election.

None of us, on our way to the polling booths on 12th December, would have been much interested to learn that a Chinaman was eating an undercooked bat from a “wet market” in Wuhan (or that scientists in the Wuhan Institute of Virology were experimenting with bat coronaviruses).  Yes, we already knew that zoonotic viruses are common in China, for obvious reasons, but we don’t expect any of them to hit Britain.  In the SARS epidemic of 2002 to 2004 – whose source was also found to be bat coronavirus in China that had jumped species – Britain wasn’t touched at all.

Boris, to his credit, did manage to get Brexit done, as promised, on 31st January 2020, a prospect that seemed impossible until Christmas 2019.

We were expecting the second month of the 2020 calendar not to be rumours of imminent lockdown, but of a national call-out to celebrate a new era for Britain.  The Church of England – our Established Church – was meant to be joyfully singing Blake’s/Parry’s “Jerusalem” with the Women’s Institute despite the BBC and despite a dissonant and Re-moaning psalter of bishops in the upper chamber, cawing with a parliament of liberals.

The cities were to be full of boys and girls playing in the streets as communities fêted on jam-filled Victoria sponge and lashings of ginger beer.  Grown-ups were to revel in the pubs until the early hours, wrapped in red-white-and-blue (pas bleu-blanc-rouge, forcément), celebrating the return of British sovereignty to Britain:  Christian Britain:  Monarchist Britain.  “Merry Christmas”.
God Save the Queen.

On January 31st 2020, the United Kingdom was saved from the inexorable philosophical and anti-theological alignment to the French Republic, and the overtly Humanist agenda that France has driven through the European Union.  And so throughout England, church bells were to delight us with English melodies from the time of the Restoration of King Charles II, such as Plain Hunt on six bells, and Grandsire Doubles, and Plain Bob.  Even Big Ben, England’s largest bell, silenced since 2017 for ongoing restoration work on the Palace of Westminster, was to be temporary unmuffled, and the streets of London filled once again with its sonorous and world-famous E-natural.

Alas, it all went flat, or bémol as the French say.  There is no singing, not in the churches, not in the football and cricket stadia, not in the concert halls, not in the theatres and opera houses, not even in the schools and the playgrounds.

We could not even sing on VE Day 75.  And to add insult to injury, anti-British mobs descended on the streets of London to burn the Union Jack and vandalise the statue of Sir Winston Churchill – the last British commoner to receive a state funeral, as a result of decision by Parliament in 1965 under Labour Government.  Worse, Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of Londonistan, decided that the best thing to do in our time of national crisis was to hide Sir Winston by encasing his statue in a metal tomb, as if he is really is, as the ‘Woke’ BBC journalists have decided, a “controversial figure”.  The Prime Minister of Pakistan, Imran Khan, will approve I think.  Just a few days ago (26th June), according to the BBC website (if you dig down deep into subsidiary News pages), Imran Khan lamented the death of Osama bin Laden, the Al-Qaeda mastermind of New York 9/11 and London 7/7.  Imran Khan tells us that Osama bin Laden – whose declared primary motive was the destruction of Israel and the USA – is a martyr or “shaheed” for Islam.  It’s not Cricket.  The Prime Minister of Pakistan is lionising Bin Laden, terroriser of London, whilst Prime Minister Churchill, the Roaring Lion, is hidden by the Mayor of Londonistan, who is batting for the wrong side of Christian civilisation.

Imran Khan, a former great international cricketer and a former play-boy in English high society, now seems to be trying to pass himself off to the Muslim Brotherhood as a puritanical Fakir.  Perhaps Imran Khan is hoping to take the place of the recently retired elder statesman of Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), the Prime Minister of Malaysia, Mahathir bin Mohamad, who said, on his visit to Cambridge University last year, he is happy to be called an “antisemite” (receiving laughs and applause from the audience at the Cambridge Union).  The Cambridge Union, like the Oxford Union earlier in 2019, invited Mahathir Bin Mohamad despite (or perhaps because of), his antisemitism, and in the knowledge that he said in his address to the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation in Kuala Lumpur in 2003:

“Jews still rule the world by proxy… but 1.3 billion Muslims cannot be defeated by a few million Jews. There must be a way. And we can only find a way if we stop to think, to assess our weaknesses and our strength, to plan, to strategise and then to counterattack…The Europeans killed six million Jews out of 12 million”.

The Prime Minister of Malaysia, Mahathir bin Mohamad, addressing the OIC in 2003.

In April 2020, Boris seemed to be channelling not Moses but Lazarus of Bethany, spending several days in intensive care in what he tells us was “touch-and-go”, and a “50/50” brush with death.

The NHS, thank God, brought Boris back to life, but now he finds himself leading the People through a strange kind of wilderness indeed.  Like the Israelites we are indeed locked out of the nation we knew in 2019, and we are receiving unearned “furlough” income like manna from heaven, whilst protesting about this and that, wishing we were back where we were.  And we, the British people, are looking to everything and everyone but God, falling into new cults:  clapping for this, and kneeling for that, and, just like the roaming Israelites in the hands of Aaron, demanding new statues.

Worse, Boris seems to be channelling the spirit that came down on Pharaoh’s Egypt.  We’re not far short of ten calamities on the nation, especially when we consider economic calamities.

It began with the floods, including the highest February rainfall since records began in 1766.  There followed the worst pestilence in a century.  Then the longest spring drought in British history, which not only worried our farmers, but frustrated the People locked into their dwelling, waiting impatiently for the Angel of Death to pass over.

There is now a dangerous appetite for revolutionary iconoclasm and a cultish hatred of statues that England has not witnessed since Oliver Cromwell’s New Model Army started to smash up images of religious and historical figures, and beheaded the king.  Labour politicians have praised this “movement” and Labour councils have suddenly convinced themselves that we should “debate” images in public places of historical figures such as, even, Sir Francis Drake, Oliver Cromwell, Lord Admiral Nelson, Clive of India, and Sir Winston Churchill.

And just as we were thinking that things could not get any worse, we now have swarms of law-breaking neo-Marxist rioters and anti-white racists (backed by hard-left groups such as Socialist Workers’ Party) and neo-Fascist rioters and anti-black racists (backed by hard-right groups such as Britain First).

In the Ten Plagues on the Pharaoh, the first nine disasters more or less logically followed on from one another – such as frogs dying en masse after they had quickly denuded the banks of the Nile of food, causing a plague of gnats….  The lockdown seems to have created a similar ecological domino effect.  And we are right to be anxious about what comes next.  The generalised good will and spirit of volunteerism for the first weeks of lockdown seems to have evaporated, at least in some demographic groups.  Whereas the centenarian Yorkshireman Captain Tom Moore was the representative image of the first half of lockdown, the second half is of rioting thugs attacking and injuring many police, and spraying graffiti such as “all cops are bastards”, and other Americanisms, such as “defund the police”.

We now have a very troubling breakout of Anarchy.  And a plague of British stupidity is on full public display.  We are in danger of catching the French disease.  We recently had the absurd spectacle of heavily-tattooed and obese drunken men ostensibly intent on guarding the statue of Sir Winston Churchill, making the Nazi salute and attacking the Police.  Churchill would have had them all rounded up and locked up.

And don’t tell me that all this is righteous anger. As I wrote in my last piece[iv], the civilised world is not really so concerned by death and gross injustice, otherwise Modern Slavery, which affects people of all colour, including white, would not be so widely ignored.  Two centuries ago, people enjoyed refined sugar, wilfully ignorant that it was a product of slavery. Today, people enjoy chocolate, wilfully ignorant that it is the product of Modern Slavery, including 2 million children in Ghana and the Ivory Coast, many of whom are sold as slaves or given as debt bondage.  Britain today at least, partly thanks to PM Theresa May, is leading the world in anti-Modern Slavery initiatives, just as Britain led the way in the Abolition of legalised slavery, which has cursed the whole of mankind, everywhere, since time immemorial, including in England.  

Non Angli sed Angeli, Pope Gregory famously said on pitying pretty English boy slaves.


4. The mainstream anti-Israelist and anti-Christian threat in Britain today

PM Boris Johnson, who had dissolved his minority Government in calling a General Election, returned a Tory Government with the largest majority since 1987, as the Labour Party – embroiled in antisemitism and other Marxist ideals – suffered its worst defeat since the 1930s.

Most of the nation was much relieved that Her Majesty the Queen was not obliged to invite Jeremy Corbyn MP to the “kissing hands” audience and then to ask him to become Prime Minister.

Britain was saved by Tories, and not only from the Corbynistas.  As noted, by getting Brexit done, we have been saved from a project that, for the first time in almost two millennia, has made the seats of power in Western Europe formally unchristian.

The challenge now, I suggest, is to save Britain, and the world, from Boris’ vision, or rather lack of monotheistic vision.  Without vision [of God], the people perish, as Boris will know from his Bible studies at Eton – where, like almost every English True-Blue Tory, he chose to be confirmed into the Church of England.

Boris – the boy who wanted to be “world king” – doesn’t do grown-up philosophical theology.  He professes Pagan philosophy.  He often quotes Homer and never quotes Habbakuk.  And I have yet to see evidence that his recent near-death experience resulted in any kind of Damascene conversion, or improved his dire understanding of Israel, temporally or spiritually.

At least Boris’ Government, for which I voted, gives me some hope.  The alternative would have seemed absolutely hope-less and would have perhaps cursed us for three or four generations.  And I thank God that it wasn’t inflicted on Britain and the wider world, especially on Israel, the Son of God.

“And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the LORD, Israel is my son, even my firstborn:” Exodus 4:22 (KJV)

Before analysing Boris’ position on Israel, I will remind the reader to where British left politics has led us on Israel, and why we must quickly recover from the resurgent antisemitism/anti-Israelism that has now deeply affected the United Kingdom.  The threat is very much still here, and the “Black Lives Matter” movement has given it a second wind.

Corbyn would have been the first Prime Minister in history to be overtly Antisemitic, the first overt Republican, and the first overt Atheist.  Corbyn would have been first Marxist-Leninist agitator to lead the country.  He would have been the first leader of Government who throughout his whole parliamentary career has courted and befriended leaders of revolutionary terrorist regimes and religious extremists around the world, from Gerry Adams to Ra’ad Salah to the state propaganda apparatus of the Islamic Republic of Iran.  And we must not forget the Marxist revolutionaries he befriended in Latin America, where our Socialist messiah spent the Lost Years after dropping out of university.

Corbyn promised world peace – as they all do.  Even the leaders of the Soviet Union and Communist China promised that Socialism would eventually bring world peace (especially before the Sino-Soviet split in the early 1960s).  We are to be convinced that world peace and ‘justice’ will come, as if by a natural law, through the fulfilment of History in a nationless Socialist Commonwealth.

As the Labour Party sees it, the main problem in the world, the main impediment to internationalist Socialism, is the existence of Israel.  Seamus Milne, the Director of Strategy and Communications for Corbyn’s Labour Party, and openly Communist, admits this.  Hence the Labour Party now communicates to the world by wrapping itself in Arab/Islamist flags.  The United Kingdom under Corbyn’s Government was to definitively convince the world of the need to “Free Palestine”, chanting slogans such as, “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free”.  The Labour Government was then to find ways to undermine Israel’s defence capability and Israel’s economy, and then unleash Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Palestinian Authority (Fatah), and Hezbollah on Israel: to rid the world of the metaphysical root of all evil.

The British Labour Party is now in the absurd position in which it moans about the British Christian imperialism in the days of yore, but waves the flag of extant Islamic pan-Arab imperialism whose four colours represented four Arab Muslim empires that took more slaves even than the whole of Christian Europe.  This four-coloured flag first appeared throughout the Arab world only a century ago.  Since the fall of the Ottoman Empire, it has become the banner of pan-Arabisation, or pan-Arab imperialism, throughout the whole of the Middle East and North Africa.  The Arab League wants back the empire it lost to the Ottomans and the French and the British.  And the Arab regimes seem unable to give up on the dream of pan-Arab imperialism, despite the fact that the Arab nations are locked into devastating internecine conflicts with each other, and internally (Syria, Yemen and Libya being the civil war hotspots at present, and Lebanon on the brink of revolution, and the population of Jordan now displaying similar revolutionary traits).

As noted in the introduction, the pan-Arab imperialists are, today, committing “near genocide” on the region’s Christians, according to a report commissioned in 2018 by former Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt MP, who tells us that the atrocities have become increasingly widespread since the turn of the millennium.  The near genocide of Christians (murder, kidnapping, imprisonment, and uprooting) by Muslim Arabs is “the greatest story never told of the 21st century” said Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt, and that “political correctness” contributes to the failure to address the evil.  As Hunt’s report reveals, even our English clergymen are wilfully ignorant of the situation.  Why?  Because, the Church of England is generally (but not universally) as antisemitic as the Church in England always has been, with some notorious Israel bashers and “Palestinian Liberation” supporters in the upper chamber.  (I was recently approached to write a 1000-word Op-Ed for The Algemeiner on antisemitism in the Church of England.  I’ve put a link to it in the footnotes[v].)

Our once-great British Labour Party has become something disturbingly and dangerously alien and anti-British and obsessively hateful of Israel.  The secular-Jewish led “Momentum” movement behind the rise of Corbyn has not yet gone away. But even if it does, and even though Sir Keir Starmer at the helm has set the ship’s telegraph to STOP antisemitism, I think the inertia is unstoppable, especially with secular Jews stoking the engine room who are still philosophically committed to Marxist-Corbynism and unlikely to want to ever change course.  Labour, I think, is destined to run aground.  Labour’s only hope is to convince the people of Britain that Israel has nothing to do with Jews.  But this is absolutely untrue.  Israel has everything to do with observant Jews, and observant Christians for that matter. The axis mundi of the world is eternally Jerusalem, being “the City of the Great King”, said Jesus, quoting from his Hebrew scripture in his vows following his Beatitudes.  “Swords into plowshares” can come from nowhere but Mount Zion, said Isaiah, the Prophet whom Jesus most often quoted.

Even the modern Roman Catholic Church came to accept that the covenants between God of Israel and the Jews cannot be superseded by anyone or anything, and certainly not Socialism.  This was first mooted by Pope John XXIII in the Second Vatican Council and, more satisfactory, by Pope John Paul II.

John Paul II, apart from helping the West to win the Cold War, and to steer his Church away from Marxist “Liberation Theology” and the Sandinistas, insisted that his flock must not attempt to convert Jews, whose eternal covenants with God, and the Land, and the People of the Land, cannot be broken by man.  The Church of England, on the other hand, still endorses its society for promoting the conversion of Jews to Christianity, as if, somehow, highly intelligent and observant Jews who are expert in the Holy Language, and are guardians of the Holy Name, are going to come into the Church of England to listen to the vacuous sermons and platitudes of Archbishop Justin Welby.  Welby, in my view, is a national and religious embarrassment, who could do well to grasp a rabbi by the hem (Zech 8:22-23) and go up with him to Jerusalem to learn about the faith that Rabbi Jesus lived, and to learn what Jesus meant by hallowing the imageless Father and His unutterable Name.

Saint Paul, the Pharisee whose theology was to have the most influence on the Church (whose epistles make up half the books of the New Testament), insisted that we wild Christians would ultimately all be grafted into the original Jewish fruit-bearing olive tree.  There is no other.  God is One, with one holy of holy names, on Earth as in Heaven.  There is one holy centre, and one holy language containing the one holy Name of the one Lord of History who has determined the destiny of the nations.

“God of our fathers, You chose Abraham and his descendants to bring your Name to the nations: we are deeply saddened by the behaviour of those who in the course of history have caused these children of yours to suffer, and asking your forgiveness we wish to commit ourselves to genuine brotherhood with the people of the Covenant.”

Pope John Paul II, handwritten prayer inserted into the Western Wall, Jerusalem, AD 2000

5. PM Boris Johnson on Israel and the United Nations General Assembly

Although the Conservative Party does not share the general antisemitic/anti-Israelist ideology we now see in the Labour Party, the Tory foreign policy on Israel, including the “vision” that Boris Johnson wrote as Foreign Secretary in 2017 is essentially no different to Labour’s (even Corbyn’s Labour Party), and, as we will see, is just as ungodly, duplicitous, disingenuous, and dangerous.

Under Conservative Government, the UK’s voting record in the UN forums – all of which are obessively anti-Israel – is little different to the position of France and Germany, and Pakistan, Burkina Faso, Mali, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, China, Japan, Uganda, Venezuela, Argentina, Malaysia, Nicaragua, South Africa, Somalia, Russia… practically all the nations of the UN apart from the USA in fact.

Israel is a tiny nation, smaller than Wales, much of which is inhospitable desert.  And yet every year, when all nations gather at the UN General Assembly, almost all nations apart from the USA condemn Israel as the wickedest nation in the world.

In fact, the UNGA (and the UN Human Rights Council) condemns Israel as more wicked than all the other nations of the world combined.

Thankfully, UN Watch, an accredited NGO which has a seat in the UN, collects the statistics for us.  Here are the country-specific condemnations from 2015 to 2017:

UNGA resolutions against Israel20.
UNGA resolutions against every other nation in the world combined: 3 (just one each for Syria, North Korea and Iran).

UNGA resolutions against Israel20.
UNGA resolutions against every other nation in the world combined: 6

UNGA resolutions against Israel:  21.
UNGA resolutions against every other nation in the world combined: 6

It sounds too incredible and impossible to be true, doesn’t it, unless one has properly studied the history of antisemitism.  Antisemitism is a very complex subject, and I normally advise against attempting a potted history.  But I know what I am doing:  I know the subject inside-out.  Also, I am a technical writer, whose profession involves truthfully simplifying complex subjects and focusing on what matters.


Historically, most nations, especially all Christian nations, have spent most of the past 2000 years in a state of ideological antisemitism, believing Jews to be the metaphysical enemy of God.  This is why, throughout most of its history, the Church never taught that Jesus, and his Apostles, were Jews.  Even when the churches (Catholic and Reformed) started to read out the Bible in Church in the vernacular, they only read out a small and highly-selective fraction (the “lectionary”) that is most favourable to the Church, and least favourable to the Jews.  Had you told a typical Victorian Englishman, even highly educated, that Jesus is a Jew, the Victorian would think you were blaspheming.

Exodus, in the Hebrew, tells us that when Moses came down from the mountain his face shone with beams of the glory of God, but when the fourth-century saint Jerome translated the Bible into Latin, he mistranslated the Hebrew as Moses came down with “horns on his head”.  Hence, in Church art, Moses is frequently depicted with horns, not least in Michelangelo’s marble Moses. This mistranslation contributed to ideas that Jews are not quite human.  In the Passion plays, first performed in Bavaria in 1634, as gratitude to God for curing the region of the bubonic plague that Bavaria blamed on the Jews (they “poison the wells”), Jews were acted as collectively-accursed “Christ killers” with horn-shaped hats.  Historically, Passion Week, and especially Good Friday, have been the most times dangerous for the Jews of Western Europe, as the Church allowed, or even encouraged, the antisemitic mob to do their thing.   And Passion plays have continuously attracted antisemites, notably Henry Ford, Adolph Hitler and, in our times, the antisemitic Roman Catholic actor and film producer Mel Gibson.

Some Protestant churches (including those that make up the World Council of Churches) still do not teach that Jesus is a Jew.  There are even Anglican clergy in the Middle East today who refuse to accept, let alone to teach, that Jesus is a Jew.  They do not teach that Mary and Joseph are Jews, who had the baby Jesus circumcised and named in the Abrahamic Covenant on his 8th day like every other Jewish boy (by definition) to this day. They do not teach that Mary and Joseph took Jesus to the synagogue for his coming of age in his 13th year (or Bar Mitzvah).  The Church has rarely taught the laity that Jesus was a conservative and observant Jew who wore his tzizit right up until the last year of his life (mentioned in the miraculous healing of the bleeding woman). The Church does not teach that Jesus taught that the greatest commandment is the Shema:  prayerful emphasis and cognisance of the eternal Oneness of God, and the unutterable holiness of the Holy Name.

However, the Church was keen to teach that Judas Iscariot (“Judas” being the transliterated Greek for Judah, or “Jew”) was a Jew.  The Twelve Apostles were Jews (although it is not certain who all 12 were, the records differ).  Judas Iscariot was one of two of the Twelve Apostles called Judas, but Christians came to refer to the other, Judas Thaddaeus, as “Jude”.  Therefore in the mind of most Christians until within living memory, the only Jewish Apostle of Jesus is “Judas” – depicted as the ultimate betrayer of course.  But Judas was arguably the ultimate hero by agreeing to become the scapegoat and necessary baddy of the Passion drama.  “Do it quickly”, said Jesus to Judas, who up to this point is established as the most trusted of the Twelve, and therefore all the better for the betrayal narrative.  Jesus could have said, “don’t do it”.

Theatre was hugely important in the time of Jesus.  Literacy was extremely rare, as were the very-expensive commodities of papyri/parchment and ink.  Writing was the preserve of the scribes: highly-skilled and rare professionals.  The Greeks had introduced theatre as the medium, the social media, of the times.  Drama was an important way, if not the only, way to get political and philosophical messages across in the Hellenized civilisation, and the Romans copied the Greeks (and even their gods).  Jesus would have been familiar with theatre.  There was a great newly-opened theatre at Sepphoris, walking distance from Nazareth. It is reasonable to speculate that Joseph and Jesus, as carpenters, were employed in the building of it.

When Jesus walked into Herod’s Temple and shouted “hypocrites” he probably did use the Greek word hypokrites, meaning “actor”.  And the big theological words at the beginning of Christian theology (the “New Testament” being Greek) were from Aristotelian ethics and Greek drama, such as metanoia (or “repent”) and hamartia (or “sin”).  Had the Passion drama not had all its dramatic elements, and had Jesus’ resurrection been like that of, say, the resurrection of Elijah, the drama that has come to define the centre of history, the Anno Domini, would perhaps have been forgotten.  Similarly, had Jesus died in, say, the way of John the Baptist, the drama would have been lost.

The Christian non-Jewish Jesus narrative even carried on since the invention of printing presses in the 15th and 16th century, despite ever-improving rates of literacy in subsequent centuries.  In fact it arguably got worse, because no-one was more antisemitic than Martin Luther, whose anti-Jewish tract calling for the destruction of all Jewry Hitler so admired that he had it displayed it in a glass case at the Nuremberg Rallies.

For Catholic and Reformed churches, Jews were now the un-chosen, and Christians the new Chosen.  This “replacement theology” or “supesessionism”, was dropped by the post-WWII Roman Catholic Church, but it still dominates the Protestant churches, whether explicitly or implicitly.

In 1555, Pope Paul IV, fearing not only the Protestants’ printing presses, but that his flock were coming into contact with Jews, decided Jews need to be put into ghettos, and he issued a Europe-wide papal bull.  The ghettoization bull was titled Cum nimis absurdum taken from the first sentence of the bull:  “Since it is absurd and utterly inconvenient that the Jews, who through their own fault were condemned by God to eternal slavery…”.   The Pope insisted that Jews were to wear a yellow badge of shame, just as in England in 1218, the Archbishop of Canterbury Stephen Langton, persuaded Henry III to proclaim the Edict of the Badge, a yellow badge of shame to identify the Jew, until, in 1289, King Edward I issued the Edict of Expulsion of all Jews from England.

Once in the ghettos, denied land, denied arms, denied access to the universities, denied access to the professions, denied access to politics, denied freedom of movement, Jews had few opportunities to thrive or reveal their talents.  They typically earned a meagre living as tinkers, or selling second-hand rags.  However, they were allowed to lend money to Christians, and so were needed because the Church forbade Christians’ lending money for interest.  And who in their right mind would take the risk of lending money for no interest?  Jews became good at the only intellectual endeavour they were allowed to become good at that was of any interest outside the ghettos:  moneylending to the Goyim.  Christian leaders of Europe came to depend on Jews to finance wars and empire building.  But if funds dried up, kings, princes and archdukes invariably reneged on loan repayments, and expulsed or killed the Jews through pogroms, confiscating their money, gold and other assets.  Eventually, Jewish genius, notably the Rothschild family, came up with a solution to prevent their being ripped off by the Holy Roman Empire:  a new kind of international bank with financial instruments such as stocks and bonds that were impervious to raids and pogroms by Christian kings, tsars and mobs.

[ Today, we all, in the West (if we are fully functioning) enjoy this international banking system, notwithstanding the corruptions and greed revealed since the financial crisis of 2008.  We are all moneylenders now, if we have a bank account with a positive balance:  we lend to the banks and the banks pay us interest.  Yes, our banking executives think far too highly of themselves, and choose to pay themselves absurdly high salaries, and yet our day-to-day lives would be quite tedious if not impossible if we had no modern banks.  The USSR tried an alternative form of banking, the “Gosbank”, which resulted in more inequality and corruption than anything we have seen in the West, as has “Sharia” banking in the Arab world.  This has become obvious to the West as Russian and Arab billionaires have suddenly arrived in the West to enjoy the high life, bringing money out of the nations that their racketeering has reduced to generalised squalor and fear. ]

In the late 19th century and the first half of the 20th century, Christian antisemitism was exported to the Arab world largely through the colonies of the French Third Republic, and then more latterly by the Nazis (who authorised translations in Arabic of Mein Kampf, minus the bits in which Hitler said that Arabs are “half apes”).  Today, Mein Kampf, and Protocols of the Elders of Zion, are bestsellers in all Muslim nations.  And the medieval Christian Blood Libels (such as that Jews steal and murder Christian children to make bread out of their blood) are now quoted on authority by Muslim clerics, not least by Jeremy Corybn’s friend Ra’ad Salah:

“We have never allowed ourselves to knead the bread that breaks the fast in the holy month of Ramadan with children’s blood… Whoever wants a more thorough explanation, let him ask what used to happen to some children in Europe, whose blood was mixed in with the dough of the [Jewish] holy bread.  Great God, is this a religion?  Is this what God would want? God will deal with you yet for what you are doing.”

Speech in Jerusalem, 2007, by Ra’ad Salah, Muslim preacher, political leader, and friend of Jeremy Corbyn MP.  Corbyn has tried to invite Salah to the House of Commons, because “his voice must be heard”, and Corbyn said to Salah in a filmed speech in 2012, “I look forward to giving you tea on the terrace [of the Houses of Parliament] because you deserve it”.  Salah’s discourse is far from unique in contemporary Islam.  

The Blood Libel, first preached by the Church in England in Norwich in 1144 according to the historical records (which led to the expulsion of Jews from England until the royal edict was overturned by Oliver Cromwell), is today preached by Muslim scholars and clerics throughout the Arab world, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Qatar… everywhere.  And although modern Christian nations no longer preach this medieval Blood Libel, they have recycled it into contemporary forms that still have the power to convince the antisemitic ear, including in Britain, and especially in France, with devastating power.

[ I am presently writing a long essay on the “Al-Durah affair”, the French-mainstream-media hoax, beginning in 2000, that has done inestimable damage.  It has fuelled 21st-century antisemitism and anti-Israelism of a particularly virulent and genocidal Islamic form that has now cross-infected back to the West, not least in universities, many of which are heavily funded by the Gulf States.

In France, the Al-Durah affair is proving to be another Dreyfus Affair, in which the French establishment is doing everything it can to protect the reputation of France.  The antisemitic Dreyfus Affair was protracted (12 years), and the Al-Durah affair even more so, but I think truth will out, and that France will suffer reputational damage as severe as it did a century ago, and which could lead to a shakeup of French governance and law as dramatic as those post-Dreyfus Affair.

The Second Intifada in 2000 was itself largely fuelled by reports and highly-edited filming of the Al-Durah incident, broadcast throughout the world by the French. And there have been sustained anti-Israelist-motivated attacks ever since, not only on Israel, but on the USA, the UK, and, indeed, on France.  Osama bin Laden used the French-media staged footage in a recruiting video for al-Qaeda.  And he told the world that at the top of the list of reasons for the attack on the USA on 9/11 2001 was the USA’s support for Israel.  Subsequent overtly al-Qaeda motivated attacks include London, 7/7 2005.

The Al-Durah hoax became, and remains, a global recruiting sergeant for Jihadism not only in the Middle East but everywhere, particularly in the francophone world, from Mali to Morocco. The French media, particularly the French-state TV channel France 2, broke all the rules of journalism, but it turns out the truth doesn’t matter:  the world’s appetite for Blood Libels against the State of Israel must be sated, because it is a Jewish-majority nation. ]

And so, dear reader, there you have a potted history of antisemitism from the ancient Church to the United Nations to the extant French Al-Durah Blood Libel.  For a deeper read, see my 55,000 word essay[vi] directed at the Church of England.


You can see that there was a certain inevitably to things when the UNGA was first formed about 75 years ago, even though UNGA at its formation agreed to a homeland in Israel for Jews.  When you gather all the nations together, the majority of which today are still barbaric and have much to hide from international forums – not wanting to expose or discuss their slavery, child labour, female genital mutilation, honour killings of girls by the males of their family, and religious intolerance or Communist intolerance  – it is inevitable that they scapegoat the Jewish nation.  It is inevitable that in a gathering of the world’s nations, things bottom out at the lowest common denominator:  antisemitism.

In was inevitable that nations that have a continuous history of condemning and scapegoating the Jews in their midst, would, with the return of the Diaspora Jews to their ancient and Biblical homeland, condemn Israel, the Jewish nation in the midst of all nations.

Anti-Israelism is the newest mutation of the virus of antisemitism – some call it “the new antisemitism” – but there is a very important difference: some of the world’s most fervent and influential anti-Israelists in our times are Jews, from the highly-intelligent secular and entrepreneurial Jews in California’s Silicon Valley to highly-stupid ultra-religious Jews, such as Neturei Karta.  Melanie Phillips, one of the best Jewish commentators on this, has described the Jewish amplification of the new antisemitism as “immune deficiency”, referring especially to British Jewish leadership, which if not itself anti-Israel thinks it is obliged to support secularised anti-Israelist Jews in order to be representative of diverse Jewish communities.

You might hope that, in light of all this, Boris is man enough and wise enough not to allow British policy to be dictated by the UNGA.  But he isn’t.  Just like Jeremy Corbyn, Boris Johnson invokes UNGA resolutions to define his party’s policy on Israel and what Boris disingenuously, or perhaps just lazily, passes off as “international law”, in the delusional belief that the Arab regimes want peace, and the delusional belief that the Arab regimes want a two-state solution, when their charters make it explicit that they deny Israel’s right to exist at all.

Surely, the UK Government persists in thinking, Arab regimes will agree to the next reasonable proposal.  My friend Dr Richard Landes calls this liberal egocentrism:  the deluded belief held by Western liberals that the other party will eventually come to their way of reasoning and to a liberal way of seeing the world, despite the overwhelmingly obvious evidence to the contrary.  The West generally does not understand the Arab mind, or Islam, or the Arab shame-honour codes.  Educated by liberals not to see the Arab as “the other” – to do so is intellectually taboo – the Western liberal denies the Arab his Arabness and tries to see him as a Western liberal, the same Western liberal – the Infidel – for whom the Arabs of Arabia have utter contempt, as we can see from the genocidal plight of liberals and Christians in the Middle East in the 21st century.

There is also a general Western delusion that the Arab regimes can be persuaded by money, whereas if there is one thing the Arab regimes surrounding Israel, and their benefactors, are not short of, it is money.  The money does not reach the long-suffering Arab people.  It is embezzled and squandered by the regimes in every conceivable way, for terrorism, for brainwashing, for missiles, for many miles of terror-tunnel networks in the Gaza Strip, and to reward slayers of Jews.  In the meantime, the Gazan and PA leadership live in luxury in mansions, enjoying exclusive luxury hotels, restaurants and shopping malls, convincing the people that the reason for their poverty is the Jews.  One does not need to visit too many Arab nations to quickly see that, today, Arab regimes do not generally care about Arabs or other peoples, and this is even outside the few Arab nations where there are presently no inter-Arab wars and conflicts. What contemporary Arabs regimes do care about, and about the only thing they can agree on (even agree with the Turks and Iranians) is taking Israel from the Jews in the name of Arab/Islamic honour.

1920: The Arab regimes rejected the San Remo Conference Proposal

1922: The Arab regimes rejected the League of Nations Proposal

1937:  The Arab regimes rejected Peel Commission Proposal

1938:  The Arab regimes rejected the Woodhead Partition Proposal

1947:  The Arab regimes rejected the UNGA Partition Proposal

1949:  The Arab regimes rejected UNGA Resolution 194

1967:  The Arab regimes rejected UN Security Council Resolution 242

1978:  The Arab regimes rejected the Begin/Sa’adat Peace Proposal

1994:  The Arab regimes rejected the Rabin/Hussein Peace Proposal

1995:  The Arab regimes rejected the Rabin’s Counter-Offer for Peace

2000:  The Arab regimes rejected the Barak/Clinton Peace Offer

2001:  The Arab regimes rejected Barak’s Peace Offer (at Taba)

2005:  The Arab regimes rejected Sharon’s Offer and Withdrawal from Gaza

2008:  The Arab regimes rejected the Olmert/Bush Peace Offer

2014:  The Arab regimes rejected Kerry’s Contour-for-Peace Offer

2020:  The Arab regimes rejected the Netanyahu/Trump Peace Offer (even before they had seen it)

Until 1947, the British controlled the Arab revolts, although sometimes by trying to pacify the Arabs by arming them to kill the Jews, and preventing Jews attempting to escape Nazi Europe from entering Israel, as we read on the website of the British Army Museum:

“During the Second World War (1939-45), the British restricted the entry into Palestine of European Jews escaping Nazi persecution. Anxious to appease the Egyptians and oil-rich Saudis, they imposed a limit on Jewish immigration.” (

And perhaps this anxiousness to appease the Arab regimes is really what goes on in the mind of PM Boris Johnson today:  appeasement of the Gulf States.  Every time that Israel has agreed to the UNGA resolutions since 1947, the Arab nations have been so angry that the UNGA has not agreed to totally remove “Israel” from the map of the world, they have taken the law into their own hands, raising multiple Arab and Iranian armies, and the Pakistani Air Force, and even Latin-American Marxist revolutionaries, and matériel from the Soviet Union.  Most of these invading armies and air forces were not only committed to wiping Israel off the map, but explicitly committed to the genocide of all Jews (many of whom in British Mandatory Palestine in 1947 were remnants of the Holocaust).

The seven Arab armies that invaded British Mandatory territory in 1948 failed in their aims to destroy the nascent State of Israel.  However, the Transjordan army annexed and occupied Judea and Samaria, which, being west of the River Jordan, they called “West Bank” (an annexation term I refuse to use), proceeding to Jerusalem, which the Jordanians de-Judaized by killing or expelling the Jews, destroying all the synagogues and using ancient Jewish gravestones as latrines. Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria were liberated during 1967 defensive war, when the forces of Jordan, Syria, Egypt and Iraq, expecting to overwhelm Israel with vast numerical superiority, were repelled back through the Sinai in the west and back across the River Jordan in the east.

Therefore, since 1947, the territory that is now east of Israel’s Green Line, has been “disputed territory”, because it was never, in international law, granted to Jordan, who invaded, annexed and occupied it and called it their “West Bank”.

However you want to dispute Israel’s plans to increase sovereignty in Judea and Samaria, you cannot condemn it in international law as Israeli annexation and occupation, because it is already illegally annexed by the Arabs of Jordan (who some time after 1967 started to call themselves “Palestinians”).

But in any case, there is a higher law.  Boris obviously cannot channel Moses, but he can at least read the words of Moses:

“Justice, justice shalt thou follow, that thou mayest live, and inherit the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.”  Deuteronomy 16:20

This covenantal attachment – attaching Jews to the land – runs right through the Bible, the Bible on which Christian civilisation is built, beginning with the land purchases of Abraham and Jacob, to King David’s establishing Jerusalem as the capital of the kingdom, to the teachings of Rabbi Jesus, who called Jerusalem, “the City of the Great King”.

God Almighty owns all land, and everything in it thereof.  The land in the world He has set aside for a special purpose is the tiny plot of Eretz Israel, about 0.1% of the landmass of the Middle East.

Boris Johnson could do worse than to seek advice from Colonel Richard Kemp CBE.  Richard is a well-syndicated journalist, and a battle-hardened soldier who had led his men into some of the hottest conflict zones in the world, and has dealt with the terrorist threat from Ireland to Israel, advising the UK and the Israeli Government and the UN (through UN Watch) on all forms of terrorism, from Irish Republican to Islamist.

See footnotes for very recent article[vii] in The Algemeiner by Colonel Richard Kemp and the international lawyer Arsen Ostrovsky.  Their short article is very good, but would have been stronger I think had it mentioned the Jordanian annexation, and de-Judaization of Judea and Samaria. (Richard Kemp has mentioned these things elsewhere.)

I hope that Richard, who has the ear of the Government, can educate Boris and his Cabinet, because what Boris thinks is “UNGA” international law is not international law worth its salt, and not, incidentally, how Sir Winston Churchill understood the Land of Israel.  Richard Kemp occasionally studies his Bible in the original Hebrew, as I do, with Jewish experts in the Holy Language.  He is a good Christian soldier, and a good friend of Jews, or at least Jews who haven’t given up God and on the whole-making nation of Holy Israel.  As Richard has often pointed out, the future of Christian civilisation depends on the integrity of Israel, without which the Middle East, including Jordan and Egypt, would likely be overwhelmed by Islamic State and the other extant Caliphater and Jihadist movements, multiplying the current terrible refugee crisis many times to the point of being overwhelming for Europe.  Furthermore, Judaism and Christianity in the Holy Land would cease to exist, just as Judaism has all but ceased to exist in the 22 Arab nations, and Christianity, as last year’s report for Jeremy Hunt MP points it, is now experiencing “near genocide” in the Middle East.

The following is a screenshot from Colonel Richard Kemp, tweeting a message to HM’s Government.  Compare it with the screenshot from the Bishop of Southwark in the House of Lords, a notorious Israel basher, who seems to have the ear of James Cleverly MP, the Minister of State for the Middle East and North Africa.

Boris Johnson, as Foreign Secretary, offered in November 2017 what he called his “vision for Middle East peace between Israel and a new Palestinian state [viii] ”, justifying it by appealing to the authority of the UN General Assembly.

Boris says he envisions a ‘Palestinian’ state extending from Syria to within 7 miles of Tel Aviv, or, his own words as Foreign Secretary: “The borders should be based on the lines as they stood on June 4, 1967 – the eve of the Six Day War – with equal land swaps to reflect the national, security, and religious interests of the Jewish and Palestinian peoples”.

Well, I can promise Boris that Israel’s “security interests”, in 2020, are not possible as things stood in 1967, with the matériel now possessed by Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, and Fatah (Palestinian Authority) – and other players in the region, not least the Islamic Republic of Iran, Syria, and Islamic State – all of which are ideologically committed to genocidal antisemitism and wiping Israel off the map.

I am not totally naïve in these matters.  I don’t have Colonel Kemp’s feet-on-the-ground knowledge as an infantryman, but I am airman – with my head in the clouds in the literal as well as the philosophical sense.  As an RAF electronics/avionics engineer during the Cold War, I worked on ground-mapping radar, terrain-following radar, electronic counter measures, and electronics counter-counter measures on a Tornado GR1 night-bombing squadron.  I know that the existence of Israel today is largely down to the fact that the Jews are the world’s best scientists and electronics engineers.  But there are limits to what electronic warfare, or rather electronic defence, can achieve.  Israel still manages to keep a step ahead of the technology of the Arabs, Persians and Turks, but, more than ever today, she needs sovereignty running up to the God-given topographical features that define the Biblical Eretz Israel.

Arab genocidal antisemitism (and, now, anti-Christianism) is the elephant in the room that Boris diligently fails to see, or smell, preferring to draw attention to the dead cat on the table.

As I wrote in a piece last year, the existence of genocidal antisemitism in the Arab regimes precludes negotiation for any “solution”[ix].  Genocide of the Jews of Israel is the stated religious interest in the charters of the two governing bodies in the Gaza Strip, i.e. Hamas (being a transliterated Arab acronym for “Islamic Resistance Movement”) and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and it is also in the charters of Palestinian Authority/Fatah the government of the Arab-only regions to the east of the Green Line.  These three democratically-elected regimes, which are extremely dangerous even by Arab standards, are so dangerous that even Egypt has built a wall to keep them out. They are the only regimes on offer to rule an autonomous new Arab state, which Boris thinks should exist between Israel and the godforsaken Arab state of Syria.

Obliteration of the whole of the State of Israel is also the stated intention of Iran-backed Hezbollah, which now leads the coalition parliament of Lebanon, and is involved in the internecine conflicts in Syria.  Iran’s Quds Force raison d’être is to take Jerusalem, and rename it Al-Quds.

Hezbollah has placed up to 150,000 rockets, some long range (100 km) and with precision (GPS) warheads imported from the Islamic Republic of Iran, hidden amongst the civilian populations of south Lebanon.  Refer to the letter of 22 October 2019[x], from Dame Louise Ellman MP, then Chair of Labour Friends of Israel, to Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab MP, regarding the posturing of Hezbollah in Lebanon, and its accumulation of high-tech rockets.

Lebanon – with Jordan not far behind – is now virtually in a state of revolution (largely due to the people protesting against the racketeering and Jihadist militarism of Hezbollah), and another civil war beckons.  If Hezbollah were to attack Israel, I cannot see how Israel would have any choice but to obliterate south Lebanon.  Can you?  Can you Prime Minister Boris Johnson?  Can you the Bishop of Southwark?  Can you James Cleverly MP?

What other option would Israel have, against the threat of thousands of simultaneously launched rockets, which would be coordinated with other forms of attack by Arab and Iranian armies and air forces, if not Turkish and Russian-backed Syria too, on all Israel’s borders?  In the meantime, the European Union, with the UK, insists on giving Iran the capacity to develop its nuclear enrichment.  The whole world risks being brought into the Battle of Armageddon, that many Islamists, and many of the world’s Christian fundamentalists for that matter, hope and pray for.  But, alas, Israel, God willing, will save us from these perverted hopes of prophetic fulfilment, just as, in Operation Opera of 1981, Israel saved the world from the nuclear facility that President François Mitterrand had sold to Iraq.

Hezbollah (or the “Party of Allah”) in Lebanon knows that launching an attack on Israel would be suicide, but Hezbollah ideologically believes in suicide in the name of Allah (and has frequently engaged in terrorist suicide “martyrdom”) even if the vast majority of people of south Lebanon have no wish to be recruited as martyrs for the Party of Allah.  Where is the Bishop of Southwark?  Where is the whining weasel Justin Welby?  Where are the real Christian men?  Step up, for heaven’s sake!

The unhinged regimes in the region, Arab and Iranian (and Turks for that matter), have no concern for human life, as we see across the border from the Golan Heights, where millions of lives and livelihoods are being destroyed in Syria, and 6 million refugees created.

Boris’ vision (published on involves preserving the “religious interests” of the “Palestinian peoples”.  What religion does Boris have in mind?  The Pagan Emperor Hadrian named the region of Biblical land “Palestine” nearly 2000 years ago. For most of that time, Jews and Christians have lived there continuously, Muslims since the 7th century, and Druzes since the 11th century.  These are the main religions of the “Palestinian peoples”.

In British Mandatory Palestine, until the British left in 1947, the British called the Jews “Palestinians” and the Arabs “Arabs”.  The Jews also willingly referred to themselves as Palestinians, hence in 1936 when professional Jewish musicians fled Nazism and arrived in Mandatory Palestine, and formed an orchestra, they chose the name “Palestine Symphony Orchestra” (now the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra).

The appropriation of the national identity “Palestinian” for the Arabs of the region was idea of the “PLO” leader Yasser Arafat, himself a terrorist Egyptian Arab of the Muslim Brotherhood.  There is no such thing, in any meaningful sense, as “Palestinian people”, and there has never been a sovereign state of “Palestine”.   For centuries of Ottoman rule, the land was derelict and barren, sparsely inhabitable and largely uninhabitable and malarial, until the British started to sell land to the first Zionists.  As Winston Churchill pointed out, many Arabs of the Levant were attracted into British Palestine by the prospect of work and a part in the new economy of the region.  Although these Arabs now call themselves “Palestinians”, there is no Palestinian language, no history, no culture, no religion, and no flag:  one needs a microscope to see the difference between the flag of ‘Palestine’ and the flag of Jordan that annexed Judea and Samaria.

Even from 1948 to 1967, Judea and Samaria were not “Palestine” but Jordan, and the Gaza Strip was not “Palestine” but Egypt.

If “Palestinian” means you were born in British Palestine, it means Jews who were born there before 1948 are no less “Palestinian” than the Arabs, such as Mahmoud Abbas, Chair of Fatah/PA, who was born in the British Mandate before 1948.

Whereas millions of Arabs live peacefully in Israel – within the 1967 borders, or the Green line – the regions run by Hamas, Palestinian Islam Jihad and Palestinian Authority (Fatah) have all been de-Judaized by regime leaders ideologically committed to genocidal antisemitism.  They send their children to annual training camps on how to murder Jews, including the use of suicide vests.  And so there cannot be a partition with land swaps (which would mean people swaps) between Israel and Boris Johnson’s fantasy Palestine.


It all seems rather ugly, depressing and hopeless, doesn’t it.  But if it was possible to de-Nazify the West Germans, and then in the 1990s de-Stalinize the East Germans, surely the Arabs can be de-conditioned, and retrieve what was once beautiful in Arab culture?  “God is Beautiful and He loves Beauty”, the Arab-language religion traditionally taught.

Not only have the autonomous Arab regimes (in almost all the 22 Arab nations), expelled all their Jews, all the Arab regimes surrounding Israel teach antisemitism in their schools and universities.  The children of the region are conditioned to become suicidal terrorists, with a promise to the parents of the children that they will receive a lifelong stipend – “Pay for Slay”, or the Palestinian Authority Martyrs’ Fund – if they enter any part of Israel to murder a Jew, even a child: it all qualifies for the stipend, which goes either to the terrorist if he or she is caught and imprisoned, or the family of the terrorist if the terrorist becomes a ‘martyr’.

Kay Wilson, with whom I have shared some correspondence (and whose memoirs I am now reading), was hacked very nearly to death with a machete by two young Arab men whilst she was hiking with a Christian friend in Israel (who was hacked to death in the same incident).  She has been campaigning, fruitfully, in the UK and elsewhere against funds that governments, including the UK Government, give to Fatah/Palestinian Authority.  Hundreds of millions of dollars of overseas funding is consumed by the “Palestinian Authority Martyrs’ Fund”.  These so-called martyrs earn more than educated professionals.

As we have seen, cancerous forms of antisemitism are not limited to the regions that border Israel. The pan-national Muslim Brotherhood, whose main political base is in Qatar, preaches antisemitism, including the call to murder Jews.  In Yemen, Houthi movement’s motto is: “God is great, death to the US, death to Israel, curse the Jews, and victory for Islam”.

Land swap?  People swap?  Come on, Boris, be serious.  Go to Jordan and talk to Sheik Hamza Mansour of the Islamic Action Front, and tell him and his followers that you support Israel’s right to exist. The “religious interests” of what Boris calls the “Palestinian people” is Islamism.  Contemporary Islam in most of the Muslim-majority nations today is as genocidally antisemitic as it was in most of the Christian nations of Europe in World War II.  And the only way forward is education and de-radicalisation, just as, following WWII the British de-Nazified West Germany, and the USA de-radicalised Japan.

From within Islam, we need to see great and courageous scholars and thinkers coming through to take on the rotten scholars presently at the top.  The closest figure to a Muslim pope today is Sheikh Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi, in Qatar, who heads the International Union of Muslim Scholars. At age 93, he seems to be the most revered and decorated thinker of contemporary Islam. Like a medieval Pope, he makes infallible proclamations on everything, from sex to dancing to death sentences.  And the Muslim faithful, including scholars, lap it up as canonical. The fact that much of what he says violates any sensible standard of human rights seems to afford him more authority: Islam sets itself above human rights: there is not a single Muslim-majority nation that has universal human rights, or shows any intention of introducing them, precisely because of thinkers such as Qaradawi.  Qaradawi says he is not antisemitic, but encourages Muslims, including Muslim children, to martyr themselves in order to help wipe the Jewish state of Israel off the map.

In January 2009, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who has issued fatwas on Jews, gave a sermon on Al-Jazeera TV (translated by MEMRI):

“O Allah, take your enemies, the enemies of Islam. O Allah, take the Jews, the treacherous aggressors. O Allah, take this profligate, cunning, arrogant band of people. O Allah, they have spread much tyranny and corruption in the land. Pour Your wrath upon them, O our God. Lie in wait for them. O Allah, You annihilated the people of Thamoud [An early pagan Arab tribe] with an overpowering blast, and You annihilated the people of ‘Aad with a fierce, icy gale, and You destroyed the pharaoh [of Exodus] and his soldiers – O Allah, take this oppressive, tyrannical band of people. O Allah, take this oppressive, Jewish Zionist band of people. O Allah, do not spare a single one of them. O Allah, count their numbers, and kill them, down to the very last one.”

Yusuf al-Qaradawi, Al-Jazeera TV, 2009

Two weeks later, also translated by MEMRI, Qaradawi offered the Arab world his theory of the Holocaust:

“Throughout history, Allah has imposed upon the Jews people who would punish them for their corruption … The last punishment was carried out by Hitler. By means of all the things he did to them – even though they exaggerated this issue – he managed to put them in their place. This was divine punishment for them … Allah Willing, the next time will be at the hand of the believers.”

Yusuf al-Qaradawi, Al-Jazeera TV, 2009

Israel takes such threats seriously; Boris evidently does not.

Boris, who by his own writing as Foreign Secretary has proved he has a lot to learn on Israel, should beware of people in his party who are career-long Israel bashers, such as Crispin Blunt MP and Nicholas Soames MP, to whose letter inter alia to The Times in January this year I immediately responded on my blog[xi] in a short piece.

My piece has been shared amongst people who matter, including Colonel Richard Kemp, Dr Richard Landes, Melanie Phillips, and Dr David Deutsch (even though I have had no direct contact with Dr Deutsch).

Colonel Richard Kemp will also confirm that although Europe was de-Nazified following Victory in Europe, the Arab world never was.  (See my piece on the alliance of the Nazis and the Arabs, who, following the anticipated victory of Rommel in North Africa, were to follow the methods of the Holocaust in Europe in the Middle East.[xii])  And the warring against Israel has never stopped, just as the warring between and within the Arab nations has never stopped.  It is miraculous that the State of Israel exists at all.  It is miraculous that she defends herself against the Levantine Leviathan.

Israel is the best nation, not the worst nation, in the world. And when Israel receives the world’s blessings, the world will be blessed.  This is the basis on which Christian civilisation is founded.

Politically, there are no solutions, and there was never meant to be.  The solution to Israel and the whole world, is the blessing of God of Israel through Israel and the whole world.  Every nation that curses Israel will remain in a state of spiritual curse and godforsaken soullessness.

“Justice, justice shalt thou follow, that thou mayest live, and inherit the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.”  Deuteronomy 16:20


7. Israel is the best, not the worst, nation in the world

As we have seen, almost all UN condemnatory country-specific resolutions of the UN General Assembly (UNGA) and the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), exclusively pointed at Israel.  Why do all nations so furiously rage together, against Israel?

Why do the people imagine a vain thing?  Why do the leaders of the world – kings, presidents, and Church of England archbishops and bishops, and the Lutherans, and the imams and the mullahs – rise up and take counsel together, against the Lord and against His anointed?  Why do the nations call evil good and good evil? Alas, the Jewish prophets, including Jesus, told us to expect just this before, at last, the world does come into the voice, the Word, from Jerusalem.

The world will not, cannot, be blessed until all this animus for Israel is turned upside down.  Israel is far from perfect, but Israel is the best nation in the world, the most talented nation in the world, the most giving nation in the world, the most indispensable nation in the world.  Even if you are a secularist who does not understand Israel’s spiritual indispensability, you can easily see that you depend on Israel for modern living.

Israel is the gift that keeps on giving, just as God promised to Abraham.  And the head nation not a tail nation, as God promised to Moses.  Today, this tiny nation is the best candidate for a cure of Alzheimer’s, the biggest and cruellest killer known to the British nation.  If you are benefitting from any life-saving and life-prolonging drug, or vaccination, chances are it came from the genius of Israel, or certainly the Jews, who have won an incredible 30% of Nobel Prizes in Medicine.  This is why the British universities that boycott Israel are all condemned to be failing universities, whose only hope for sustainable financial viability is Gulf-State funding.

Would we have already found the cure for Alzheimer’s had the Nazis not murdered half the world’s Jews within living memory?  Who knows?  Would we have even more Israeli ideas to heal the damaged ecology of the planet?  Last year, the Prince of Wales, on his visit first official to Israel (despite being badly advised on Israel by his close friend Nicolas Soames MP) acknowledged that Israeli genius “maintains the entire structure of the NHS”, the same NHS that recently brought Boris back to life and gave him the clap.

The World Economic Forum recently listed Israel as the second-most innovative nation in the world, behind only the USA. Per capita, Israel is by far the most innovative nation in the world, leading the way in medicine, IT, IT security, airport security, ecology, and sustainable agriculture and irrigation, despite being under constant attacks through violence, vandalism, propaganda and academic boycotting (including by British business, universities, churches).  Israel keeps us all safe and healthy.  Israel was the first nation to eradicate endemic malaria, and is the first nation in the world to sustainably reverse desertification.  If Israel can do all this despite the world, imagine what she could do for the world with the world’s support.  Without Israeli genius maintaining the structure of the NHS, Boris the Pagan might well have died in NHS care.

Israel needs to take measures both to improve her long-term security and become one step nearer to her divinely-sanctioned sovereignty.  And she must take these steps.  I have friends, including Jews, who offer only secular arguments for this, but ultimately the case is Biblical, the very same Bible that is banned on the French Way, the way of the EU.

If my advice to support Israel in the Biblical way gets to the Prime Minister, it will be the most profound and solemn advice he has received since he took office.  And if the Queen’s first minister does heed my advice, he will find himself walking with destiny rather than against it.  Britain – this sceptred isle, this blessed plot – will be truly blessed.  All nations will be blessed, as is the long-promised and providential destiny of the nations.

Let’s face it.  In these extraordinary times, we could use some blessings from the Almighty!

7. The Biblical Proportions of 2020

Nothing happens unless God, Lord of History, allows it to happen.  The Christian faith, if you ignore the trendy Liberal clergy in the Church of England, is faith in the Providence of God Almighty, God of Israel, whose power is without limits, omnipotent: Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem.  If you deny this, the very central claims of Christianity are undone, and the Church is reduced to a kind of vacuous spiritual humanism, or a museum artefact in the Republic of France.  If you deny God’s omnipotent life-giving power to all who choose not to become unattached from God, you are swallowing the camel and straining at the gnat. “Today you will be with me in Paradise”.

Omnipotent power means of course that God has the power to relinquish power as He wills. And He does relinquish power, by giving us free will.  God gives us free will, and in raising us to be in His image, asks us to choose to work with Him or against Him.  God works with, or around, the free will of man, who is given the freedom to choose good or choose evil.  Man, ultimately, cannot stand in the way of God’s promises to mankind for the ultimate harmonious destiny of the nations, centred on Mount Zion.  The French Way cannot, ultimately, cut across the Vertical Way.

The really, really serious human rights abuses that are still present today in most of the nations of the world are simply not being addressed.  Why?  Because all the nations scapegoat Israel.  The nations of the world are so obsessively anti-Israel that they are incapable of being anti the things that we really do need to challenge, and agree to challenge as nations.

The world really does need the nations to unite on human rights abuses, especially for children, and especially for girls (in Somalia and Egypt for instance, FGM is almost universal, and in many parts of the world men take child ‘brides’ whose insides are ripped out trying to give birth in early puberty).  Modern slavery is a great curse on us all: we are all economically implicated whether we choose to know it or not.

The modern world does in fact unite on many things, and has done for several centuries.  The metre and kilogram for instance – of the Napoleonic Code – is now universal.  The worlds sets its clocks and navigation systems according to Greenwich Mean Time.  The universal agreement to use the English language makes international flights and shipping possible, and the “world wide web” is wrapped in English-language coding and mark-up languages. But the world needs to unite in accepting the sanctity of human being, and this requires the Holy Way.

I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live.

Deuteronomy (KJV)

And many peoples shall go and say:
Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord,
To the house of the God of Jacob;
And He will teach us of His ways,
And we will walk in His paths.’
For out of Zion shall go forth the law,
And the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
And He shall judge between the nations,
And shall decide for many peoples;
And they shall beat their swords into plowshares,
And their spears into pruninghooks;
Nation shall not lift up sword against nation.

Isaiah (KJV)


[i] 1919 Vision – Albert Einstein’s Gravitational Lens,
Mark Pickles, December 2019:

[ii] I Accuse – Antisemitism and the Church of England,
Mark Pickles, July 2019:

[iii] Two pieces on “Islamophobia”, Mark Pickles, December 2019:

In Defence of Melanie Phillips’ Calling Out Bogus Claims of ‘Islamophobia’:

Why we must fear, challenge, and expunge the word “Islamophobia”:

[iv] It is time to drop the words “Race” and “Racism”; it is time to tackle MODERN slavery, and it is time to be thankful of the colonial history of Great Britain
Mark Pickles, June 2020:

[v] Antisemitism in the Church of England: Op-Ed in The Algemeiner, Mark Pickles, November 2019:

[vi] I Accuse – Antisemitism and the Church of England,
Mark Pickles, July 2019:

[vii] Annexation versus Sovereignty – words matter, Op-Ed in The Algemeiner, Arsen Ostrovsky and Colonel Richard Kemp, June 2020:

[viii] There is no Two-State Solution
Mark Pickles, January 2020:

[ix] The Arab-Israeli Conflict Made Simple – The Nazi elephant in the room
Mark Pickles, August 2019:

[x] Dame Louise Ellman’s letter to Dominic Raab MP on the Iran-sponsored threat from Lebanon:

[xi] There is no Two-State Solution
Mark Pickles, January 2020:

[xii] The Arab-Israeli Conflict Made Simple – The Nazi elephant in the room
Mark Pickles, August 2019:


Talks by Colonel Richard Kemp, pertinent to this essay:  (4 minutes) (40 minutes)

Posted in Antisemitism, Christianity, Ecology, France, Gravity, Great Britain, Israel, Judaism, Musicology, Political philosophy, Science, Theology, Uncategorized | 3 Comments

It is time to drop the words “Race” and “Racism”; it is time to tackle MODERN slavery, and it is time to be thankful of the colonial history of Great Britain

Students of political science, and social policy – and other disciplines in the humanities – are presently obliged to study “racism”.

raceIn this piece, I argue that we should now drop the words “race” and “racism” from academic discourse, and from such things as employment law, and from legislation such as, here in the UK, “race relations”, and “racial equality”. I suggest dropping such terms at home and abroad, and disbanding the World Conference Against Racism, which, as I have written very recently, perpetuates and augments the very evil it claims to oppose. [i]

Racism, where it is studied, should be a study of a philosophy of the past, not of the present.  As a discipline, it should be limited to history:  “racism from the 18th century to 2020”.

Why do I say all this?

Because the very use of the word “race” applied to human beings is an anachronism of bad science.  To aspire for good “race relations”, or “harmony between all races” is to validate the very ideology of racism. It is to fall into the trap that our 18th and 19th century ancestors created for us.

I am half Indian, and therefore very much a product of British Imperialism. Having a brown mother has its advantages, not least that, unlike President Trump, I do not need to waste thousands of hours of my life on sunbeds in order to remain a darker shade of pale.  But apparently I am “mixed race”, and “multiracial”.  Logically, therefore, I am supposed to see my dark-skinned mother as one race, and my white-skinned father (who met my mother during his National Service in the British Empire) as another race.  But frankly, that would be a very weird thing to try to get my head around.  And to do so, i.e. for me to see each of my parents as belonging to a different race, would make me racist in the very way the theorists of racism, including Charles Darwin, wanted me to be.

The full title of Darwin’s famous “Origin of Species” is (my highlighting) On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.

“No country can be named in which all the native inhabitants [could not be] better adapted and improved; for in all countries the natives have so far been conquered by naturalised productions, that they have allowed some foreigners to take firm possession of their land. And as foreigners in every country have beaten some of their natives, we may safely conclude that the natives might have been modified with advantage, so as to have better resisted the intruders”.

On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life
, Charles Darwin, 1859

And in his other famous work – The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex – Darwin wrote that he thought the weaker ‘races’ of man would naturally perish, and that this would be good and desirable for humanity.  I don’t think that Darwin was a bad man with bad intentions.  He just had ideas that, at the time, seemed to be good ideas, and right and scientific.  And Darwin (or rather the Darwins, Erasmus and Charles) certainly advanced human knowledge, not only in science, but in all domains, not least philosophical theology.  We learned new truths about the place, and the age, of man in Creation.  I certainly don’t want to see statues of Darwin being toppled, or any statue of historical figures being toppled for that matter, as I wrote in my last piece. [ii]  Not all subjects of historical statues can be subjects of veneration, but they all teach us about how our ancestors saw themselves and understood things.

But it was from some of Darwin’s ideas that we got such spurious philosophies as Social Darwinism and eugenics, and most absurdly of all, “Aryanism”, concocted in France in the 19th century, and adopted by the Nazis in the 20th century as the justification for world war and the Holocaust.

You see, racism when it was invented was seen as a necessary and positive and scientifically useful thing – until WWII.  In order for mankind to progress, it was believed that you had to divide it into races.  And this was the idea that enabled Christian Europe to justify, amongst other things, Imperialism, the Slave Trade and slavery (post-Slave Trade) and more recently, the carving up of Africa, which was agreed by European powers (in the French language) at the Berlin Conference 1884-1885.

Today we need to accept that imperialism, and slavery, was the reality in all nations, since the beginning of history (which is, by definition, the time since the first written communication).  Christianity and Islam both had extensive slavery and trading in slaves.  And slavery is still common in Muslim nations, rich and poor.  Qatar is using slaves to build the football stadia for the next World Cup, for instance. The highlife in the United Arab Emirates is supported by modern slavery (such as of Filipino ‘migrant workers’ who end up in forced labour with no rights).  And of course, Islamic State took slaves wherever it invaded.

As I wrote in my last piece, there is more slavery today than ever (although of course there are several times more people in the world than a century ago).

Addressing modern slavery must become our real concern.  And I commend, in the UK, the Modern Slavery Act 2015.  More black people are in slavery today than ever, enslaved by other black people, often in the form of debt bondage. Furthermore, child labour is so cruel in many nations that it is no less evil than slavery. Over 2 million children work in cocoa production, many are trafficked into Ghana and the Ivory Coast, and some are indeed explicitly slaves, often owned by their masters through debt bondage. If you, in the UK, care about “black lives”, stop seeking out statues to topple, and address modern slavery, and start campaigning for fair cocoa production, with a view to paying more for your chocolate.  Lobby, and shame, the confectionary corporations to help improve the situation for the famers and villagers in Africa (such as building schools and health clinics).  And following this, we all must subsequently pay much more for the luxury of chocolate, otherwise we are just as implicated as our ancestors who developed a taste for slave-produced sugar.


It is not for us today to judge all our European ancestors of recent centuries as “racist”, even though they all generally were.  Most were racist in the belief that racism was good for mankind.  Life was brutal and hard in previous ages.  Pandemics and epidemics were frequent.  Survival was high on the list of personal priorities.  And many believed that racial selection could improve the human lot.

Racism in previous centuries, since the Enlightenment, was simply accepted wisdom. It was simply accepted that racism, which was new and apparently scientific, was good and true.

Ideas on race, and on how to apply them, varied between generations and between nations. For instance, when the British colonised India, they encouraged British colonisers to marry Indian women and have children (as did the Dutch and Portuguese colonisers in India), until the policy changed in the late 19th century, by which time “mixed races” were discouraged, and the overt “Anglo-Indian” culture in India faded away.

The history of civilisation is the history of colonialism and slavery

Men (and it was almost exclusively men) doubtless had good and bad motives for wanting to spread civilisation across the globe.  Some of the motives were racist (and some racists thought their motives were good), and some economic, and some religious.  Christians for instance believed it was a matter of duty to God to spread, or evangelise, the knowledge of God Almighty, God of Israel, and His Messiah, throughout the world, or “to the ends of the Earth”.  Jesus demanded nothing less.

And slavery was accepted from the dawn of civilisation, and was taken for granted in Christianity (because it certainly was by Paul and Peter, and, arguably, Jesus himself) until the American Civil War, a mere century before I was born in 1961.  The way forward is not, here in Britain, to topple statues of slavers past.  Britain was a slaving nation, as was every other powerful nation.  Every monarch and every figure of the Establishment was implicated in the Slave Trade, apart from the very few who worked to abolish slavery.  For a book I am presently writing on the philosophy and history of science, I have been studying the writings of Sir Isaac Newton MP and Sir Christopher Wren MP.  Neither of them spoke against slavery in the House of Commons, and neither of them criticised their peers involved in the trade.  We should also note that the horrors of the Slave Trade were hidden to British society, just as the horrors of modern slavery are hidden to the affluent nations today.  It is easy to criticise our ancestors for slavery; it is not as easy to blame yourself for the modern slavery in which we are all implicated (including here in Britain, where it is well hidden).

It is simply wrong and dangerous and ignorant to bring down statues and memorials of men implicated in the Slave Trade.  You would need to flatten St Paul’s Cathedral and all the Wren churches for a start.  You would need to remove all statues of British figures – including of Oliver Cromwell’s Republic – to remove those not implicated in the Slave Trade, or in the exploitation of Ireland.  You would need to ban Shakespeare, and productions of Mozart’s The Magic Flute.  You would need a Cultural Revolution, which is of course what the Socialists want who are funding and organising, and writing the charters for, the global “Black Lives Matter” movement.

People who protested against slavery in the history of the British Empire were few and far between. And because they were religiously “non-conformists”, they were denied positions in the establishment, or even a university education. Some non-conformists did achieve fame despite being disadvantaged, such as scientists (such as the Quaker John Dalton), and poets (such as William Blake) and their statues are dotted up and down the nation. But we cannot remove evidence of all figures who were not Abolitionists, or who helped to build the British Empire.

Modernity is indebted to Empire, especially the British Empire

From the beginnings of civilisation until within living memory, every nation was either an empire builder or it imperialised other nations.

This is how we have come to have global things, such as English as the universal language of science, air traffic, maritime traffic, and, indeed, the World Wide Web (because every website is wrapped in English-language scripts and mark-up languages).  And of all the empires, I would say that the British Empire, a Christian Empire, on the whole, did much good, including leading the Abolition of the Slave Trade.

There are a lot of empires (and caliphates and blocs) that were worse than the British Empire. The great march of history, and civilisations, would have been impossible without empires such as the British Empire and, indeed, the Islamic empires.  Had Christianity itself not been imperialistic, it would have been crushed by much worse empires, such as the Vandals, the Goths, the Celts, the Visigoths, the Huns, the Vikings, the Mongols…  who would have overwhelmed Christianity had the Roman Empire itself not converted to Christianity, and had Islam not continued the monotheistic civilising of Europe after the collapse of the Roman Empire.  And had the Christian empire not recovered in the Middle Ages, Europe would have been consumed by Islamic empires, or worse, by the Mongols under Genghis Khan (whose empire at its peak consumed much of Europe).

Had the British not had an empire, England would have been the subject nation of an empire, as it was until the English, and the English Church, separated off from the mother-ship Norman Empire that rapidly conquered England after 1066. Eventually, in the 15th century, and the reign of King Henry IV, even the English kings and bishops started to speak English rather than Norman French, and England would change from being colonised, to being a coloniser.

More recently, had Britain not had an empire, it would have become ruled by the French empires and the Bonaparte dynasty, and, more recently still, by the Third Reich. And yet more recently, had Britain not had a strong empire, we would surely have been overrun by the Socialist Bloc: the biggest Eurasian empire since the reign of Genghis Khan, especially before the Sino-Soviet split of the early 1960s.

History is what it is. And I thank God for Britain’s strength, and that it had the power to stop the worst racists of all:  Adolph Hitler’s Nazi Germany.

And in our post imperial age, the Commonwealth of former British nations does much good, and is a valued institution.


In sum.  Yes, the philosophy of race was used in building the British Empire and in justifying Colonialism.  And just as we no longer believe in empire building, we should no longer believe in race.

Most of us today, having seen where racism led, accept that the natural philosophy of racism is bad. And so it is time to drop ideas such as “race relations”, because such things in themselves imply that categorising people by race is valid.  Such things perpetuate the spurious philosophy of racism.



[i]  My recent piece on the antisemitism of the World Conference Against Racism:

[ii] My recent piece in response to the toppling of statues in England:

Posted in Great Britain, Political philosophy, Science, Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Go Home, British Millennials. Get a proper education and THEN help the human race.

Following a week of protests and riots in the UK, we got this from the youngest MP in the House of Commons, celebrating mob vandalism (that she calls “acts of resistance”) and the toppling of the statue of the 17th-century MP Edward Colston:


I don’t know Bristol, and I knew nothing about Edward Colston MP (1636 – 1719) until I looked him up today. But I do know that all MPs and members of the Establishment, including churchmen, of the late 17th century and the 18th century were implicated in the Slave Trade, directly or indirectly.  Colston was directly involved in the Slave Trade, as were many MPs of Government and Opposition, and even bishops of the House of Lords.  As wrong as it seems to us today, public figures at the time were not judged according to their involvement in the Slave Trade but on other things on which our civilisation is built, and to which we are indebted.

Colston’s era was several centuries before the birth of the Labour Party in the early 1900s.  But Labour too, when it appeared on the political scene, was deeply unpalatable by today’s standards. Keir Hardie (after whom Sir Keir Starmer MP is apparently named) was an antisemite.  And the first Labour “think tank”, the Fabian society – comprised largely of scientifically-minded atheists – preached eugenics and sterilisation. The Fabians supported, and gave intellectual justification for, the “Half-Caste Act” in British Australia, as a result of which children of Aboriginal mothers who were raped by their white masters were forcibly taken from their mothers to be educated as whites, such as in Christian missions.

I dedicate a fair amount of my time these days to campaigning against antisemitism, but I would not advocate toppling any statues of Keir Hardie MP, or of campaigning to rename his namesake ‘Sir’ Keir Starmer MP.  Toppling statues, and renaming things, is not the British way, and is not the right way.

If there is a case for removing any statue, of any MP or anyone, it must come through the democratic process, not through our democratically-elected Labour MPs encouraging mobs to tear them down.

Had there been a democratic process, I would have made the case for not removing the statue.  There is scarcely any public figure since Britain formed the “Mother of  Parliaments” in the 17th century, until 19th century, who can be detached from the Slave Trade.

Expunging evidence of Slave Trade from our cities – even if it were to be done democratically – is not the way to educate future generations of the evils of the Slave Trade. We need to conserve the history of our cities to learn about history, which includes learning about how our ancestors saw themselves.

The Millennial generation, for all its strengths and good points, does not understand its addiction to an anachronistic perspective of history.  As “digital natives”, they have a propensity for judging our ancestors as they judge, say, Piers Morgan, or as Piers Morgan judges “Britain’s Got Talent”.  I remember when my own daughter was 14 telling me that she found it hard to imagine a time before mobile phones, especially when I told her that when I was 14 we didn’t even have a phone in the house.  At the risk of sounding like Monty Python’s “Four Yorkshiremen”, such things as telephones were “luxury” for working-class Yorkshire families such as mine. If we wanted to arrange to meet friends or extended family in another town, we had to post letters, or rely on diaries agreed in the previous meeting.

Although I don’t know Bristol, I know Liverpool very well, and have visited often from my home in south Cheshire, including to worship in its wonderful Anglican cathedral.  There is an excellent museum, the Mersey Maritime Museum, which (the last time I saw it, with my daughter) leaves the visitor in no doubt about the evils of the Slave Trade, but you would have to flatten Liverpool, including the churches, to expunge evidence of Slave Trade and slave traders. You would have to rename streets, such as the popular and bohemian Bold Street (named after Jonas Bold), and Penny Lane, made famous by The Beatles (named after James Penny).

Nadia Whittome MP, Labour, was born in 1996, and is about the same age as my daughter, but not as wise or as well-educated and informed.  (My daughter has studied modern slavery, and has done voluntary work to help young girls sex-trafficked into Britain.)  Whittome is the age that the Tory MP William Pitt the Younger (1759 – 1806) was when he became the youngest British Prime Minister.

There are monuments and statues of Pitt the Younger throughout Britain.  Through the encouragement of William Wilberforce MP, Pitt the Younger laid the ground for the Slave Trade Act 1807, which abolished international slave trading (but not slavery).  The Slavery Abolition Act for the British Empire did not appear until a generation later: 1833.  Will Nadia Whittome and her coevals celebrate the tearing down of all statues representing “systemic racism” of all British public figures before 1833?  I hope not. I hope she learns that her role involves assuring law and order, not encouraging mob rule “acts of resistance”.

Think about our ONE HUMAN RACE, and modern-day slavery

Our Millennials, or at least many of them, seem to have got distracted by the recent problems in the USA, distracted into forgetting that all lives matter.  Folks are distracted into ignoring far more important issues than racism in Britain.  Racism in Britain is relatively low.  I was born in 1961. I am “half-caste” (to use a term that was still current when I was young). My mother, born in Singapore, is dark brown, of Indian descent.  Her father was one of many thousands of Singaporeans (and millions of other Asian civilians) killed by the Japanese from 1937 to the end of WWII.   My mother followed my father back to Britain when he finished his National Service in Singapore (which was then still British). My family has experienced some racism in England over the decades, but not much to be honest.  My mother, who was at the tender age of 9 when the War ended, saw the Japs in action.  She knows what real racism looks like.

I served in the RAF in the 1980s. There was occasionally some jokey racism directed at blacks and Sikhs that wouldn’t be accepted today, just as the British policy of not allowing homosexuals to serve in the military is no longer relevant.  Times have changed. In the 1980s, when homosexuality was still largely in the closet, the British Establishment was reasonable in believing that Soviet spies would target closet gays with the threat of ‘outing’ them. Anachronism is easy if one is ignorant of history.

Britain is arguably the best place to live in the world, for many reasons not least the  British people, of all creeds and colour and sexual orientation.  On the whole, British people are good and kind and outstandingly polite.  And so please, Millennials, seek more worthy causes than violent resistance movements against Britain.  You have been generally [mis]educated to seek out and exaggerate problems that don’t really exist, in order to fit popular socio-political ideological narratives.

Aside from the events that inspired Nadia Whittome MP’s anarchism yesterday (that I hope she comes to regret and learn from), also reported yesterday was the death of a 14-year-old daughter in the Islamic Republic of Iran. The Persian girl was beheaded with a farming sickle by her father, named as Reza Ashrafi, who first called a lawyer, to make sure his “honour killing” would not get him into serious trouble. Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch – whom I follow on Twitter and from whom I learned about this atrocity – tells us that 30% of murders in Iran are honour killings of girls. But why does hardly anyone in Britain seem to think the lives of these girls matter?

In Somalia, female genital mutilation stands at 98%.  Mali and Egypt are not much better.  Some of the girls die from this terrifying and barbaric practice, and many suffer lifelong debilitating injury. Their screams under the razor blade are unheard by the world.

Pakistani men take child ‘brides’, many of whom die trying to give birth, or, again, suffer lifelong debilitating injury, including rejection by society.

And don’t forget slavery, which is more widespread today than it was at the height of the Slave Trade, which, incidentally, was not limited to white Europeans:  slave trading in the Muslim nations was just as extensive as in Christian Europe.

I wrote a piece a few years ago on the use of children, in slavery or debt bondage, in the cocoa trade. The Wikipedia page “Child labour in cocoa production” is well referenced.  West Africa (which is where most of the chocolate we consume comes from) is the worst area affected.  Look it up. Children’s lives matter.  Today, slavery affects people of all colour, including white. Slavery, overt slavery, is rife in Nigeria, China, North Korea, Guatemala, Uzbekistan, India, China, Congo, Pakistan, Russia, Sudan, Dominican Republic, Yemen, Iraq, Philippines…

Theresa May MP, as Foreign Secretary, effected the Modern Slavery Act 2015, to tackle the extensive and varied and hidden forms of modern slavery in Britain.  This seems to be having some impact, including raising awareness.  British employers, including my own employer, now ensure that we are aware of what modern slavery is.  I admit that I was shocked at the data presented by my employer (an international science corporation), despite thinking I was already aware of the extent of the problem.

Modern slavery is often highly disguised, and good British employers are now careful to ensure that we don’t unwittingly get involved with supply chains or raw materials that involve slavery anywhere in the world.  But there is more we can all do of course.  I suggest to fellow Brits, let the USA sort out its own problems, whilst we advance the global cause, as the Tories did under William Pitt the Younger.  The Americans, who were a generation behind Britain in banning slavery, and are a generation behind us now, will catch up.

As a form of penance – and in the interests of necessary education for British Millennials and future generations – I think that the City of Bristol should be made to re-erect the statue of Edward Colston MP, and next to it a statue of Theresa May MP, architect of the Modern Slavery Act 2015, Britain being the first nation in Europe to introduce such a thing.


Further Reading:

Like William Wilberforce MP, I am a Christian opposed to oppression and cruelty.  Here is a piece I wrote a few days ago, in which I look at recent events through a theological lens:


Posted in Christianity, Great Britain, Political philosophy, Uncategorized | 9 Comments

Zion is the Cure for Global Racism – and all other things in our broken world

The cure for global racism is Zion.  It is important to reinforce this Holy vision as the resurgent black-rights movements in the USA and further afield gravitate, once again, to antisemitism, anti-Israelism and the desecration of synagogues by rioters throughout the USA this week.

When the nations gathered at the World Conference Against Racism in Durban in 2001, the only nation discussed and condemned was Israel.  We will return to this.  It is the nations’ negative obsession with Israel, and the nations’ innate ansitemitism, that precludes any progress on global racism. Every time the nations gather to discuss race, they discuss Jews (a mere 1 in 500 of the world population), as if to charge God of Israel Himself with racism for choosing to pilot the history of the world through the Jews. As I have written in other pieces, Christians, Muslims, Socialists (and other atheists and secularists) have their diverse reasons for loving to hate Israel.

Things will not improve until the world is turned upside-down.  The cure for racism and other forms of conflict and injustice is the world’s coming into the wisdom, understanding and knowledge of God’s vision for the destiny of nations – a world beyond empires and caliphates.

Similarly, the cure for the ecological and climate catastrophes and encroaching desertification is Zion and the Wisdom of Zion.  The blessing of the world to the time beyond war, famine and pestilence can come from nowhere but the City of David: the one Holy City Centre of the world.  Or as Jesus put it in his vows following his Sermon on the Mount:  “Swear not by Jerusalem, for it is the City of the great King”.  There is nothing else on which the nations of the world can properly and harmoniously unite.

The Jews were chosen to teach the world that Creation is Holy, Time is Holy, and Geography is Holy.  And it is through remembering the Creation and the Holiness of Time and Geography that we remember that God is God of the Sabbath.  It is through the revelation through the Jews that we have come to have a 7-day week.  And it is through our cycles of worship that we remember that certain things are deemed to be Holy, not least man – i.e. all men and women and boys and girls of the human race – made in the “image of God”.

Long before the Jewish teacher Jesus of Nazareth arrived on the scene, the Jews were unique in teaching that there is only One God, not gods for this and that, such as a god of the sun, a god of the moon, a god of time, of thunder, of corn, of wine… There are not gods for this or that city; the god of Athens is not Athena, and the god of Alexandria is not Aion.  Our One Creator God is housed in the One Holy City for the world.

This idea must have seemed incredible 2000 years ago, as Saul the Pharisee – whom we now call Saint Paul – went to teach in cities such as Athens and Rome.  But today, the majority of the world’s population believes in One God:  God of Israel, who entered the history of man through the People Israel.

Everything in Creation comes from a single source. Indeed, according to our modern knowledge there is only One Big Bang, i.e. one source of Creation, not many.  And of course in modern times, it is predominantly the Jews, from Einstein onwards, who came to discover the source of the cosmos in Big Bang.  (Jews have won around 30% of Nobel Prizes in Physics.  Having said that, I challenge Einstein’s worldview.  He was an atheist.  See the piece I wrote earlier this year, to which I have pointed in the footnotes.)

The Jews, uniquely, taught us that Time is sacred.  Einstein tried to undo all this by suggesting that nothing is sacred and that Time is relative, but he was wrong.  And he was wrong to elevate mathematics to a kind of god, or the ontologically greatest phenomenon in the cosmos.

Only when man truly knows and understands that he is the image of God will he be at peace with himself, his fellow men, and indeed with the environment:  God’s very good Creation.  Man must centre on the Holy Centre.

In the garden of the United Nations headquarters in New York is the “Isaiah wall”.  Carved into it are the famous words from Isaiah Chapter 2:

“They shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks, Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, Neither shall they learn war any more.” 

Through Christianity, these words of world peace from the Jewish Prophet have become famous throughout the world.  I am not a pacifist – I am ex-British Forces – nevertheless I hope these words come true.  But they can only come true if we sit down by the river and remember Zion.

Less famous than “swords into plowshares…” , and apparently of less interest to the historical Church centres in Rome, Byzantium, Canterbury, Zurich, etc. are the preceding verses in Isaiah Chapter 2 which tell us that the words of judgement and peace are issued from God at the House of God: on a hill exalted about all hills:  Mount Zion:  Jerusalem.  It is to Mount Zion that the kings of all nations will flow up.  It is from Mount Zion that God brings the world into His Peace. Shalom.

You might call this magic thinking, but I don’t.  It is right thinking.  It is my Christian faith. It is the faith on which global civilisation (including science) is built.  Man can no more create true Peace out of the ideas in his head than he could have created the cosmos – nay even a single living cell – out of the ideas in his head.

Peace only comes through the trusting of God’s vision of Peace.  True Peace is trusting the destiny of the nations to the plans and promises of God, not the lesser plans, lesser promises and lesser ideas of man or collectives of men, including in our times the international bodies set up ostensibly to engender peace between the nations and to tackle racism.


I think that future generations will come to understand that the United Nations is, scandalously, the nations united against God our Creator, God of Israel, and His People of the Covenant.

The international forums on human rights and on racism created after World War II perversely ignored the fact that the philosophical ideology that had cursed the people of Germany and Austria and ultimately much of Europe, and led to the murder of a large proportion of the world’s Jews, was antisemitism.  The Nazis murdered many others on the grounds of race, but went to war in the belief that they could eliminate the Jewish race altogether.

In 1948 in Paris, leaders and influencers in culture, law and politics from 58 nations gathered at the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) to proclaim “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights”.  The structure of the document – and to some extent the content of the document – was based on the Napoleonic Code: the first modern pan-national system of legal coding, adopted throughout Europe, Latin America, and much of the French Empire (or if not fully adopted, the Napoleonic Code nevertheless deeply influenced the systems put in place by nations aiming to modernise, and the UN still defers to this in using French as the working language of the Secretariat).

But the Declaration has one huge omission, an omission that, in hindsight, has resulted in the absolute and extant failure of the whole UN project, and especially the Human Rights project.  Unlike Napoleon himself, whose vision and Code emancipated the Jews of Europe from the Church-enforced ghettos, the main drafter of the UN Declaration – René Cassin – failed to write into the Declaration that special measures are necessary to counter antisemitism, “the longest hatred”.

A tragic irony is that the Leftist thinker René Cassin, the Declaration’s author, was himself a French Jew and old enough to remember the antisemitism of the Dreyfus Affair, as Cassin himself told the world in his acceptance speech for the Nobel Peace Prize in 1968.  But he is far from the first or the last Leftist or secular or ‘progressive’ Jew to have lost the plot, and to assimilate into an internationalist and godless Socialist vision in which Zion is irrelevant.

In my studies in antisemitism, I have come to realise that every international organisation, be it religious, secular, charitable, or political will inevitably be consumed by antisemitism and anti-Israelism unless it rigorously sets out not to do so.  The World Council of Churches is no exception. The European Union is no exception. The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (the bloc of Muslim nations) is no exception. The International Criminal Court is no exception.  The United Nations is no exception.  The World Conference Against Racism is no exception.  Amnesty International is no exception.  And the activist movement Black Lives Matter is no exception.

The World Conference Against Racism in 2001, in Durban, was nothing more than a launchpad for anti-Zionism.  Indeed, Zionism was the only contemporary issue on the agenda in Durban, largely thanks to antisemitic/anti-Israelist Muslims and Christians, including South Africa’s favourite son Archbishop Desmond Tutu.  The world gathered in Durban to join Tutu’s despicable chorus in declaring Israel the most racist and “apartheid” nation in the world.  This is the opposite of truth.  Israel is the most giving and most indispensable nation of the world, whilst South Africa, despite its natural beauty, is at least as morally depraved and racist and murderous under black government as it was under white government.  We can say the same about Zimbabwe.  And Israel is the only nation in the Middle East and North Africa that has human rights, for peoples of all colours, and all faiths, and no faith.  This is because the Middle East is deeply infected with genocidal antisemitism, and has been since the 1930s.  And since the turn of the Millennium this genocidal antisemitism has morphed into anti-Christianism.

Historically, killing usually starts with Jews (as it did in pre-Revolution Russia over a century ago), and but never ends with the Jews. Once a society becomes psychologically and spiritually amenable to genocide, the killing never stops with the Jews.  According to a report commissioned last year by former Foreign Secretary of the UK Jeremy Hunt, persecution of Christians in the region (including murder, imprisonment and kidnapping) is now at “near genocide” levels according to the formal definition of genocide. The Christian population in the Middle East is now down to 5% where it used to be 20%.

UN Watch tells us that in the decade following the creation of the UN Human Rights Council in 2006, there have been more human rights condemnations against Israel than all the other nations of the world combined. Hillel Neuer, Executive Director of UN Watch, recently Tweeted:

Israel – 68 UN human rights condemnations
Iraq – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Cuba – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Qatar – 0 UN human rights condemnations
China – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Russia – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Turkey – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Somalia – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Pakistan – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Venezuela – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Zimbabwe – 0 UN human rights condemnations … etc, etc

And so we can see what is happening here.  The nations of the world gather, as the Jewish Prophets including Jesus said they would, to take counsel together, letting themselves off the hook by agreeing on a scapegoat:  the Jew, the Jewish nation. Half the world’s Jews live in Israel, a tiny nation the size of Wales, half of which is desert, and a nation that since its creation has been under permanent siege on all sides by Arab and Iranian regimes overtly avowed to wiping Israel off the map.  And half the Jews of Israel are refugees, or descendants of refugees, from the Arab nations.

Here in the UK at the time of writing, people are rallying, and rioting, in copycat protests against US police who have been arrested on charges of manslaughter of a black man.  This has even led to attacks on the British police, despite the fact that British police are rightly reputed as one of the most just and effective police forces in the world.  But where are the protests against Iran’s slaughtering of 1500 innocent protesters, or the internecine killing in Syria and Yemen, or Pakistan’s murdering of Christians, or China’s persecution of Uighur Muslims, or the near genocide of Christians in the Middle East, or Saudi Arabia’s capital punishment of ‘blasphemers’, etc?   And what about the many millions of girls subject to female genital mutilation in nations such as Somalia, Egypt and Mali, some of whom die from FGM, and many more suffer a life of debilitating health problems.  It’s as if the world thinks that their unheard screams do not matter.

Little girls’ lives matter, and hundreds of millions of them are the most vulnerable and most neglected people in the world.  But the nations won’t address this because they insist on excluding every subject apart from Israel from the international agendas on human rights.

In London this week, people have poured out into the parks and squares, forming large crowds, despite, or perhaps partly because of, the Covid-19 lockdown rules, and all the frustrations they cause.

People seem to sense the world will not be same again.  The world is looking for something new, something novel, for the post-Covid-19 era.  But as I said at the beginning of the piece, we should be conserving the divine revelations of old, although of course always mapping them to our modern knowledge.  Novel philosophies are never good.

A century ago, after World War I, the world saw many novel movements of the political left and of the political right, irreligious (such Socialism, Anarchism and Fascism for instance) and religious (such as Clerical Fascism in the West, Islamism in the Middle East, and Imperialistic Shintoism in Japan for instance), all of which led to tragedy and great evils.  They all promised peace in the end, but all delivered greater and greater bloodshed, until the philosophical vision of their leading protagonists failed after three or four generations of curse.

In the Jewish Proverbs we read that, “without vision, the people perish”. But this famous passage is not the vision of any man or woman, it is vision of God Almighty, the lawgiver, who looks at all nations through “the apple of His eye”:  Israel:  the nation that God is building up to be “the head, not the tail”, and “always at the top, never at the bottom”.

It is sadly ironic that today many “progressive” thinkers, including even some Jewish thinkers, see Israel as the product of imperialism and colonialism (and therefore inherently racist).  In fact the restitution of Israel in 1948 defined the beginning of the end of imperialism.  For the first time in millennia, Israel was no longer the possession of an Empire or Caliphate, be it Pagan, European-Christian, Arabic-Islamic, Ottoman, or British.

It is also sad, and worrying, that here in England, a Christian state, our Millennial generation is generally theologically illiterate due to our schools’ misguided attempts to teach not Christianity and Christian worship, but rather something of “a broadly Christian character”.  Our young generally do not even know what Zion is, or what Zion means, except through a kind of osmosis of insidious propaganda through the UK’s Gulf-State funded universities.  “Zion” is simply associated with the colonial ancien régime, therefore it is good to be “anti-Zionist”, and to “Boycott Israel”, and to make “Free Palestine” the 21st-century cause célèbre around which the Millennials can rally. Few seem to reallise that “Free Palestine” is a euphemism for the genocide of Jews through the unleashing on Israel of Hamas, Fatah and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, unhinged regimes even by contemporary Arab standards (which is why Egypt has walled them out).  Jews have been wiped out of all Arab lands, where Jews had lived continuously for up to 3000 years, and as noted, Christians are now suffering the same fate.

Without vision, the people perish.  And the only vision that will not perish is the vision  centred on the People Israel.  The only possibility of Peace is the nations arrayed on Zion: all nations grafted into the olive tree of our fathers.

“God of our fathers, You chose Abraham and his descendants to bring your Name to the nations: we are deeply saddened by the behaviour of those who in the course of history have caused these children of yours to suffer, and asking your forgiveness we wish to commit ourselves to genuine brotherhood with the people of the Covenant.”
Pope John Paul II, handwritten prayer inserted into the Western Wall, Jerusalem, AD 2000



Further Reading:

1919 Vision: Albert Einstein’s Gravitational Lens:

Posted in Antisemitism, Christianity, France, Great Britain, Israel, Judaism, Political philosophy, Theology, Uncategorized | 2 Comments

The Lethal Journalism of Peter Hitchens

(Introducing the “Hitchens Formulation”)

I have decided to write two essays on “Lethal Journalism”.  This is the first, the subject of which is Peter Hitchens. He is not the only bad British journalist and broadcaster, but he is one of the most famous.

My second essay will be on the Al-Durah affair, which is the very epitome of Lethal Journalism, and out of which, indeed, the very term “Lethal Journalism” was coined [i].

[ The Al-Durah affair is a French-mainstream-media hoax, beginning in 2000, that has done inestimable damage.  It has fuelled 21st-century antisemitism and anti-Israelism of a particularly virulent and genocidal Islamic form that has now cross-infected back to the West from where it was exported to the Arab world in the 1930s and 1940s.  Western universities, many of which are heavily funded by the Gulf States, have become deeply infected by this virulent antisemitism, and are now either unable or unwilling to challenge Islamist/Salafist propaganda. The four-coloured flag of pan-Arabisation is now as ubiquitous in British universities as it was in Jeremy Corbyn’s British Labour Party.

In France, the Al-Durah affair is proving to be another Dreyfus Affair, in which the French establishment is doing everything it can to protect the reputation of France.  The antisemitic Dreyfus Affair was protracted (12 years), and the Al-Durah affair even more so, but I think truth will out, and that France will suffer reputational damage as severe as it did a century ago, and which could lead to a shakeup of French governance and law as dramatic as those post-Dreyfus Affair.

The Second Intifada in 2000 was itself largely fuelled by reports and highly-edited filming of the Al-Durah incident, broadcast throughout the world by the French. And there have been sustained anti-Israelist-motivated attacks ever since, not only on Israel, but on the USA, the UK, and, indeed, on France.  Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda told the world that at the top of the list of reasons for the attack on the USA on 9/11 2001 was the USA’s support for Israel. 

I don’t think that it is reasonable to blame French Lethal Journalism for 9/11 and subsequent overtly al-Qaeda motivated attacks, such as London, 7/7 2005 (and the more recent Islamist attacks in London).  But what is without doubt is that the Al-Durah hoax became, and remains, a global recruiting sergeant for Jihadism not only in the Middle East but everywhere, particularly in the francophone world, from Mali to Morocco. ]

The American scholar Dr Richard Landes – a retired historian, now an influential and key accuser in the Al-Durah affair of the French media, courts and judges – has defined “Lethal Journalism” as:

“A pattern of journalistic activity whereby, wittingly or unwittingly, information professionals introduce lethal narratives into the public as news, as factual accounts of what happened.”

Richard is a personal friend, whom I have met several times and with whom I communicate occasionally.  He is multilingual, including francophone (as I am).  I will say more about his work, and my own survey of the French media, in my next essay, but in the meantime, I recommend a visit to the Al-Durah Project website:  I’ve put a link to it in the footnotes.  The influence of French media on all of us (including the Anglophone world) cannot be overstated:  the Agence France-Presse is the world’s oldest news agency, and remains one of a handful of the most powerful news agencies of our times.

Peter Hitchens writes and talks for some of the most popular media channels in the world, not least The Mail, which is, I believe, the most visited “News” website in the world.  Hitchens, and The Mail, have worked out a formula of what sells, including sex of course, but also any kind of hyperbole or sensationalism that can be passed off as serious journalism.

I cannot prove that Hitchens’ journalism is lethal, but it is obvious to me that his writing is often irresponsible, especially for a writer with such huge celebrity influence.  His writing is particularly spurious when he attempts to take on scientific consensus, much of which has been established, and is being continuously self-corrected through the scientific method, to keep us safe and healthy.

On the subject of scientific consensus, here is a passage from an essay I wrote a few weeks ago:

“There seems to be a romantic notion that the best scientists are the dissenters, the ones who speak out against the scientific consensus.  But in modern science this is not the case.  Consider aerospace. A little over a century ago, two men could design and build the world’s most advanced flying machines.  Today, aerospace involves many sciences, and scientific consensus and trust…

“The days of the Wright Brothers and Marie Curie and Crick-and-Watson and Alexander Fleming and pioneering do-it-yourself science are now long gone.  Science can no longer be done in the garden shed.  And scientists can no longer fabricate their own instruments.  Scientists no longer discover radioactive elements by mixing muddy minerals in a big bucket (as Marie Curie did with pitchblende).”

Like Hitchens, I am a professional writer.  I am a Scientific Technical Writer, and so in my professional writing I have to be very attentive, accurate, and empathetic.  My job demands trust and consensus in science.  I have variously worked in aerospace (I am ex-Royal Air Force), electronics engineering, and the life sciences.  I need to be considerate too:  my source English is likely to read by people whose first language is not English, and typically my writing is translated into all the official European languages, plus Hebrew, Arabic and Turkish, and the main languages of the Far East.  Of course, I cannot be wholly sure that all of what I need to convey has been perfectly translated, but I am trained and experienced in translation management and working with translators in alphabetic and ideographic languages, and in left-to-right and right-to-left languages, all of which present their own problems, especially where my writing appears as instructions on a screen or device or scientific instrument.

God forbid that I write or have written anything lethal.  Like all professional technical writers, I am personally insured in case I do make errors; nevertheless, we have a duty of care, which we take solemnly.  Lethal errors certainly do occur in technical writing, not least in aerospace.  One of the ascertained causes for the recent Boeing 737 Max tragedies, and the grounding of the whole fleet, is incomplete and omitted definitions of the software in the pilots’ manuals.  (I do have on my CV a decade of experience writing about aircraft software to the standards of the Airbus Consortium and various military specifications.)

In this essay, I will look at just three of Hitchens’ scientific media campaigns:  (i) his influence on the anti-vaccination movement, (ii) his personal campaign against climate change legislation, (iii) his personal campaign against the Governments’ measures to prevent the spread of the Covid-19 coronavirus.

In all these three scientific areas Hitchens dissents against scientific consensus and expertise, seeking out dissenting scientists to justify his position.  He seems to give his readers and listeners the impression that he is a more reliable source of truth than the experts, and bodies such as the General Medical Council, the Royal Society, and, more recently, the Governments’ scientific and medical advisors.  Hitchens knows best, or at least he does in his own mind, and the minds of his trusting fan base.

The Hitchens Formulation

I thought about coining the term The Peter Hitchens Formulation, but then I realised that his older brother, Christopher, was just as bad, and often used the same formulation.  And so The Hitchens Formulation applies not just to Peter, but to the pair of them.

Christopher Hitchens was a chain smoker and a heavy drinker who wrote in his mid-50s that he is the “living proof” that his habits were not detrimental to his health.  In an article to back up his living proof, Christopher Hitchens pointed to research that tobacco smoking aids short-term memory and delays the onset of Alzheimer’s disease, and he pointed to research that “shows clearly” that alcohol can protect that heart.  However, just a few years later, when Hitchens contracted terminal cancer, he admitted that it was probably because, every day, he drank enough “to kill or stun the average mule”.  In other words, his previous proof and clear research were no longer so convincing even to himself.  Christopher Hitchens was dying proof that insidious self-poisoning with a high daily dose of smoke and drink is, indeed, likely to prevent the onset of dementia.

I have watched Peter Hitchens interviewed numerous times on scientific subjects in which he has no meaningful or useful knowledge.  His formula is to first to attack the scientific consensus by falsely asserting there is no real evidence, and then refer to the work of this or that individual or team of scientists, who are supposedly leaders in the field but whose work is variously speculative, incomplete, spurious, or might eventually turn out to be grossly dishonest and fraudulent.  Hitchens then reinforces his point by reminding his audience of one of very few radical failures of modern science and medicine – typically the thalidomide drug – rather than the very many radical successes.  The radical successes and breakthroughs in science have radically increased the life expectancy of all of us in the developed world.  I was born in Bradford, Yorkshire, in 1961.  Had I been born a century earlier, my life expectancy would have been 18.  Even the relatively affluent Brontë sisters, in the surrounding hills and fresh air, only made it to their 30s.

This, then, is the 1-2-3 of the Hitchens Formulation:

[1] There is absolutely no evidence for [enter scientific consensus here]…

[2] on the contrary, Professor [enter name of dissenting scientist here] at Oxbridge, whose research is the most scrupulous and diligent I have come across, shows clearly…

[3] Remember that the authorities were wrong about the thalidomide drug.

Of course, serious mistakes can happen in science and medicine, from the design and documentation flaws in the Boeing 737 Max to the thalidomide drug.  And without doubt, science and medicine can be, and often are, skewed in favour of this or that organisation, usually with a monetary motive (such as Volkswagen’s recent ‘Dieselgate’ scandal).  Not all scientists and managers of scientists are honest, obviously, and every scientist in our times is employed by an organisation whose goals he or she is bound to support.  And scientific knowledge can of course be put to good and evil purposes.  But because scientific knowledge is based on data and repeatable evidence (that must be repeatable by third parties, not just the laboratory or organisation who developed the science and created the data), bad science and skewed science (such as of Volkswagen) is eventually found out.  Scientific knowledge is generally self-correcting, especially so in our times, in which data are held in curated libraries of “Big Data” on the Internet, to which all nations are contributing and interrogating.

Hitchens seems to have a general downer on science and modern medicine, and seems to seek out any scientist or doctor who works against the consensus.  Only a few days ago I heard him say, “it’s hubris for our Government to think it can stop the spread of a virus”.

How absurd!  The Government’s overriding responsibility is the security of the nation, including from lethal and highly-contagious pathogens.  A generation ago the British Government had to depend on scientific knowledge of HIV to take the right measures, and give the correct advice, to ameliorate the widespread devastation caused by HIV.  Britain is winning that battle, whereas many less advanced nations are still suffering a HIV epidemic, now worsening in southern Africa.

Similarly, we have, in the UK, largely controlled the diseases that killed the Victorians (including Prince Albert at age 42): cholera, typhoid, scarlet fever, syphillis, tuberculosis, diphtheria, smallpox, polio, measles, mumps, rubella…

Hitchens and the Anti-Vaccination Movement

Peter Hitchens defended in his columns Dr Andrew Wakefield’s campaign against the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine, at least until Wakefield became discredited for fraudulent science and for medical misconduct, but not before spawning a global anti-vaccine movement which has resulted in recent outbreaks of childhood diseases in parts of the world, such as the UK and the USA, where they had hitherto long been eradicated.  It turns out that Wakefield was being funded by ambulance-chasing lawyers, who realised that there was much money to be made if Wakefield could prove his speculations that the MMR vaccine is the likely cause of autism.

Vaccinations have increased the life expectancy and quality of life of all of us – my own uncle was crippled in childhood by polio in Yorkshire, a disease now almost eliminated in the world through vaccination.  Blame for the anti-vaccination movement is commonly attributed to Andrew Wakefield, of course, but it was journalists of the Hitchens school, not least Peter Hitchens, who gave Wakefield, and his badly-skewed science, the oxygen of publicity.

Hitchens and Climate Change

Hitchens has worked out that scientific consensus on climate change is wrong:

“This particular frenzy [climate change measures], if not checked, could end by bankrupting the West and leaving us sitting in the cold and the dark whistling for a wind to power our dead computers – while China and India surge on to growth and prosperity because they have had the sense to ignore the whole stupid thing.”

Peter Hitchens, Mail Online

Peter Hitchens is a conspiracy theorist.  You have to be conspiracy theorist to campaign against climate-change amelioration on the grounds that the world’s scientists are in a great conspiracy – even now the ones working for Exxon Mobil (who used to be paid to lobby against climate-change amelioration).  You have to be a conspiracy theorist to suggest that the scientists and fellows of the Royal Society have duped themselves and all non-scientists in a great scientific conspiracy, a conspiracy that has duped the UK Government into introducing legislation to commit the UK to net zero emissions by 2050.

Hitchens claims that climate-change amelioration is a threat to civilisation, whereas the opposite it true: climate change is a threat, not only due to weather shocks and ecological havoc that cause massive displacement of peoples due to flood and drought and fire, and thereby contagious disease.  Air pollution caused mainly by the burning of fossil fuels is, according to the European Environment Agency (EEA), “the main cause of premature death in 41 European nations” (in a report on the BBC News website, 29 October 2018).  In China and India, the situation is many times worse.

It seems that Hitchens’ was deeply influenced, in his beliefs on climate change, by a single book written by Christopher Booker, who is not even a scientist, but a journalist who founded Private Eye in 1961.

“I, and anyone seriously interested in this subject [debunking climate change], owes a great debt to Christopher Booker, who has set down all the arguments for doubt in a single, concise book that will no doubt be either ignored or abused.”

Peter Hitchens – Mail Online 2 December 2009

Climate study is too complicated to debunk in a “single, concise book”. It involves many sciences, each of which has huge data, some of which inevitably conflict (sun cycles and the Milankovic cycle for instance).  The industrialised activities of man has changed, and is changing, the composition of atmosphere.  And although the climate has always changed in the life of the Earth, it is changing at a rate that seems to be unprecedented.  Scientists and non-scientists are right to be alarmed, and to advise the precautionary principle where proof cannot be totally conclusive.  And amongst the scientists involved in climate studies are epidemiologists.

And as I wrote in a recent piece, climate change itself poses the risk of increased frequency of pandemics, as virus-carrying vectors are spreading northwards, including the Aedes mosquito, which transmits, amongst other things, the Zika virus.  (Had the Zika virus epidemic of 2015-2016 not peaked when it did, the 2016 Olympic Games in Brazil could not have taken place.)  Similarly, epidemiologists, such as Professor Chris Whitty – our Chief Medical Officer – warn that species of malarial mosquito are venturing north into Europe as our winters become milder.

Hitchens and Covid-19

Hitchens’ hyperbole seems to be becoming more and more extreme even by his own standards.  Recently, the Hitchens Formulation has gone into overdrive.

We need look at just one article[ii], on 9th May 2020 for The Mail Online, titled:

Has our mad mass house arrest during Covid-19 saved even a single life?

The article is really a rant against Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his Government, a rant throughout which Hitchens chooses to be oblivious to the fact that we are living through a global pandemic.  Hitchens mentions none of our neighbouring nations:  France, Italy, Spain, Belgium, Netherlands, Ireland… most of which imposed far-stricter lockdown rules than the UK.  He also fails to note that the devolved Scottish Government has imposed stricter rules than Boris Johnson.

No-one in the UK lockdown has been under anything resembling “house arrest”.  And the need for legal enforcement has been surprisingly infrequent, as most of us have accepted the advice of people who know what they are talking about, rather than the advice of Peter Hitchens.

Hitchens’ article opens:

“We will not escape from this misery until the Government has been forced to admit that it made a foolish mistake and over-reacted wildly to Covid-19.

“The Prime Minister is like a man who sets fire to his own pyjamas, while he is wearing them, to cure himself of hiccups.

“Now he stands naked and scorched, as his house burns around him, and exults that his hiccups have indeed gone away. This is what I mean by getting things out of proportion.”

Is this drivel supposed to be funny?  Is this what makes the Mail Online the most-read website on the World Wide Web?

In the next paragraph, paragraph 4, we learn that the PM’s actions are based on “evidence free bilge”.

Paragraph 5:  We read about the PM’s “painful stupidity”, “Panic Policy”.

Paragraph 6:  “this farce”.

Paragraph 7:  “I have seen this before in the old Communist world, a mad, fixed idea pursued by dense men…”

Paragraph 8:  “there are no [sic] “justifications” for the “national shutdown”.

Paragraph 9:  Hitchens is “yet to see any reason” how “mass house arrest [has] saved a single life”, and he says the decline in Covid-19 cases has come “far too soon to have been brought about by the Johnson Panic of March 23”.  [Hitchens doesn’t tell us where he got this great insight into contagion and epidemiology.]

Paragraph 10:  “I have seen masses of reasons to believe that the risk from the coronavirus has been gravely exaggerated and that the figures of deaths have been overestimated” [This is the Hitchens Formulation, although in this instance, Hitchens doesn’t even bother to tell us the sources of his masses of reasons.]

Paragraph 11:  “wild, almost Maoist measures adopted by the Government,”.

Paragraph 13:  “vast, sweeping, showy policies of mass house arrest”.

Paragraph 14:  “teenage minds in charge of this”

Paragraph 15:  “The buffoon who got us into this… fawned upon as if he were Kim Jong Un”.

Paragraph 16:  “landscape of ruin he [Boris Johnson] has now created”.


Hitchens finishes off by telling us that we are “living in a mad country, governed by clowns”.

The quality of journalism in our times is appalling.  Equally as hysterical is Piers Morgan, Editor-at-Large of the Mail Online, who has been ranting against the Government for the very opposite reasons to Hitchens!  Morgan thinks the Government has not been strict enough in its lockdown.

The business of Government is extremely difficult.  Our leaders must take and assimilate advice, often conflicting, from all quarters, as they mitigate risks to our life (indeed their own life) and our livelihood.  As I wrote in a piece on 8th May – a patriotic piece for VE Day 75 – I think Her Majesty’s Government deserves support in the war against coronavirus:



[i] Al Durah Project website :


[ii]  Peter Hitchens article in the Mail Online, 9th May 2020:

Posted in Antisemitism, Climate Change, Ecology, France, Great Britain, Israel, Political philosophy, Science, Uncategorized | 2 Comments

In Defence of Her Majesty’s Government in the War Against Covid-19


This royal throne of kings, this sceptred isle,
This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars,
This other Eden, demi-paradise,
This fortress built by Nature for herself
Against infection and the hand of war,
This happy breed of men, this little world,
This precious stone set in the silver sea,
Which serves it in the office of a wall
Or as a moat defensive to a house,
Against the envy of less happier lands,–
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England

King Richard II, Act 2 Scene 1

“I hope in the years to come everyone will be able to take pride in how they responded to this challenge. And those who come after us will say the Britons of this generation were as strong as any. That the attributes of self-discipline, of quiet good-humoured resolve and of fellow-feeling still characterise this country.”

Queen Elizabeth II, from the Coronavirus address to the nation, 5th April 2020

This is a non-party political broadcast.  However, I must admit that had Jeremy Corbyn been elected Prime Minister, I could never have written anything in defence of his Government, which would have been an anti-British, pro-terrorist Government, and a profoundly antisemitic one, not to mention republican and disestablishmentarian.

I have never voted Labour, and most probably never will, but had Liz Kendall, Yvette Cooper or Andy Burnham won the Labour leadership election in 2015, and had he or she now become the Prime Minister of Her Majesty’s Government, I’m fairly sure that I would be writing this piece more or less as it is, with national pride, fellow-feeling, and support for the Government.  Indeed, as a Yorkshireman, I’m proud of fellow Yorkshireman Prime Minister Harold Wilson, Labour, who did nothing to offend my love of England, my love of Israel, my love of the English language, and my Anglican antidisestablishmentarianism.

Alas, this royal throne of kings, this sceptred isle, this fortress built by Nature for herself against infection, is in fact not “the envy of less happier lands”, at the time of writing

The less happier lands might well envy our good-humoured resolve, and stiff upper lip.  But no nation is envying, on this 75th Anniversary of VE Day, the fact that our fortress against infection has been breached. No. We seem to have become the whipping boy for the world’s media, who are at risk of seeming to take delight in British deaths.  Surely, this anniversary week of all weeks is not the time for European schadenfreude directed at Britain.

Had the British Isles not, for a time, stood alone against Hitler’s empire, there would have been no Victory in Europe, which would have become a battleground between National Socialism (allied with Fascism) and Soviet Socialism. As it is, the eastern half of Europe was lost to the Communists until the 1990s.

Perversely, it seems that much of the world’s animus is sourced in our own main broadcasting medium: the BBC. The BBC’s News editors and interviewers have given us nothing but cynicism, and sniping at everything the Government says or proposes to save our lives and our livelihoods.  And of the 1.3 million employees of the NHS, the BBC have disproportionally sought out those known to be politically active on the hard left, such as Trotskyists and Corbynites, (according to research by Guido Fawkes, published on on 28th April).

Two days ago, The Telegraph published an article by senior news reporter Patrick Sawer, headlined:

Britain criticised around the world for ‘complacent’ and ‘calamitous’ coronavirus response


As British death toll becomes the worst in Europe, criticism of the UK approach is being voiced around the globe

Patrick Sawer has collected what he calls a “chorus” from the world’s media singling out Britain for criticism over Covid-19 death rates, such as Sydney Morning Herald, The Lancet, CNN, El País, La Repubblica.

Perversely, at the time of writing both Italy and Spain have reported higher deaths per capita than the UK, and yet Sawer tells us that the Spanish daily El País gloats, “Brexit chickens are coming home to roost”. La Repubblica, the Italian daily states: “Certainly many countries, including Italy, committed grave errors, but the confusion and contradictions displayed by the British Government in the past few months have few equals, with consequences that have yet to be fully understood”.

GeriSpiceGirlsIt is perhaps because we are the best at almost everything – not least defeating the Germans – that the world takes delight in our misfortune, and sometimes even tries to bring it on. Consider Eurovision for instance. There is not a single nation in the whole contest that has produced even a tiny fraction of the successful British pop music that the world wants to listen to, and yet we are the « nul points » nation. We play along with the farce, with our quiet good-humoured resolve, by sending out amateurish musicians performing amateurish compositions, because we know that the rest of Europe actually takes Eurovision seriously. And it would destroy the fun if we were to send out world-beating artists of the calibre of, say, the Beatles or the Spice Girls.

HaroldBeatlesPerhaps today at least, VE Day 75 – 8 May 2020 – the Spanish and Italian dailies will have some gratitude for Britain. We saved Italy from its home-grown Fascism under Mussolini, and Spain – ostensibly neutral during the War, but which gave direct support to Hitler and the Axis Powers – would have remained Fascist long past 1975 had there been no Victory in Europe.

Journalists within and without Britain offer their own ideas of where our Government – which is doing its best to save lives – has gone “wrong”. Some point to Sweden, a huge sparsely populated nation, which has a low number of deaths despite no lockdown, and some point to Israel, a tiny densely populated nation, which has an extremely low number of deaths, with full lockdown.

And then the journalistic punditocracy offers all its theories about Britain’s tragically high number of deaths. But all these comparisons are futile. Not in months, not even in years, will we know why one nation fared better or worse than any other. And regions that have few deaths in this wave of pandemic might find there is, God forbid, another wave in which the virus finds a way to the communities that managed to resist the first time around, and for whom the virus is still “novel” (i.e. no herd immunity). This in fact happened in the 1918-19 flu pandemic, which hit in three waves.

Viruses are Nature, and very much a necessary part of the circle of life and death. There are millions of viruses on earth, genetically diverse, and largely unknown.

Nature is largely inexplicable. To the very question, “what is life?”, science offers no answers, or rather it offers many answers, and opinions, which can be pushed back to the philosophical worldview of the scientist. I’ve worked in diverse sciences in my career, including the life sciences, and have had this kind of discussion with many colleagues. What is life?  Is a strawberry alive?

In my last two Covid-19 pieces (linked to in the footnotes) I noted that I have long been a keen birdwatcher, which includes a love of birdsong. I explained how birds, including their ancient patterns of migration, are our “miner’s canary” for the whole ecology, such as swallows that visit Britain from as far as South Africa every year (becoming worryingly fewer in number), and the Arctic tern, whose annual migration cycle can cover the entire length of the planet. One bird that is presently on the “red list” of conservation status of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) is the house sparrow, due to a drastic decline in UK population in recent decades. The sparrow – the “cockney sparrow” – was once the iconic bird of London, but now we don’t see sparrows in London. And despite decades of research, ornithologists and scientists have been unable to establish the cause. Many theories have been put forward: city pollution and particulates from diesel was a popular idea for a time, but if you take the train from sparrow-free London St. Pancras to Paris Gare du Nord, sparrows are hopping around your feet, and Paris suffers more pollution than London. And latitude is not a factor, because northern English cities still have large sparrow populations.  It’s a mystery.

Similarly, the new Coronavirus is Nature. It is a pathogen whose reservoir seems to be bats and pangolins in China’s “wet markets”, and it has now developed a taste for human host cells.  Why it seems to be prevalent here-and-not there, and here-and-not-there, is a mystery, and always will be. Yes, many theories will be offered over the course of time, and might provide intellectual satisfaction to some, and might even provide some medical uses, but the mysteries will always be there.

Unlucky Britain

We have been unlucky on this sceptred isle, this royal throne of kings. Even the Prince of Wales, the future king, was infected, and the Queen’s first minister says he nearly died during his days in intensive care. A number of HM Government’s ministers and advisors, including the Chief Medical Officer, Professor Chris Whitty – for whom I am developing a good deal of admiration – either contracted the disease or at least had to self-isolate due to its symptoms (and they are absolutely entitled to never reveal their personal health records).

We have been unlucky, but that’s Nature. And so far as I can see, the fickleness of Nature is never mentioned anywhere in British reports – journalistic or scientific – of the virus  and our response to it, but it should be. Perhaps scientists are too proud to admit that they are baffled, or to acknowledge that the regularities of Nature are not as regular as we like to think we understand.

We have also been unlucky in that, at the time this virus broke out and declared war on the world (which seems to be early December in Wuhan, China) we had no Government.

As is customary, Parliament had been dissolved a month before the General Election which was – highly unusually – held in December, for the first time in almost a century. And the reason we had a General Election in the run up to Christmas, is, in a single word “Brexit”.

To remind the reader of some distant history: throughout 2019, the UK’s Parliament was in deadlock over Brexit (and the so-called the “Irish Backstop”), which is why Prime Minister Theresa May resigned in the middle of the year, and then Prime Minister Boris Johnson, after no less than four attempts to call a General Election to break the deadlock – the “Zombie Parliament” – managed to get Parliament to agree to a snap General Election.

In December, and January, and February, no-one in politics was talking about preparing for a pandemic. The victorious Conservative Government immediately launched into their promise to get Brexit done within a year, and Her Majesty’s Most Loyal Opposition, having suffered the worst defeat since 1935, realised it would need to busy itself electing a new party leader, and seeking out top lawyers to defend the Labour Party against formal charges of antisemitism.

In other words, no-one in British politics was talking about preparing for emergency contingency plans, be it against a military adversary or a viral pandemic.

The Covid-19 virus, had it been sentient, could not have chosen a better moment to declare war on Britain. December 2019 could not have been a worse time for a Chinaman in Wuhan to undercook his bat, as here in Britain we lurched from the Zombie Parliament to the dissolved Parliament to the newly-elected Government in Christmas recess, which returned not to emergency concerns about pestilence, but emergency concerns about floods, the worst in a generation, and extending right into February – which witnessed the highest monthly rainfall since records began in 1766.

Despite this comedy of errors at the start of the pandemic, I think that our Government is doing a good job, and deserves, rather than constant sniping, our encouragement and support in what must be stressful and tiring times for our leaders who are trying their best to save our lives and our livelihoods.

As Her Majesty said:

“We should take comfort that while we may have more still to endure, better days will return: we will be with our friends again; we will be with our families again; we will meet again”.

God Save the Queen.




Further Reading:

Here are two further pieces based on my “lockdown” reflections:

Knowledge of Birds, Birdsong, the Bible, and Zion can Defeat the Chinese Viruses

Climate, Conspiracy, Covid-19, Canaries, Commies, and the Corbyns

Posted in Ecology, Great Britain, Political philosophy, Science, Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Knowledge of Birds, Birdsong, the Bible, and Zion can Defeat the Chinese Viruses

Speaking metaphorically
, by far the most deadly virus of the past century is Communism, the epicentre of which, today, is China.

The virus of Communism began to spread from Russian lapsed Christians and Jews and observant Muslims in the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution, perversely in a city whose name was Peter, being the Greek for Cephas, the nickname that Jesus gave to the Apostle Simon ben Jonah, who was to become the first leader of the Church.  (Peter, or Cephas in Aramaic, means “the rock” on whom the Church is built.)

The city was renamed from Peter’s City to Lenin’s City (or Leningrad), and the state religion was changed from antisemitic Christianity to “Scientific Atheism”, which would itself gravitate to antisemitism.

It is, by the way, impossible to understand the origins of Socialism without understanding the origins of 20th-century antisemitism, including the Holocaust.  The twin evils are very much intertwined and started contemporaneously in Russia.  The virus of Socialism was responsible for the major extant mutations of the virus of Antisemitism, which is the oldest and most chronic of all mutating viruses (cf. The Mutating Virus: Understanding Antisemitism, keynote address by Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks to the European Parliament in September 2016, easy to find on the world wide web).

Decades later, Hitler would explain why he chose the name “Socialist” for his National Socialist movement.  But Hitler wanted to conserve German Christianity (over 90% of Germans were Christian in the 1930s), to differentiate National Socialism from the explicit Atheism of international Socialism.  The German churches enthusiastically went along with Hitler – even overcoming their denominational differences to form the ecumenical Protestant Reich Church.

The text book, the manual, for 20th-century antisemitism was the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.  It was first published anonymously in Russia in 1903. It is a malevolent hoax that minutes a meeting of Jewish elders planning to take over the world.  It was not discovered to be a hoax until 1921, by The Times of London, before which it was often quoted on authority throughout Russia and Europe, including in Britain, and including by The Times of London.  In the USA, Protocols was made popular and quoted on authority by the car magnate and Jew hating Anglican Henry Ford.  Ford and Protocols were indeed the main influences on Hitler’s theories of Jewish international conspiracy.  (Hitler mentions Henry Ford in Mein Kampf, and Ford was awarded, and accepted, the Nazi Cross – Order of the German Eagle – in September 1938. Hitler said, “You can tell Herr Ford that I am a great admirer of his. I shall do my best to put his theories into practice in Germany. … I regard Henry Ford as my inspiration”.)  In Mein Kampf, Hitler stresses that Protocols is not a hoax, but factually true.  The text was taught to German schoolchildren from 1933.  Today it is taught as factually true throughout the Arab world, including in its universities. It is quoted on authority by Arab intellectual and political elites.


The publication of Protocols in Russia coincided with (although there is little evidence of causal links) the worst anti-Jewish pogroms in pre-Soviet Russian history: the 1903-1906 pogroms.  These were initially Christian-led pogroms, with Orthodox priests leading the murderous mobs after Easter Day services in Kishinev in 1903.  (Good Friday and Easter liturgy have inspired Christian antisemitism throughout the whole history of the European and Russian Church.)  The pogroms, in hundreds of towns, coincided with the nascent radical Socialist movements in Russia.  It was inevitable that Russian-Christian and Tsarist antisemitism would carry over into the Soviet Socialist system.  Joseph Stalin, after all, had started out as a seminary priest before converting to Atheism.

Meanwhile, at the turn of the 20th century, “death to the Jews” chants were heard not only from the tongues of priests and mobs of Russia, but from the priests and mobs in France, still reeling from the Dreyfus Affair and Roman Catholic antisemitism (the Church had sided with the anti-Dreyfusards).  Theodor Herzl, an atheistic Jewish journalist working in Paris, knowing the situation in Russia and seeing it first-hand in France, proposed the need for a homeland for the Jews.  The Zionist movement was born and, through the support of British Zionist Christians, England would become the de facto centre of the world Zionist movement.

Just a few weeks after the 1917 October Revolution in Russia, the British in the Holy Land defeated the Ottoman Empire (although not the malarial mosquito) in the Battle of Jerusalem.  Now the dream seemed more real:  the derelict, largely desolate and malarial land that had been occupied for centuries by the Ottomans would indeed become the homeland for the Jews.  Observant Jews (if not the ultra-orthodox Jews) and Christian Zionists saw the unfolding of events as the beginning of the fulfilment of Biblical prophecy for nothing less than the ultimate goal of history.

Antisemitism/anti-Zionism within all Socialist movements is inevitable for the simple reason that the goal of history in Socialist philosophy is very different to the goal of history that the Jews have obstinately promised the world for millennia, which is that history will come to its fulfilment: the “age to come” or the “messianic age” through Zion, from where all nations are to be blessed.  Only through God our Creator, God of Israel, Lord of History can Earth come into its true providential peace and harmony, and blessings.  No idea or plan for the goal of history in the mind of any man or collective of men can ultimately defy the ideas and promises of God Almighty. There can be no ultimate and true happiness in any global plans of man.  (In Christian theology, “blessed”, from the Greek makarios, means “happiness”.  And following his blessings, or Beatitudes, in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus reminded his followers to “swear not by Jerusalem, for it is the City of the Great King”.)

Meanwhile, back in Russia, and based on Vladimir Lenin’s ideas that the peasants and workers be armed soldiers, Leon Trotsky founded and commanded the “Red Army”, following which the virus of Socialism was unstoppable and extremely deadly.

It didn’t take so many years for the Communists – the Scientific Atheists – to become the first men to reach outer space, and to become the first men to murder tens of millions of their fellow men in pursuit of a political or theocratic goal, ultimately outstripping the worst historical excesses of Christianity and Islam, and even of Fascism and Nazism and Imperialistic Shintoism.  And the killing is far from over a century after it began.  The Communist nations and some of the ostensibly post-Communist nations still kill in order to hold power.  They have to:  no majority in any nation wants Communism (unless they are conditioned to want it through brainwashing and thought-policing, such as the East German Socialist “Stasi” and its huge network of civilian informers).

Apart from the 100 million (at least) killed by the Socialist Republic of Russia and the Republic of China, we must not forget others who subscribed to Socialist ideology, such as Pol Pot in Cambodia, Tito in Yugoslavia, Ceaușescu in Romania, Castro in Cuba… and nations such as Korea, Vietnam, East Germany, and many others.

Although today the Muslim nations seem hell-bent on trying to top out history with the worst murderous enormities, it should be noted that contemporary Islam is itself deeply infected with Socialism.  Indeed, Sayyid Qutb, the genocidally-antisemitic post-War leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, coined the word “Islamism” as a portmanteau for Islam and Socialism.  Karl Marx’s teaching of the necessarily violent revolution to gain power and possession of the land was easily mapped to Jihadist and Caliphate ideologies.  The atheists’ commonwealth was replaced with the believers’ Ummah.

[ On a smaller scale, Christian parts of the world also introduced revolutionary Marxism ideology, particularly in Latin America, and “Palestinian Liberation Theology” in Israel, led by the Anglican Church in Israel, and endorsed by the Church of England.  (See my article on Church of England antisemitism in The Algemeiner, 27 November 2019, to which I’ve linked at the end of this piece.) ]

Suffice it to say that in Syria, the governing party and the main opposition parties are Socialist parties, namely the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party (in coalition with the Communist Party of Syria), and the Syrian Social Nationalist Party.  Similarly, the Yemeni Socialist Party is built on the dual ideologies of Marxism and Pan-Arabisation, which of course comes into conflict in Yemen with the Iran-backed Houthi movement: ideologically motivated by dreams of a Shi’ite theocracy, which itself is in conflict with the dreams of Islamic State and of Saudi Arabia of a Salafi-Sunni theocracy.

Communism/Socialism is far from the only reason that the Islamic nations are today so cruel, antisemitic, anti-Christian, despotic and generally immoral, but I think the influence of Socialism is generally underestimated, certainly in understanding Islamism.  The Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO)/Fatah for instance, was largely driven in its violent revolutionary aims by the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, run by a “political bureau” whose Party remains committed to an overtly
Marxist–Leninist–Maoist ideology, i.e. secular Socialism rather than Islamic Socialism.

Islamic Socialism (i.e. Islamism) began in Russia, with the first commune formed in the 1917 Revolution.  Its role in Russian Socialism was relatively short-lived, and did not survive Stalin’s Great Purge of 1936 to 1938.  Nevertheless, the virus of Islamic Socialism was by this time widespread in the Arab world, where it mutated, through the Muslim Brotherhood, into the extant National Socialist form, using Arabic translations of Mein Kampf and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. (See my essay, “The Arab Israeli Conflict Made Simple”. [I])


Speaking literally, why, one might ask, do the world’s most deadliest viruses generally come out of China (including Hong Kong)?  The simple answer is that China is a cauldron of filth.  Land, air, and water have seen extreme pollution since the 1980s.  Soil pollution is now as much a threat to health as the toxic grey shroud that covers every major Chinese city.  This pollution is extremely deadly for the Chinese, and of course makes the people more susceptible to other health problems, including zoonotic viruses that can result from the poor handing (and combined handling) of poultry, pigs and ‘bushmeat’.  As we have suddenly discovered the hard way, we cannot ignore China’s public health problems, especially because, since the turn of the millennium when the Communists plugged their economy into the non-Communist world, there has been a rapid increase in Chinese travel, business and influence.  The peak reproduction rate of Covid-19 coincided with the pagan new year at the end of January 2020, as millions of people flew into and back out of China to celebrate the Year of the Rat.

Not only must we insist that China cleans up.  We must no longer continue to ignore China’s massive contribution to anthropogenic climate change – a problem that implicates all of us, that is all nations that do business with China, and all consumers with an insatiable desire for cheap imports, oblivious to the true environmental cost.  As I wrote in my piece last week, climate change itself poses the risk of increased frequency of pandemics, as virus-carrying vectors are spreading northwards, including the Aedes mosquito, which transmits, amongst other things, the Zika virus.  (Had the Zika virus epidemic of 2015-2016 not peaked when it did, the 2016 Olympic Games in Brazil could not have taken place.)  Similarly, epidemiologists warn that species of malarial mosquito are also venturing north into Europe as our winters become milder.

China’s understanding of, and relationship with, God’s good Creation is appalling.  In parts of China, the medieval attitudes to public hygiene, diet and witch medicine have mutated with Chinese Communism (the viral mutation of German-Russian Socialist theory) to create the worst of all worlds.  And the Chinese are not content with eating everything that moves in China.  China imports species from all over the world, and the more endangered and exotic the species is the better:  horn of black rhino, penis of slow loris, fin of shark, nest of swift… fillet of fenny snake, eye of newt and toe of frog, wool of bat and tongue of dog, adder’s fork and blind-worm’s sting, lizard’s leg and owlet’s wing:  a curse of powerful trouble, like a hell-broth boil and bubble.

As I wrote in my essay last week: if there is one great lesson from Covid-19, it is that we must clean up our environmental act.  It is no use literally washing our hands to prevent viruses in the UK if we metaphorically wash our hands of the problems in China, whose filth is the reservoir for lethal zoonotic pathogens of which Covid-19 is far from the first.

Cheap goods, and cheap outsourcing of manufacturing from the West to Asia, and invitations to China to inwardly invest, have proved to be false economy.  Our nations have suddenly been hit with huge debts, and many individuals have taken a direct hit to the wallet.  It used to be often said that if the USA sneezes the world catches a cold.  Such metaphors now seem a bit lame: the literal reality is that if a Chinaman undercooks his bat or ignores hygienic and compassionate living conditions for poultry, the world catches a lethal acute-respiratory virus, or avian flu.

We must, at last, kill off the virus of Socialism, in all its mutations.


peter_pprubensSaint Peter has the Key

And yet, there is hope. As I’ve written elsewhere, China has more practicing Christians than the whole of Europe.  The President of the Communist Party of China is trying to break the Christians (a fact which attracts less coverage than the cruel plight of the Uyghur Muslims), which is easy to do in a Communist-controlled economy, through thought police, threat of starvation and of course propaganda.  Churches in China are being closed down by the Party, and Christian paraphernalia are removed and confiscated from homes.  And President Xi Jinping is doing exactly what Caesars such as Emperors Caligula and Nero did: having his own image put in place of religious imagery.  Xi Jinping is putting himself in the place of God, hoping to lock the Chinese out of the Church.

Deep down, Xi Jingping knows that Christianity will break his Communism.  He’s fighting a losing battle.  He knows that Christianity will ultimately defeat and eradicate the virus of Communism/Socialism.  Even Angela Merkel after all, formerly an East German political administrator who obliged the Stasi, is now ostensibly Christian, and leads Germany’s governing “Christian Democratic Union”.

As the Christ told Saint Peter 2000 years ago: “thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” (Matt 16:18, KJV).


Let’s think about the birds.  The birds are key.

To see a World in a Grain of Sand
And a Heaven in a Wild Flower
Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand
And Eternity in an hour
A Robin Red breast in a Cage
Puts all Heaven in a Rage
A Dove house filld with Doves & Pigeons
Shudders Hell thr’ all its regions
A dog starvd at his Masters Gate
Predicts the ruin of the State
A Horse misusd upon the Road
Calls to Heaven for Human blood
Each outcry of the hunted Hare
A fibre from the Brain does tear
A Skylark wounded in the wing
A Cherubim does cease to sing
The Game Cock clipd & armd for fight
Does the Rising Sun affright…

Auguries of Innocence, William Blake

The following screenshot is a retweet of Tony Juniper, whom I follow on Twitter.  In 2019, Tony Juniper was appointed by Michael Gove MP (whom I also like) as chairman of “Natural England”.  Juniper is a friend of the Prince of Wales, and helped the Prince to write his excellent (though theologically-lacking) book Harmony:  A New Way of Looking at Our World.  The article to which the Tweet points is good, but I think the screenshot says it all.

We must become as Adam (man) in the Garden, able to name all the birds and the animals that were created long before us (us being the 6th-day late arrival).  And we must reduce our vulnerability to pandemics by addressing “habitat loss and climate change and our [poor] relationship with nature”.  I’m a sports fan, with professional sportsmen in my extended family.  But if we are to have a viable future of international sports, including the Olympic Games, we must take a good look at the world, and see it anew.  Perhaps we had to destroy, pollute, uglify, and generally desecrate so much of Nature in order to come to truly understand the value of things.

I was pleased when the incumbent Pope chose the name Francis, after Saint Francis of Assisi, whom we associate with birds, and is generally envisaged and depicted as being surrounded by birds, if not ‘preaching’ to them. Francis of Assisi was probably influenced by the Sufis, to whom Francis was introduced on trying – at great risk to his life during the Fifth Crusade – to convert the Sultan of Egypt to Christianity.  “Sufi” means “one who wears wool”, and it seems to me probable that Francis copied this practice from Muslim mystics, as he founded an monkish order that wears a woollen habit.

Contemporaneous with Francis was the epic Persian Sufi poem The Conference of the Birds, by Farid ud-Din Attar, whose title is based on a passage in the Quran that Solomon and David had been “taught the language of birds”.  If so, David, King of Israel, was far from the only great musical composer in history to draw from birdsong!

Birds are the most conspicuous of all creatures.  Here in Britain, even if you live in a urban area, and your daily commute is by car, you are likely to see and hear a bird in the brief time between walking out of your front door and into your car. The robin in particular, which, unusually, sings from early autumn right through to late spring, has often set me up for the day with a few sweet notes of its jangling song on a gloomy winter morning.

francispreachingtothebirdsNot only are birds the most conspicuous of the creatures, they are also the oldest.  I often hear people say that birds are descended from dinosaurs.  This is in fact wrong:  birds are avian dinosaurs:  feathered and bipedal coelurosaurian theropods, which started to evolve about 200 million years ago, and survived the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event about 66 million years ago.

Our birds’ very ancient patterns of migration (some of which are noted in the Jewish Bible/Christian Old Testament) are being suddenly disrupted if not broken.  This should deeply concern us more of us than it presently does.  As I wrote last week, bird populations in general, and their success or otherwise in migration (such as our swallows, which visit Britain from South Africa and Namibia) are the “miner’s canary” of the world’s ecology: the health of our planet.  Furthermore, if birds become sick, because the eco-system and agriculture and food production become sick, we humans are likely to become sick, not least through avian flu, which readily passes from diseased poultry to wild birds, and pigs.  The loss of birds is also often an indicator of a loss of pollinating insects, on which we all depend.

How the Bible in the Indian state of Nagaland is proving to be the antidote to the destructiveness of Chinese Communism and witch medicine

There are always been forms of Judaism, Christianity and Islam that have nothing but contempt for Nature, and other forms that have been at best disinterested.  But all these forms of monotheism are, with Socialism and Communism, on the wane.  There are too many people of good will in the world, and increasingly in politics, and increasingly in our children’s generation, who accept that we have a moral duty to steward the Earth, and leave Earth for the future generations who will inherit it as a better, not a worse, place than we inherited.

Let us take a look at Nagaland, a small mountainous state in northeastern India.  Firstly, I should say that I’d never heard of Nagaland until March of this year, on listening to a radio documentary [ii] by the British travel writer Antonia Bolingbroke-Kent, on the remarkable and Biblically motivated conservation efforts of one of the Naga tribes and several villages.

In the mid 19th century, Christian missionaries from Europe and the USA, with a good sense of ecology (and who apparently were dismayed at the destructive aspects of Western industrialisation) ventured to the dangerous British colony of Nagaland in northeastern India.  The warrior tribes of the region were reported by the British colonial administration and the missionaries as the most savage they had ever encountered.  They were notorious for headhunting, i.e. collecting and preserving human heads, apparently in the belief that preserved heads empowered the warrior with the life force of the unfortunate victims.  There were, and still are, dozens of languages spoken in this small state. The official language, for administration and education, is now English.

Today, remarkably, about 90% of the people of Nagaland are observant Christian, Protestant and Catholic, with the assimilation of Naga traditions and song.

Traditionally, the Naga people hunted for all their food, and would eat every species from snakes, to mammals to birds.  This used to be ecologically sustainable until insurgents in the state, in the 1960s and 1970s, obtained high-velocity rifles.  These weapons were soon turned to hunting, especially when the Naga hunters realised that there was a huge market for their wildlife in China.  Whereas the Naga used to hunt with catapults for food, they now hunt with rifles and traps for commerce.  Pangolins for Chinese ‘medicine’ (but which turn out to the be the most likely bridge between bats and humans for the Covid-19 virus) are particularly prized, as are tiger bones, many species of orchid, and even beetles.  Regions that once had some of the most diverse flora and fauna in the world have been stripped bare, largely to supply the market for Chinese witch medicine and exotic bushmeat.  Many species are now extinct in the region, or endangered.

However, Antonia Bolingbroke-Kent reports that there is reason for hope.  A few pioneering villages have decided to address the catastrophic loss of wildlife, largely through the leadership and ideas of Nuklu Phom, whom Bolingbroke-Kent describes an intense, godly man, who himself used to hunt with a gun, but who has managed to convince village elders to see the value of conservation.  He tells us that, “the principle applied was very Biblical… every species has been created by God”, and that God expects us to care for His Creation. Nuklu Phom would sit down with the elders and ask them to listen to birds, identifying the different species, and noting the species that have been wiped out or are now very infrequently heard.  In the radio broadcast we hear some of the birdsong.

Although individualistic hunters have turned away from lucrative income, they realise conservation is a fulfilling community project involving the whole village, and this more than makes up for the sacrifice of the high income from trade in wildlife (which is unsustainable in any case).  The areas of Nagaland that have put an end to hunting now attract people who come to enjoy the beauty of the wilderness and its rich flora and fauna with hundreds of species or orchid, over 500 species of butterfly, and 500 species of bird, including the impressive great hornbill (a bird that I have never seen in nature but would certainly like to).  What were hunting men have now become perfect eco-tourist guides, helping visitors to spot and identify the diverse species of birds, mammals, insects, and flowers.  I have to admit, I’m tempted to spend a birdwatching holiday (holy day) there myself.

It is remarkable, isn’t it, that the words from the Prophets of Israel, the Word from Mount Zion, have found their way into what were, until a little over a century ago, the most savage headhunting tribes of Nagaland, whose descendants are now enjoying the conference of the birds.

God made man the steward of Creation

In January 2001, Pope John Paul II – arguably the greatest of all Cold-War warriors against the virus of Socialism, including the Marxist-inspired “Liberation Theology” movement – issued a remarkable General Audience [iii], calling for an “ecological conversion” of the Church and the wider world.  I think his words are apposite as we start to think about the world “post-Corona”. Here are a few selected passages:

“In the hymn of praise proclaimed a few moments ago (Ps 148: 1-5), the Psalmist summons all creatures, calling them by name. Angels, sun, moon, stars and heavens appear on high; 22 things move upon the earth, as many as the letters of the Hebrew alphabet, in order to give an impression of fullness and totality. The believer, in a sense, is “the shepherd of being”, that is, the one who leads all beings to God, inviting them to sing an “alleluia” of praise. …

“On the one hand, this vision might represent a lost paradise and, on the other, the promised paradise. Not without reason, the horizon of a paradisal universe, which Genesis (chap. 2) put at the very origins of the world, is placed by Isaiah (chap. 11) and the Book of Revelation (chap. 21-22) at the end of history. …

“Unfortunately, if we scan the regions of our planet, we immediately see that humanity has disappointed God’s expectations. Man, especially in our time, has without hesitation devastated wooded plains and valleys, polluted waters, disfigured the earth’s habitat, made the air unbreathable, disturbed the hydrogeological and atmospheric systems, turned luxuriant areas into deserts and undertaken forms of unrestrained industrialization, degrading that “flowerbed” – to use an image from Dante Alighieri (Paradiso, XXII, 151) – which is the earth, our dwelling-place.

“We must therefore encourage and support the “ecological conversion” which in recent decades has made humanity more sensitive to the catastrophe to which it has been heading. Man is no longer the Creator’s “steward”, but an autonomous despot, who is finally beginning to understand that he must stop at the edge of the abyss…

“In this rediscovered harmony with nature and with one another, men and women are once again walking in the garden of creation, seeking to make the goods of the earth available to all and not just to a privileged few, as the biblical jubilee suggests (cf.  Lv 25: 8-13, 23). Among those marvels we find the Creator’s voice, transmitted by heaven and earth, by night and day:  a language “with no speech nor words; whose voice is not heard” and which can cross all boundaries (cf.  Ps 19 [18]: 2-5). …

“The Book of Wisdom, echoed by Paul, celebrates God’s presence in the world, recalling that “from the greatness and beauty of created things comes a corresponding perception of their Creator” (Wis 13: 5; cf.  Rom 1: 20). This is also praised in the Jewish tradition of the Hasidim:  “Where I wander – You! Where I ponder – You! … In every trend, at every end, only You, You again, always You!” (M. Buber, Tales of the Hasidim [Italian ed., Milan 1979, p. 256]).



[i]  My essay (6500 words), written in August 2019:
The Arab-Israel Conflict Made Simple – The Nazi Elephant in the Room

[ii] This heart-warming broadcast in the BBC’s “Costing the Earth” series might not be available to listeners accessing it from outside the UK, but I highly recommend it if you can access it:
“Fate of the Falcons: Meet the Naga people of India who have turned from headhunters to conservationists”

[iii] God made man the steward of creation.
This heart-warming and deeply inspiration short General Audience by Pope John Paul II, is on the Vatican website in many languages:


Further Reading:

My sister piece (4000 words) to this one, written last week:
Climate, Conspiracy, Covid-19, Canaries, Commies, and the Corbyns

And for a longer, deeper piece (22,000 words) on my philosophical theology and apocalyptic theology in relation to Covid-19 crisis, see:
The All-Crowning Pestilence
A Balanced View of the Chinese Corona Virus:
Philosophical, Theological, Scientific, and Apocalyptic

My article in The Algemeiner, on the Church of England’s antisemitism and support for revolutionary Marxism in Israel:


View at

View at

View at

Posted in Antisemitism, Christianity, Climate Change, Ecology, France, Israel, Judaism, Political philosophy, Theology, Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Climate, Conspiracy, Covid-19, Canaries, Commies, and the Corbyns

Climate Change is Real, and Everything is Connected

Here in England at the end of 2019, the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) declared that its Word of the Year was “Climate Emergency”.

In June 2019, the Conservative Government under Theresa May became the first major Government in the world to agree to cut greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by 2050.  In the words of Theresa May, we have a “moral duty to leave this world in a better condition than what we inherited”.

Apparently most of the other OED’s candidate words/expressions for 2019 contained the word climate, and the very word climate was itself a candidate for top word of the year. OED tell us they base their decision on usage, and that climate emergency came from relative obscurity to the top of the list.  I don’t doubt that other high-incidence words and expressions for England in 2019 included: “Brexit”, “Boris”, “Let’s Get Brexit Done”, “antisemitism”, “Labour party antisemitism”, “Greta Thunberg”, and “Corbyn”.

At the top of English-word usage for 2020 will doubtless be anything relating to Covid-19 or Coronavirus or pandemic, including the centenarian “Captain Tom”.

Another high-ranking 2020 word, I think, will be birdsong.  The general quietness and the slowing down of things in this April lockdown period has coincided with the most intense annual period of bird courtship and birdsong, and the arrival of diverse species of warbler and other summer visitors. And the unusually good and sustained sunny weather encourages the birds to sing more (no need for them to take cover from wind and rain).

The Canary in the Coal Mine

Many people in recent weeks have been talking about birdsong, and its value to us.  More and more people seem to have unblocked their ears and started to properly listen, and enjoy, perhaps for the first time in their life.  Businessmen who spend most mornings thundering up the motorway blasting out crappy Pop or Rock music, and who take their family holidays in Dubai and Disneyland, are hearing new sounds in the spring morning, such as the happy whistling and twittering of the goldfinch.  Like Gregor Samsa in Kafka’s Metamorphosis, or George Bowling in Orwell’s Coming Up for Air, it seems that more people are asking themselves what it truly is to be human, and to be alive, perhaps especially because death is another word that is witnessing abnormally high usage in 2020.  Events have encouraged a reflection on our mortality.

Birds such as skylarks are coming closer as the towns become quieter:  skylarks avoid noise where their aerial song cannot carry and be heard by other birds.  Many factors have joined to ensure that 2020 is the Year of Birdsong.  As a keen birder myself since the age of 8, I might write an optimistic piece on birdsong, although I would need to note, with sadness, some birds that are no longer heard in the British towns and countryside, partly attributed to climate change and the disruption of ancient patterns of bird migration.  Some of this is easy to understand, such as the loss of the turtle dove, which is being shot out of the sky on its attempt to migrate by the bloody Spanish; and some of the disruption requires deeper study and investigation. Against that, there have been some successful conservation efforts, in which Britain is ahead of the field.

Britain has no wild canaries of course, but bird populations in general, and their success or otherwise in migration (such as our swallows, which visit Britain from South Africa and Namibia) are the “miner’s canary” of the world’s ecology: the health of our planet.  Furthermore, if birds become sick, because the eco-system and agriculture and food production become sick, we humans are likely to become sick: the last flu pandemic (2009-2010) was avian flu.

If there is one great lesson from Covid-19, it is that we must clean up our act.  It used to be often said that if the USA sneezes the world catches a cold.  Such metaphors now seem a bit lame: the literal reality is that if a Chinaman undercooks his bat, the world catches a lethal acute-respiratory virus.

Bad Journalism versus Science

It is impossible not to talk about the pandemic that has locked us down.  It has knocked other subjects, such as the environment, off the agenda.  I have heard and read highly intelligent thinkers and writers who have long sneered at environmentalism and climate change now scoffing such things as, “well no-one is talking about climate change now, are they?”

The popular idea is that the pandemic is obviously overwhelmingly important, and this somehow proves that the environment and the climate never were truly important because they have now been dropped from the news agenda.  But I have news for the climate-sciences scoffers:  post-Corona, “climate” will be back on the agenda, and “climate” will return to the tongues of men, more, not less, than before the pandemic.  The urgency on international climate collaboration will increase not despite the pandemic, but because of it.  I will explain why soon.

I personally do not like the expression “climate emergency”, much less the apocalyptic cult that it has attracted, such as those contemptible people who dress in red and paint their face white, and superglue themselves to public transport.  But as a scientist – with a very diverse CV across the domains of science, and a recent decade of experience as technical writer for science corporations – I accept that what we are burning on Earth is changing the composition of the thin and fragile atmosphere.  If our atmosphere were much different, Earth would be as uninhabitable as every other planet (and their moons) of the Solar System.

I have known hundreds of scientists in my career, and not one of them contends that, since the Industrial Revolution, we, mankind, have introduced unprecedented changes to the composition of Earth’s atmosphere.  This cannot be scientifically denied in any case, just as I don’t think there is anyone today who denies that we humans have manufactured and emitted chemicals that can destroy the thin ozone layer that protects life on Earth from almost 100% of the most deadly frequencies of ultraviolet light.

What is impossible to definitely establish is the link between the man-made changes to the atmosphere and the unprecedented rate of change to Earth’s climate.  But every scientist I know believes the link is there, i.e. believes in anthropogenic climate change.  I’m not saying that all scientists care about this issue.  And those who do care are all likely to offer difference answers as to what we should do about it, politically, economically, technologically, and not least personally:  lifestyle and consumption habits, including diet.  I work with some scientists who are vegan, cycle to work in all weathers, and try to avoid flying.  And I work with other scientists who hope that incremental changes to economics, technology, and international agreements will repair things, just as they stopped pollution of the ozone layer, and stopped children being polluted by the passive smoke of tobacco smokers. After all, if we all suddenly stopped flying, there would be no money in aerospace for the research and development for cleaner aerospace technology.  We scientists just do a job – relatively low-paid for experienced professionals in England – and the overriding cares of any of us is generally typical of the norm.  (My overriding cares are different to the norm of mainstream science, because I’m more studiously interested in philosophy and theology than the sciences, and few scientists in our times do philosophy or theology.)

Whereas I have never met a scientist, in my professional or private life, who denies man’s influence on the climate, I have met many non-scientists, including friends, who dismiss climate change as a “hoax”, or a “scam”, or a “myth” or “hysteria”.  I have regularly seen the words hoax, scam, hysteria, and racket used by influential mainstream journalists in their British newspapers columns.  I would hazard a guess that there is more information that is read on the Internet that dismisses climate change as “myth” than reports serious science on climate change. This is because every science is specialised, and either non-referential or indecipherable to the non-specialist, even where the scientific papers are publically available (most are not).

And so the journalists have by far the loudest voice.  And unlike scientists, journalists can make things up out of their own head, and believe only what they want to believe, and draw from the ideas of the minority of scientists who claim that the whole scientific concern about climate is a conspiracy, and that climate change has got little or nothing to do with the industry of man.  Journalists direct their readers to the words (and charts and graphs) of this or that scientist who is campaigning against the science mainstream.  Indeed, you can find scientists who will ‘prove’ anything that you want to believe.  There are scientists who will ‘prove’ that tobacco does not cause cancer; there are scientists (quite a lot in the USA) who will ‘prove’ that Earth is only 6000 years old (and that man lived alongside Tyrannosaurus Rex in the beginning); there are scientists who will ‘prove’ that the measles vaccination causes autism.  And journalists seem to be attracted to these outspoken and spurious scientists, like flies around dung.

There seems to be a romantic notion that the best scientists are the ones who speak out against the scientific consensus.  But in modern science this is not the case.  Consider aerospace. A little over a century ago, two men could design and build the world’s most advanced flying machines.  Today, aerospace involves many sciences, and scientific consensus and trust.  My background specialisation is air radar, which I learned in the military and civil aerospace industries:  I can explain how the various radars keep the aircraft in the air in the right place at the right height (and detect incoming enemy aircraft or missiles), but I know nothing about, say, the science of metallurgy that tells us how much stress the aircraft can take before the wings are likely to fall off, or the inlet blades of the jet engines disintegrate.

The days of the Wright Brothers and Marie Curie and Crick-and-Watson and Alexander Fleming and pioneering do-it-yourself science are now long gone.  Science can no longer be done in the garden shed.  And scientists can no longer fabricate their own instruments.  Scientists no longer discover radioactive elements by mixing muddy minerals in a big bucket (as Marie Curie did with pitchblende).

And don’t ever be fooled by headlines referring to “hundreds of scientists” that say something that is radical or sensational, at least not without consulting the millions of scientists who say otherwise.  “Hundreds of scientists” is really not very many in the scheme of things.  Of the world’s millions of scientists, it is always easy for, say, 200 of them to write to The Times to call out the climate agenda. Similarly it was easy for the Labour Party to depend on the 200 Jewish-Socialist academics who wrote to The Guardian to explain that Jeremy Corbyn is not antisemitic, despite the fact that the Jewish mainstream, including the Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mervis (and former Chief Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks), pointed out all the reasons why he is, and has been since his student days, an antisemite.

[ For the first time since 1936, British Jews took to the streets to protest, not this time against the antisemitism of the hard right – the British Union of Fascists – but the antisemitism of the hard left.  Jeremy Corbyn did not, thank heaven, become PM in the December 2019 General Election.  He is now a disgraced MP whose Party under his leadership suddenly became riddled with antisemites – the most influential of whom are self-hating Jews.  The Labour Party is now under formal legal investigation as required by the Equality Act 2016, due to widespread allegations of antisemitic abuse of Jews, including Jewish MPs, within the Party. ]

Peter Hitchens, a popular and influential writer and columnist for The Mail (whose online version is the most visited newspaper website on the World Wide Web), wrote a few years ago in his Mail column:

“This particular frenzy [climate change measures], if not checked, could end by bankrupting the West and leaving us sitting in the cold and the dark whistling for a wind to power our dead computers – while China and India surge on to growth and prosperity because they have had the sense to ignore the whole stupid thing.”

Peter Hitchens, Mail Online

We will return to Peter Hitchens, he is one of many journalists who has developed his career and fame, as did his brother Christopher Hitchens, as a professional sensationalist.  Hitchens seems to have a general downer on science and modern medicine, and seems to seek out any scientist or doctor who works against the consensus.  Hence his columns defended Dr Andrew Wakefield on the MMR vaccine, at least until Dr Wakefield became discredited for fraudulent science and for medical misconduct, but not before spawning a global anti-vaccine movement which has resulted in recent epidemics of childhood diseases in parts of the world, such as the UK and the USA, where they had hitherto long been eradicated.  One wonders what Hitchens will make of the Covid-19 vaccine (or vaccines) when it is developed.  What we do know is that Hitchens is presently raging about the lockdown in the UK, which, he tell us, is “driven by hysteria and unreason”.  (It is interesting that other famous professional sensationalists, such as Piers Morgan, have been raging at the Government for not being more stringent on the lockdown.  May the cannibalism of the professional sensationalists continue.)

Now, whatever one thinks of, say, Professor Chris Whitty, Chief Medical Officer (I like everything I have seen about his life’s work and his approach to things), he is not “driven by hysteria and unreason”.  As an epidemiologist he has been involved with epidemics throughout the world, including the Ebola virus.  Epidemiology, by the way, is one of the many sciences involved in climate studies, and epidemiologists, including Chris Whitty, warn that virus-carrying vectors, such as certain species of mosquito, are moving northwards into Europe as the climate changes.

Peter Hitchens is a conspiracy theorist, who is driven by hysteria and unreason. You have to be conspiracy theorist to campaign against climate-change amelioration on the grounds that the world’s scientists are in a great conspiracy – even now the ones working for Exxon Mobil (who used to be paid to lobby against climate-change amelioration). You have to be a conspiracy theorist to suggest that the scientists and fellows of the Royal Society have duped themselves and all non-scientists in a great scientific conspiracy.

Corbyn has all the answers

Peter Hitchens won’t find much joy in talking to Chris Whitty.  But as noted, you can find a scientist to back up any belief.  In fact, as Hitchens prepares to campaign against a future Covid-19 vaccine, and looks for scientists to support his spurious hypotheses, I’ll save him the trouble by pointing to a scientist who represents the whole shitshow:  anti-climate change conspiracist, anti-vaccination conspiracist, and antisemitic/anti-Israel conspiracist to boot: who supports the conspiracy theory that “Israel orchestrated 9/11”.

His name is Corbyn, Piers Corbyn.


The screenshot above is from the Twitter feed of Piers Corbyn – scientist, former Labour councillor, and Jeremy Corbyn’s brother. He is retweeting his own tweet on 15th March 2020. Corbyn is persuading his followers that Covid-19 was manufactured by the world’s “mega-rich”, and the UN, to cause sufficient deaths to persuade everyone outside of the conspiracy to get vaccinated. We must refuse the vaccine, insists Corbyn, because it is the vaccine for the virus, not the virus itself, that has been created to effect a “world population cull”, because the conspirators claim “people cause CO2 problem”.




I took the ugly screenshot above today (26th April). You can see that Corbyn’s anti-vaccine conspiracy theory is quite extreme, and you can see on his profile that his main interest is climate.  Corbyn is a climate scientist with a difference, and he believes “climate change” is a global conspiracy, the goal of which is to crash the economy and thereby cull the Proletariat.

The Communist in the Coalmine

It seems that Piers Corbyn’s initial interest in anti-climate conspiracy was a reaction to Margaret Thatcher’s taking on the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM), led by Arthur Scargill and other ideological Marxists (i.e. overtly Marxist) who believed that Britain was on the wrong side of the Iron Curtain, and used the miners as pawns in the class war, backed by Soviet Union cash smuggled in for the NUM.

It’s a tragedy.  I’m a working-class lad born andscargill bred in the coal-mining village of Lofthouse, Yorkshire (site of a pit disaster in 1973 which deeply affected my primary school at Lofthouse Gate).  Our community was great, Christian (with religious assembly on every school day), and always neighbourly, and produced some great cricketers and rugby players and church/chapel choirs, and brass bands – some of which are world-beating.  Handel’s Messiah is internationally associated with the Huddersfield Choral Society (and the famous big and bold recording with Sir Malcolm Sargent).

But then the Marxist ideologues moved in, in the belief that they could use the miners to grind the nation to a halt and then lead the Marxist revolution. And, of course, many in our mining communities were deceived into thinking that England should be Socialist, like Poland or Russia or East Germany or Cuba or China.  The project resulted not in power-to-the-people, but in generalised British pit closures, and Britain’s importing coal (of a poorer and dirtier grade) to fuel our power stations.

coalmine2We, the working-class, lost the class war, thank God.  Incidentally, not only were most of the miners laid off, Britain retired off 200 mine canaries, to good homes or aviaries I hope (they were all replaced with electronic detectors by 1986).

Alas, by this time – the time of the miners’ strikes – I’d long left school to join the British Forces with a view to fighting the Commies. It would be remiss of me not to have mentioned all this before I thread Margaret Thatcher into this essay.  I am certainly not ideologically Thatcherite, and never have been. And, dare I say, had Thatcher been here today she would not be Thatcherite/Monetarist, having seen how Monetarism unfolded.

As it happens, I was never posted into heroic action (to the disappointment of my mother, when the Falklands War broke out):  the RAF decided I could best serve it by furthering my studies in electromagnetism, and spending most of the 1980s wearing a white coat, in sleepy and lovely Suffolk, in the RAF’s electronics laboratories and Faraday cages, which, at least, set me up for a career in science.


“For generations, we have assumed that the efforts of mankind would leave the fundamental equilibrium of the world’s systems and atmosphere stable. But it is possible that with all these enormous changes (population, agricultural, use of fossil fuels) concentrated into such a short period of time, we have unwittingly begun a massive experiment with the system of this planet itself.”

Margaret Thatcher, speech to the Royal Society, 27 September 1988

Just as Theresa May was the first world leader to announce a major economy’s commitment to net zero emissions by 2050, Margaret Thatcher was (I think) the first major world leader to express concerns about climate change.  Thatcher, a scientist (and a fellow of the Royal Society) went on to say:

“In studying the system of the earth and its atmosphere we have no laboratory in which to carry out controlled experiments. We have to rely on observations of natural systems. We need to identify particular areas of research which will help to establish cause and effect. We need to consider in more detail the likely effects of change within precise timescales. And to consider the wider implications for policy—for energy production, for fuel efficiency, for reforestation. This is no small task, for the annual increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide alone is of the order of three billion tonnes. And half the carbon emitted since the Industrial Revolution remains in the atmosphere… We must ensure that what we do is founded on good science to establish cause and effect.”

“We have unwittingly begun a massive experiment with the system of this planet itself”, says Thatcher. She is right of course. And in the ensuing decades the consensus has changed from “likely”, to “highly likely”, to, in effect, “let’s stop debating this and take precautionary measures rather than continue the experiment with the system of this planet itself”.

There can in fact be no proof according to the scientific method of man’s impact on the climate, because the scientific method requires not just data, but verifiably repeatable experiments.  And what Baroness Thatcher called our unwitting “massive experiment with the system of the planet itself” cannot be a repeatable experiment, obviously.  We are not, and never can be, outside observers of the system: we are but the dust of it:  Adam of the Adamah, if I might don my theological hat (of which Thatcher would have approved: she was the most openly Christian Prime Minister we have had for a century).

And so, dear reader, the next time you hear a journalist speak of climate change as a “hoax”, “scam”, “myth”, “hysteria”, or “racket”, ignore the journalist. He or she is a conspiracy theorist who has convinced himself that all the world’s scientists are either duped or involved in a conspiracy to dupe everyone.  Do they ask themselves of the motive of such a conspiracy?  There are more scientists, I imagine, employed in the petrodollar economy than there would be in renewable energy.  Fracking, for instance, is hugely science intensive.

The influential scientists (in terms of lobbying power) who have for decades been denying man’s impact on the climate have been those paid directly or indirectly by the coal and oil-and-gas giants, who now, since the turn of millennium, have accepted the position of bodies such as the Royal Society – with whom they were once in dispute – that fossil fuels are affecting the climate changes, and thereby the abnormally high number of weather shocks (droughts, floods, fires, storms, etc.).

The pattern of denial has followed that of the tobacco industry.  The tobacco giants produced scientists and scientific papers in their endeavour to lobby against charges that their products are extremely addictive and carcinogenic and the cause of many diseases.  The links had been known to the scientific and medical consensus for decades, but the tobacco industry held out until the 1990s, by which time they had to admit responsibility: “Inhaling these smoke toxicants [from cigarettes] is the cause of most smoking-related diseases”  – words from the website of British American Tobacco, who tell us the “primary health issues” are lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and coronary heart disease.

I don’t know if there are journalists who still try to deny that smoking is linked to cancer, but there are journalists who deny that passive smoking is linked to cancer, one of whom is Christopher Booker, a journalist who founded Private Eye in 1961. Booker, who has never worked in science, seems to be the major influence on Peter Hitchens’ climate studies:

 “I, and anyone seriously interested in this subject [debunking climate change], owes a great debt to Christopher Booker, who has set down all the arguments for doubt in a single, concise book that will no doubt be either ignored or abused.”

Peter Hitchens – Mail Online 2 December 2009

Climate study is too complicated to debunk in a “single concise book” and in newspaper columns

Climate study is not one science. It is many, each of which has huge data, some of which inevitably conflict (sun cycles and the Milankovic cycle for instance). Predicting climate change is infinitely more difficult than predicting next week’s weather.

The industrialised activities of man has changed, and is changing, the composition of atmosphere, and the climate.  And although the climate has always changed in the life of the Earth, it is changing at a rate that seems to be unprecedented.  Scientists and non-scientists are right to be alarmed about this “unwitting experiment”.

Scepticism is fine. No-one and nothing is certain.  The political strategy hasn’t been agreed on scientific certainty, and never can be, but on the precautionary principle based on well-informed study.  It is actually impossible, and always will be, to join up all the climate sciences and studies, which include (in no particular order), solar cycles/variation, zoology, epidemiology, biology, physical sciences, mathematics, chemistry, biochemistry, atmospheric studies, stratospheric/tropospheric studies, cryospheric studies (ice), glaciology, meteorology, climatology, astronomy, hydroclimatology, paleoclimatology, Milankovic cycles studies, paleontology (fossil records), statistics, data modelling, computer sciences (Big Data), oceanography, surface temperature monitoring (in every nation and in every sea on Earth), ecology, carbon dating, mineral sciences, etc. etc.

But aside from all these sciences, amateur ornithology (which is done across all borders by people throughout the world) offers a good general indicator.  If you notice fewer swallows returning to Britain in the summer, or fewer Arctic terns (whose migration cycle covers the entire length of Earth) returning from the Antarctic, it is worth asking, and investigating, why these very ancient patterns have become suddenly disrupted if not broken.

Know your birds; know your English; know your Bible.  Know a hawk from a handsaw, and a raven from a dove.



For a much longer Covid-19 essay (22,000 words), even more discursive than this one, and going deep into philosophy and theology and science (including the downside of science), here it is:




Posted in Antisemitism, Christianity, Climate Change, Ecology, Political philosophy, Science, Uncategorized | 2 Comments