A Word On Roman Polanski (Or, Why [Some] Of His Defenders are Degenerate Morons)

By now, I'm sure you're all aware that director Roman Polanski has been nabbed by authorities in Switzerland for his rape of then-13 year old Samantha Gailey in Los Angeles thirty-some years ago. After days of reading about the issue and arguing futilely about it on (where else?) Film General, here's my two cents.

A lot of people, from Hollywood directors to French politicians to geeky FGers, are rallying to Polanski's defense and making him into something of a perverse cause celebre. There are legitimate reasons, perhaps, to drop or reduce the charges on Polanski:

- Although I'm more inclined to believe the victim's side of the story in this instance, to be absolutely fair to Polanski, there's enough ambiguity in the situation that there could possibly be room for doubt as to what exactly went on.

- The crime happened thirty-two years ago. (I will say, though, that there is no statute of limitations since he was convicted and then fled.)

- Polanski himself is 76, hasn't (apparently) engaged in such activities since then, and at his age is arguably no danger to anyone.

- The victim herself has expressed willingness to forgive Polanski, on more than one occasion. This has little legal strength but it's certainly a powerful emotional appeal, and might in and of itself make the justice system's actions cold-blooded and hard to defend.

- The judge who was prosecuting him was an ambitious prick who planned to railroad Polanski for little good reason, and so he had at least some justification for fleeing.

These are arguments that, even if I take issue with them up to a point, I could accept and at least be on the same wavelength as. But too many people, from the misogynist amoral teenage apes of IMDB to the bone-headed gliteratti of Hollywood and beyond, to even French and Polish politicians (!), more specious, idiotic reasons are being advanced, that range from the illogical to the idiotic to the insane.

- What Polanski did was not a crime, or else should not be.

- There are people with far worse crimes out there, why should the US focus on Polanski?

- The girl in question was old enough to say no, she consented to it, etc. Some have even gone so far as to argue that because she may have had sexual relations prior to that, she somehow deserves it.

- Polanski has somehow atoned for the crime through his admittedly traumatic life.

- The American criminal justice is corrupt, mean-spriited and barbaric.

- Polanski has made a lot of great films since the crime - doesn't that exonerrate him?

Allow me to address each of these points in fairly abbreviated fashion:

- That's not for you to say, is it, bonehead? Too bad we don't have your wisdom to enlighten all of us, eh wot?

- Bullshit moral equivalence. What Henry Kissinger did in Chile or Cambodia or Angola may well be a crime, but it has no bearing on this case in particular, so drop your smug act of superiority. Unless you want to argue that only murderers and capital criminals should be prosecuted.

- Although Ms. Gailey (now Geiner) has expressed willingness to forgive Polanski, she has not changed her story but for a few details. Her testimony seems to indicate the equivalent of a date rape, where she was drugged and clearly resisted his advances. Not to mention, I would seriously argue that a 13 year old girl - let alone one who was drunk, on drugs, and being advanced upon by a much-older, very-famous film director - isn't old enough and sound enough to consent to sex anyway (If you believe otherwise, you're either overgeneralizing or just being a pig.) As for the latter point, I hope I don't need to detail how misogynistic and disgusting it is - but to the amoral monkeys who don't see pedophilia as a bad thing, well, there's no hope in persuading them anyway.

- Polanski certainly had one hell of an awful life, losing relatives in the Holocaust and the murder of Sharon Tate by the Mansons. Should that alone clear his record? No. Pretty much every criminal has some background circumstances that might drive them to crime, from a broken home to a traumatic incident to mental illness. Should they all be pardoned too? In any case, Polanski hasn't expressed any regret over the incident, so why should we factor this in?

- Maybe so, but I don't see it as being remotely relevant to this particular case. He committed a crime, was convicted of it, and fled justice. Most repulsive, to my way of thinking, is the implication that Polanski is somehow a martyr to justice for sodomizing a thirteen year old girl. Come on, you idiots, let's not make him into Martin Luther King Jr. (although it wouldn't surprise me after the way Hollywood rolled out the red carpet for Tookie Williams and Mumia Abu Jamal).

- This last one is, without a doubt, the most idiotic. If it were confined to IMDbers, that would be expected and no big deal, but members of the French and Polish governments are saying as much in protest of his arrest. Give me a fucking break, people! Art undoubtedly has its value in society, but that does not exonerrate an individual from responsibility for their own actions. To quote George Orwell, "If Shakespeare returned to the earth to-morrow, and if it were found that his favourite recreation was raping little girls in railway carriages, we should not tell him to go ahead with it on the ground that he might write another King Lear."

Not much more to say, except that those who advance such arguments reveal a great deal of unpleasantness about themselves.

Let's face facts here. Whatever the reasons advanced, most are defending him because he's a film director, plain and simple. If Polanski were Joe Schmoe, a politician, or (God forbid!) a priest, these people would either not care or be all over him like Mr. Freeze on an ice pun. But because Polanski is an artist and a celebrity, he's somehow above the law, and we must unquestioningly forgive him his trespasses.

Well, screw that. If you really think that a film career exonerrates a man of a heinous crime, you've forfeited my sympathy and respect, and outed yourself as an amoral ape.

Charade

Regina Lampert (Audrey Hepburn) is a young American woman on vacation in Paris, whose marriage to her husband Charlie is about to unravel. The situation is solved quite unexpectedly when Charlie is murdered, and almost instantly Regina realizes that something sinister is going on. During WWII her husband had been a member of the OSS who had stolen a shipment of Nazi gold along with several others, and now the surviving gang members (James Coburn, George Kennedy, Ned Glass) are willing to kill Reggie to get it back. Bewildered, frightened, but always with ready with a snappy comeback, Reggie holds her own, but must rely on a seemingly upright CIA Agent (Walter Matthau) and a man whose name, identity, and allegiance seems to change at every turn (Cary Grant) to find the money and avoid a grisly fate at the hands of the criminals.

Charade is a borderline impossible film to classify. The plot description makes it seem like a rather straightforward Hitchcockian thriller: an individual trapped in circumstances they don't understand, protagonists who can't be fully trusted, menacing bad guys, and a rather ingenious Macguffin. But the movie also works as a wonderful romantic comedy, with an extremely witty script and two old-school Hollywood romantic leads. That the film works as both is a testament to its status as a classic. It may not be the smartest or most inventive film of all time, but it's certainly one of the most entertaining.

The film's main attraction is undoubtedly the two leads. Audrey Hepburn and Cary Grant were both stars of classic Hollywood, and both were entering the later stages of their careers. Audrey Hepburn is simply one of the greats. She aged incredibly well on film, maintaining the class and lovable straightforwardness from her earlier films, and adding to it a degree of sophistication and wit as she grew older. Audrey's charm is undeniable; even in her lesser works like Breakfast at Tiffany's, it's almost impossible to dislike Audrey. In Charade she is as beautiful as ever, dressed in a gorgeous array of Givenchy dresses, and carries herself with her trademark class and dignity. If anything she's more appealing in this film than in Roman Holiday or Sabrina.

On the other end is Cary Grant, one of Hollywood's greatest leading men, nearing the end of his career. His character is never who he seems; his identity and name change every other scene or so. You WANT to think that he's a good guy, I mean he IS Cary Grant, and he IS flirting with Audrey Hepburn. But when Reggie sees him conspiring with the three villains, when he gives himself a different name in every scene, how can you be sure? The film somehow manages to pull this character off without it being laughable or predictable, and I think Grant is to be credited for this. He and Hepburn have great chemistry and are helped by a witty script with an endless stream of verbal bantering, which together makes their rather large age difference superfluous. Nowadays, these two actors playing these characters would be decried for "typecasting" or "lack of range", but when something works, particularly as well as in a film like this... who cares?

The film makes brilliant use of gorgeous Paris scenery throughout, and features marvelous set pieces, most notably a roof-top fight between Grant and Kennedy's characters and the lengthy chase sequence/shootout at the climax. Peter Stone's fine screenplay deserves credit for somehow managing to amalgamate the comedy and thriller aspects and keep the viewer guessing as to who the bad guy is. Charles Lang's cinematography captures both the beauty of Paris and also adds a touch of darkness appropriate to the story. Stanley Donen's direction is fabulous and he keeps a brisk, even, suspenseful pace throughout. Henry Mancini provides a catchy and extremely memorable score.

The supporting cast is also solid. Walter Matthau does a good job as the CIA Agent who seems to be the one honest character in the film. James Coburn, George Kennedy, and Ned Glass are perfectly cast as the menacing yet goofy bad guys. Coburn and Kennedy would soon go on to bigger things and they show why in this film, while Glass is wonderful as the obnoxious sniveling twerp. Jacques Marin (The Train) also provides an amusing turn as the bewildered French policeman investigating the whole mess.

All in all, Charade is just plain fun. It works on many different levels and anyone looking for a pleasant waste of two hours should definitely check it out. Supercritical writers could pick out the various plot holes and improbabilities, or pick out the plot twists before they develop. But most viewers will undoubtedly be charmed by the two leads, the wonderful script, and the gorgeous Paris scenery, all the while wondering whodunit? And that's all one can really ask from a film like this.

Has Labour 'Lost It'?

Dunno. But this guy surely has. Lucky it wasn't the Yellow Pages who sided with the Tories! He should have got one of those shredding machines on the platform! Or even better, taken a match to The Sun, put it in the dustbin and continued with his speech, causing a small fire and widespread panic in the auditorium...Okay, now I'm being silly. Those Labour Party people though, eh?! They don't like it up 'em!

10 Days to Go...

Well, there are 10 days to go until St Mary Magdalen's Church makes the pilgrimmage to visit the relics of St Therese of Lisieux at Aylesford Priory, Kent. I for one, can barely wait! We had 35 places on a coach and I believe we may have, at the most, one or two seats available. If there are a couple more I always have the car. It will be an early start at 7.45am but it should give us some time to get there early in preparation.

After all the bad columns written about the Little Flower, who it has to be said, was perfectly delightful to everyone, I was heartened today to read a calm and well-written piece in The Independent on how the veneration of the relics is going on her tour. Maybe one or two miracles associated with her this week as well!

Gordon Brown's Big Brother

He looks like Gordon, sounds like Gordon, makes the same hand gestures as Gordon and he is watching you. Especially all you single mothers. Oh yes! It's off to Care Homes for you so you can raise your children under constant supervision of the State. Don't rely on your family, your parents or grandparents for help. It's for your own good and for society's good!

So, remember single mothers, if you decide to have your baby at 16, and that's a big if, given that you're going to be shunted into a Moat housing estate if you do, surrounded by men and women watching you like hawks, that Big Brother Gordon and Gordon's Care Homes will be here for you...waiting...and watching...and waiting!...but mostly watching! Cracking. Either this idea will halve teen pregnancies and instill a mindset of abstinence in the young or abortions are about to skyrocket because it will soon become apparant that Social Services are watching the single mothers so intently and waiting for them to make a mistake so intently, because they want to find any excuse they can to give their children to gay couples who want to adopt.

And, is it just me, or is Gordon Brown courting the BNP vote?



That'll be a yes then. That repulsive flag is back! Yep! It must be a recession!

Brown: "Mandy! It's an emergency! We're shafted at the next election? What are we going to do!?"

Mandelson: "It's time to wheel out the big guns,Gordy. I want you to stand in front of the Union Jack and appeal to a sense of national pride, because, my man...it's all we have left. Oh, and do as much as you can to appeal to the middle classes. Convince them that its all the fault of the very rich and lazy and the very poor and lazy and that 'honest, hard working Brits' are the guys you want to help. Believe me, Gord. This has NEVER been known to fail. We need Daily Mail readers! Yep! All those people who hate us because we've Ed Ballsed up the nation's civil liberties - we need them now and what is more, we need them quicker than a Big Mac at a Drive Thru, because The Sun have just kneed us in the knackers so hard this Party won't be walking for days, possibly weeks!"

Everyone knows The Sun are kingmakers. I wish I could feel sorry for the Labour Party, but I'll be as glad to see the back of them as I was seeing the Tories get their behinds whipped out of power last time they were in. Power corrupts, they say, and let's face it, that was 1997. It didn't take long for power to corrupt the Labour Party after the wilderness years. I doubt very much the Tories will have learned their lesson, but still, a change is as good, if not better, than a rest. Most people, I think, hated the Tories back in 1997 because they were just seen as being a bit mean to the poor and needy, ordinary workers too, a bit like old Scrooge. Hence Cameron does his, 'Hey, everybody! I'm nice!' act.

The Labour Party, if they lose the next election will probably go away licking their wounds and take everything into stock and decide that the biggest mistake they made was that they didn't interfere in people's lives enough. I saw a cavalcade tonight, one sleek black car, with police motorbikes and a couple of cars behind and in front of it, while I was driving around in town and I thought to myself, '**** me! How's anyone in a car like that, with all that security going to have a clue what's going on on the ground in communities in the UK?' Fact is, he, whoever he is, PM or not, doesn't have a clue because their lives are totally divorced from ours, which is exactly what we were talking about after Mass today. Anyway...

O

Since I haven't had much movie-watching time of late, here's another review from the IMDB comment archives. Hopefully my first Pitt News review is forthcoming, sooner rather than later. Until then (or my next free two hours for film watching)...

Odin James (Mekhi Phifer) is the only black student at Palmetto Grove, a private school in the Deep South. He is the star of the basketball team, is dating Desi (Julia Stiles) daughter of the school's dean, and is loved by teachers, coaches, and students. All that is, except Hugo (Josh Hartnett), the insanely jealous son of the basketball coach (Martin Sheen). Enlisting the help of hopeless outcast Rodger (Elden Hanson) and his girlfriend Emily (Rain Phoenix), Hugo launches a convoluted scheme to destroy Odin's life, convincing him that Desi is cheating on him and also turning him against best friend Mike Cassio (Andrew Keegan). Odin's jealousy eventually gets the better of him, and a tragic conclusion becomes inevitable.

Adapting Shakespeare for teens is a process that generally strikes me as intellectual masturbation or pompous self-importance. The themes of Shakespeare's plays are so universal and more importantly oft-copied that claiming descent from Shakespeare seems like a desperate attempt to add class to an otherwise typical film. Luhrman's Romeo+Juliet was a loud, flashy mess, redeemed only by its lead actors. Ten Things I Hate About You and She's the Man were disposable fun but more or less interchangeable with any number of other teen flicks, and in any case bearing only tertiary relation with their source material. I'm not impressed with She's the Man claiming descent from Twelfth Night because its basic story has been done five million times since.

However, O stands above these films, despite a few notable flaws, namely the ending. Tim Blake Nelson adapts what is (in my opinion) Shakespeare's greatest tragedy Othello into a modern setting with surprising skill, keeping the spirit and themes of the play intact and even adding additional layers to it.

Shakespeare's play is as much about the villainous Iago as it Othello. Despite his wickedness, Iago is a sympathetic character; he is clearly a tormented man with inner demons he doesn't know how to face. In this film, Hugo has additional motivation beyond merely being passed over for promotion (or acknowledgment as MVP). His father barely acknowledges his existence, while embracing Odin as "the son I never had". As despicable as Hugo's actions are, it's easy to see what would drive him to such extremes.

Also added is an exploration high school caste system. Usually dealt with in a truncated and comic fashion, it is devastatingly portrayed here. Rodger, Hugo's accomplice, is the son of one of the school's contributors, but also a geek who is beat up and picked on by pretty much everyone. There is a painful scene where Cassio torments him at a basketball game until he leaves. Hugo's alienation from his team mates is also a major factor, and it's easy to see why many people thought of Columbine when the film was released. People cast out by society are likely to their revenge, and this film shows that with devastating effect.

Perhaps inevitably, the movie gives more weight to Odin's race than the source material did. The film features several sex scenes, including a disturbing one at mid-point where Odin's jealous begins to take hold in the middle of coitus - a scene that is both disturbing and effective. Odin is a model student, a great player, and liked by almost everyone in spite of his race, and yet as Hugo's scheme begins he begins reverting to stereotypes - he does drugs, is violent and moody, and at the end is driven to murderous rage. Odin is a victim as much of his own demons as Hugo, and the movie does an excellent job showing that.

The biggest problem with the film is the end. Although abbreviated, the movie does a good job following the original text, and the film is perfectly paced. Until the climax. The decision to reduce the last two acts into a brief montage scene was a mistake, and ruined the pacing of the film. Odin's monologue at the end justifying his actions would have been more powerful if the movie hadn't just leaped into it.

The cast is uniformly solid. Mekhi Phifer is powerful as Odin; his portrayal of Odin as a victim of his own insecurities is spot-on, and he is a thoroughly believable character throughout. Josh Hartnett, whom I've never rated as much of an actor, surprised me with a powerful performance as the treacherous Hugo. Julia Stiles' part as Desi is underwritten but Stiles cannot be faulted for that, and as always her performance is top-notch. Andrew Keegan, Rain Phoenix, and Elden Hanson also create memorable characters. Martin Sheen and John Heard are effective as the two most prominent adult cast members.

Despite the rushed and flawed ending, O is definitely the best of the teen adaptations of Shakespeare. The spirit of the original play is kept intact, and the characters are adapted well into a modern context. Definitely worth a look.

Peter to Enter the 'Three Lions' Den

"What?! England?! Are you having a laugh!?"

Pope Benedict XVI must feel as happy about coming to England, the 'Three Lions Den' as St Peter was about being told by Christ to go back to Rome along the Appian Way. Perhaps the Three Lions now represent Atheism, the Culture of Death and Anti-Catholicism.

I fear that the Holy Father may face protests on a large scale, such is the secular, atheistic outrage in the UK towards the 'scandal' of the Successor of St Peter. For evidence of it, click here and look at Tanya Gold's Guardian article on the visit and some of the comments below. I hope that the Holy Father's words are not drowned out by the hoardes of men and women who scream the same sort of diabolical diatribes that were shouted when Nero condemned St Peter to being crucified for the love of Christ.

Peter Tatchell Comes Out Fighting...

...and he doesn't care who gets hurt.

David Lindsay has posted an interesting riposte to Peter Tatchell's call for a lowering of the age of consent to 14.

Peter Tatchell is a militant homosexual. He is an advocate and promoter of homosexuality. He is a political homosexual, some would say a political 'animal'. Infact, as a 'human rights campaigner' his entire public career has been defined by promoting homosexuality and its practise as a human rights campaign. Anyone who disagrees with Mr Tatchell on his position, to him, is a fascist. As far as he is concerned, UK laws on homosexuality will never go far enough and must be relaxed as much as possible lest people become criminalised on account of their actions. His organisations and political efforts were demonstrable in the lowering of the age of consent for homosexuals and doubtless, too, for UK civil partnerships.

But, as self-appointed 'human rights leader' Tatchell has not stopped there. No. He now campaigns to lower the age of consent for sexual intercourse to 14. That's right 14. His reasons? Well, having listened to him on the radio the other day it appears that once more he sees the great punishment of illegality as criminalisation. 14 year olds are having sex, he says, and he is doubtless quite right, so why criminalise them for having sexual intercourse?

Well that is rather painting the situation black. Laws, just like laws against assisted suicide which people wish to see swept away, are there to protect individuals, rather than punish them. Teenagers are vulnerable to predators, just like the elderly are vulnerable to people taking advantage of them and encourage them to die. Yet, people like Tatchell cannot see this. Every law is about restriction on human freedom, rather than the protection of the innocent, and just like assisted suicide the law on the age of consent is open to abuse along with the children who could become its victims - the victims of coersion, abuse and sexual overtures from others for experiences of which they are not yet physically, emotionally or spirtually ready.

I am assuming that when sex education, for instance, is taught in schools that teachers state categorically (even while filling children's minds with erotic imagery and condoms) that the legal age of consent is 16, so that, should they choose to have sex with someone they are committing a criminal offense. This also protects the young from older sexual predators who wish to have their way with younger girls, or even, as seen recently from the public case of a teacher, young boys. It does not take too much imagination to realise that when or if the age of consent is lowered to 14, that the last legal protection of children who have only just got used to their changing bodies will have been swept aside. Suddenly, its a sexual free-for-all and even though 14 year olds are almost certainly at it, a lifting of the law will give the teenagers not discouragement, but encouragement towards sex - which is incredible, when the Government keeps telling people that it wants to reduce the number of underage pregnancies and STIs which teenagers are contracting.

And what is at the root of this. Tatchell is still, primarily, a homosexual human rights campaigner. Once the age of consent is lowered to 14, he will then, no doubt, be aiming at lowering the age of consent for homosexuals to 14 as well. The State legitimising the sodomy of teenage boys? Well, you can say what you like about various scandals which have infected Holy Mother Church, but such a move would perhaps define much of the abuse that hampered the US church, and destroyed the innocence and lives of so many pubescent boys, as the law of the Land.

How many young, 16 year old boys have already fallen victim to older sexual predators? How many teenage boys have fallen into a life of male prostitution, simply because the law has allowed it? How many teenage boys have fallen into a life of being used and abused to make pornography films, simply because the law, by default of the age of consent, allowed it? How many teenage boys and girls does the law, because of a lack of concern, no longer protects them from the advances of those with only wicked intent. I don't know, but I'll bet Peter Tatchell doesn't know either and what is more, he has not the time, nor inclination to think of it or care.

Then he takes his homosexual agenda to east european countries, which are predominately Catholic and is aghast when the people of that country vociferously tell him and his campaigners to get out and stay out. Some of these people will be 'homophobes' but I expect the great majority do not want his anti-life agenda foisted on them by him and they don't want their children to be brought up in the same culture as the UK, a culture which now sees sex as totally divorced from marriage, procreation and the institution of the family. Tatchell asks for respect for him and his agenda, yet he does not respect the culture of the places where he propagates his message. That culture, in Eastern Europe, is largely Catholic and maybe that is what he really does not like.

Brighton's House of Horrors

Wiston Clinic, Brighton

I was walking past Brighton's abortion clinic last week and as usual felt a shudder at what must daily go on within those walls. There is no Catholic presense there, largely, I imagine, because arrests would be swift even with a peaceful protest. I don't know whether anyone has ever held a peaceful vigil there. I know that images of aborted unborn children are not legal in this country and I always think that an image or Icon of the Blessed Virgin would be just as effective. Possibly vigils took place there years ago. Nowadays the local MP, David Leppar praises it as a place of cracking healthcare for women.

The reason I post on this was having read My Heart Was Restless blog post that...

'Bishop Aquila of North Dakota recently sent a letter to all Priests of his Diocese, asking them to participate in the 40 Days for Life campaign, which is a well established pro-life witness in the United States. The Bishop wrote: 'I will pray on the sidewalk in front of the abortion facility on Friday, September 25, at 11 a.m. and again on Respect Life Sunday when I lead a Eucharistic procession to the abortion facility, carrying our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament to the site of death for so many of His children.'

Outside to the right of the building, as you walk past, you can see a large electrical generator. I wonder why they need so much power? I can't imagine it is for lighting. Secondly, whenever I go past, I see three large blue and yellow bins stuffed with black bin liners. I don't know whether the contents are surgical equipment, general domestic rubbish or something much, much more tragic and horrifying.

I looked up at the window and to my surprise, for it was 12:30 in the morning, a nurse pulled the curtains away. I looked at my watch. 'Gosh,' I thought, 'It appears they work around the clock.' A look at the website indeed confirms that Wednesday they are open overnight, presumably for those 'difficult' procedures which might involve several hours recuperation.

Because my car is parked relatively nearby, I always feel ashamed when I walk past there and say and do nothing, and undoubtedly, that is exactly how I should feel.

Mandelson's Spinning A New Yarn

The BBC reports that...

Labour is in "the fight of our lives" but the party can win the next election, Lord Mandelson has said. The business secretary said a Labour government had "never been needed more than now", saying his party should behave as "fighters, not quitters." (That's how I've always felt about smoking...).

He pledged his "undivided loyalty" (cough, "Yeah, right!", cough) to Mr Brown and urged the public not to let the Conservatives "off the hook", saying their appeal was "shallow". The Conservatives said the speech was devoid of new ideas or policies. Lord Mandelson praised Gordon Brown, saying he had "gripped" the global financial crisis when other leaders had made mistakes (Brown = Good. Other world leaders = Bad. Brown didn't make mistakes. Brown gripped the global financial crisis while other leaders fumbled at it like teenagers at a houseparty...All hail the Great Leader!)

In response, the prime minister told the Labour conference, the last before the next election, it should be "proud" of Lord Mandelson's contribution to the party. (Hmm...Let's get this straight. Mandelson's contribution to the Labour Party has always been and still is in his ability to spin, put spin on things, make things appear as they are not, deceive, deliberately mislead, cheat, lie and be more slippery than an oiled up eel fresh from a visit to his local masseur. What is more if he ever reads this he can sue me because God knows, I got nothing!).

Lord Mandelson said Conservative leader David Cameron had pursued a policy of "concealment not real change" in his efforts to modernise his party and was not equipped to deal with the major economic challenges facing the UK. Recalling his surprise return to the Cabinet last year, Lord Mandelson said he had returned to frontline politics because Labour was in "his blood and bones" and because of his admiration for the prime minister. (Is this the same Peter Mandelson who spent years conspiring with Blair and issuing press leaks about how "psychologically flawed" Brown was? But didn't he say a day ago that he would gladly help the Tories? Err...??)

"You win elections on the future not the past (Well, the future's all you got guys!) This will be a change election. Either we offer it or the British public will turn to others who say they do." The new Labour project (TM), which Lord Mandelson helped devise in the early 1990s, was "far from complete" (Just like the Death Star in Star Wars! It isn't "fully operational" yet!) he insisted. He said Labour needed to "explain with confidence, clarity and conviction" the differences between it and the Conservatives, saying the election was "still up for grabs". (Yep, its still 'up for grabs', Peter. But then, isn't that how you feel about the Labour leadership as well, because it is obvious to all that you want to take the reigns and make the Death Star, "fully operational"....)

Is it OK for gay men to joke about lesbians?

Following a joke made by the chat show host Graham Norton, the BBC has today ran a piece asking the question, "Is it okay for gay men to joke about lesbians?" I'm not a big fan of Graham as his humour is mostly so vulgar it isn't funny. However, the day Britain loses its sense of humour entirely is a sad day. Nowadays, the question, 'Is it okay to say...' is based upon whether someone might get upset or offended. Yet, that means nobody can say anything which might upset or offend anyone. So, what is the big deal?

As Catholics we are offered no protection against offensive jokes, gestures or words towards some of the dearest things we hold as holy. Furthermore, if Catholics were so easily offended and upset, nobody would go to Mass to hear the words of the Gospel which, so often can be a source of discomfort, especially when we are not living as we should. What could be more offensive to those of us who live worldly lives than the words of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Maybe that is what makes us more tolerant than liberals. We don't mind being in the wrong.

So, here goes.

An old cowboy dressed to kill with a cowboy shirt, hat, jeans, spurs, and chaps went to a bar and ordered a drink. As he sat sipping his whiskey, a young lady sat down next to him. After she ordered her drink, she turned to the cowboy and asked him, "Are you a real cowboy?" To which he replied, "Well, I have spent my whole life on the ranch, herding cows, breaking horses, mending fences. I guess I am."

After a short while, he asked her what she was. She replied, "I am a lesbian. I spend my whole day thinking about women. As soon as I get up in the morning I think of women, when I eat, shower, watch TV, everything seems to make me think of women."

A short while later she left and the cowboy ordered another drink. A couple sat down next to him and asked, "Are you a real cowboy?" To which he replied, "I always thought I was, but I just found out that I'm a lesbian."

There. That wasn't so bad was it?

Painting the Town Red...Or is that Brown?

Operation Otter!

I spent the afternoon with an Anglican friend who is working for a company who have to be notified of the security preparations for the Labour Pary Conference in Brighton and, let's face it, the way they've royally shafted the country...they need all the security they can get! So he has a security pass with the Sussex County Police emblem saying "Operation Otter".

What is it with our police and innocuous, fluffy animal names for what are meant to be highly efficient and incredibly assertive, off-putting counter terrorist strategies? 'Operation Otter', eh!? Well, the name of the operation alone has put me right off from going there and committing some terrorist outrage such as calling the Prime Minister a big statist, expenses grabbing, embryology supporting, sycophantic Obamalover! 'Operation Otter'? Is it wet, soggy, a bit cute, fluffy but with teeth that could potentially be a bit painful if you got on the wrong side of the operation and it got you between its jaws?

According to our beloved Beeb, ahead of the Conference, Brown said he would, 'use his conference speech to set out how he would deal with "the whole future of our economy and the whole future of our society".'

Now, I'm not a Tory, never have been, never will be. But at some point, you have to ask whether the Labour Party, under Gordon Brown, can possibly deal with the "whole future of our economy and the whole future of our society" when the whole present of the economy, which is a shambles, and the whole present situation of our society, which is by all accounts, in a state of some kind of ruin, has been governed by either himself, Tony Blair, or both he and Tony Blair for the past 12 years. If they cannot be trusted with either the past or the present, how can they be trusted with the future?

Medugorie: Faith or Fiction? The Only Test?

I know this is not the advice of Holy Mother Church and I'm only joking of course, promise! For we must follow the advice of the Bishop of Mostar, because as well as being bound by Holy Obedience as sons and daughters of the Church, God knows, if there is one thing solid and concrete in the Church, one thing you can rely on, one thing most prevalent in the Church in the modern World, it is holy Bishops who are preaching the Magisterium in season and out of season...If, however, you want further validation of the position of the Bishop in Medjugorje, then...

As a Catholic, go around saying, to all and sundry, "This Medjugorje stuff...It's almost certainly all b***ocks, isn't it!? All this spinning sun and floating Crosses and strange clouds and miraculous golden Crosses. What a load of superstitious nonsense!"

1. If the Lord gives you blessings and graces you with peace you know you're on the right track.
2. If the Lord sends a bus that nearly knocks you over or you fall over on your arse for no apparent reason, or you do something that causes embarrassment to you and those around you, or you start being cataclysmically clumsy, you know you're on the wrong track. I'm only joking! Heaven have mercy on me if its for real, and the Bishop for that matter, because if I were the Bishop at Medjugorje, I'd keep in mind the fate of the Bishop who condemned St Joan of Arc. I hear after her death they dug up his bones and threw them into the river! I hope he knows what he is doing!
   

And the second reason I'm only joking, of course is that we've been told, explicity not to put the Lord our God to the test. Err...So don't do it! Stick with the Bishop! Oh, I don't know, Bishops are so fickle nowadays! Oh it's so confusing! Maybe we should all just pray, do penance and go to Confession and the Blessed Sacrament as frequently as we can!

Hang on...IT'S THE BLESSED VIRGIN!

"Yep, yep, yep, yep. Yep, yep...yep, uh-huh, yep, yep, noooo, do I have to?! Okay, yep, got it, right, yeah, oh alright, yes, yes, yep. Right you are!"

She said return to God, pray, go to Confession, receive the Blessed Sacrament, avoid sin, be chaste, stop leading others into sin, stop being nasty to your girlfriend and be holy.

What was it Our Blessed Lord said?

"Blessed are those who do not see, and yet believe."

Medugorie: Faith or Fiction?

"Yes. Uh-huh. Yep. Yep. Yep. Yep. Really? Yep? Yep. Yep...Right you are! Really? Yep, Noooo! Well I never! Yep, yep."

"What did she say?"

"She said, "Buy more stuff!""

Fr Ray Blake has posted about Medjugorje last couple of days. I really don't know enough about it to comment too much. I agree with him that we should follow the official Church position on it. What does concern me is this video. The 'seer' is receiving an apparition of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Where? In her house! To all outward appearances the vision she is experiences appears authentic, with tears, devotion, as if being swept up into mystical contemplation of the beauty of the Virgin and her words, her message to her and the World.

But is it me, or is there something a little unsettling about it. Like, what's Our Lady doing popping into this woman's house! Is this not a little out of keeping with Marian behaviour? I mean, far be it for me to say, "Isn't Our Lady more into scenic and rocky positions in the countryside?"

I don't know, whether this lady is authentic or not, but if she really is experiencing visions of the Blessed Virgin then how come she hasn't put a habit on and joined an order? As far as I know, and I'll admit to not knowing a great deal about Marian apparitions, the Virgin is appearing to a few seers, nearly all lay people and almost like clockwork, regularly like a party piece or something. This is totally out of character with historical, authenticated apparitions of the Blessed Virgin Mary. I have an open mind about it, but at first hand I agree with Fr Ray's analysis that the fruits are important.

Does Medjugorje result in an abundance of devotion to the Blessed Virgin, return to piety among the Faithful and hoards of Confessions etc, or does it just result in a devotion to Medjugorje. We know that God has used many visionaries in the past, some of whom, I think were lay people. Either Our Lady is appearing at Medjugorje so intensely and so regularly because she wants the World to recognise her Son now before some Great Chastisement, or these visionaries are not mystics but deceived individuals led astray by the wicked lying wonders of the Devil. Difficult, isn't it because Our Lord talked about wonders in the sky prior to the End. Yet, I didn't think the Devil had the 'power' to move the Sun and for that to be caught on camera. Until Holy Mother Church authenticates it, it cannot be taken as authentic. All we know is, Our Lady doesn't make mistakes in who she chooses, therefore if the visionaries are unreliable then that leaves open the question of whether they were chosen by Our Lady. Confusing!!

Scary Barry Obama Dream...

I had a weird dream last night. I'm not really into looking too closely into nocturnal phantasms of the mind, unless they're evidence of a guilty conscience. But, just for once, I'll post it.

I'm in the White House with Barry Obama and I have a glass of wine in my hand and we're chatting. At some point when we're talking the subject of a New World Order comes up. And he says to me;

"Well, there are some benefits to a New World Order. For example, everyone cheers the leader."

I say, "Are you out of your mind, Mr Obama?! What you are talking about President Obama is a Cult of Personality. We've seen it all before. Hitler, Stalin, how many were left dead? 5 million? 6 million?"

At that point, my friend Henry comes along and puts a small Masonic symbol into my wine glass when the President isn't looking, and winks at me, as if to say that it is evidence that the President is involved in a vast Masonic global conspiracy to forge a New World Order under his headship!

Aaaaaghhh! Nightmare! And then I woke up...I must be some kind of visionary or something! I'm going to lay in bed all day and get hoards of followers to be by my bedside, start up a tourism trade, get a load of gold Crosses in etc. Nevermind that I'm a profligate sinner with about as much claim to visionary holiness as my fish.

On a Personal Note...

Shock! I have a job interview coming up in October as a Project Administrator. Anyone who wants to say a prayer for me, that would be much appreciated! I've had a few interviews in my time and my track record of clinching the job is appalling.

Mothers Banned from Looking After Each Other's Children

Good grief!

The Mail reports on a staggering case in which...

'Two working mothers have been banned from looking after each other's toddlers because they are not registered childminders. The close friends' private arrangement had let them both return to part-time jobs at the same company. However, a whistleblower reported them to the education watchdog Ofsted and it found their informal deal broke the law....'

Read more by clicking here.

Bamboozled

TV writer Pierre Delacroix (Damon Wayans) is tired of having his TV concepts rejected by the studio. Accused by his ultra-"hip" white boss Dunwitty (Michael Rappaport) of not being "black" enough, an enraged Pierre comes up with an outlandish idea: a modern-day minstrel show, complete with black-face, musical revue numbers, racial epithets, and the most ridiculous stereotypes imaginable. He enlists the aide of his reluctant secretary Sloane (Jada Pinkett Smith) and two street dancers Manray and Womack (Savion Glover and Tommy Davidson) desperate for a buck. Pierre is flabbergasted when the network accepts the show, and then becomes a pop culture phenomenon. But not everyone enjoys the racial epithets the show provides, and the Maumaus, a group of wannabe gangstas/rappers, decide to take matters into their own hands - with tragic results.

Spike Lee's Bamboozled is certainly an ambitious film. It is an unremittingly vicious satire of the portrayal of blacks in popular media, a topic all too open to attack from Lee's inflammatory eye. However, having set up a potentially great and scathing satire, Bamboozled ultimately fails by being just too broad and over-the-top in its target.

Lee is certainly right in attacking media portrayal of African-Americans. And for the early sections, it works. The most effective is the portrayal of pop culture - namely gangsta rap and hip-hop. The Maumaus are ridiculous posers who don't even notice that one of their number is white. The TV ads for Blow Cola and Timmi Hiln!gger showcase the artificiality and toxic nature of gangsta culture. Women are hos, bitches, and sluts; the men are cool because they do drugs and kill people. Lee's double-edged sword goes after the white media (embodied by the embarrassingly patronizing boss Dunwitty) for perpetuating such images, but also the blacks who embrace it. Very few societal targets, regardless of race or position, escape Lee's critical eye. The film's use of clips from minstrel shows of the past, as well as cartoons and other caricature portrayals, as well as the commentary of Sloane, to make the point reverberate. All of this is brilliantly done, and the witty dialog and character interactions of the first half indicate that Lee has winner on his hands.

But the film ultimately fails due to the methods it employs. Seriously... is there a sentient human being alive who thinks that there would be a TV audience for a MINSTREL SHOW? Black face is such an inherently, blatantly offensive concept that it's impossible to take it seriously. For lack of a better word, it's overkill. And by showing it again and again, Lee rather overdoes (and undermines) his point. We get it; this show is racist and humiliating. Wouldn't Lee have better made his point by keeping the focus on the contemporary equivalent, or at least gone about it in a more subtle manner?

Of course, Bamboozled is a satire, so hyperbole is expected. But, there are limits to this, particularly within the media of film. Be too outlandish and over-the-top, and the point is lost. Jonathan Swift's A Modest Proposal works because it is a written essay, where the venom beneath Swift's seemingly earnest tone is almost undetectable. In Bamboozled, however, we see starkly outrageous images of minstrel shows about black-faced, watermelon-eating, chicken-stealing blacks (and the black-faced fans who love and emulate them). And that image in and of itself blots out the point Lee is trying to make with such images. We don't remember that the media is demeaning towards blacks; we remember the minstrel show.

The movie is also damaged by its cop-out ending, which uses violence as an easy solution to the problems it has set up. One could argue that Lee was attempting to show the detrimental effects Delacroix's show had on society. Thanks, but I'm not buying that. Whatever justice that argument has is killed by the ham-fisted, rushed way the climax is executed.

The acting is uniformly solid. Damon Wayans, an actor I usually dislike, makes Pierre an intriguing character. Pierre's descent into hell - ultimately embracing the stereotypes he presents through his work - is fascinating. Jada Pinkett-Smith gives a quietly effective performance as the film's conscience, although her actions at the end seem ridiculously out-of-character. Savion Glover and Tommy Davidson are both extremely likable as two characters who slowly realize what they're doing is wrong. Michael Rappaport's hopeless studio VP is hysterical, and provides some of the film's best moments.

In short, Bamboozled is an extremely ambitious film that starts out great, then becomes so outlandish and over-the-top its point is obscured. Regardless, one should note it is very much a point worth making.

Be Afraid...Be Very Afraid...

Can anyone tell me what the odds are at the bookies for 'Christmas' either to have been banned and replaced with 'Winter Holiday', or to even more audaciously have been renamed 'Obamas' by this time next year?

This is totally bizarre. These children are too young to be doing this off their own backs. It's coming from the teachers. But who is feeding it to the teachers? And then, who is feeding it to the people feeding it to the teachers? And who is feeding it to them? Who is at the top of the pyramid? This is sick! How can even the 'liberals' in America stand this, especially when unemployment is going through the roof! Crikey! And we thought Tony's suits were 'teflon'! Nothing sticks to Obama. Planned Parenthood, FOCA, ACORN, euthanasia facilities in the healthcare bill, mass unemployment, gargantuan bail outs of Wall Street, a federal reserve debt so huge that if all the World's seas were drained and replaced with dollar bills, the Earth still could not contain it?

Of course, this kind of stuff won't go to Barry's head will it?! Wake up, America! Your president has 'nightmarishly dangerous dictator' written all over him! Give it another 5 years and he'll be holed up in some bunker playing 'Russian roulette' with only Timothy Geithner and 'Eugenics Czar' John Holdren still standing by his side.

How to Kill a 'Hoodie' in Four Moves...

According to the Independent, a Californian marital arts expert has arrived in Slough with a radical new technique of 'self-defense', for those concerned about walking the streets alone at night. Unfortunately, the technique doesn't involve pointing in the sky and shouting shouting, "Oh my God, its the Lord's Second Coming!" before running away. Neither does it involve a quick kick to the groin and scarpering. Neither does it even involve saying, "Take it all, take it all, just spare my life! I've got kids you know!"

No, it involves learning to kill someone in just four moves, which, I'm not sure quite describes 'self-defense' but how to achieve a charge of manslaughter. I'm quite sure some of the workshop attendees who show up to learn the techniques from Tim Larkin will be some of Slough's more unsavoury types who take a dislike to certain people and might just go on the offensive. Call me a chap with a pessimistic view of human nature if you like, I just can't help feeling such knowledge is open to abuse!

The Holy Father is Coming to the UK!

You heard it here first! Okay, you probably didn't...Amazing news from The Telegraph!



"Oi, you Brits! Come to Papa!"

I've just been handed an official schedule of the Holy Father's visit. Here it is...

10.30am Papal High Sung Mass at St Mary Magdalen's Church, Brighton, with local priests as deacons and sub-deacons.

11.30pm Coffee with the parishioners of St Mary Magdalen's Church, Brighton and a swift Fanta at The Windmill, where he says he needs a light for his fag. Even rabid atheists go onto their knees and hold their lighters up to the Holy Father, like in that Marilyn Monroe flick. He enjoys one of Fr Ray's Camels with Fr Ray, me, and all of the parishioners some of whom never smoked before. All this we do inside the pub and break the smoking ban, but nobody cares because its the flippin' Pope!!! Bar staff at The Windmill come over and break open a dozen bottles of champagne, saying, "It's on the house, Your Holiness," having kissed his hands and feet. He blesses them, they rise and go back to serving customers. The Holy Father chinks glasses with Fr Ray, has a sip or three and then says, 'Must dash! May Almighty God bless you in the Name of the Father and of the Son and the Holy Spirit!'

1pm Meeting in London with the Bishops of England and Wales.

1.03pm Bishops of England and Wales make official statement publicly calling on all Priests to learn the Traditional Latin Mass...Now!

1.05pm Lunch with Richard Dawkins

1.06pm Dawkins cries like a baby, converts and asks for Baptism and the location of the nearest Carthusian monastery.

2pm Meeting with Her Royal Highness the Queen

2.05pm Queen requests intensive RCIA course. Prince Charles begs the Holy Father to address climate change and save the planet. Pope Benedict XVI tells him to save his soul and that the planet can go spin on its axis like it always has done and always will until the Lord Jesus returns in Glory at the End of Time and that if the Lord's main concern were that we save the rainforests he would have flippin' said so during His Ministry on Earth.

2.06pm Prince Charles converts to Catholicism.

3.30pm Meets Gordon Brown PM. PM asks if the Holy Father has a spare 'moral compass' on him as he seems to have lost his. Holy Father passes him a penny Catechism.

3.35pm Gordon Brown converts to the Holy Faith, reverses the smoking ban, bans abortion, tells Stonewall to get knotted, promotes marriage and England is Our Lady's Dowry glorious and everyone goes home and prays the Rosary in thanksgiving for the reconversion of the British Isles!

6pm Arrives in Birmingham and canonises Cardinal John Henry Newman.

Well, we can dream!

Will Britain Become 'Brazil'?

Opening Scene

The way we are heading...Highly likely!

Ending

P.D. James Expresses Fears Over Assisted Suicide

The Telegraph reports that P.D. James - a former senior Home Office civil servant, turned crime fiction writer is concerned the assisted suicide 'clarifications' and any future change to law is open to grave abuse.

"We've got to be really careful when we start making it legally possible to end any life. I don't think people who are against legalising euthanasia are any less feeling, they just see that there are great dangers in the state legislating for this, and indeed there are."

Her comments come on the day when the Director of Public Prosecution, Keir Starmer indicated to the press that family members or friends who help a person under 18, or one suffering from a mental illness or learning disability are more likely to be prosecuted, Keir Starmer, Director of Public Prosecutions.

"Would it make a difference if a person was under the age of 18? Does it matter if the person who dies was not suffering from a terminal illness or severe degenerative condition, or if they had a mental illness or learning difficulty?" he wrote. Are any of these factors more worthy of sympathy than a criminal trial?

"If you answer “Yes”, you are exercising your discretion whether to prosecute. I think these factors do make a difference, and I will be setting out exactly how later on today."

The one thing that disturbs me is just how relaxed the Director of Public Prosecution appears in his language, firstly concerning assisted suicide and then about the possible manipulation and killing of people with learning disabilities, mental illness or 'under 18s' by families or relatives. It is the great problem with the moral relativism so endemic in the UK today.

Clearly the man cannot bring himself to say that assisted suicide is a grave and serious crime. Given this, shouldn't he say, quite categorically, 'If you assist in the suicide of someone so vulnerable as someone mentally ill, someone with a learning disability, a teenager or manipulate someone anyone who is impressionable to commit suicide that you will be prosecuted.' But he cannot even bring himself to say that. Highly, highly disturbing. Anyone would have though we were discussing legalising wacky-backy or something. We're not! We're talking about whose lives may be protected by law, and whose lives may not. Who will live and who will die.

The Crowning Glory of Atheism: The French Revolution

Episode 1

If you want to watch this and are confirmed in your belief that atheism does not lead to tyrannical and brutal regimes take a peep. Great series on what happens when a 'new ideology' takes the place of God and Religion and puts it at the service of one who believes in neither.

I was asked by a discussion member in the atheists internet forum to name one atheist who had acted negatively because of his atheism. 40,000 is the estimate at the number killed during the Reign of Terror, all as a result of Robespierre's atheism, rejection of the Church, of God and because of his fervent, passionate and evangelical 'new vision' of human society.

"The French Revolution", said the discussion chap, "was the poor rising up against the rich."
"Eh?" I replied, "What books have you been reading?!"

The French Revolution may have gathered a great deal of men and women who were impoverished to rise up and fight, but primarily it was a coup d'etat on a massive scale by a group of 'Enlightened' thinkers, not just a natural upsurge by the oppressed against the powerful.

Furthermore, as V.I Lenin maintained in his work 'What Is To Be Done?', such 'revolutions' require a 'Vanguard' - a group of 'enlightened men' who can maintain the constancy of the revolution in order to create the utopian vision required.

The victims of the French Revolution were many and varied. Many 'dissenters', however, were Catholics, the Church having been put underneath the power and authority of the State and subjected to it. Robespierre despised the Church because it didn't fit in with his 'passionate ideals' and those who refused his demands, he had slaughtered, because frankly, if you didn't really like the glorious republic and though it was actually a bit restrictive and rather naff, you didn't stand a chance. They had secret police and everything. The Inquisition had nothing on these guys! They hated Christianity so much they changed the flippin' calender! Robespierre died in the month of 'Thermodere' or something.

If you've got time on your hands and enjoy a good documentary...

Episode 2
Episode 3
Episode 4
Episode 5
Episode 6
Episode 7
Episode 8
Episode 9

Voices in Exile

Courtesy of The Telegraph

French authorities have today closed a migrant camp known as 'The Calais Jungle'. I wonder who it was who came up with that name! Was it the migrants themselves or perhaps the politicians who wished to denigrate the asylum seekers genuine pleas for human rights and to be given refuge in Europe in the eyes of the World's media? I'm sure if it was the migrants themselves that it wasn't a term of endearment. Alan Johnson has apparently 'praised' the efforts of the French police and Government. How charming!

"It is a clear signal that France is honouring the agreement... to build even stronger controls at the Calais border with the UK," he said.

Mr Johnson pledged continuing support for the French action, saying that the UK Border Agency officers "already work day and night alongside the French authorities to secure the border at Calais".

French riot police detained 278 illegal migrants in a dawn raid on a makeshift camp in northern France. Illegal migrants and left-wing protesters fought with police on Tuesday as armed officers began clearing the camp. As soon as dawn broke at 7.39am dozens of vans accompanied by bulldozers began circling the stretch of wooded waste ground a few hundred yards from the ferry port. Up to 500 officers had massed for the operation – at least two for each migrant who had stayed on in the blue tarpaulin tents and rickety shacks.

Of course, asylum seekers, particularly Muslim asylum seekers from areas of the World we are not that keen on are not going to be that welcome in Europe, especially in time of recession and fear of terrorism and, unfortunately, these migrants will have few friends in the mainstream media or perhaps even in the UK. What does strike me as a little sinister is the way in which the media are portraying these migrants. The language of 'Clearing of the Jungle' reminds me rather of Robert Mugabe's 'Clearing Out the Trash' attacks on the poor in Harare. The Daily Mail, for example has this picture on its paper today and the headline appeared to convey the view that these migrants are a grave internal threat to the UK, where some of them would have liked to have lived.



To me, that looks like a genuine plea from impoverished and destitute asylum seekers for clemency, human rights, dignity and refuge from their own politically unstable and perhaps dangerous countries of origin. Call me an old, wet, liberal softie if you want, but this labelling of the migrants as 'parasites, freeloaders and traffikers' seems a little too convenient for people who may just be xenophobic, mean-spirited, unmerciful and dare I say it, racist. No! Not Daily Mail readers surely! This Mail report suggests they have softened their line. But really! Come on, atheists! Rise up and defend your Muslim brothers and sisters from a crackdown by a fearful and racist State! No? Didn't think so...I mean, look at them, you can tell they're all terrorists...Send them packing.

Apparently, according to The Mail...

'Protesters, some in tears, shouted slogans at the police, including: "Shame on France!"' Aid worker Sylvie Copyans, from the group Salam, described the heavy-handed police response as "disproportionate and sickening’. To highlight this she told how a frightened Afghan boy called Ali was torn from her arms by police as she wept. She said: 'I tried to hide him, he was very, very frightened.’

The great majority of the men in the migrant camp were Afghans! Get it!? The West bombs the crap out of their country, makes it a perpetual war-zone, an unending conflict and then when the citizens flee here they get put in detention centres, are forced to live in destitution, are treated like animals and are then rounded up and sent packing! Incredible!

Jessica Nora Shadia, 25, from Dunkirk, said: "It's shameful. They treat people like animals. Children were being pushed to the floor as if people have nothing. It's so sad. We tried to help them," she shrugged: "What can you do?"

Oh, France! The glorious Republic! The victorious Queen of the Enlightenment! Marianne and especially Robespierre would be proud of you! These images will go on Al-Jazeera. Of course, that's going to help relations between Muslims and the West no end!

Atheism: The Great Deception

Why did Dr Josef Mengele, do it? Why? In the name of 'science' and 'progress' of course!

Fr Ray Blake of St Mary Magdalen has penned an excellent piece that has an internet atheist discussion group up in arms. You can view Fr Ray's piece here and the atheist discussion group, which I decided to pop into and in which he is rounded upon here. Sometimes it is worth walking into lion's den, waving a Crucifix around and then seeing what will happen. Not many of the responses to Fr Ray's article seem proportionate, reasonable or just, but then, hey, we Catholics know what to expect.

There are, of course, perhaps hundreds of figures the Faithful could point to in human history and draw attention to their atheism as being a defining reason as to why they might have gone so far off the rails and suddenly, seemingly without warning, decided to slaughter a truckload of people, for no good reason whatsoever.

However, just for the sake of doing something a bit different, let's take someone who doesn't get talked about much these days, whose operations in the Holocaust seemed to have been particularly interesting to the arch-bad eggstraordinaire, Adolf Hitler. Dr Josef Mengele, come on down! I realise that Wikipedia is not the World's most respected historical website but let's just have a read of Mengele's biog. Bear with me, there is a point here.

In 1943, Mengele replaced another doctor who had fallen ill at the Nazi extermination camp Birkenau. On May 24, 1943, he became medical officer of Auschwitz-Birkenau's "Gypsy camp". In August 1944, this camp was liquidated and all its inmates gassed. Subsequently Mengele became Chief Medical Officer of the main infirmary camp at Birkenau. He was not, though, the Chief Medical Officer of Auschwitz — superior to him was SS-Standortarzt (garrison physician) Eduard Wirths.

Mengele's experiments also included attempts to change eye color by injecting chemicals into children's eyes, various amputations of limbs and other brutal surgeries. Rena Gelissen's account of her time in Auschwitz details certain experiments performed on female prisoners around October 1943. Mengele would experiment on the chosen girls, performing sterilization and shock treatments. Most of the victims died, either due to the experiments or later infections. According to a website, "Once Mengele's assistant rounded up 14 pairs of Roma twins during the night. Mengele placed them on his polished marble dissection table and put them to sleep. He then injected chloroform into their hearts, killing them instantly. Mengele then began dissecting and meticulously noting each and every piece of the twins' bodies."

The subjects of Mengele's research were better fed and housed than ordinary prisoners and were, for the time being, safe from the gas chambers. When visiting his child subjects, he introduced himself as "Uncle Mengele" and offered them sweets. Some survivors remember that despite his grim acts, he was also called "Mengele the protector". In addition to his studies on twins he did a number of horrifying experiments. Once he burned several Jewish prisoners in a gigantic oven to test how long it would take for the human body to get first, second and third degree burns at certain temperatures. He also tested how much force it would require to break a human skull.

Auschwitz prisoner Alex Dekel has said: "I have never accepted the fact that Mengele himself believed he was doing serious work — not from the slipshod way he went about it. He was only exercising his power. Mengele ran a butcher shop — major surgeries were performed without anesthesia. Once, I witnessed a stomach operation — Mengele was removing pieces from the stomach, but without any anesthetic. Another time, it was a heart that was removed, again, without anesthesia. It was horrifying. Mengele was a doctor who became mad because of the power he was given. Nobody ever questioned him — why did this one die? Why did that one perish? The patients did not count. He professed to do what he did in the name of science, but it was a madness on his part".

Now, on this point I disagree. It is not enough to just say, "Well, Mengele was mad!" As Fr Ray Blake says in his blog, atheism is responsible for as many great evils of which he can think. Atheism does not defend all human life. It only defends human life it deems to be a life 'worth living'. Josef Mengele professed that all of his crimes he did "in the name of science". The poor and deluded individual simply could not help himself. And of course, as our Priest well knows, what with hearing our Confessions, we humans do not necessarily seek or will what is bad. We will what is good but go astray in attaining it because we very often seek a version of the good which has been divorced from the Will of God. We want something good, like love, sex and human intimacy and are prepared to do it unlawfully, outside of marriage, for example, to get it. Scientists want significant breakthroughs and scientific discoveries, treatments or cures, but they're willing to sacrifice some human beings in order to achieve it, which is, of course evil.

And this is exactly what was introduced in the Human Fertilisation and Embryology legislation. At the disposal of scientists today is a great deal of technology. Religious Faith is discarded by the mainstream media and the mainstream political parties as outdated and of no modern use.

Science is the future, they say. Science means 'progress' and in the name of science and 'progress', atheism will doubtlessly be responsible for more Mengelian madness, perhaps the likes of which we could never have shuddered to imagine. The atheists who do not see that history is about to repeat itself, in just this one arena alone, because science, reason and progress have been divorced from Faith, are only deceiving themselves. Catholics, we pray, are not so easily deceived.

According to secularists and atheists embryos don't count. Well, gypsies didn't count to Mengele! According to many secularists and atheists unborn babies don't count. Well, I'm sure unborn babies wouldn't count to Mengele but then, gypsies, dwarves and Jews didn't count to Mengele either. He could not defend human life because he could not see it for what it truly is - sacred, holy and to be defended, and especially not from his own scientific pursuits, because such sacred truths just got in the way.

Yet, that is the road this country has set itself upon. Atheists will not defend unborn human life in laboratories because they cannot see the embryo as a life. Atheists very rarely defend unborn human life in the womb because a great many cannot see that 'it' is a life. Atheists will not defend the lives of the elderly against the subtle pressure to be euthanised once people become unproductive, expensive to care for, or terminally ill. If, in principle, you cannot defend life at all stages, then it makes it far more likely that you will oversee death, acquiesce with death, agree with death, espouse or even promote and spread, death. Because to the atheist, who has no recourse to the Divine Law, the ends unfortunately, can always justify the means.

Master of Spin Slips Up

According to The Telegraph, 'Lord Mandelson, the Business Secretary, came close to falling for the Downing Street photographers’ trap as he allowed them a tantalising glimpse of his bundle of confidential papers.'

Apparently, these documents outline the attacks Labour plans upon the opposition in order to, totally against the odds, secure yet another stunning electoral victory. That The Bones You Have Crushed May Thrill can reveal, exclusively, the contents of Mandelson's brief.

a) Buy ice pick.

b) Insert ice pick into Gordon Brown's back when he's not looking.

c) Take over as Labour leader and dab away tears at former PM's funeral in glare of world's media.

d) Tell the World I want to be the 'People's Prime Minister' because that kind of crap worked for Tony, so its sure to work for me.

e) Remain unpopular but rig election through elaborate electoral ward boundary re-definement.

f) Ratchet up the 'terror/flu pandemic/economic chaos' threat level to 9.5 a week before the election. Claim I'm the only guy to see the populace through.

g) Win election, rule supreme and move into Number 10 with Ronaldo, making myself king and going down in history as the first openly gay guy in power. Ban all future elections. Yippee!

BBC Report: Dementia 'Burden' Underestimated

"I feel like such a national and global burden..."

According to BBC News...

Notice the language here, chaps and chapesses...

'The future global burden of Alzheimer's and other types of dementia has been underestimated, say UK experts. A report from King's College London suggests more than 115 million people across the globe will suffer from dementia by 2050. This prediction is 10% more than previous figures published in 2005, driven mainly by new figures from South Asia and Latin America.

The Alzheimer's Society said the data showed the "scale of the challenge". The rise in dementia fuelled by increasing life expectancies in countries around the world is causing widespread concerns.'

Interesting choice of language, isn't it? Instead of reporting that the number of dementia and Alzheimers sufferers is set to rise in the future, the report describes those suffering with the illness as a 'burden', and not just any burden but a 'global burden'. Does that sound like not-so-subtle news-speak propaganda or what?

I mean, anyone watching the report or reading that might think, 'Oh, Good Lord. I don't want to be a part of the national or global burden, nevermind a burden on my own family. Where's the hotline to order the 'Assisted Suicide: Your 12-Step Guide to Topping Yourself or Members of Your Family without Fear of Prosecution' leaflet?! The "scale of the challenge," after all, is so great and the burden set to rise by 10%. I don't want to be one of them. I'm doing the decent thing and checking out of this life early so I don't become a burden on the State or society or anybody...Get me a telephone...Hello, yes is that Hotel Dignitas. Get me a room. I'm coming in a fortnight. Yeah, of course I want en suite. Yeah...Yep. Actually do you do room service? You do? Oh, fantastic!"

Again, in the same article...

"The strain of caring for people with dementia is not just a social issue, but
an economic one, placing a growing burden on the working population and health
systems."

How shocking and outrageous! The economically productive have to foot the bill for people who were economically productive but who now have dementia and so are no longer economically productive. Now they've got dementia they're just feeding off the rest of us, even though one day I might have dementia, but that's scary to think about and while I am fit and healthy I'm just going to think about how terrifying it is that these burdensome people are still with us today...Burdensome dementia burdens! If I ever get dementia I'm straight off to Dignitas pronto to get myself put down like an aged, limping yorkshire terrier! Anyone who doesn't do that is just plain selfish and nicking my hard-earned cash. There's nothing worse than someone being a burden!

Honestly, who is going to be reported as being a 'burden' next? The mentally ill? The unemployed? The gypsy community? Children? Adults with learning disabilities? The language used in this report is sinister and insidious and should most definitely not go unchallenged. What an affront to all the people who do suffer Alzheimers and other forms of dementia!