Including:
The truth behind the anti-hijab issue -
multiculturalism, Charles' coronation & the PF interfaith link to leading Satan
hunter, Col. Jonker
------------------
Prince Charles should ‘not’ have multi-faith coronation say
evangelists.................
So they want a king or queen that defends only ‘one’ elitist faith?
According to supporters of the Evangelical Alliance
(EA), the umbrella group that claims to support over one millions Christians,
Prince Charles should be known only as ‘Defender of the Faith’ rather
than his own preferred title – ‘Defender of Faiths’. Apparently unable to
move ahead appropriately into the multi-faith, UK twenty first century the EA
wants the spiritual monopoly on the nation via Charles in this instance. The
geniuses running the Pagan Federation foolishly seek to interfaith with the
fundamentalists that self -admittedly wish to evangelise the whole nation, via
seeking to make converts out of practitioners of other faiths, and the recent
row about Charles’ title of faith is just further evidence of this undeniable
truth.
The PF seemingly imagine that if they smile broadly enough, make the right noises in public and invite the right anti-occultist evangelists to their self-congratulating conferences then all will be sweetness, harmony, love and light. They have ‘no’ idea of what they are dealing with even though PAN and SAFF have been trying to freely educate them to the facts for numerous years. We ask are these people, and others like them, really the right ones to be representing Pagans’ best interests? It’s hard to conceive of such gullibility yet we reiterate that we have been spelling this out to them for years and ‘still’ they fail to listen to hard facts.
Incidentally,
Rev Thomas
has just (October 2006) been found guilty of downloading
child porn - PAN has written at length about this anti-occultist
vicar who was 'invited' by the PF to their
conference.
Although he was not jailed he
was ordered to pay £1,000 costs and attend the Thames Valley Sex Offender
Project. Is this the
kind of Christian
the PF believe we should be liaising with?
The convert-seeking missionaries may also make the right noises at interfaith
events, which of course pleases the poor old plastic Pagans, yet this is all a
hollow pretence which pays nothing more than lip-service to any proper and
productive interfaith liaison that may work for ‘all’ parties concerned instead
of being simply a Trojan Horse gambit to get a foot under the table for
the forces of fundamentalist Christianity. Please recall this following
statement?
"The bold goals we set out here reflect the conviction that Jesus Christ and biblical morality are the only true hope for our nations."
(Evangelical Alliance-millennium manifesto)
Doesn't all this nonsense just give more evidence of what we
have been saying all these years? When push comes to shove the fundies were, as
usual, just misleadingly denigrating all other faiths in order to keep their
biblical power base in one piece? We won’t labour this point yet also recall the
Archbishop of Canterbury's previous insistence that the U.K. is a
‘Christian nation, not a multi-faith nation.’
Yes, when the going gets tough the truth surfaces and the fundies then declare
the 'superiority' of Christianity whilst Moslems, Jews, Pagans, Buddhists and
others are wrong-footed by the latest pussy-footed political crusades to quieten
religious stridency with the latest example being the controversial hijab (veil)
issue over Muslim woman’s right to wear what they want. MPs like Jack
Straw (Blackburn) and Phil Woolas (Oldham) have apparently
annoyed many with their outspoken (and some would say - 'bigoted')
pronunciations on Muslim apparel. Southport’s own Catholic Libdem MP, John
Pugh has also joined in the melee and stated in the local media:
"Muslims must accept that even if it is not meant as a barrier, it feels like it
is and since there is no instruction in the Koran for women wearing a veil I
can't help wondering what argument there is for veiling women that could not
equally support the veiling of men."
Ex – religious teacher and Pro-life supporter Pugh also said that he finds it
‘difficult’ not to make a link between the veiling of women and
the repression of women. Unhappily for him many Muslim ladies will
find that utterance to be both erroneous and decidedly offensive. Following 9/11
one would think that all ‘sensible’ politicians would be seeking to improve
faith relations rather than inflaming tempers.
What’s 'really' behind the hijab issue, multiculturalism and the fundie
backlash?
The Christian fundamentalist backlash against Islam has of course already
started through discrediting the design of interfaith and multiculturalism. This
is the main purpose of the Hijab issue - government has recently decided to use
the most extreme symbol of Islamic separateness to open up a debate where the
language and parameters are changed; ostensibly justifying it by the
'suppression' of women's rights but really it concerns being able to discredit
multiculturalism. This of course filters down from the increasing Catholicism of
Blair and evangelism of the Christian Fifth-Column in parliament. We have
written about this several times on this site. Markedly, other politicians
across the planet have picked up on this method of controlling the ascendancy of
Islam in what are essentially western cultures, hence the very same statements
which our government hopes will destroy the philosophy of multiculturalism are
being reiterated virtually word for word by other westernised countries with
large Islamic populations as far apart as Australia and France. From the
politicians’ angle Interfaith was a method of trying to create a balanced multi-
culturalism; a half-way house to ameliorate the conflict between Christianity
and Islam, after all remember that Interfaith WAS paradoxically initially
promoted heavily by Straw himself when he was Home Secretary with such
initiatives like the Derbyshire University Project but as the SAFF and PAN
rightly claimed from the beginning it could be no such thing because of the
conflicting dynamics of two rival absolutist theocracies (Christianity and
Islam) each of which would never surrender to the other.
Thus the 'experiment' of Interfaith simply created arenas for both Christianity and Islam to separately network with their own kind and grow stronger in their demands. Now Interfaith and its associated philosophy of 'Multiculturalism' have become the Detente and Glasnost of our time. When the Russians were a formidable world power their discourse with the west was based on 'Detente'. To the Americans and British the word Detente was taken to mean that the Russians were reaching across to become more like 'us'. To the Russians however Detente meant that the West should sod off and keep its nose right out of Soviet business. Therefore Multiculturalism to the Moslems means the West shifting its culture and attitudes to make way for an Islamic state within a state, whereas Multiculturalism to the Establishment means that Moslems should come across and adopt a meld of cultural mores which suit everyone in order to perpetuate the status quo of the Church and State. Consequently, Interfaith and Multiculturalism were never ever about the establishment of alternative religions (as the poor old PF junta had naively assumed) but a failed attempt to reschedule the unavoidable Holy War between Islam and Christianity.
Make of this what you will but do please remember that the SAFF and PAN have been highly accurate about these issues, right from the very start. Accordingly, the hijab issue is merely a ‘diversion’, but there IS a simple way of dealing with it and that is to do what they did in France and ban ALL religious symbology and paraphernalia from public places and state institutions. Thus Moslem Women would not be allowed to wear the Hijab and Christians would not be allowed to sport Crucifixes. However, it’s not hard to see why the fundie fifth column in Parliament would never allow this particular debate get started, because this country IS legally a Christian country and the monarch IS the link with the Christian Church which gives them their point of authority. Hence the only feasible way this ban could ever work is if the Christian Church was properly DIS-established. Disestablishment however strikes abject terror into the hearts of the fundies and their think- tanks have already spotted this danger which is the logical end result of Multiculturalism. This is why the Evangelical Alliance has demarked the battle ground already by pronouncing the distinction between Multicultural and Multifaith. The last thing the Christian militia want is Multiculturalism - they want their OWN culture to be in the ascendant. This leads us to the latest uproar over Charles' eventual coronation even though it could be another decade away.
It is highly significant for the Christian militia at this
stage, when the Moslems are wrong -footed, to dig their heels in deep and refuse
point blank to even consider any decrease of their power base. They, as always,
require the indisputable spiritual monopoly on the nation and no amount of
sweet-talking and spice will ever alter their central focus in all this.
Incidentally, please note how the government has capitulated to the Christian
lobby regarding imposed 'bussing' of non- Christians in so-called Faith Schools.
The government had a law drafted to compel Christian Schools to take in 25% of
students from non-Christian beliefs but the fundies got their act quickly
together and created a million strong letter writing campaign to MPs who were
subsequently terrified at the prospect of losing their precious seats at the
next election and so the government backtracked and has now instead agreed a
'voluntary' rule with Christian Schools (even though in order to get state
funding the Moslem Schools have to sign up by law to a 25% extra-Islamic student
count.) The prospect of the Holy Crusade gets closer each year.
Of course most outraged Muslims can speak very well for themselves about the
hijab issue and defend their corner against smug MPs and the like a lot better
than we perhaps could. We add this data as an illustration of how the
self-righteous political machine kicks into gear bringing politicians in from
various parties rushing into rows that they would perhaps be better advised to
keep well clear of.
And what variety of effective actions do we see from the Pagan Federation in all
this?
Time and time again the PF have shown that they are less than useless at protecting the rights of members. Their gullibility is unhappily second to none. They rush in like lemmings and the rest is history. How much further could the rights of genuine Pagans’ have evolved today if this self-righteous organisation had not taken up the ludicrous and unworkable - ‘let’s all interfaith with fundamentalism’ banner? As it is, well-placed activists within the Church just click their devout fingers to the sensationalist-loving media and the latest horse ripping death, graveyard desecration by yobbos or missing child is blamed of the forces of occultism and Pagans. The usual reaction from brain-dead Pagan leaders is to say – ‘Eh it wasn’t us mate – must have been them Satanists,’ and so it goes on and on! The eternal wheel of ignorance with the blind leading the blinder!
The PF interfaith officer and the SRAM link
Some years ago PAN reps corresponded with a person called Carol Nowlan
(also know as ‘Epona Moondancer’ – ed. where do they get
these names, off the Sooty Show?) who is now we deem a leading PF
interfaith officer. We believe this to be the same person who is mentioned
below, yet if this is just some type of incredible coincidence then we would be
more than delighted to correct our data immediately on this serious issue.
Nowlan, who is also apparently a member of the Fellowship of Isis and
other groups, at the time actually told us that when she was ‘still’ with the
Pagan Federation in South Africa she had “worked
with Col. Jonker” (Chief
Satan hunter /SRAM promoter)
see:
http://www.10111.co.za/servamus/servamus200105/gods1.htm
Private Eye magazine has also recently produced an important article on
this situation:
http://www.patregan.freeuk.com/private_eye.htm
Nowlan also told us that she “passes on”
children that have been involved in “Satanic ritual”
to Rietta Everton (Jonker’s fellow evangelical operative and deputy policewoman)
she told us that Everton is a most “helpful woman”.
Can any genuine Pagan get their head around this nightmare scenario? A leading
and incredibly gullible PF interfaith promotion officer actually 'working'
intimately with some of the most vicious fundamentalist SRAM -promoters in the
world and judging by her own words (which we keep on file) she was played
like a bloody drum by Jonker and Everton during their fiasco of anti-occultist
crusades.
It's worth recalling this link too which shows what incredible lengths the PF will go to in order to promote their ludicrous Christo/Pagan interfaith policies and quell any dissent. However can anyone take them seriously?
Interfaith with Fundies lobby almost left speechless?
The blind naivety of some pagans is clearly evident on a leading interfaith
forum link in which it seem two members challenge the ‘interfaith with
fundamentalists’ line and get no feasible response in return. Comparative
Religion – Interfaith with Fundies supporters have no logical answers to
maintain their wacky stance!
We say it again:
Interfaith between charitable and honest religious
paths is a very good thing yet interfaith between tolerant trusting faiths and
the forces of missionary evangelism is plainly ludicrous and dangerous with
fundamentalism being the only winner.
PAN and SAFF have been reiterating this home truth for many years and we have
numerous examples of the depressing ramification of naïve people opening the
door to fundies at interfaith. We have and will continue to strongly criticise
groups like the Pagan Federation too for their flawed interfaith policies
between fundamentalists and Pagans. Most interestingly a certain ‘interfaith’
thread on the ‘Comparative Religion’ site (claimed to be the UK’s largest
interfaith website) has recently been brought to our attention which very much
proved what we are saying herein. The posters ‘RubySera Martin’ and
‘Bolo’ quite proficiently put forth the case to the other members that
letting in fundies at interfaith was the height of stupidity. PAN has to say
that not one person presented a legitimate rationale why the involvement of
missionaries at such events was in any way shape or form ‘beneficial’ to others
present. They had NO argument to support their inconsistent case. They gave no
valid excuse why pluralistic and open-minded folk should bother to involve
convert-hunting missionaries at interfaith even though they promoted the
belief that this is the root for all others to take.
This (below) is the thread in question which proves rather well how naïve these
trusting such interfaith bunnies actually are.
http://www.comparative-religion.com/forum/interfaith-as-a-faith-4428.html
We will leave the last word to 'Bolo' who states the situation very well indeed:
“It is blind to not warn others that are openly
trusting, that billions are spend each year by suited evangelical outreaches to
other faiths; evangelicals that have abused the TRUST of others in order to gain
converts? It is not a matter of ‘hating’ anyone – or discrimination just simple
logic and common sense, that is all. It is decidedly ridiculous to jeopardise
otherwise amicable interfaith liaisons by letting in outreach missionaries and
very precarious as well.”
”Again I reiterate – troublemaking evangelical ‘Missionaries’ unremittingly seek
converts at interfaith events via infiltration (don’t believe me – just check
out their own websites, doctrine, history, literature etc) ergo letting them
into interfaith is both ridiculous and hazardous for the other members
(especially new trusting types) present at these welcoming gatherings!”
Enough said!
Disclaimer:
PAN realises that the vast majority of Christians are 'not' fundamentalist or
evangelical in make up and we only criticise religious extremists who seek to
disenfranchise other faiths whilst bolstering their own. PAN does not in any way
condone violence against any persons or property and we must state that we have
always worked towards a more tolerant and equal society.