Jonathan Hayes
"Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will sit in a boat and drink beer all day." Begin forwarded message: > From: "Ehowatt" <ehow...@bigpond.com> > Date: August 27, 2014 at 10:05:15 PM PDT > To: "'Richard Van Allen'" <r...@imagecomm.co.uk>, > <chateaustegosau...@att.net>, "'A.L. Syson'" <syson.fi...@hotmail.co.uk> > Cc: "'Siu Ling Hui'" <siuling...@gmail.com>, "'Robert Lewis Galinsky'" > <robertlewisgalin...@gmail.com> > Subject: Arrested for Quoting Churchill > > > > > August 27th 2014 ⎙ Hal G.P. Colebatch > > Arrested for Quoting Churchill > > Britain's wartime leader defied Hitler and preserved at the cost of blood and > treasure the sceptre'd isle of Magna Carta and hard-won liberties. How now is > that we see this legacy of freedoms being so meekly surrendered? > > Britain has taken a symbolic step further down the road to cultural suicide > with the arrest, on the steps of Winchester’s ancient and historic Guildhall, > of Mr Paul Weston, who was a candidate in the elections to the European > parliament. His offence was having quoted Winston Churchill’s 1899 book The > River War. > > Mr Weston, chairman of the small party Liberty GB, was addressing a public > meeting when an unidentified woman took offence and called the police. No > fewer than seven police officers promptly appeared. Mr Weston was arrested in > mid-speech and bundled into a police van. He was charged with having failing > to comply with a request to move on under the powers of a dispersal order > made against him. > > He was further arrested on suspicion of religious or racial harassment, an > offence possibly carrying a severe prison sentence. This police overkill, > where a word of warning might have been enough in a case of mere obstruction, > indicates that Mr Weston’s offence was seen as political rather than a mere > minor infringement of public order. He was bailed pending further inquiries. > > A Liberty GB spokesman said: > > Mr Weston was addressing the passers-by in the street with a megaphone. He > quoted an excerpt about Islam from the book The River War by Winston > Churchill. Reportedly, a woman came out of the Guildhall and asked Mr Weston > if he had the authorisation to make this speech. When he answered that he > didn’t, she told him, “It’s disgusting,” and then called the police. > > Unfortunately for the police and the complainant, Sir Winston himself was > beyond the reach of the law. Had he been around, other offences of harassment > by him might have been taken into account, such as describing the well-known > European statesman and advocate of European unity Adolf Hitler as a > bloodthirsty guttersnipe to be purged and blasted from the surface of the > earth, and the leaders of the late Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as > “foul baboonery”. > > In The River War he had written: > > How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides > the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, > there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many > countries. > > Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of > commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the > Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace > and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. > > Churchill was particularly concerned with the oppression of women in many > Islamic societies and said the world would not be free until this was ended: > > The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his > absolute property—either as a child, a wife, or a concubine—must delay the > final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great > power among men. > > He claimed, in words some might think prophetic: > > Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the faith: all know how to > die but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of > those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. > > Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing > faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless > warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the > strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, > the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of > ancient Rome. > > The River War is Churchill’s account of the Sudan campaign against the > Dervishes, in which, aged twenty-three, he had served as an officer of > lancers and had also moonlighted as a war correspondent. In the Battle of > Omdurman he had taken part in one of the British Army’s last great cavalry > charges. > > The question of whether Churchill’s sweeping strictures on Islam are > objectively true is beside the point. The point is that Britain has gone a > long, long way towards destroying its cherished principle of freedom of > speech, and no end to the process is in sight. I have written previously of > recent cases of British people arrested for quoting or displaying passages > from the Bible. > > This censorship and persecution take place under the eyes of the apparently > culturally-lobotomised and inert Conservative–Liberal Democrat coalition > government. Tory Prime Minister David Cameron could end this madness > instantly by picking up a phone or uttering a few pointed words to the > responsible ministers in cabinet, but he apparently does nothing. > > Children have been arrested and brought before judges (not mere magistrates) > by the Crown Prosecution Service for using racist words in school; or even > kindergarten, playground squabbles. One schoolgirl was actually arrested and > held in custody for racism (I am not making this up) when she asked her > teacher if she could join English-speaking students to do a group assignment. > > A generation after the Lady Chatterley trial and the abolition of the Lord > Chamberlain’s office and powers ended literary and theatrical censorship, it > appears to be returning in full blast from a different direction, driven by > forces of political correctness. There seems no point at which a line might > be drawn and a stand made against the rising tide of this new censorship. If > it is an offence to quote The River War, should it not logically also be an > offence to print or sell it? And why not other books expressing politically > incorrect opinions, even if they were written by men like Churchill who were > great champions of freedom and democracy against totalitarianism and against > the racist genocide of German National Socialism? > > What has happened to that anti-censorship gaggle of trendy bishops, media > personalities and so forth who arose honking with indignation over the > banning of the pathologically misogynist Lady Chatterley’s Lover? > > If quoting the writings of Churchill is a criminal offence, who is safe? I > can, for a start, think of several passages in the canon of George Orwell’s > writing which might also attract the censor’s attention. Passages which might > offend the hyper-sensitive on racial or eugenic grounds occur in the works of > a vast multitude of British writers including, from the Left alone, George > Bernard Shaw, H.G. Wells and D.H. Lawrence. Even so enthusiastic an Arabist > as T.E. Lawrence wrote of the Arabs in his magnum opus, Seven Pillars of > Wisdom, much as the young Churchill did. Don’t go quoting Seven Pillars of > Wisdom around Winchester: > > They were a limited, narrow-minded people, whose inert intellects lay fallow > in incurious resignation. Their imaginations were vivid, but not creative. > There was so little Arab art in Asia that they could almost be said to have > had no art, though their upper classes were liberal patrons, and had > encouraged whatever talents in architecture, or ceramics, or other handicraft > their neighbours and helots displayed. Nor did they handle great industries: > they had no organizations of mind or body. > > Shakespeare, however, might get away with the anti-Semitic portrayal of > Shylock, since Jews are increasingly once again considered fair game in > Britain and Europe. > > Also on the conservative side ready for banning on racist grounds are Rudyard > Kipling, John Buchan, Arthur Conan Doyle, Evelyn Waugh (read what Dr Grimes > has to say about the Welsh in Decline and Fall) and literally countless > others from all points of the political compass. Indeed, taken to its logical > conclusion, political correctness could destroy virtually Britain’s entire > literary heritage. Already some progressive local councils—Brent is one, but > by no means the only, recent example—have purged their libraries, destroying > literally thousands of politically incorrect books. > > Other victims of anti-racist purges to date include children’s stories > featuring golliwogs, even when the golliwogs are shown in a favourable light. > Censorship of this sort invariably attracts the fanatical and the stupid. > > Of course this bizarre Churchill incident is not really about someone being > offended. It is part of the one-way war that is being waged against anything > that smacks of British traditions and identity. Destroying or rendering > illegitimate Churchill’s legacy would be a major victory in this one-way war. > > > > Elizabeth Howatt-Jackman > > > www.topcatfilms.com > www.dustandglory.com > > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ChurchillChat" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to churchillchat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to churchillchat@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/churchillchat. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
