Robin Shepherd: Declare War on the Methodist Church!

By Joshua18
July 4, 2010

Brilliant article by Robin Shepherd up at JPost:

The banality of Methodist evil


"Overall, a church that behaves in the manner of the Methodists has buried its credibility under a gigantic dunghill of intransigence, pedantry, lies and distortions.

But let us not allow this matter to rest with a mere recognition of whom and what they have chosen to become.

If the Methodist Church is to launch a boycott of Israel, let Israel respond in kind: Ban their officials from entering; deport their missionaries; block their funds; close down their offices; and tax their churches.

If it’s war, it’s war. The aggressor must pay a price."


jose (not verified)

Mon, 07/05/2010 - 03:29

Rate this:

0 points

There is a very simple and inexpensive thing that can be done: having each Israel's visitor sign a declaration saying that they are not involved in any anti-Israeli activity, such as cultural or economic boycott, that they are not members of banned organisations, IHH, ISM, Hamas, Hezbollah, etc. Then, they could be refused entry on the motive that they lied or refused to answer.
I remember the Cold War era when each US visitor had to sign a paper saying that he was not a member of the Communist Party and even declare his 'race'. So there would be nothing shocking to my suggestion in the not-so-cold war with the Far Left and islamism.


Mon, 07/05/2010 - 09:12

Rate this:

0 points

Could not agree more - see my response to Rabbi Goldsteins " roll over and tickle my tum piece" elsewhere.


Mon, 07/05/2010 - 11:41

Rate this:

0 points

Incidentally, Robin Shepherd blogs here:


Thu, 07/08/2010 - 01:35

Rate this:

1 point

There's no point the Chief Rabbi having an epi about the Methos now. For years he's been sucking up to the Pope! I was shamed in my shul last year for purely saying that Judaism was the one and only religion - my rabbi claimed Islam was equal!

We have no friends but ourselves.

Julie Burchill

Jonathan Hoffman

Thu, 07/08/2010 - 05:19

Rate this:

0 points

Robin is right.

Picking on Jews has been cost-free throughout the ages.

No more

Blacklisted Dictator

Thu, 07/08/2010 - 07:45

Rate this:

0 points


Unfortunately Judaism's obsession with "the messiah", led directly to Christianity. So to some extent, we have only ourselves to blame.

Europe should have remained pagan. There was no need to damage The Parthenon in Rome and turn it into a church.

As for The Muslims.. whilst they are torturing women who break their ridiculous dress codes (having already mutilated their genitals), your Rabbi must be totally meshuggah to claim that Islam is equal.

Blacklisted Dictator

Thu, 07/08/2010 - 07:59

Rate this:

1 point

Btw, I think that that the Jews would be stark raving bonkers not to have you. In my book, you should be welcomed with open arms.

(Julie Burchill wikipedia)
In June 2009 The Jewish Chronicle reported that she had become a Friend of Brighton and Hove Progressive Synagogue and was considering again a conversion to Judaism. Reported as having attended Shabbat services for a month, and learning Hebrew, Burchill now describing herself as an "ex-christian", pointed out that she had been pondering on her conversion since the age of 25. Burchill said that "At a time of rising and increasingly vicious anti-semitism from both left and right, becoming Jewish especially appeals to me. ... Added to the fact that I admire Israel so much, it does seem to make sense – assuming of course that the Jews will have me."

Blacklisted Dictator

Thu, 07/08/2010 - 08:38

Rate this:

0 points

Burchill added that as an ex-Christian, “it is a great relief not to hear people banging on about the ‘Baby Jesus’ and the ‘Holy Ghost’ and the whole dumbass shebang. There is only one God and He is the Eternal One.

“I may or may not become a Jew. But I would venture to state, without qualification, that every other alleged ‘monotheist’ believer is living in a dream world. The filthy stain of antisemitism which un-ites Christian and Muslim is based on their pathetic envy of the perfect, enduring faith of the Jews. We/they rock!”


Thu, 07/08/2010 - 09:38

Rate this:

0 points

Julie you are a legend.


Wed, 10/19/2016 - 09:01

Rate this:

0 points
A response to the Methodists' BDS report (2014)

Though this be madness, yet there is Methodism in 't.

This report supports racism. People will always find excuses for racism. Let us examine those excuses.

1. Supporting the "right" of return of only Palestinian refugees:

(2.1) "The stated aims of the Movement are:
… 3. respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in the UN General Assembly Resolution 194."

No mention is made of any "right" of the approximately equal number of Jewish refugees who fled Arab countries (including the West Bank) at the same time.

No mention is made of any "right" of the far larger exchange of populations between India and Pakistan (1947), or Greece and Turkey (1922-3), or in many other conflicts.

Racists recognise this "right" only in one conflict (Arab/Jew), and on only one side!

As for Resolution 194, it is a General Assembly resolution. Only Security Council resolutions have force in international law.

The boycotters have no support in international law for this "right", yet they make it one of their three "stated aims".

2. Supporting the end of a Jewish majority in the only Jewish state:

(2.1) "The stated aims of the Movement are:
… 3. respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties …"

After most conflicts, the aim of the international community is to relocate all refugees as soon as possible.

The United Nations General Assembly has (with no force of law) done the exact opposite with the Palestinian refugees of 1948: for 66 years not only they have been kept in refugee "camps", but also their children and grandchildren.

In no other conflict does the General Assembly (or international law) recognise post-conflict children and grandchildren as refugees.

The Jewish population of Israel is about 5.7 million and the Arab population about 1.5 million (just over 20%).

The Arab refugee population in 1948 was about 0.75 million. It is now about 5 million. Do the maths!

Even the Arab League recognises the injustice of, and has abandoned, a "right" of return, and has declared (23/9/2002, see (formerly …

"… the Arab world commits itself to an AGREED solution to the refugee problem, thus addressing Israel’s concern that the demographic character of the Jewish state not be threatened. …
The key point here is that Arabs understand well that the implementation has to be both fair and realistic, and certainly agreed upon. In other words, there is no possibility of a solution that will lead to the changing of the character of the Jewish state."

The boycott movement supports a racist "right" of return: it will cause the only Jewish state in the world to lose its Jewish majority, or at least to become ungovernable.

The Methodist conference is being asked to support demands that are not restrained and limited, but aim for the racist destruction (or absorption) of the Jewish state itself.

3. Selective condemnation of the only democratic state, with full access to justice, in the Middle East for its treatment of its own minority citizens:

(2.1) "The stated aims of the Movement are:
… 2. recognising the fundamental rights of the Arab Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality"

This report states this aim without even attempting to justify it.

In fact, such rights are already granted: the Israeli declaration of independence (Israel has no written constitution) says …

THE STATE OF ISRAEL … will foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; it will be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture …

It is racist to pretend that Israeli law does not grant such minority rights (or that minority protection under the law is any worse than eg in Britain).

It would be racist for Methodists to boycott Israel on this spurious ground when they do not in any way assist, not appear to recognise, the "fundamental rights to full equality" of the Coptic Christians in Egypt (about 10% of the population), or of the Christian or Jewish or Baha'i or Ahmadi or homosexual minorities in other Arab or Moslem countries, or of their female majorities.

4. A one-sided view of justice (and mercy):

(3.1) "There are strong arguments to support the case that BDS is not in itself anti-Semitic. … those [Jews] who support some form of BDS say that their motivation for doing so stems from their commitment to justice. In this, they align themselves with Christian supporters of a boycott and those of others faiths or of none."
"Sensitive dialogue is required as together Methodist members seek guidance on how to interpret the call of Micah to “do justice, love mercy and walk humbly with our God” in this situation."

"Justice" is the only defence this report offers to the charge (which it raises itself) that BDS is racist (apart from the classic "a few Jews agree with us" defence, see below)

Yet the report takes for granted that justice is solely on the Palestinian side.

The report does not consider any injustices suffered by Jewish Israelis …
• the suicide bombings of civilians
• the thousands of rockets solely targeted at civilians
• the innumerable other attempts to kill as many civilians as possible
• the three wars of destruction against Israel started at the Palestinians' request (and the huge loss of life resulting from them)
• the destruction of Jewish holy places
• the attacks on worshippers at Jewish holy places
• the anti-semitism taught in Palestinian schools
• the refusal of the Gaza government [and now of part of the whole Palestinian government] to recognise the right of Israel to exist
• and of course the hundreds of thousands of Jewish refugees persecuted and expelled from Arab countries

Nor does it consider injustice sought by the Palestinians …
• the "right" of return which would result in the destruction or absorption of the only Jewish state in the world

The issue of the balance of justice is not even discussed.

Justice for one side only is a contradiction in terms.

This report is blatantly one-sided.

5. Seriously raising the issue of whether BDS is racist, and responding only (apart from its totally unsupported claim of "justice") with the classic excuse "I have a Jewish friend …":

(3.1) "There are strong arguments to support the case that BDS is not in itself anti-Semitic. There are Jews and Jewish organisations that support some form of BDS as well as those that oppose BDS. In their responses to the consultation of the Methodist Church, those who support some form of BDS say that their motivation for doing so stems from their commitment to justice."

This report dishonestly tries to give the impression that pro-BDS Jews are a substantial proportion of the Jewish community. In reality, they are tiny.

In any event, the idea that people of Jewish ancestry cannot be anti-semitic is both ludicrous and contrary to experience.

6. Mentioning Israel's alleged minor breaches of international law while not mentioning the thousands of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by the Palestinians:

(2.1) "The [BDS] Movement seeks a boycott of Israel “until it meets its obligations under international law”. "

Establishing settlements may well be a breach of international law (last sentence of article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention), but it certainly is not a war crime, or a crime of any sort … the Fourth Geneva Convention lists the crimes it creates (in article 147), and this certainly isn't on the list.

By contrast, each deliberate targeting of civilians by Palestinians is clearly a war crime and a breach of international law.

In particular, the Palestinians have committed dozens of war crimes and breaches of international law by suicide bombings of civilians, and thousands by rockets targeted purely at civilians (and are still committing them, almost daily).

Justice and mercy require that the Palestinians stop trying to kill as many innocent civilians as possible.

This report racistly fails to seek to sanction the Palestinians “until they meet their obligations under international law” not to commit war crimes, but only to sanction the Israelis for their lesser breaches.

Throughout the ages, Christians have found excuses for singling out Jews for persecution.
But modern Christians have recently stopped doing so.
Do Methodists really believe that the Holy Spirit is calling them, to pick up the torch, and to be a light unto the whole of Christendom?


Mon, 11/21/2016 - 09:52

Rate this:

1 point

"Principled impartiality"

The Methodists (at least, their Hinde Street, W1, church) have adopted EAPPI's concept of principled impartiality — an Orwellian term for one-sidedness.

At Hinde Street this week, they are hosting an EAPPI exhibition entitled:

"You cannot pass today" - Life through a dividing wall

(it is part of the World Council of Churches' World Week for Peace in Palestine/Israel, whose theme this year is "dismantling barriers")

The exhibition (apart from some photographs) comprises a plywood corridor representing Checkpoint 300 (the Bethlehem gate in the security barrier), along which the visitor walks and reads several dozen notices of "Eyewitness accounts" and "Testimonies", plus some poems and quotations from the Psalms. Against this, there is one short notice quoting the Israeli government.

It is so one-sided that Lord Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, has said:

“Jewish people across Europe are increasingly being targeted and killed by terrorists, who often attempt to justify their actions by demonising Israel.
It is therefore particularly sad to see a church in London demonising and singling out Israel’s defensive actions against terrorism.”
“Checkpoints in Israel are sadly needed in order to save lives. The methods used by democracies to defend their civilians should not be undermined by religious leaders in places of worship and brotherhood.”

The Methodists, and EAPPI, justify this by claiming, not impartiality, but principled impartiality (in the exhibition's Programme; see also

"Each human rights monitor is trained in international humanitarian law and to follow principled impartiality—not to take the side of either Israeli or Palestinian but the side of justice."

In practice, this means taking the "principled" view that everything Israel does is illegal, and therefore the Palestinians are always the victims, and so justice and impartiality requires that only their side should be presented.

This Orwellian doublethink justifies treating the inconvenience to Palestinians of queueing for 2 hours (to work in Tel Aviv) as a far graver breach of humanitarian law than the inconvenience to Israelis of being dead.


You must be logged in to post a comment.