web analytics

Misplaced Loyalties

The journey home from school today was not a bus driver’s success story. All four of the younger Roberts kids were back after a three day detention for misbehaving in school.

Jethro, the eldest, and Izaiah – suffering anger management problems – sit opposite the driver; Treanna, their sister, sits behind the driver, and little Azariah – with chipmunk agility and a shorter attention span than any amoeba – is squeezed in between two fifth graders with orders to sit on him, if necessary, rather than let him out of his seat.

The root of the troubles had nothing whatever to do with the Roberts family. Sharreta Robinson, a pleasant, friendly, girl who sits near the back of the bus, and a fifth grade boy, Keyshawn Attwell, a friend of Jethro’s, had been engaged in shy conversation at every given opportunity for the last three days. Keyshawn was new to the bus, and the driver was quick to notice a relationship developing between the two.

It made a pleasant change to see two kids enjoying each other’s company. Usually, the bus reverberated with continual bickering and name-calling, occasionally erupting into more serious fistycuffs, so he was happy to turn a blind eye when Sharetta slipped across the bus aisle to a vacant seat behind Keyshawn, better to hear what he was saying above the cacophony of thirty-eight, over-excited, voices.

No doubt all would have been well had not Kaitlin Sanders, a plump and loud-mouthed sixth grade girl sitting across from Jethro, not also had her eye on Keyshawn. Sharreta’s illegal move to another seat was not lost on Kaitlin, who immediately began making loud disparaging remarks about Jethro’s parentage, for no better purpose than to gain Keyshawn’s attention.

Jethro, of course, responded by calling Kaitlin a “fat, lying, bitch,” whereupon the two ended up in the aisle, arms flailing, and emitting language never heard in a church vestry.

The driver’s reaction was to stop the bus, separate the two, then charge up and down the aisle, much like the proverbial bull in a china shop, yelling at the remaining thirty-six kids to settle back down in their seats before they all got referrals.

The Roberts family alighted at the next stop, as did Keyshawn. Jethro still muttered to himself on the injustice of getting a referral for no more than defending his honor, and the meanness of school bus drivers in general.

Kaitlin Sanders sulked for the rest of the journey, knowing her referral meant she would miss the next school field trip. Both she and Sharreta left the bus at the final stop.

The driver watched as they walked away up the street, arm in arm, laughing and joking about nothing in particular.

Filed under:

From The Horse’s Mouth

Every nation has the finest, most moral, army on Earth. Even Adolf Hitler praised his troops for the honorable manner in which they fought in France and Poland. The US military in Afghanistan, we are constantly told by the media, consists of a fine bunch of brave men and women doing their duty for their country.

Usually, those on the losing side have a different tale to tell.

Even prior to the war in Gaza ending, in January this year, Israel was defending its forces and denying any possibility of war crimes. Despite international observers, and stories of despicable brutality told by the Palestinians themselves, the Israeli government continued to deny any such events had occurred.

Now, however, Israeli soldiers are speaking out, describing the atrocities they saw committed by their own side. Evidence has emerged of heavy involvement by rabbis, circulating religious pamphlets among the troops that described the war as a ‘war of religion’.

“All the articles had one clear message,” one soldier said. “We are the people of Israel, we arrived in the country almost by miracle, now we need to fight to uproot the gentiles who interfere with re-conquering the Holy Land.”

“Many soldiers’ feelings were that this was a war of religion,” he added.[1]

There’s nothing quite like injecting a religious cause into conflict, to bolster the moral high ground.

Despite statements from Israeli soldiers, describing Palestinians murdered in cold blood, Defence Minister Ehud Barak recently told Israel Radio:

I still say we have the most moral army in the world. Of course there may be exceptions but I have absolutely no doubt this will be inspected on a case-by-case basis.”

Say it often enough, Barak, and someone, somewhere, may eventually believe you.

[1] “Israel troops admit Gaza abuses” BBC, March 19th 2009

Filed under:

A Load More Papist Balls

Despite the possibility of Sparrow Chat being labeled an anti-religious tome, the Pope’s visit to Africa cannot be allowed to pass without comment, given his deliberately false proclamation to journalists before he landed on the continent.

In fact, Sparrow Chat is in no way anti-religious. It just condemns the papery, pestilence, and perpetually lying proclamations of those charged with perpetrating a fraud for the purposes of enriching their purses and enforcing their power.

The present occupant of the Vatican is one of the worst for a long time. Were he to have been born six hundred years ago he would likely have rivaled the infamous Alexander VI, or Innocent VIII. Fortunately, popes today are no longer able to murder and fornicate at will – at least, not so easily.

It’s not generally known if, during the elaborate papal consecration ceremonies, the ‘sexual verification’ of the new pontiff is still practiced. Since the thirteenth century and the infamous case of Pope Joan ( a Pope John believed to have possibly been a woman) legend has it that new popes have had to prostrate themselves on a low seat while selected clergy examined the pontiff’s intimate parts to ascertain his credentials. Once verified to everyone’s satisfaction, it’s a short journey from the low seat of examination to the high throne of Saint Peter.

While the procedure is considered by some to be mere myth, one Adam of Usk – a Welsh cleric who spent time in Rome during the fifteenth century – recounts the procedure in his Chronicum of the period:

……and having arrived there, the pope dismounts and enters the church to be enthroned. Here he sits on a throne of porphery through which a hole has been cut for this purpose, and is examined by one of the younger cardinals to ensure that he has male genitalia; whereupon, while “Te Deum Laudamus” is sung, he is led to the high altar.” [1]

In fairness, no-one has truly ascertained the authenticity of this practice. Given that medieval popes generally sired umpteen illegitimate offspring prior to ascending to the highest spiritual office the church could bestow, the process would appear somewhat irrelevant. Adam of Usk, however, was in no doubt.

Pope Benedict XVI is unlikely to have needed such an examination. Membership of the Hitler Youth was confined to males and, unless he was really a member of its sister organization, the League of German Girls, he would have been ‘checked out’ on entering the organization.

His dictatorial manner, and love of those proclamations to which we must all conform or be damned to everlasting hellfire, were always apparent even before he touched down on African soil.

The condemnation of condoms as an instrument of the Devil; his insistence that they not only have no beneficial effect in preventing the spread of HIV, but actually contribute to it, are symptoms of a being well used to blindly accepting orders from on high, without stopping for a moment to question their wisdom.

Presumably, as he gave no explanation of his ‘condom proclamation’, he’s still sticking to the old and long-disproved Vatican theory that HIV viruses pass through condoms and infect people.

Pope Benedict XVI knows that isn’t true.

He is the holiest creation of the Roman Catholic church on earth, yet just like his medieval predecessors he blithely resorts to blatant lies and hypocrisy, knowing full well that many of his followers will believe him simply because he’s the Pope, and a pope’s word is sacrosanct.

It’s estimated that two million people have died from HIV/AIDS in Africa. No-one would suggest they all contracted the disease because of the Roman Catholic doctrine, but there are in excess of 150 million African Catholics on the continent. With an HIV/AIDS rate nationally of around 4%, possibly six million Catholics are presently infected.

Denying the faithful condoms, by condemning them to everlasting hellfire if they use them, is probably resulting in thousands more being infected and eventually dying.

Does that make Benedict XVI better, or worse, than medieval counterparts like Innocent VIII or Alexander VI, who simply used a more direct approach to slaughter many of their flock?

[1] “The Myth of Pope Joan” by Alain Boureau, Lydia G. Cochrane pp.13

[2] “Vatican in HIV condom row” BBC, October 9th 2003

Filed under:

Hosted By A2 Hosting

Website Developed By R J Adams