Magic Statistics

A ground-breaking new book is perfect for those who always give 110%, are committed to excellence, and ready to think outside the box.  (That would include me, I think.)  Christopher Howse and Richard Preston of the London Daily Telegraph have collected the most infuriating phrases in the English language, many of which were submitted by Telegraph readers.  The book’s title provides the headline for this post.

Every day, sensitive ears finely attuned to the nuances of proper English are beset by the blather of politicians and bureaucrats.

"The thing is is, [sic] we've a whole raft of upcoming proposals to deal with issues around diversity and inclusion," gasps a junior minister, and we grip our bread knives a little tighter. "I have to say, John, I don't recognise that figure, but we've clearly reached a tipping point and lessons must be learnt," asserts an evasive spokeswoman, while we reach for a missile.

Who could possibly mangle English more than euphemism-spouting functionaries?

Switch stations and things get worse. "I watched Big Brother last night," twitters a talk show host, "and I was like, Oh… my… God, Kyleene was, like, all over Marco, and I was like, Hell-lo?, he's so not interested.

Sounds like my daughter and her friends.

'She Literally Exploded: The Daily Telegraph Infuriating Phrasebook' by Christopher Howse and Richard Preston (Constable) is available for £5.99 + 99p p&p. To order please call Telegraph Books on 0870 428 4112 or visit books.telegraph.co.uk.

Actually, the book is not listed at books.telegraph.co.uk, but you can find it at amazon.co.uk for only £4.79.  Publication is set for 14 June.

Canadians can pre-order it here for C$13.18.  Canadian release date: 14 August.

After searching several online booksellers, it appears to me that Americans cannot order the book at all.  Pity.

Read the whole thing, and don’t miss the definitions of selected infuriating phrases.

Previous related post: Department of Bureaus, International Service

Authorities in the Central Asian republic of Turkmenistan have in recent weeks intimidated Protestants and unjustly imprisoned two Baptist leaders, leading Christians to fear that the state is returning to the extreme religious oppression in force when the country was part of the USSR.  (Map at bottom of this post.)

On 14 May, Vyacheslav Kalataevsky was sentenced to three years in a labour camp for illegally entering Turkmenistan in 2001, even though the maximum sentence for his offence was only two years.  He had been summarily expelled from the country for "establishing a house of prayer and organising meetings of Christian Baptists".  His family and supporters are convinced that the charge was instigated by the secret police to punish him for his religious activities.

Only five days later, Baptist pastor and Russian citizen Yevgeny Potolov was arrested and is now being held in a detention centre in the Caspian Sea port of Turkmenbashi (Türkmenbashy).  He, too, was thrown out in 2001 for activities with an unregistered religious group.  Authorities have so far refused to discuss or specify the charges against him.

Potolov and Kalataevsky had their local residence permits stripped from them in June 2001, in punishment for their religious activity with an unregistered Baptist congregation. They were then seized by the MSS [Ministry of State Security] secret police and dumped across the border with Kazakhstan in Novy Uzen, without documents or money. Both had no option but to return to their families in Turkmenistan.

The Baptists call for prayers and appeals for Potolov to be freed, for his residence permit to be restored, for him to be returned to his family and for him to be allowed to resume his service to his congregation.

Concurrently, secret police and other public officials have begun a campaign of harassment against ethnic Turkmen Christians.  Homes have been searched and Christians compelled to attend public meetings where they were threatened and accused of violating criminal and religious laws.

In what appears to be a growing crackdown on Protestants in Turkmenistan, members of a Protestant church in a village near the north-eastern town of Turkmenabad [Turkmenabat] (formerly Charjew) had their houses raided and searched by local officials and secret police on 20 May, Protestant sources who did not wish to be identified for fear of reprisals told Forum 18 News Service. On the following two days, public meetings were held where church members were publicly humiliated and threatened.

Parents were told that their children could be expelled from school if they continue to attend Protestant worship services.  They were also threatened with termination of electricity, gas, and water supplies.  A slew of public officials humiliated and intimidated the Christians in front of the entire village, including the local Muslim mullah.

"They read out the names of Christian parents, made them stand up and berated them. Again they were threatened that power and water would be cut off, that they would be sacked from their work and that they would not be allocated land to cultivate. They accused the Christians of conducting criminal activity and political activity against the government. They said they would do whatever it takes to crush and destroy them."

Authorities told Christians that, although they are individually free to believe whatever they want, they are forbidden to meet together.

Another Turkmen Protestant, Merdan Shirmedov, has been refused permission to join his wife Wendy Lucas in the United States.  He was hoping to be with her when she gave birth; however, their first child, a baby girl, was born last week.  No reason has been given for the refusal.

Turkmenistan’s Christians have good cause to apprehend a return to the bad old days of Soviet-style religious repression and persecution.

Previous related post: Kazakhstan to expand restrictions on religious activity

A Malaysian citizen has been battling for years for official recognition of her conversion to Christianity from Islam.  Lina Joy was born into an ethnic Malay family and raised a Muslim; but, at the age of 26, she embraced Christ.  That was over fifteen years ago.

She took her fight all the way to Malaysia’s highest court, which has now announced a date for rendering judgment.  Whatever decision is made will have repercussions throughout Malaysian society.

The Federal Court, the country's highest civil judicial authority, will announce on May 30 if it has decided to acknowledge the decision of Lina Joy to convert to Christianity and give up Islam, the faith she was born into.

"We're all awaiting with bated breath a case which has a great impact on the course that the country will take," Benjamin Dawson, Joy's lawyer, told Reuters.

Although Malaysia’s constitution promises religious freedom, jurisdiction over religious issues involving Muslims falls to sharia courts, which have steadfastly refused to recognize Lina Joy’s conversion.  Officially, therefore, she remains a Muslim and, as such, legally barred from marrying a non-Muslim.

A ruling in her favour will agitate Muslims and perhaps spark anti-Christian violence.  On the other hand, Christians and other religious minorities could regard a rejection of her petition as confirmation of fears that Islamic law is gaining excessive influence in Malaysia.

h/t: Religion News Blog

Previous related posts:

• Egyptian and Malaysian governments disapprove of Bibles
• Secret Christian converts in Malaysia
• Malaysian church may have been set up by Muslim mufti

UPDATE (29 May): The court found against Lina.

The Assembly of First Nations has warned Canadians to prepare for a “day of action” next month.  National railways that do not “voluntarily” stop running on 29 June could be blockaded.

How did native grievances become so volatile?  Gordon Gibson writes in the Globe and Mail that it’s the fault of Canadians themselves for allowing courts and “the Indian industry” to take over the aboriginal file.

Indians account for only 2 per cent of Canada's population and have been governed by our racist law (our Constitution singles them out) for well over a century. Mainstream society has created a culture of victimhood, collectivism and bureaucracy worthy of the old Soviet Union.

For the past 50 years, the public has been subject to sporadic guilt on the issue, usually after chilling stories of suicide, poor health or poverty. We shake our heads and turn the page. Our politicians mumble and send some more money.

The only serious attempt at addressing the question was Pierre Trudeau's famous "White Paper" in 1970, which called for natives (with massive assistance) to become ordinary Canadians. This removal of a hundred-year-old security blanket was rejected. The government backed off, traumatized, and since then policy has been run by an Indian Industry of chiefs, academics, consultants, lawyers and the courts, all employed by the taxpayers.

Ill-conceived and open-ended court decisions based on the notion of collective rights have handed immense power to aboriginal leaders.  Native bosses have capitalised on the court-sanctioned system of collectively owned assets, and our political leaders have succumbed to pressure tactics.

Canada expends billions annually on aboriginal issues, but the condition of the people seems never to improve.  One cannot avoid wondering whether Canadian aboriginals would be better off if their leaders pushed self-reliance instead of life-long welfare.  But, then, the Indian Industrialists would be out of work.

Native leaders have every incentive to continue to portray their people as victims with potentially unlimited claims against the government.  Canada reaps the whirlwind.

Previous related posts:

• Promoting aboriginal self-reliance
• Burqa critics ignore discrimination on Canadian reserves
• Tenured aboriginal warriors
• We have a right to be unaccountable

The British government’s top doctors have issued a warning to pregnant women not to drink any alcohol, but they admit there is no scientific evidence behind that warning.  Just their gut feeling dressed up as sound medical counsel, apparently.

Women who are pregnant or trying for a baby should stop drinking alcohol altogether, the Government’s leading doctors give warning today.

The new advice radically revises existing guidelines, which say that women can drink up to two units once or twice a week. Fiona Adshead, the deputy chief medical officer, said that the change was meant to send “a strong signal” to the thousands of women who drank more than the recommended limit that they were putting their babies at risk. But she admitted that it was not in response to any new medical evidence.

Does the deputy chief medical officer think that misrepresenting the state of accepted medical evidence is a means of sending a “strong signal”?  Seems to me more likely to undermine the doctors’ credibility.  So much for medical “science”.

However, it emerged yesterday that the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists intended to stick with its advice that moderate drinking was perfectly safe, which could leave many pregnant women confused.

I feel sorry for British women who are pregnant or trying to conceive.