26 Comments

  1. Further thoughts:

    How tedious is the discussion every time some fascistic headcase complains about his free speech rights being violated because he isn’t allowed to speak in public wherever and whenever he wants, as if it’s a fundamental human right to be allowed to address the Oxford Union or the House of Lords?

    Answer:

    Extremely fucking tedious.

    And so it is with Geert Wilders being denied entry to the UK. Of course, Wilders–like all other fascists–doesn’t actually give a shit about freedom of speech or expression: he called for the Koran to be banned. Maybe if his vile little film wasn’t a 2-second Google search away he could rightfully claim that his opinions were being suppressed. They’re not.

  2. Forget Wilders. When the Archbishop of Canterbury caves to Sharia law, that’s truly frightenting. It’s against the law to marry a minor, have more than one wife, kill someone for “honor’s” sake, such a a raped daughter. And yet, bit by bit, the British are caving. Not only that, they’re giving welfare to the people who are breaking basic British law–they’re subsidizing them. Please let it never happen here. The Xians are bad enough.

  3. @Jim Buck

    I believe you miss the point.

    It doesn’t matter how ugly Mr Wilder’s words may or may not be. (I haven’t seen his film or heard him speak). It doesn’t matter if he’s a hypocrite in the matter of free speech. He has (or should have) the right to say whatever it is he damn well wishes so long as it doesn’t infringe on the rights of others. Is his speech stupid? Ugly? Nasty? Spiteful? Venemous? It doesn’t matter. So long as he isn’t trying to incite violence or something else that would infringe on other’s rights, it makes no difference what he has to say; he has the right to say it. Even if it’s a lie, even if it’s ugly, he has the right to say it.

    Freedom of Speech is freedom for ALL speech. If we can’t protect the ugliest things people express, then we can’t protect the beautiful things they express either. It’s as simple as that.

    Of course that doesn’t mean anyone is entitled to or guarenteed a venue in which to express themselves.

    But when the Brits refused the man entry to the country, just because they either didn’t like what he had to say, or because they caved to the screaming idiot muslim extremists; they essentially said “well, you can only say things that don’t have the potential to be controversial.”

    And indeed, that is saying “Freedom Go To Hell”

    What happened to “I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”?

  4. Pat Condell is a racist, xenophobic bigot and his speeches are consistently thinly-veiled hate mongering, usually directed at muslims (although in this video he made a nice little aside to denigrate homosexuals–not too openly of course, but just enough to get a wink from the crowd).

    He has every right to be up on his soapbox, preaching hate and supporting the right of other bigots to get on their soapboxes to preach their hate. I’d rather hear a good discussion of the implications of a new religious paradigm in western secular society; I wouldn’t mind a REAL indictment of religious power’s encroachment over secular society; but enough of this “alle juden raus” bullshit wrapped up to be something it’s not.

  5. Jonny said:

    “[Condell] made a nice little aside to denigrate homosexuals”.

    Lets examine that one, shall we? Starting at 2:45:

    ” … the Labour Party despises freedom almost as much as Islam does. Which is why they make such `willing bedfellows’. Although not in a gay way. I don’t want to insult anyone’s homophobic prejudices, because that might `cause offence’.”

    Listen again Jonny – he’s pointing out that homosexuality is particularly offensive to Islam. And of course that we should not respect this.

    If you clearly can’t listen carefully enough to understand what is being denigrated, why should we trust the rest of your indictment?

  6. Jonny, is it wrong to hate muslim extremists? People use the word “hate” for much more ridiculous subjects, so here, at least it fits. You should hate muslim extremists. What you make of this hate, of course, is another topic.

    I don’t know if you’re one of those 100% politically correct Germans who connect any criticism of foreign cultures to “alle Juden raus”. It’s a tendency typical for Europe (or the western world in general), and it creates the very extremes it condemns: “Criticism forbidden” on the one side – “Tolerance prohibited” on the other end of the political spectrum… and nothing in between.

    Pat Condell, although I’m not a big fan of any internet guru figures, is what most “atheists” actually are: A rationalist, a realist. He’s in between, if you will.

    And, realistically, what happened there is a political tragedy. Now you can discuss diplomacy or the impact this all could have had on the shouting, roaring masses… But rationally speaking, this is a farce and has to be discussed and stopped at some point. Call me naive, but I still have hopes that can happen in a non-violent way.

  7. @Jonny,

    Ummm, Islam isn’t a race.

    Also, I think you didn’t listen to Condell correctly. He isn’t against homosexuals, he meant that tongue in cheek because the muslim extremists are against homosexuality to the point that they consider it a capital crime.

    I’ve watched a lot of Condell’s videos and I’m not his biggest fan but he isn’t so much anti-muslim but very much anti-sharia law that many British parliament members seem to be bending over to respect when sharia law deserves no respect by people who value freedom.

  8. I agree with Jonny! We SHOULD talk about how these new paradigms have uh…encrouched on our implications secular-ly

    and stuff

    …soapbox

  9. Frostillicus, Vlad – my earphones are broken. I already knew this; but now I’m confused. What’s making you say these things? I only get sound in my right earcup and now I’m really confused…

  10. Geoff

    Frostillicus, Vlad – my earphones are broken. I already knew this; but now I’m confused. What’s making you say these things? I only get sound in my right earcup and now I’m really confused…

    Its really quite simple – Frostillicus and Vlad are astrally projecting themselves into your head!

  11. yeah, i misheard the remark on homophobia. my bad. i can usually find something in each of his videos that shows (to me, anyway) that his agenda is not simply to point out the offenses of religious extremists, but to brand all practitioners of religion (and in this, as in almost every case with condell, it is islam) as sociopathic fascists that want to restrict your freedoms and take over your land.

    but i misheard this one, so my apologies for the misunderstanding and the accusation.

    he just calls muslims “intolerant, hysterical malcontents”. and he was clearly talking about ALL muslims, not just extremists. but he was telling a joke and used sarcasm, so that’s okay, he probably didn’t mean it that way.

    but what if he called the jews intolerant, hysterical malcontents? that would be bigoted. or blacks? racist. or the italians? that would be a bit silly of course, but i bet the italians would be at least a little pissed.

    maybe you hate muslims, too, and you have every right to do that. but you’re a bigot. because if you hate a group of people just because of their religion, culture, gender, race, etc. you’re a bigot. that’s what a bigot is, and that’s what a bigot does.

    it has nothing to do with everyone else being too politically correct, or you defending your freedom of speech, or your insistence that you’re only talking about “those crazy” other muslims, because hey, some of your best friends are muslims, right?

    no, it is about the branding of a group of people as troublemakers, as invaders, as intolerant, hysterical malcontents. and if that sounds to me a little bit like alle juden raus, or justification for jim crow, forgive me for the stretch.

    i’m not saying that pat condell doesn’t have some good insights. or that i don’t agree with his general premise that organized religion is not to be trusted anywhere near one’s government. i actually think he’s quite right on a lot of points.

    it’s just that he makes remarks about muslims that are bigoted, and just because he hides them in sarcasm or rhetoric doesn’t absolve him of these remarks. and that makes pat condell a bigot. and an asshole. and that’s why i hate pat condell.

    A+!

  12. I’ve little time for Islam, and none at all for the Wahhabist strains and various other fundamentalist offshoots thereof… but I’ve precious little time for Condell, either.

    He makes some valid (if rather obvious) points, but he likes to cast everything in black and white and (like Wilders himself) he seems to be as ignorant about Islam as most Islamists.

  13. but what if he called the jews intolerant, hysterical malcontents? that would be bigoted. or blacks? racist. or the italians?

    Jonny you’re making a fundamental mistake and confusing ethnicity with philosophies and ideas. Pat is speaking out against a philosophy that expects you to abide by its rules whether you believe in it or not. There is certainly nothing wrong with disagreeing with people because of ideas that they believe in that they’re trying to force on you.

  14. Jonny said

    no, it is about the branding of a group of people as troublemakers, as invaders, as intolerant, hysterical malcontents. and if that sounds to me a little bit like alle juden raus, or justification for jim crow, forgive me for the stretch.

    This is ludicrous Jonny. The central issue here is whether certain ideas are protected from criticism (or denigration) simply because of their religious origin. You’re doing a good job of showing us how to protect Islam from criticism – to those who would, you level an accusation of racism akin to the worst events of the 20th century. Sorry, no, I don’t forgive you for the stretch.

    Lets ask you – you seem to take offense at the denigration of homosexuals. Are you comfortable with religious homophobia? Or are you going to show the courage to denounce it where it arises? Can we call you a bigot if you do?

  15. Condell articulated thoughts of majority. He is a bright man, but not far beyond average mind. Now, what free world needs is an intelectual, able to point out how ethical relativism, the philosophical fundament of multiculturalism, is in contradiction with elementary logic and unsuitable as guidance for practical life.

  16. “Jonny, religion is a choice.”

    So are a lot of things. But that doesn’t mean that it isn’t bigotry to hate those views or people who hold those views. That is why religion is placed with gender, race, and ethnicity in terms of freedoms – we have the freedom to think as we so choose rather than have someone throw it down into our throats (that includes atheism). Condell is a bigot, an obvious one, and you guys know it. The reason you can not see that is being of your devotion to him. A choice doesn’t always mean that either choice is good or bad, wrong or right. Didn’t you learn as a child that because someone choses a different path you don’t have to get butthurt about it? Condell argues that Christians, muslims, etc, all push their views down others’ throats. But isn’t that, in fact, what he is doing?

    What people need is a thought-provoking and intellegent individual, whether he/she be an atheist, a Muslim, a Christian, or whatever, to work through these problems rather than spread generalization and bash on others. Humans have evolved far beyond the point of making sweeping generalization, you need to stop being pricks about it and enjoy life. And don’t give me that crap about “oh, but they don’t let us enjoy our life.” Seriously, if your reply is that, get out of the basement and enjoy the fresh air for a change.

  17. Being an atheist, I think Condell makes us all look bad. He DOESN’T use intellect to get anywhere, rather, he rehashes arguements of the 70s by atheists to insts that religion was an evil. Since that’s dead and fading, all we can hope for is that we cast our differences out of the fucking window and piss on our prejudices. I don’t care if you’re a fundamentalist Christian, I’m not going to bash you or your religion; it’s not ethical nor is it productive. It does nothing. Absolutely nothing. The problems Britian and Europe have with immigration and Islam can not be cured with xenophobia. Humanity will run its course. It’s people like Condell that embarass me and true atheists. We aren’t atheists because of religion, we’re atheists because of ourselves. We don’t need to throw our shit down their throats.

  18. Good words, Andrew (except I didn’t quite get the pissing part). People like Condell don’t make me sick, I just pity them. It’s like they’re ingorant of the facts yet they honestly, to their heart’s content, believe they are right. Pity is all I can give.

Comments are closed.