Pat is a lot lot like Dawkins people get very upset with him and call hi racist and strident but upon review I can't see either of those things he is however right.
Pat is bang on the button here. This resolution is an absolute disgrace. The UN fails in places like Darfur and then wastes its time on this kind of nonsense. Big time fail.
This is outrageous... its so filthy a resolution
than i can barely believe is real.
But again, if we could create a organization of
freethinkers which had the same privileges as
any religion... that would be nice, but im
afraid of this backfiring on us.
I feel better to run along my own trail instead
of living beneath a single flag, even of is
made of pure freedom.
Something about a Brit denouncing another society as uncivilized, and saying "those people" wouldn't be happy living in a civilized society like Britain....
well it might not be racist, but it sure is something.
But then, the sanctity of freedom is something I completely agree with. If you ask me, his main point comes through loud and clear, no matter how you interpret the racist/imperialist/____ist undertones.
I did not care one litle bit for Pat's angry call for those 'bearded... unhappy...(Muslims who)... jump up and down on the streets' to take advantage of the 'price of a plane ticket' and get out of Britain.
Now, I love Pat, and abhor the resolution, but just how representative of European sentiment is Pat Condell? Is it really getting to the point where intelligent, well-educated Europeans are starting to espouse that Muslims 'would be happier' if they lived in the Middle East rather than Europe?
Well...awesome! Its great on so many levels, especially the one obvious problem which is how large groups can influence public policy. Get enough of these radicals mating and repopulating and eventually their ideals are the norm and public policy begins to change. It's sad, scary, and almost inevitable :(
Well...awesome! Its great on so many levels, especially the one obvious problem which is how large groups can influence public policy. Get enough of these radicals mating and repopulating and eventually their ideals are the norm and public policy begins to change. It's sad, scary, and almost inevitable :(
It's preachy and hyperbolic, but I don't know what other kind of reaction is called for by such blatant attacks on human freedom.
Still, it all kind of falls flat, because even the IDiots like to talk as if they really favor free speech, no matter that they share the same theocratic tendencies as the Muslim nations who are quite happy to admit that they intend to control speech and thought.
The main complaint I'd make is calling free speech "sacred." That doesn't make it sound good or free to myself.
I don't think that Pat was being racist. Anyone who thinks he is, is making an error of logic. Just because most Moslems are brown skinned is not a sufficient condition for his statements to be defined as racist.
He was complaining about the extremists for being extremist.
Although pretty much everything he says is correct, I can't help but feel that Pat has been poisoned by his own (admittedly righteous) vitriol. One of the things I liked about his early videos was that they were sharp, clever, but also good-natured.
He seems angrier and angrier in every video (probably rightly so) but he seems to be slipping into unnecessary invective and insults more often than he used to as well. The world can seem maddening at times, but it seems a shame to let it get to you, like it obviously has to Pat.
Calling your values your religion wouldn't fly with the Muslims who were pushing this resolution. They only recognize Islam, Xianity, and Judaism as "real" religions.
I did not care one litle bit for Pat's angry call for those 'bearded... unhappy...(Muslims who)... jump up and down on the streets' to take advantage of the 'price of a plane ticket' and get out of Britain...Is it really getting to the point where intelligent, well-educated Europeans are starting to espouse that Muslims 'would be happier' if they lived in the Middle East rather than Europe?
He wasn't saying that Muslims would be happier in the Mid East. He was very specifically saying that those particular Muslims who made it painfully clear that they only wanted to live in a country where they are not exposed to things that offend their religious sensibilities might be happier in the Mid East.
I don't really see this as being any different than telling Christians in the United States who want the government to explicitly promote Christian belief as the True Religion that they might be happier in a country where the laws -- and philosophical underpinnings -- allowed them to do that.
Glen Davidson #23 wrote:
The main complaint I'd make is calling free speech "sacred." That doesn't make it sound good or free to myself.
But, I specifically heard him put those " quotes on the word "sacred!" ;)
I fully support this UN resolution; it is terrible to blaspheme the names of Father Dagon and Mother Hydra, even when you are being devoured in dark, damp catacombs. There is simply no excuse to insult the honor of the Esoteric Order. Why, if I had my trapa...wait, what? They're not protecting my religion as well? Oh now that's just not nice, the shoggoths are quite upset about this.
This is actually a pretty pointless rant. The resolution doesn't criminalize anything, because it doesn't have the force of law. It's non-binding. Sure, it's a dumb resolution, but it won't lead to any criminalization of speech in any country that doesn't criminalize it through its own legal means.
Furthermore, as DavidMWW points out, the language has been removed.
"I did not care one litle bit for Pat's angry call for those 'bearded... unhappy...(Muslims who)... jump up and down on the streets' to take advantage of the 'price of a plane ticket' and get out of Britain."
I generally sympathize with your sentiment. Pat can slip into the rhetoric of bigotry once in a while, but I think your characterization here is a bit unfair. I think Pat was trying to subtly imply that a free society is BETTER and what these people actually desire. They want the benefits of an open and tolerant society but also ignorantly want to impose their own values on it. It sounds exactly like our own brand of religious lunatic here in the states!
Gotta love Pat. Not only does he rightly rail against the Muslim knuckleheads, but he shows up just a few posts after ol' PZ holds a "banning" party on his own blog, where his minions froth and pitchfork and torch with the best of them...
To be fair, he is only referring the Muslims who live in a free democracy, all the while decrying the democracy that nurtures them. I'm positive Mr. Condell isn't calling for the relocation of all Muslims. The ones who seem to crave theocratic governance should go ahead and move to a country that espouses their views.
Pat's attitude that 'If this place disgusts you so much, feel free to sling yer hook.' doesn't strike me as racist at all. Every now and then we get some clapped out 'entertainer' in the UK who moans about how the country has been taken over by femi-nazis, the gay mafia, the PC crowd or whatever and threatens to relocate (Dubai seems to attract them, for some reason). Good bloody riddance, says I.
If someone is a citizen they have every right to campaign for any changes they want, however odious. But when their loathing for every aspect of life in the country becomes a mania that requires constant screaming for blood, then is it so unreasonable to ask, if you knows of a better 'ole...?
Sorry, but some cultures ARE more civilized than others. List any criteria for civilization that matter to a rational human being; they're all better exemplified in present-day England than anywhere in the Islamic world. That barbarians take offense at being called barbarians is no reason to stop telling them the truth.
I fully agree with Condell: if you want to enjoy the considerable amenities of England, or the Netherlands, or the U.S. for that matter, you have no cause for complaint if you're told you can no longer beat or kill your wife, or seek to kill any journalist who offends you, or any Jews whatsoever. If you find this state of affairs oppressive, there are plenty of boats ready to take you back to Barbary.
Although the terms 'race' and 'culture' are likely irretrievably linked, it is worth noting that they do have different meanings.
Pat Condell is not attacking the race of the 'bearded... unhappy...(Muslims who)... jump up and down on the streets', but is explicitly attacking their religion. As such, he is peripherally attacking their culture, given that it is inherently bound to their religion. Their race, the population of people who carry certain common genetic traits, is not inherently bound to their religion. It is functionally linked to the religion, but with a decent educational system in their home countries that could hopefully be fixed.
Calling him a racist seems technically wrong. He is not arguing about racial superiority, but is arguing for cultural superiority.
Pat Condell represents the 0.1% of youtube opinion piece creators who actually think about what they are going to say, practice what they are going to say, and film it again until they have it right. Watching one of his videos, whether I agree or not, I am sure I'm getting the best expression of his viewpoint.
Just about all the others follow this process: Have a murky feeling that needs to be expressed. Turn on camera. Try and figure it out out to express your murky feeling while filming. Turn off camera. Upload.
For some people getting "video unavailable", I have found that, oddly, somehow "linked" videos have a time out. They are still, usually, available, but if you don't watch them when the page first loads, they eventually become "unavailable" from your browser. Fixing it is as simple as refreshing the page. I have no idea why, unless maybe some of the players involved keep an "open" connection to the source, and the source eventually cuts bandwidth, by dropping connections that are not active.
For some people getting "video unavailable", I have found that, oddly, somehow "linked" videos have a time out. They are still, usually, available, but if you don't watch them when the page first loads, they eventually become "unavailable" from your browser. Fixing it is as simple as refreshing the page. I have no idea why, unless maybe some of the players involved keep an "open" connection to the source, and the source eventually cuts bandwidth, by dropping connections that are not active.
Gah.. Server lag causing post delays.. Let me check something... Hmm, nope, not in the Second Life at the moment, so it can't be the asset services. lol
As someone whose face resembles one covered in Krazy Glue and dropped into a grain silo of Tribbles, I think the attack on beards was unjustified and not on point. I am most deeply offended!!11!
Couldn't get it on this page, couldn't get it on his Youtube channel. Tried IE, Firefox and Chrome. Did get it on his home page, http://www.patcondell.net/ on plain old IE.
@ Flaq "Something about a Brit denouncing another society as uncivilized, and saying "those people" wouldn't be happy living in a civilized society like Britain...."
Oh dear the code words police are in town, but while offense has been taken at the use of the heinous phrase "those people" apparently "Brit" is ok.
This is a sweet example of mini-quote mining. Falq complains about "those people", implying that this is some kind of racist imperialist comment, but fails (deliberately) to acknowledge that those innocent two words were referring to the sub-set of Muslims in the UK who spend their life constantly complaining about how non-Musilim the UK is - as has been pointed out above. Pat is clearly very accurate is stating that "those people" might prefer to live in Saudi Arabia.
Lambert @ 54
Well, as I said, I don't think it's racism. (The racism notion was brought up early in the thread, and I was responding to that.) I took it more as an unflinching claim that Our Society is superior to Their Society -- that's a sentiment that will tend to raise some eyebrows, no matter where you're from.
No code word police here. I like Pat's videos and I tend to agree with his points, mostly. And as I said before, I thought his point came through well, in spite of whatever little red flags he might have raised along the way.
Oh, and is Brit really an epithet? By what name does someone from Britan prefer to be called? Englishman? Loyal Subject?
I am one of those "beardey guys" Pat mentioned, at which point I started laughing my ass off. Pat is very good - one of the most logical commentators on Youtube.
Like E.V. I made the mistake of going to AVSN's blog page: don't bother. Someone above mentioned the amount of thought most people put into doing videos: apparently AVSN put even less thought behind his reason for starting a blog. He has absolutely nothing to say.
English people tend to like to be called "English", even when they mean "British". Scottish people prefer "Scottish" or "British" (but never "Scotch" - that is what the English call "Whiskey" and it grates when they use it as the name of a people). The Welsh and the Irish have a similar attitude to the Scots (which is an acceptable contraction of "Scottish" as well as the name of a dialect of English spoken in some southern areas of Scotland).
"Brit" is a mild epithet which can have imperialist connotations, although British people do use it to refer to themselves, just as many African Americans will refer to each other as "Nigger" in street conversation. Just as "nigger" can be acceptable is some contexts, so can "Brit". It is so commonly used by Australians that the derogatory suggestion of past colonial masters is almost gone, but I sometimes get the feeling that in the USA the revolutionary woulds are still a little sore, a so "Brit" from a "Yank" is not quite kosher. It gets complex to be PC. :-)
Getting back to Pat's comments. If a group of people in the UK are so vehemently against the British way of life then I too think they should leave. On the other hand, if they are "devout" Muslims they may well believe that they have a moral obligation to change the world to suite their religious dictates. And therein lies the problem.
Posted by: Scott from Oregon | March 18, 2009 2:19 PM
Gotta love Pat. Not only does he rightly rail against the Muslim knuckleheads, but he shows up just a few posts after ol' PZ holds a "banning" party on his own blog, where his minions froth and pitchfork and torch with the best of them...
The irony is delicious.
Scott, if you have a party and the idiots next door to you drop in and want their presence appreciated though doing what they do best, being complete idiots, would you still let them stay?
Fuckwit!
DAMMIT FLAQ!
I got here just in time to see you beat me to the lewd joke.
I now serve no purpose on this thread.
It sucks having such a limited skill set.
I took it more as an unflinching claim that Our Society is superior to Their Society -- that's a sentiment that will tend to raise some eyebrows, no matter where you're from.
I understood Condell as saying that if a group of Muslims don't like living in Britain and wish that Britain was more like Saudi Arabia, there's a simple solution: Move to Saudi Arabia.
Oh, and is Brit really an epithet? By what name does someone from Britan prefer to be called? Englishman? Loyal Subject?
'Sir' works quite well. Especially when one is addressed by colonials or people with nothing better than a degree in some so-called 'humanity' subject.
I have always wanted to start my own religion. First I'm going to make up a fake god, a fake deciple and fake town. My religion will be cool, with many secular, humanistic philosophies, but my number one damn rule is IF YOU ARE NOT PART OF MY RELIGION, ANYONE WHO TALKS ABOUT IT, WRITES ABOUT IT, IS OFFENDING ME. Only we are allowed to critisize ourselves and talk about it. I will be super, duper offended if anyone mentions my religion around me and will sue.
The second rule is IF YOU TALK ABOUT MY RELIGION, WRITE ABOUT IM OFFENDED. The next 10,000 rules are the same.
"Something about a Brit denouncing another society as uncivilized, and saying "those people" wouldn't be happy living in a civilized society like Britain....
well it might not be racist, but it sure is something."
It's not racist. He's talking about Saudi Arabia and many other parts of the Middle East, by and large, known to be among the most brutal and repressive regimes (that's the theocracy he mentioned). People who idolize these societies, and wish to criminalize any criticism of Sharia law or religion in general (and "religion in general" is the only wording that will pass at the UN, if it will pass at all).
Right now, Europe has been receiving lots of pressure from many vocal Islamists within their country, Pat is talking about people living in England, who think that there is too much freedom. They complain about having to share a public pool with unbelievers, for instance, and have successfully lobbied to have "Islam only" days in pools where only believers can go and not risk becoming befouled by sharing the water with unbelievers.
So yes, THOSE PEOPLE, who he specifically identified as being those people who are living in Europe and yet are criticizing the fact that it isn't run like Saudi Arabia are people who aren't really happy in a civilized society.
Unless you want to try to argue that Saudi Arabia is a civilized society.
The word you're looking for is "provocative" or perhaps "inflammatory". Definitely not "racist".
"Scotch" was used in the 17th and 18th centuries as we would now use "Scotsman or Scot". It can be found in Hume and Johnson. It is also used in an archaising sense in modern Scotland with the same meaning as well as being the popular the name for usquebaugh.
They complain about having to share a public pool with unbelievers, for instance, and have successfully lobbied to have "Islam only" days in pools where only believers can go and not risk becoming befouled by sharing the water with unbelievers.
Incidentally, Philip Pullman weighs in with an impassioned opinion piece, called "Malevolent voices that despise our freedoms," about laws published or proposed in the United Kingdom:
It is inconceivable to me that a waking nation in the full consciousness of its freedom would have allowed its government to pass such laws as the Protection from Harassment Act (1997), the Crime and Disorder Act (1998), the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (2000), the Terrorism Act (2000), the Criminal Justice and Police Act (2001), the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act (2001), the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Extension Act (2002), the Criminal Justice Act (2003), the Extradition Act (2003), the Anti-Social Behaviour Act (2003),the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act (2004), the Civil Contingencies Act (2004), the Prevention of Terrorism Act (2005), the Inquiries Act (2005), the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act (2005), not to mention a host of pending legislation such as the Identity Cards Bill, the Coroners and Justice Bill, and the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill.
Pat Condell is an assTurkey whom singlehandedly proves that an extreme right-wing xenophobic imperialist anglo with sharp wit and enough jesus bile can sucker even the smartest of the dumbest political fucktards on godz grey earth, namely americans.
The guy is essentially Michael Savage, included Michael Savage rants in his favorites for the first year of his youTube infestation.
His favorite stomp on Islamotards is their rampant anti-semitism, ignoring the well known fact that everybody who is not a fucking retarded american knows, the Arabs are semites, too.
The pasty-faced little condell twerp dismisses the entire problem with Israel's treatment of Palestinians as giving the Israelis a pass, because Jews do not knock on his door trying to convert him, his words not mine.
He's politically an ally of Pat Robertson, and makes Christopher Hitchens seem like Mao Tse Tung by comparison.
He is a far right xenophobe bedwetter along the lines of David Duke only it's mus-tards instead of blacks that will end the world.
If you believe what this idiot spouts regularly, the Immans of London are running the place.
All you have to do is get down with the gays and bash the christards and you are the darling of the new atheists???
Condell is a great wit, and I enjoy his rants, but he is a right wing twit fucktard and does not deserve the level of praise I'm barfing over reading this thread.
Scooter, you are a lying sack of sh*t, Pat Condell has specifically denounced in no uncertain terms the far-right extremists in his own country such as BNP thugs and other Neo-Fascists.
Scooter, you are a lying sack of sh*t, Pat Condell has specifically denounced in no uncertain terms the far-right extremists in his own country such as BNP thugs and other Neo-Fascists.
Pat Condell has specifically denounced in no uncertain terms the far-right extremists in his own country
So does Michael Savage in the US, who has remarkably similar complaints. As well as the entire Faux News network.
Anyway I have to answer the door, AIPAC has just shown up on my doorstep, they want me to donate another 30 billion this year to Israel. I need to hide one of my daughters who looks sort of Arabic before I let them in.
We need to start thinking of a name for our church, doing some Good Works, such as visiting prisoners in jail (I suggest the guy who just got 20 years for questioning the interpretation of the Koran on the subjugation of women), and performing marriages. I suggest "The Church of the Three Freedoms." C'mon, you don't have to be weirdos like Scientologists to start a religion!
So if I start referring to the Catholic Church as the GT or Gilded Turd, everyone will know what I'm talking about? The evangelicals can be the Sugar-coated Turd (SCT) and the wackaloon homophobes can be the Sour Turd (ST).
Also, it seems that the Arab nations are having a major irony fail, since if they did pass a law against defaming other religions, they'd have to stop lambasting Jews and Judaism.
Well, I was under the impression that the UN was all for protecting human rights and have no idea why they would even consider such a resolution.
I have said it for a long time, those abominable religious values ARE a crime against humanity, and I reserve the right to say so.
Pat is a lot lot like Dawkins people get very upset with him and call hi racist and strident but upon review I can't see either of those things he is however right.
This has to be one of Pat's best! Not as funny as some of the others but still very relavant.
Pat is bang on the button here. This resolution is an absolute disgrace. The UN fails in places like Darfur and then wastes its time on this kind of nonsense. Big time fail.
Check out Mo's take on this:
http://www.jesusandmo.net/2009/03/18/aids/
But ... but ... I thought being nice and respectful to religious sensibilities would make everything all nice and respectful for everyone!
Heh. Give 'em hell, Pat. This resolution is an abomination.
I love you, Pat!
May the Church of Freedom outlive all others!
Instructive and refreshing post.
Deserves a prize for showing that one can rant and rave persuasively without obscenities, insults, strawmen, non sequiturs, and ad hominem fallacies.
Off topic, but it looks liek Ron Paul is coming to a big screen near you soon.
http://slate.com/id/2213882
"Free-dom? It is our worship word! You will not speak it!"
This is outrageous... its so filthy a resolution
than i can barely believe is real.
But again, if we could create a organization of
freethinkers which had the same privileges as
any religion... that would be nice, but im
afraid of this backfiring on us.
I feel better to run along my own trail instead
of living beneath a single flag, even of is
made of pure freedom.
That's why we love him.
Something about a Brit denouncing another society as uncivilized, and saying "those people" wouldn't be happy living in a civilized society like Britain....
well it might not be racist, but it sure is something.
But then, the sanctity of freedom is something I completely agree with. If you ask me, his main point comes through loud and clear, no matter how you interpret the racist/imperialist/____ist undertones.
That was EPIC!
It's what I've been telling people here for months, only much more eloquently put. Haha
Off topic, but it looks liek Ron Paul is coming to a big screen near you soon.
http://slate.com/id/2213882
I did not care one litle bit for Pat's angry call for those 'bearded... unhappy...(Muslims who)... jump up and down on the streets' to take advantage of the 'price of a plane ticket' and get out of Britain.
Now, I love Pat, and abhor the resolution, but just how representative of European sentiment is Pat Condell? Is it really getting to the point where intelligent, well-educated Europeans are starting to espouse that Muslims 'would be happier' if they lived in the Middle East rather than Europe?
Is the conversation starting to change in Europe?
Hahaha. I liked how he opens it.
Well...awesome! Its great on so many levels, especially the one obvious problem which is how large groups can influence public policy. Get enough of these radicals mating and repopulating and eventually their ideals are the norm and public policy begins to change. It's sad, scary, and almost inevitable :(
That was EPIC!
It's what I've been telling people here for months, only much more eloquently put. Haha
The defamation of religion passages have been dropped from the Durban II conference's draft declaration.
Well...awesome! Its great on so many levels, especially the one obvious problem which is how large groups can influence public policy. Get enough of these radicals mating and repopulating and eventually their ideals are the norm and public policy begins to change. It's sad, scary, and almost inevitable :(
The defamation of religion passages have been dropped from the Durban II conference's draft declaration.
That's right, it says so, right there in the "E-Pleb-Neesta" (as I recall).
It's preachy and hyperbolic, but I don't know what other kind of reaction is called for by such blatant attacks on human freedom.
Still, it all kind of falls flat, because even the IDiots like to talk as if they really favor free speech, no matter that they share the same theocratic tendencies as the Muslim nations who are quite happy to admit that they intend to control speech and thought.
The main complaint I'd make is calling free speech "sacred." That doesn't make it sound good or free to myself.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/6mb592
I don't think that Pat was being racist. Anyone who thinks he is, is making an error of logic. Just because most Moslems are brown skinned is not a sufficient condition for his statements to be defined as racist.
He was complaining about the extremists for being extremist.
Although pretty much everything he says is correct, I can't help but feel that Pat has been poisoned by his own (admittedly righteous) vitriol. One of the things I liked about his early videos was that they were sharp, clever, but also good-natured.
He seems angrier and angrier in every video (probably rightly so) but he seems to be slipping into unnecessary invective and insults more often than he used to as well. The world can seem maddening at times, but it seems a shame to let it get to you, like it obviously has to Pat.
Calling your values your religion wouldn't fly with the Muslims who were pushing this resolution. They only recognize Islam, Xianity, and Judaism as "real" religions.
They even deny that Baha'i is a religion.
Gingerbaker #15 wrote:
He wasn't saying that Muslims would be happier in the Mid East. He was very specifically saying that those particular Muslims who made it painfully clear that they only wanted to live in a country where they are not exposed to things that offend their religious sensibilities might be happier in the Mid East.
I don't really see this as being any different than telling Christians in the United States who want the government to explicitly promote Christian belief as the True Religion that they might be happier in a country where the laws -- and philosophical underpinnings -- allowed them to do that.
Glen Davidson #23 wrote:
But, I specifically heard him put those " quotes on the word "sacred!" ;)
DEFAME, v. t. To lie about another. To tell the truth about another.
Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary
I fully support this UN resolution; it is terrible to blaspheme the names of Father Dagon and Mother Hydra, even when you are being devoured in dark, damp catacombs. There is simply no excuse to insult the honor of the Esoteric Order. Why, if I had my trapa...wait, what? They're not protecting my religion as well? Oh now that's just not nice, the shoggoths are quite upset about this.
This is actually a pretty pointless rant. The resolution doesn't criminalize anything, because it doesn't have the force of law. It's non-binding. Sure, it's a dumb resolution, but it won't lead to any criminalization of speech in any country that doesn't criminalize it through its own legal means.
Furthermore, as DavidMWW points out, the language has been removed.
"I did not care one litle bit for Pat's angry call for those 'bearded... unhappy...(Muslims who)... jump up and down on the streets' to take advantage of the 'price of a plane ticket' and get out of Britain."
I generally sympathize with your sentiment. Pat can slip into the rhetoric of bigotry once in a while, but I think your characterization here is a bit unfair. I think Pat was trying to subtly imply that a free society is BETTER and what these people actually desire. They want the benefits of an open and tolerant society but also ignorantly want to impose their own values on it. It sounds exactly like our own brand of religious lunatic here in the states!
Gotta love Pat. Not only does he rightly rail against the Muslim knuckleheads, but he shows up just a few posts after ol' PZ holds a "banning" party on his own blog, where his minions froth and pitchfork and torch with the best of them...
The irony is delicious.
I'm getting the "this video is no longer available" message - is it there for anyone else?
Gingerbaker @ 15:
To be fair, he is only referring the Muslims who live in a free democracy, all the while decrying the democracy that nurtures them. I'm positive Mr. Condell isn't calling for the relocation of all Muslims. The ones who seem to crave theocratic governance should go ahead and move to a country that espouses their views.
Does the mind boggle scott?
Pat's attitude that 'If this place disgusts you so much, feel free to sling yer hook.' doesn't strike me as racist at all. Every now and then we get some clapped out 'entertainer' in the UK who moans about how the country has been taken over by femi-nazis, the gay mafia, the PC crowd or whatever and threatens to relocate (Dubai seems to attract them, for some reason). Good bloody riddance, says I.
If someone is a citizen they have every right to campaign for any changes they want, however odious. But when their loathing for every aspect of life in the country becomes a mania that requires constant screaming for blood, then is it so unreasonable to ask, if you knows of a better 'ole...?
http://www.ww1westernfront.gov.au/zivy-crater/images/cartoon.jpg
Notice Pat links to a site in the description.
'Muslims against sharia
http://www.reformislam.org/'
He's not racist, [insert comment #34 here]
lol Rev.BigDumbChimp
#33 Epinephrine.
It still works for me.
@ 32: Scott, smoking Oregano:
Best get your irony meter fixed, 'cos you're getting false positive readings.
Scott from Oregon...........you should......don't you realize....sigh. Never mind.
Sorry, but some cultures ARE more civilized than others. List any criteria for civilization that matter to a rational human being; they're all better exemplified in present-day England than anywhere in the Islamic world. That barbarians take offense at being called barbarians is no reason to stop telling them the truth.
I fully agree with Condell: if you want to enjoy the considerable amenities of England, or the Netherlands, or the U.S. for that matter, you have no cause for complaint if you're told you can no longer beat or kill your wife, or seek to kill any journalist who offends you, or any Jews whatsoever. If you find this state of affairs oppressive, there are plenty of boats ready to take you back to Barbary.
Although the terms 'race' and 'culture' are likely irretrievably linked, it is worth noting that they do have different meanings.
Pat Condell is not attacking the race of the 'bearded... unhappy...(Muslims who)... jump up and down on the streets', but is explicitly attacking their religion. As such, he is peripherally attacking their culture, given that it is inherently bound to their religion. Their race, the population of people who carry certain common genetic traits, is not inherently bound to their religion. It is functionally linked to the religion, but with a decent educational system in their home countries that could hopefully be fixed.
Calling him a racist seems technically wrong. He is not arguing about racial superiority, but is arguing for cultural superiority.
Just another religious attempt to quash free speech!
Pat Condell represents the 0.1% of youtube opinion piece creators who actually think about what they are going to say, practice what they are going to say, and film it again until they have it right. Watching one of his videos, whether I agree or not, I am sure I'm getting the best expression of his viewpoint.
Just about all the others follow this process: Have a murky feeling that needs to be expressed. Turn on camera. Try and figure it out out to express your murky feeling while filming. Turn off camera. Upload.
For some people getting "video unavailable", I have found that, oddly, somehow "linked" videos have a time out. They are still, usually, available, but if you don't watch them when the page first loads, they eventually become "unavailable" from your browser. Fixing it is as simple as refreshing the page. I have no idea why, unless maybe some of the players involved keep an "open" connection to the source, and the source eventually cuts bandwidth, by dropping connections that are not active.
For some people getting "video unavailable", I have found that, oddly, somehow "linked" videos have a time out. They are still, usually, available, but if you don't watch them when the page first loads, they eventually become "unavailable" from your browser. Fixing it is as simple as refreshing the page. I have no idea why, unless maybe some of the players involved keep an "open" connection to the source, and the source eventually cuts bandwidth, by dropping connections that are not active.
Gah.. Server lag causing post delays.. Let me check something... Hmm, nope, not in the Second Life at the moment, so it can't be the asset services. lol
As someone whose face resembles one covered in Krazy Glue and dropped into a grain silo of Tribbles, I think the attack on beards was unjustified and not on point. I am most deeply offended!!11!
All the rest: Agree.
OMG this guy is an idiot. why are all of you encouraging his stupidity?
AVSN:
Looked at your blog.
Dude...
*shakes head*
Couldn't get it on this page, couldn't get it on his Youtube channel. Tried IE, Firefox and Chrome. Did get it on his home page, http://www.patcondell.net/ on plain old IE.
Enjoy
I cannot believe that in THIS blog, people have to be reminded that ISLAM IS NOT A RACE. Worst yet, apparently being bearded is now a race too.
I'm sorry, but if you find Pat's video remotely racist, you are a moron.
To paraphrase a (weirdly spelled) Bollywood film - Condell is KINNG!
@ Flaq "Something about a Brit denouncing another society as uncivilized, and saying "those people" wouldn't be happy living in a civilized society like Britain...."
Oh dear the code words police are in town, but while offense has been taken at the use of the heinous phrase "those people" apparently "Brit" is ok.
This is a sweet example of mini-quote mining. Falq complains about "those people", implying that this is some kind of racist imperialist comment, but fails (deliberately) to acknowledge that those innocent two words were referring to the sub-set of Muslims in the UK who spend their life constantly complaining about how non-Musilim the UK is - as has been pointed out above. Pat is clearly very accurate is stating that "those people" might prefer to live in Saudi Arabia.
Lambert @ 54
Well, as I said, I don't think it's racism. (The racism notion was brought up early in the thread, and I was responding to that.) I took it more as an unflinching claim that Our Society is superior to Their Society -- that's a sentiment that will tend to raise some eyebrows, no matter where you're from.
No code word police here. I like Pat's videos and I tend to agree with his points, mostly. And as I said before, I thought his point came through well, in spite of whatever little red flags he might have raised along the way.
Oh, and is Brit really an epithet? By what name does someone from Britan prefer to be called? Englishman? Loyal Subject?
I am one of those "beardey guys" Pat mentioned, at which point I started laughing my ass off. Pat is very good - one of the most logical commentators on Youtube.
Like E.V. I made the mistake of going to AVSN's blog page: don't bother. Someone above mentioned the amount of thought most people put into doing videos: apparently AVSN put even less thought behind his reason for starting a blog. He has absolutely nothing to say.
@ Flaq
English people tend to like to be called "English", even when they mean "British". Scottish people prefer "Scottish" or "British" (but never "Scotch" - that is what the English call "Whiskey" and it grates when they use it as the name of a people). The Welsh and the Irish have a similar attitude to the Scots (which is an acceptable contraction of "Scottish" as well as the name of a dialect of English spoken in some southern areas of Scotland).
"Brit" is a mild epithet which can have imperialist connotations, although British people do use it to refer to themselves, just as many African Americans will refer to each other as "Nigger" in street conversation. Just as "nigger" can be acceptable is some contexts, so can "Brit". It is so commonly used by Australians that the derogatory suggestion of past colonial masters is almost gone, but I sometimes get the feeling that in the USA the revolutionary woulds are still a little sore, a so "Brit" from a "Yank" is not quite kosher. It gets complex to be PC. :-)
Getting back to Pat's comments. If a group of people in the UK are so vehemently against the British way of life then I too think they should leave. On the other hand, if they are "devout" Muslims they may well believe that they have a moral obligation to change the world to suite their religious dictates. And therein lies the problem.
What, exactly, is he trying to say? I can't past all of the metaphor-shrouded language...
NICK NICK BOBDICK, give it a while, I am new to blogging
@ Lambert
A "Brit" from a "Yank" may be unacceptable, but a Yank from a Brit, now that's another story.
Sorry, I just thought that whole discussion needed a happy ending.
OK, I'll be going now.
Scott, if you have a party and the idiots next door to you drop in and want their presence appreciated though doing what they do best, being complete idiots, would you still let them stay?
Fuckwit!
DAMMIT FLAQ!
I got here just in time to see you beat me to the lewd joke.
I now serve no purpose on this thread.
It sucks having such a limited skill set.
Pat Condell, I'd tip my hat to you if I had one, well said that man.
flaq #55
I understood Condell as saying that if a group of Muslims don't like living in Britain and wish that Britain was more like Saudi Arabia, there's a simple solution: Move to Saudi Arabia.
'Sir' works quite well. Especially when one is addressed by colonials or people with nothing better than a degree in some so-called 'humanity' subject.
He speaks well but he should use his words more accurately. A theocracy is not the same thing as a dictatorship.
I have always wanted to start my own religion. First I'm going to make up a fake god, a fake deciple and fake town. My religion will be cool, with many secular, humanistic philosophies, but my number one damn rule is IF YOU ARE NOT PART OF MY RELIGION, ANYONE WHO TALKS ABOUT IT, WRITES ABOUT IT, IS OFFENDING ME. Only we are allowed to critisize ourselves and talk about it. I will be super, duper offended if anyone mentions my religion around me and will sue.
The second rule is IF YOU TALK ABOUT MY RELIGION, WRITE ABOUT IM OFFENDED. The next 10,000 rules are the same.
Thanks for that. His other vids are brilliant too. "The United States of Jesus" is my favourite so far.
"Something about a Brit denouncing another society as uncivilized, and saying "those people" wouldn't be happy living in a civilized society like Britain....
well it might not be racist, but it sure is something."
It's not racist. He's talking about Saudi Arabia and many other parts of the Middle East, by and large, known to be among the most brutal and repressive regimes (that's the theocracy he mentioned). People who idolize these societies, and wish to criminalize any criticism of Sharia law or religion in general (and "religion in general" is the only wording that will pass at the UN, if it will pass at all).
Right now, Europe has been receiving lots of pressure from many vocal Islamists within their country, Pat is talking about people living in England, who think that there is too much freedom. They complain about having to share a public pool with unbelievers, for instance, and have successfully lobbied to have "Islam only" days in pools where only believers can go and not risk becoming befouled by sharing the water with unbelievers.
So yes, THOSE PEOPLE, who he specifically identified as being those people who are living in Europe and yet are criticizing the fact that it isn't run like Saudi Arabia are people who aren't really happy in a civilized society.
Unless you want to try to argue that Saudi Arabia is a civilized society.
The word you're looking for is "provocative" or perhaps "inflammatory". Definitely not "racist".
FOR 57
"Scotch" was used in the 17th and 18th centuries as we would now use "Scotsman or Scot". It can be found in Hume and Johnson. It is also used in an archaising sense in modern Scotland with the same meaning as well as being the popular the name for usquebaugh.
@Doberman #69
Seriously? Wow...just wow.
outstanding irony that this video has been removed. anyone have another link?
Does anyone have a link to a good overview of the OIC's "Combating defamation of religions" campaign?
Ironic indeed, but I just searched youtube for the title.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTbavrZXJyg
Share and Enjoy
Incidentally, Philip Pullman weighs in with an impassioned opinion piece, called "Malevolent voices that despise our freedoms," about laws published or proposed in the United Kingdom:
I agree 100% with Pat, and generally love his videos. This whole issue of the UN and religious respect is just unbelievable.
http://www.quietatheist.com/?p=64
It's been dropped:
http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSLH86855
Pat Condell is an assTurkey whom singlehandedly proves that an extreme right-wing xenophobic imperialist anglo with sharp wit and enough jesus bile can sucker even the smartest of the dumbest political fucktards on godz grey earth, namely americans.
The guy is essentially Michael Savage, included Michael Savage rants in his favorites for the first year of his youTube infestation.
His favorite stomp on Islamotards is their rampant anti-semitism, ignoring the well known fact that everybody who is not a fucking retarded american knows, the Arabs are semites, too.
The pasty-faced little condell twerp dismisses the entire problem with Israel's treatment of Palestinians as giving the Israelis a pass, because Jews do not knock on his door trying to convert him, his words not mine.
He's politically an ally of Pat Robertson, and makes Christopher Hitchens seem like Mao Tse Tung by comparison.
He is a far right xenophobe bedwetter along the lines of David Duke only it's mus-tards instead of blacks that will end the world.
If you believe what this idiot spouts regularly, the Immans of London are running the place.
All you have to do is get down with the gays and bash the christards and you are the darling of the new atheists???
Condell is a great wit, and I enjoy his rants, but he is a right wing twit fucktard and does not deserve the level of praise I'm barfing over reading this thread.
Who is John Kwok?
-ayn
I too, saw AVSN's blog. I was reminded of something...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97hX84JpG3k
Scooter, you are a lying sack of sh*t, Pat Condell has specifically denounced in no uncertain terms the far-right extremists in his own country such as BNP thugs and other Neo-Fascists.
Scooter, you are a lying sack of sh*t, Pat Condell has specifically denounced in no uncertain terms the far-right extremists in his own country such as BNP thugs and other Neo-Fascists.
So does Michael Savage in the US, who has remarkably similar complaints. As well as the entire Faux News network.
Anyway I have to answer the door, AIPAC has just shown up on my doorstep, they want me to donate another 30 billion this year to Israel. I need to hide one of my daughters who looks sort of Arabic before I let them in.
Given this sort of thing, I'm kind of surprised that the petition on petitiononline which is against the UN resolution has so few signatures.
When I signed it, I was only number 144. That seems kind of pathetic to me.
http://www.petitiononline.com/blasphmy/petition.html
I'm applauding boisterously at 3:50!
We need to start thinking of a name for our church, doing some Good Works, such as visiting prisoners in jail (I suggest the guy who just got 20 years for questioning the interpretation of the Koran on the subjugation of women), and performing marriages. I suggest "The Church of the Three Freedoms." C'mon, you don't have to be weirdos like Scientologists to start a religion!
So if I start referring to the Catholic Church as the GT or Gilded Turd, everyone will know what I'm talking about? The evangelicals can be the Sugar-coated Turd (SCT) and the wackaloon homophobes can be the Sour Turd (ST).
Also, it seems that the Arab nations are having a major irony fail, since if they did pass a law against defaming other religions, they'd have to stop lambasting Jews and Judaism.
Snarky Fed @ 79
Thanks for the link. LOVED IT! Totally adding it to my favorites.
Of course I actually don't work a mall, but I thought it was a good song. And just today I finally saw the movie "Mall Cop."
Well, I was under the impression that the UN was all for protecting human rights and have no idea why they would even consider such a resolution.
I have said it for a long time, those abominable religious values ARE a crime against humanity, and I reserve the right to say so.
”have no idea why they would even consider”
Suzie,
hint: member countries
but never "Scotch" - that is what the English call "Whiskey"
Wrong.
It's what we call "whisky"
We call it "whiskey" if it comes from Ireland.