Pat Condell: 'There's no racist like a liberal racist'

Page 1 of 6 [ 88 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,897
Location: Lancashire, UK

19 Oct 2013, 8:02 am

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vz4PjxSmtoI[/youtube]

Quote:
One of the few certainties in this life is that if you criticise the religion of special needs you will be called a racist by people who know perfectly well that you're not, but who don't care. These people are called "progressives". A "progressive" is what happens when a liberal goes bad.

So bad, in fact, and so desperate are they to assume that you're a racist that if they can't find any evidence of it, they will actually accuse you of disguising your racism by not talking about it.

I wish I was joking. Believe me, I'm not.

Personally, I can stand being called ugly names by people whose opinions I don't respect but it must be hard for victims of genuine racism to see such an important word soiled and devalued like this but that is the "progressive" way. We know this now. We've learned it the hard way. We know that "progressives" occupy the high moral ground where the end always justifies the means, and, as they've shown us time and again, there is literally no limit to how low they're prepared to sink in asserting their lofty moral superiority. No lie is too great, no slur too egregious, and if not for double standards, they wouldn't have any standards.

So, when they throw the word "racist" at those of us who criticise Islam, we know there's no point in arguing with them about definitions because we know they're not remotely interested in whether the word is appropriate, only in whether it will stick, and in how much damage it will do. You see, in "progressive" hands, the word "racist" has become the verbal equivalent of a chemical weapon, or a dum-dum bullet, used spitefully, disproportionately, as a first resort, and without the slightest justification.

To summarise the "progressive" position (without the juvenile insults): "All religions have fundamentalists, and all are equally reprehensible. Singling out Islam is the same as attacking all Muslims, and that's racist. Yes, I know that technically Islam is not a race, but I've chosen to believe that your views are driven by an underlying hatred of brown-skinned people, for which I have no evidence, but I sense it from your tone, which I find unhelpful, and therefore racist in intent, so you are a racist and you ought to be arrested, la la-la la-la." Or words to that effect.

But, you know it seems to me that the people who constantly invoke skin colour for no reason, as "progressives" do to the point of obsession, are the ones who actually have a problem with it.

They see racism everywhere because they're riddled with it themselves. The patronising racism of lower expectations for non-white people is very "progressive", and has been allowed to permeate western society like an insidious slime. You can't pick up a copy of the Guardian newspaper without getting it all over your fingers. And this kind of racism gives Islam a free pass by default (and with it the misogyny, homophobia and anti-Semitism explicitly endorsed by Islam) because, and only because, it's a religion followed mainly by brown-skinned people.

It's the brown skin that makes all the difference. "Progressives" measure a person first and foremost by the colour of their skin, and it's the brown skin that gets Islam a free pass it doesn't deserve from racists.

Contrast the way "progressive" racists treat Mormons, whose beliefs are equally batshit crazy, but they'll happily condemn and ridicule them in a way they wouldn't dream of doing to Muslims and the reason is entirely to do with skin colour, as it usually is with genuine racists. You see, "progressives" don't really believe that non-white people are equal, or are capable of being equal on their own merits, but only in the way that a handicap golfer is equal - artificially. They justify this racism in historical terms that no longer exist, thus condemning non-white people to carry around the values of the past forever, and to always need compensating for the colour of their skin, which "progressives" regard as a kind of residual disability, because they're racists.

Traditional liberal guilt is something we're all familiar with, and, even if we don't agree with it, we can sympathise, we can respect it as part and parcel of being civilised. But "progressives" have taken this to a whole new level, an almost religious level of toxic self-hatred, of ideological self-flagellation, a kind of Original Sin of being born into the First World, for which "progressives" can never forgive themselves, or anyone else.

To the "progressive" mentality, we are all imperialist oppressors in the West, whether we want to be or not, and everything wrong with the world is our fault by default. So, when a bunch of hysterical Muslims throw a violent public tantrum because they've chosen to be offended by some ridiculous trifle, the default "progressive" racist response is to look around for any excuse not to hold them to account for their behaviour, and to find somebody to blame and call a racist for provoking them.

"Progressive" journalists are eager to explain away Islamic atrocities in political or economic terms while carefully ignoring the poisonous religious beliefs that actually drive them because those poisonous beliefs make the brown people look bad, and that's terribly racist.

An Islamic terrorist can stand in the street soaked in blood, quoting the Koran as justification and "progressives" won't hear it because they've decided his real motivation is hostility to western imperialism, which means we can take the blame again, thank goodness. Otherwise we'd be racists.

Patronising brown-skinned people in this way is what "progressives" are all about. It's the fundamental difference between a "progressive" and a genuine liberal. It's what turns the wine to vinegar. You know, I've always had time for genuine liberals because I can see that they're motivated by a sense of decency so I can still respect them even when we disagree.

But there's nothing liberal or decent about the "progressive" mentality which has shown itself to be just so morally corrupt, malodorous, and downright dishonourable that on the rare occasions I find myself agreeing with a "progressive" it's like shaking hands with a leper. And it's more than apt that these wretched people have so thoroughly taken ownership of the word "racist", what's left of it, because nobody, but nobody, wears it better.

Peace, and happy racism.



Jono
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,340
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

19 Oct 2013, 12:15 pm

Again, according to the progressives, we are allowed criticise every other religion except for Islam and if criticise Islam you're a racist.



simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

19 Oct 2013, 3:24 pm

Well, this is typical Scotsman behavior. I wish it wasnt so but it is. It's a shame really but now everyone can at least see it.

The liberals he is talking about do exist but tarring an entire movement is low brow rubbish.



thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

19 Oct 2013, 4:22 pm

Oh, not this again.

Until Mr Condell and similar reactionary demagogues understands the concept of the economies of social power, it is a veritable roundabout trying to argue with him and his ilk. Its akin to arguing with a fundamentalist Christian on the burden of proof in regards to the existance or non existance of God.


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile


thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

19 Oct 2013, 4:29 pm

Jono wrote:
Again, according to the progressives, we are allowed criticise every other religion except for Islam and if criticise Islam you're a racist.


Here is the problem that the 'progressive' lobby have which Mr Condell is referring to. When it comes to Islam there is a conscientious attempt to demonise it by politically partisan forces in almost every developed non muslim majority nation in Earth. The last time that a religious grouping became a pariah demographic on such a scale, this was the end result:

Image


First they came for the communists
and i did not speak out because i was not a communist
then they came for the trade unionists
and i did not speak out because i was not a trade unionist
then they came for the jews
and i did not speak out because i was not a jew
then they came for me
but there was no one left to speak for me.

-Pastor Martin Niemoller


Now tell me, what group is almost every extreme right group and neo nazi mob focussing their hatred against these days?

There is not ever going to be some kind of 'Islamic insurrection' in the UK or anywhere else in the west. Its nothing but hot air from carpetbaggers like Nigel Farage and Nick Griffin to dupe voters to further their career portfolios, recieve MP's wages and spread their venom. They don't give a toss about the British people. Not the majority of them at least. Al Mahijoroun, Al Quaeda, Islam 4 UK etc aren't political contenders. They haven't made any inroads or obvious attempts to take political influence. The Islamaphobes ala the BNP have and are trying, thats the difference.

If and when the jackboots and brownshirts storm the streets once more, Mr Condell, Tequila and UKIP and their adherents have made it perfectly clear what side of the line on the sand they stand on.


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile


Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,897
Location: Lancashire, UK

19 Oct 2013, 5:15 pm

simon_says wrote:
Well, this is typical Scotsman behavior. I wish it wasnt so but it is. It's a shame really but now everyone can at least see it.

The liberals he is talking about do exist but tarring an entire movement is low brow rubbish.


I myself am a liberal. We have these 'progressive' bigots in this very thread! :)

No, what he's saying is that genuine liberals will criticise Islam just as they would Christianity. They would accept (as Condell does) that religious fundamentalists are a problem in most religions (apart from Jainist fundamentalists, obviously), but the problems that they produce are not equally serious.

Ugandan Christian fundamentalism is extremely serious and is in fact deadly serious to gays. Jamaican Christian fundamentalism is also threatening to gays living there, and there often are violent attacks on gays there. British Christian fundamentalism is almost non-existent, because our society (outside some small pockets of Scotland and Northern Ireland) has mostly secularised to such an extent that these elements no longer have a significant hold.

I would love to get rid of state-funded faith schools, but unfortunately British society is not mature enough for this to happen yet. I hope it does happen in coming decades.

I know plenty of 'liberals' and socialists that are exactly like Condell says; they're cultural relativists, multicultural excusers and, well, racists. People that don't think that non-white people should be held to the same standard as anyone else. Jews can be held to a much higher standard than anyone else.

If there was a Christian terrorist attack here in this country, I would expect the ideology behind that attack to be ripped apart and savaged for months on end on the media, on television and all over the Internet. If the ideology is found to excuse or condone such attacks, it deserves to be ripped apart.

Why is Islam treated differently? Because most Muslims are non-white.

thomas81 wrote:
Now what group is almost every extreme right group and neo nazi mob focussing their hatred against these days?


Zionists. Nothing much has changed. Check out Stormfront recently, chum?

Oh, and your beloved Iran. And your beloved Palestinians. And racist Muslims in Europe. Here's a fascinating article, written by an Irishman actually, who documented his feelings wearing a kippah for only a few hours in the Swedish city of Malmö: http://www.thelocal.se/50790/20131014/

Quote:
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/46814000/jpg/_46814475_children.body.466.jpg


Ever heard of Hajj Amin al-Husseini?

thomas81 wrote:
The problem is, when it comes to Islam there is a conscientious attempt to demonise it by politically partisan forces in every developed country in Earth.


Islam doesn't need anyone to demonise it. The religion does it every day. And if it needs any help, people like Mehdi Hasan and Mo Ansar (who get endless air time) will gleefully make their religion even more despised and disliked than it already is. If I was a non-Islamist even vaguely secular British Muslim, I would be angry at the media for allowing these disgraceful bigots to pretend that they speak for me, or for anyone but themselves. I bet Hasan even says to his wife when he has his breakfast cooked: "As a Muslim, I would like a boiled egg."

So, when do you think the concentration camps will be opened? Bearing in mind that the UK has no problem allowing jihadis to settle here whilst keeping out Australians of British ancestry and, say, African anti-Islamist campaigners fleeing for their lives?

Incidentally, Mo Ansar and even Anjem Choudary are happily receiving police protection because of serious threats to their safety from various Islamist organisations. And that's precisely as it should be. I know that Anjem Choudary is widely despised here - and deservedly so - but he shouldn't be physically attacked for those beliefs. And as for Mo Ansar: he makes my skin crawl and I feel ill whenever I see him on TV or hear him on radio, the smug prick, but that doesn't mean that I wish him harm.

Conversely, Tommy Robinson has no police protection, even though he has received hundreds of death threats and threats to his families lives and wellbeing. Just a few weeks ago, he suffered a racist attack in full view of TV cameras. (His attackers punched him to the ground, referenced his skin colour whilst abusing him and spitting out anti-kafir abuse.) It's to form part of a documentary on the EDL and on Tommy Robinson. In fact, Tommy Robinson actually tried to retweet the constant death threats he was receiving but the police told him that if he did so, he would be arrested.

thomas81 wrote:
Until Mr Condell and similar reactionary demagogues understands the concept of the economies of social power


You prove his point magnificently.

You are labouring under the racism of low expectations. You don't want Muslims (or indeed any non-white people) to be seen and to be treated as full citizens, with the same respect and responsibilities and the same responsibility to tolerate criticism, mockery and even ridicule that we all have to. You don't want non-white people to be treated like everyone else because that would shake your twisted worldview and perverted moral perspectives on life, and also because it might just shake many decent folk of Muslim background out of their cosy apologetics and lead them to do some thinking.

And before you say anything about Israel: you're perfectly free to denounce the 'Zionist Entity' all you like if you feel that it's fair game. That's part of the brilliance of free speech.

If you behave like a savage, you deserve to be treated like one. No matter what your skin colour, ethnicity, or cultural background. You don't get a free pass for criminal behaviour or intolerance. So whether you're an EDL member that torches a mosque (we'll ignore the fact that EDL members have not been implicated in the torching of mosques as far as I'm aware - all the really serious mosque-related incidents have often been to do with an intra-Muslim spat), or an Islamist who specifically attacks a white man because he is white and in a "Muslim area", it is never excusable and is the hallmark of savages.



Last edited by Tequila on 21 Oct 2013, 6:01 am, edited 1 time in total.

thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

19 Oct 2013, 6:15 pm

Tequila wrote:

Why is Islam treated differently? Because most Muslims are non-white.

Mainly because there is a real, and very pronunced increase in anti-islamic sentiment and motivated violence in the wake of 9/11 and other tragedies.

Tequila wrote:

Zionists. Nothing much has changed. Check out Stormfront recently, chum?

Here is the fallacy, anti-semitism is largely confined to basement dwelling forum posters who probably don't even venture out. Half the poster base of stormfront and similar probably don't leave their homes except for cheesy corn snacks and energy drinks much less take the time to take part in political activism. The ones who do are less concerned with global jewry and more on Islam, and increasingly so in Europe where the vaster majority of non indigenous hatred is directed towards 'brown people' particularly from the Islamic world and indian sub continent.

If you actually have been on an anti-fascist political demonstration (as I have) you will notice that the majority of racism is directly towards people of colour (less and less these days black people of Sub Saharan African or Carribean descent) and more and more towards the effect of ''Pakis out'' etc. I've yet to see organised grand scale organised anti-semitism by the likes of the BNP or other increasingly diminished groups. I don't even necessarily believe that the slap headed, braces clad fascists of yore even necessarily represent the biggest chance of a resurgent extreme right. I am far more concerned about the rank and file of the EDL who seem to be on the pulse of gutter politics, or individuals in Europe like Anders Breivik. These individuals and those like them, quite aside from being open jew haters are almost always pro-Israel, pro-Zionist, anti-anti-semites who want to see a genocide or second crusade waged against all muslim kind. Many of them do cosy up to Stormfronters, incidentally.

My issue with Mr Condell and Mr Farage is that their Daily Mail-esque rhetoric only panders and reinforces the prejudices of these people and of the convenient idiots who nod their heads in agreement.
Tequila wrote:
Oh, and your beloved Iran. And your beloved Palestinians. And racist Muslims in Europe. Here's a fascinating article, written by an Irishman actually, who documented his feelings wearing a kippah for only a few hours in the Swedish city of Malmö: http://www.thelocal.se/50790/20131014/

I don't deny there are issues in continental Europe with anti semitism (particularly pockets in countries like Poland and Ukraine) and frankly I don't know enough about the situation in Sweden to make an informed comment but i will say its interesting how he stopped having problems when he removed his kippah. The reason I say that is because most muslims simply don't have the luxury of just 'blending in' because their doctrine obliges them to strict dress codes and as you say, most of them ''aren't white'' and look inherently muslim. That there is no anti semitism was never my point. My point is that anti islamic sentiment is bad, and getting worse, everywhere.


Tequila wrote:
Islam doesn't need anyone to demonise it. The religion does it every day. And if it needs any help, people like Mehdi Hasan and Mo Ansar (who get endless air time) will gleefully make their religion even more despised and disliked than it already is. If I was a non-Islamist even vaguely secular British Muslim, I would be angry at the media for allowing these disgraceful bigots to pretend that they speak for me, or for anyone but themselves.

Things are helped to be blown out of proportion by individuals such as Robinson and Griffin who referred to Islam as a ''wicked and vicious faith'' completely ignoring the fact that the vast proportion of adherents are anything but wicked or vicious while you have others cynically exploiting the Lee Rigby killing to tar everyone.
Tequila wrote:
So, when do you think the concentration camps will be opened? Bearing in mind that the UK has no problem allowing jihadis to settle here whilst keeping out Australians of British ancestry and, say, African anti-Islamist campaigners fleeing for their lives?

You know, the concentration camps and gas chambers weren't rolled out right away in Nazi Germany either. Has it been in their manifesto they'd never be elected. The German people were never that callous or cold blooded and were kept in ignorance while the holocaust was actually going on. All the genocide came later when they realised they did'nt have the logistical means to deport everyone and their desire to not use up bullets led to manufactured mass killings. It won't be under this establishment that it happens, it will be under a WASP only BNP-style autocracy that was ushered into power because of the demagoguery and hyperbole of institutions like the Sun or the Daily Mail and individuals like Pat Condell. The point is making sure that scenario never happens. Mr Condell and those that spread similar views are helping to make it more likely.


Tequila wrote:
You prove his point magnificently.

You are labouring under the racism of low expectations. You don't want Muslims (or indeed any non-white people) to be seen and to be treated as full citizens,

Not at all, you have it backwards. The issue is that the racism comes from the top down, not the other way around. When i refer to unequal power relations I'm referring to things like

In spite of what Condell says, if you're non white (esp identifiable as muslim) you're still far more likely to/be:

randomly spot checked by police
arrested
given a disproportionately unfair sentence for a conviction
violently attacked in the street
given verbal or racist harassment
recieve negative discriminatory treatment in the workplace or job interview
recieve no religious accomodation at work(eg provision of halal catering or being allowed to wear a burkah/hijab with uniform).- This is taken to the full extent in France.

Of course he is a (probably middle class, heterosexual) white male so of course he forgot to address these inconvenient tidbits.


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile


Last edited by thomas81 on 19 Oct 2013, 7:08 pm, edited 3 times in total.

ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 116
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

19 Oct 2013, 6:27 pm

Pat wrote:
It's the brown skin that makes all the difference.


you betcha! :wink:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sX39TeogB94[/youtube]

Not criticizing Moslems must be something unique to UK. In the USA, as far as I can tell, people don't have a whole lot of nice things to say about Islam. Particularly since 2001.

Maybe because you had your colonies in Moslem areas, and our principal exposures have been in supporting Israel and in buying Arab oil.



thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

19 Oct 2013, 6:33 pm

ArrantPariah wrote:
Not criticizing Moslems must be something unique to UK. In the USA, as far as I can tell, people don't have a whole lot of nice things to say about Islam. Particularly since 2001.

The situation in the USA is the textbook example of what I'm referring to. Rampant Muslim bashing often in lieu of racism against other specific groups. Its a similar situation in the UK and Ireland. Pakistanis, arabs and those who look like them receive the lion's share of racism because of the actions of a tiny, tiny minority. The Irish in England, were until as recently as the 70's treated rather similarly because of the IRA.

Also its 'muslims' not 'moslems'. That bastardisation of the word grinds me like the scratching of nails on a blackboard.


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile


ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 116
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

19 Oct 2013, 6:44 pm

Pat wrote:
Yes, I know that technically Islam is not a race, but I've chosen to believe that your views are driven by an underlying hatred of brown-skinned people, for which I have no evidence, but I sense it from your tone, which I find unhelpful, and therefore racist in intent, so you are a racist and you ought to be arrested, la la-la la-la." Or words to that effect.

...it's the brown skin that gets Islam a free pass it doesn't deserve from racists.



Actually, according to

http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/brie ... 0br-02.pdf

The US Census Bureau wrote:
"White" refers to a person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East or North Africa. It includes people who indicated their race as White or reported entries such as Irish, German, Italian, Lebanese, Arab, Moroccan or Caucasian.


Hence, quite a lot of Moslems are White.

Perhaps he is referring to the large number of Pakistanis in England?



thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

19 Oct 2013, 6:48 pm

arrant, one issue in the UK is that bona fide racists (like the BNP) have been using Islam as their 'buzz word' to circumvent UK race hate laws because they know fine well that a) most of the people they want out of the country adhere to Islam and b) muslims aren't protected as a group by the law in the same way that Jews are. If anyone is to blame for the conflation, largely it is people like that. Not the left wing, or the 'evil progressive lobby' as Pat CONdell would have you believe.


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile


Last edited by thomas81 on 19 Oct 2013, 6:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.

ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 116
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

19 Oct 2013, 6:50 pm

thomas81 wrote:
The situation in the USA is the textbook example of what I'm referring to. Rampant Muslim bashing


Actually, we don't hear a lot of Muslim bashing. Well, apart from the occasional nonsense from Fox News

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/eri ... rise-here/

and maybe from our friends at Storm Front. We just don't have very many Muslims here.



thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

19 Oct 2013, 6:54 pm

ArrantPariah wrote:
thomas81 wrote:
The situation in the USA is the textbook example of what I'm referring to. Rampant Muslim bashing


Actually, we don't hear a lot of Muslim bashing. Well, apart from the occasional nonsense from Fox News

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/eri ... rise-here/

and maybe from our friends at Storm Front. We just don't have very many Muslims here.


Sometimes its up to channels like RT to deliver the goods.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiCVAHr_We8[/youtube]


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile


ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 116
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

19 Oct 2013, 7:01 pm

Well, yes. People in America are afraid of Muslims.

Actually, our friends at Storm Front are too busy hating Jews to have much time for Muslims.

Storm Front's spiritual leader, David Duke, even made a pilgrimage to a meeting of holocaust deniers in Iran.

When we do occasionally see a Muslim woman with her face covered, we generally give her a wide berth.



thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

19 Oct 2013, 7:09 pm

ArrantPariah wrote:
Well, yes. People in America are afraid of Muslims.

Actually, our friends at Storm Front are too busy hating Jews to have much time for Muslims.

.


as i've already said about stormfront, most of them are too busy stuffing cheetos and redbull down their faces in their mothers cellars to get out and carry a placard to match the 'fire in their bellies'. Thats the ones who aren't just trolls adding to the shock value and drama for lulz.

They're an irrelevancy, forget about them.


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile