Is this guy a racist, xenophobe or just offended by what he sees ?

[KidKruger]

some bloke

[The Chair]

KidKruger

Would you care to elaborate more in the title and content of your missive so it makes more sense please.

Thank you

The Chair.

[KidKruger]

The Chair - I think it's pretty clear what I am asking. Do people think this guy is out of order for talking so 'boldy'?

I am not Captain Definitive about my own views and am sensible enough to listen to (read) debate and other people's views in the hope that I can learm or affirm balance in my own views. This doesn't invalidate my opening question nor deny the right to ask the question.

Does it ?

[ianr]

>I think it's pretty clear what I am asking.

Well, you're presumably asking people to follow a link labelled "some bloke", enable their Flash, and download and view some undescribed video of more or less unknown interest or content, and then presumably say something about it.

I'm sorry. I did, this once, get as far as selecting the link, to get maybe some idea from a YouTube page of what it was about. That turned out to be useless too. But generally I long ago gave up clicking on links proffered in the first post of a a message board thread because it was something (it tends often to be a tabloid's headline feature of the day) the writer found affirming or affronting, and wanted me to discuss, possibly even agree with them about. They generally turned out to be pretty excruciating discussions too, so I doubt that my now habitual passing them by has done me much harm.

[Jeremy]

No audio here. What is he saying?

[ianr]

I did, in fairness, look at the first 50" of the 6'45" video. Did you not see the subtitles? The audio is there, so check another sound source on your system.

[Jeremy]

Subtitles. Right.

I just saw a couple of minutes... enough to see that he is taking a few horrendous things which have been said and done in the name of a religion, and then using them as ammunition against hundreds of millions of people.

I don't know exactly what he thinks we could acheive by making pariahs out of islamic countries. That's hardly going to help the women and children that he claims to be so concerned about.

[fromeg]

I think he is just offended. Why do you ask ? Are you offended by him ?

[ianr]

My transcription of his first three paragraphs:

"Well, I understand that some bedbugs have been found at the United Nations Building in New York, which is unfortunate but, some good may come of it, you never know. Maybe somebody could find a place for them on the Human Rights Council. They might help to elevate the integrity of that forum somewhat.

"Yes, it's that time of year again, when members of the cartel of third world dictatorships known as the Organisation of Islamic Congress [in fact Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC)] take time out from brutalising their own people to force through a resolution at the Human Rights Council against what they call the defamation of religions, by which they mean telling the truth about Islam and the countries where it calls the shots.

"They say they want to stop people wrongly associating their religion with terrorism and human rights violations. But I don't think anyone does. I think people correctly associate Islam with those things. I certainly do, but then, what do I know? All I've got to go on is overwhelming evidence."

I don't see any point in discussing the particular speaker. And I currently know nothing about the OIC, so can't say anything about that either. I do see that "The OIC considers the ongoing coercion and oppression in Libya as a humanitarian catastrophe which goes against Islamic and human values." http://www.oic-oci.org/home.asp

[Huguenot]

I don't think he's too much to worry about. He's been doing this for a while.

He probably was envious of Ben Elton as a youth, and fancies himself as an acerbic wit waiting for a contract on a shock-jock show.

He has a good delivery, nicely timed with a nice rhythmn to his speech, but he makes sweeping generalizations that probably wouldn't get the nod on TopGear. He prefers Daily Mail soundbites to insight and empathy, so do plenty of others.

It's not healthy or accurate, but like I say, he admires celebrity more than pride or a contribution to society.

I don't mind him doing it for his video camera, but would probably find it a struggle to talk to him in a pub.

Just a bit of a Wally.

[Bicep_Builder]

Aww, dear Patt Condell. Bless his heart.

[DJKillaQueen]

He has the right to say what he says but his views are woefully ill informed and he shows how little he actually knows about Islam and the history of the countries he pilories. He confuses dictatorship and tryanny with religion. Yes one might be used to justify the other (and often is) but his argument doesn't exactly want me to go rush and have any kind of meaningful debate with him. I think he's just an attention seeker tbh.

[PeckhamRose]

Pat Condell used to be a stand up in the 1980s and now does sit down video comedy.

I adore him.

I absolutely love listening to his words.

He speaketh sense to me!

Religion is ignorant and a mind virus, and divisive, and holding civilisation back. There, I've said it.

He says it with reasoning and examples.

[ianr]

He uses the word 'comprise' properly (which is more than Southwark Council can do) and so cannot be all bad.

[Jeremy]

On second listen, I don't think there's any racism there at all. But I think his monologue is rather one sided, inflammatory, and unconstructive - and I say this as an ardent atheist myself.

[pk]

his views are pretty much those of the EDL aren't they? he's just a whole lot more smug than the average monkey that you hear talk on their behalf

[PeckhamRose]

And funnier.

And more knowledgeable.

[pk]

PeckhamRose Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> And funnier.

> And more knowledgeable.

may be funnier than your average edl monkey (but still not funny from the little i have seen) and may be more knowledgeable that your average edl monkey, certainly way more pompous, but the average edl sets the bar very low.

and the use of the 'knowledge' is illogical in the way that it makes prejudiced generalisations and therefore is irresponsible in my eyes - as many people have said over the years 'a little knowledge is a dangerous thing' (or words to that effect)

[paphio]

What this guy is quite rightly ranting about is islamofashism and how many of us have been suckered into thinking it is an acceptable interpretation of Islam.

It is not, and the numerous routinely occurring examples of humanright abuse he is giving are unfortunately all but true.

Please dogooders excusing the degradation and humiliation and torture of women in the name of pluralism need not bother replying.

That is me saying this as a male person of Pakistani descent, for what it's worth.

[brummie]

Pat is a star, I see no evidence of racism, nor any reason to dismiss him as a wally. He is certainly earnest and fairly well informed. I have seen no evidence of a connection to the EDL if anyone has any then it would certainly help develop a debate here. When commonalities are suggested between his ideas and the EDL I have to say that in the 1990's I wrote a dissertation at Uni, which was rather well received (smug mode on), that claimed that the "New Social Movements" of the left were being mirrored by the right and far-right by moving their ideational grounding into the sphere of culture. Not a claim that should surprise anyone nowadays but it does suggest commonalities of thought across the more "fluffy" movements and the harsher groups and that such links shouldn't be taken as evidence of direct and simple relationships.

Coming from a mixed English / Bangaldeshi family that have been in this country since the 1930's I have witnessed many things that shocked me about the muslim community. When I was 16 a female Pakistani friend went home for a holiday, she was married off whilst out there. I heard from her female friends some months later what had happened; now in my mid 40's it was a couple of years ago that I heard that she had finally made it home after escaping hubby. Not I guess an unfamiliar story but one I bet PAPHIO has heard to. And you British people did nothing, nothing at all to protect her- you were just too damn respectful of err 'traditions'

Pat Condell, seems to me to be really angry about us taking serious people with nutso beliefs- criticisms he levels against Jawehs adherents of all persuasions. Let me state that more clearly, "Its the god-fascists in all our communities he don't like" whether they wear Hugo Boss, Catholic purple or sit around in caves fetishising Mohammed by cleaning their teeth with cloves. Its the nutters who threaten to hurt people and the terrible British apathy that allows them to thrive here that bugs him.

Given the three option I have to say that Pat Condell is offended by the hypocrisy he sees around him.

Best wishes everyone

Brummie:)

[Huguenot]

"Coming from a mixed English / Bangaldeshi family that have been in this country since the 1930's"

"you British people did nothing"

You can't see the problem with that brummie?

Without a hint of irony I would suggest that the problem that you describe is probably created by people who refer to people from the UK as "you British people"

I'd like to think you're on the team, you clearly don't.

If you want to stop these problems, get on the team mate.

[DJKillaQueen]

I'd also add what should us British people be doing? How are the border agencies supposed to know is someone if being shipped out to be forced into marriage? When they are, there is often little that can be done. The only options are diplomatic anyway.

[Fabricio the Guido]

@ Brummie, marriage is perfectly legal with the parents consent for a 16 year old, unless your point was that she was married off against her will? With this one isolated example you aim to prove exactly what about British society?

You describe yourself as half English and then, the nub of what you say is that Brits respect minority culture too much to prevent harm to minorities within minority groups? You assume that because you describe yourself of having dual heritage one cannot unpick your flawed premises?

1. forced marriage is against the law

2. Identified cases are dealt with appropriately.

3. Successful cases used to require victim to cooperate without which it was difficult to prosecute.

You should have used the grooming cases in Burnley and Accrington which are a lot more controversial.