How else do you explain this though? Wilders might be pretty hateful, but what happened to the freedom of speech? Also, think about this... If a Muslim MP said the same things about Jews, would we see the same furor?ghettoperson wrote:
No, you just agree with his interpretation of reality.Turquoise wrote:
Yes, because common sense isn't so common. Pat is right almost all of the time.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
From what I read in the article the problem is more that he said what he said as a member of Parliament as opposed to as a private citizen.
Fuck Pat Condell. At least he recognizes his medium - youtube. Keep preaching to the internet, Condell! You are marginally less influential than 4chan. GG.
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Dutch MP to be charged for "insulting" Islam
Really? Somehow I find that hard to believe.Beduin wrote:
If the law says that, why not?Turquoise wrote:
...and I suppose you'd support suing an Islamic MP for comparing Jews to Nazies as well?Beduin wrote:
Nice... Me like.
Sue the bastard. Democracy FTW!
But assuming you're telling the truth, why should someone be prosecuted for having an opinion?
Certainly, if not more so. You conservative lot know how to make a huge fuss.Turquoise wrote:
How else do you explain this though? Wilders might be pretty hateful, but what happened to the freedom of speech? Also, think about this... If a Muslim MP said the same things about Jews, would we see the same furor?ghettoperson wrote:
No, you just agree with his interpretation of reality.Turquoise wrote:
Yes, because common sense isn't so common. Pat is right almost all of the time.
In any case, from a freedom of speech point of view, it's pretty terrible. It's just easy to ignore because he's a douche. But as the lowings of this forum are always saying, where does freedom of speech end, you can't shout fire in a cinema etc etc.
Why is it hard to believe?Turquoise wrote:
Really? Somehow I find that hard to believe.Beduin wrote:
If the law says that, why not?Turquoise wrote:
...and I suppose you'd support suing an Islamic MP for comparing Jews to Nazies as well?
But assuming you're telling the truth, why should someone be prosecuted for having an opinion?
Fuck the law, I will be the first one to protest if someone says Jews=Nazies! No matter who the person is, even an Imam!
You can have an opinion. You are also welcome to express it out in public. But you will face consequences specially if you, lets say, MP!
الشعب يريد اسقاط النظام
...show me the schematic
...show me the schematic
Pat Condell says what most sane people are thinking.
How come this guy is being put on trial but the islam guys can say anything they want?
All the anti religion people should applaud this guy
for his stance on crazy religious people, right?
When are you Euro folks going to stand up and stop this insanity? Or is there still nothing to worry about and everything is fine?
How come this guy is being put on trial but the islam guys can say anything they want?
All the anti religion people should applaud this guy
for his stance on crazy religious people, right?
When are you Euro folks going to stand up and stop this insanity? Or is there still nothing to worry about and everything is fine?
Love is the answer
More than just the "lowings" care about maintaining free speech. Again, as loathsome as people like neo-Nazies might be, censoring a viewpoint is not the way to go. Well, at least, not if you even care about your freedoms.ghettoperson wrote:
Certainly, if not more so. You conservative lot know how to make a huge fuss.Turquoise wrote:
How else do you explain this though? Wilders might be pretty hateful, but what happened to the freedom of speech? Also, think about this... If a Muslim MP said the same things about Jews, would we see the same furor?ghettoperson wrote:
No, you just agree with his interpretation of reality.
In any case, from a freedom of speech point of view, it's pretty terrible. It's just easy to ignore because he's a douche. But as the lowings of this forum are always saying, where does freedom of speech end, you can't shout fire in a cinema etc etc.
Yes, and those consequences should be losing re-election, not censorship. Until certain Muslims understand that, this is going to be an ongoing problem.Beduin wrote:
Why is it hard to believe?Turquoise wrote:
Really? Somehow I find that hard to believe.Beduin wrote:
If the law says that, why not?
But assuming you're telling the truth, why should someone be prosecuted for having an opinion?
Fuck the law, I will be the first one to protest if someone says Jews=Nazies! No matter who the person is, even an Imam!
You can have an opinion. You are also welcome to express it out in public. But you will face consequences specially if you, lets say, MP!
Tell that to the judge, pleaseTurquoise wrote:
Yes, and those consequences should be losing re-election, not censorship. Until certain Muslims understand that, this is going to be an ongoing problem.Beduin wrote:
Why is it hard to believe?Turquoise wrote:
Really? Somehow I find that hard to believe.
But assuming you're telling the truth, why should someone be prosecuted for having an opinion?
Fuck the law, I will be the first one to protest if someone says Jews=Nazies! No matter who the person is, even an Imam!
You can have an opinion. You are also welcome to express it out in public. But you will face consequences specially if you, lets say, MP!
الشعب يريد اسقاط النظام
...show me the schematic
...show me the schematic
I would, but thankfully, I don't live in such a spineless country.Beduin wrote:
Tell that to the judge, pleaseTurquoise wrote:
Yes, and those consequences should be losing re-election, not censorship. Until certain Muslims understand that, this is going to be an ongoing problem.Beduin wrote:
Why is it hard to believe?
Fuck the law, I will be the first one to protest if someone says Jews=Nazies! No matter who the person is, even an Imam!
You can have an opinion. You are also welcome to express it out in public. But you will face consequences specially if you, lets say, MP!
It will never happen in your country. And if someone did, they will be apologizing next day on TV. Unless the person is no oneTurquoise wrote:
I would, but thankfully, I don't live in such a spineless country.Beduin wrote:
Tell that to the judge, pleaseTurquoise wrote:
Yes, and those consequences should be losing re-election, not censorship. Until certain Muslims understand that, this is going to be an ongoing problem.
الشعب يريد اسقاط النظام
...show me the schematic
...show me the schematic
There have been hateful people in our offices too. Jesse Helms shamefully represented my state for years. He thankfully retired, but even as homophobic and racist as he was, he had the right to speak his mind.Beduin wrote:
It will never happen in your country. And if someone did, they will be apologizing next day on TV. Unless the person is no oneTurquoise wrote:
I would, but thankfully, I don't live in such a spineless country.Beduin wrote:
Tell that to the judge, please
Is it me or does the 'legendary' Pat Condell seem to lose almost all of his acerbic bite when he talks about Jews?
Sure, he makes one or two good points but where's the sweeping, broad strokes he applies to every other religious denomination? He implies that the majority of all Muslims are intolerant extremists and that all Christians are atheist-hating, hellfire merchants... so why aren't all Jews considered to be Zionist, expansionists who believe they are the chosen race above all others? Also, he says Jews don't complain as much everyone else? Well then how come we continually hear so much about Jewish deaths during WW2 and so very little about the c4,000,000 people from other ethnic groups who were killed? Or about all the Russians who were killed (the lion's share of the death toll no less)?
Pat is just another cock knocker who thinks he has all the answers to the world's problems.
Sure, he makes one or two good points but where's the sweeping, broad strokes he applies to every other religious denomination? He implies that the majority of all Muslims are intolerant extremists and that all Christians are atheist-hating, hellfire merchants... so why aren't all Jews considered to be Zionist, expansionists who believe they are the chosen race above all others? Also, he says Jews don't complain as much everyone else? Well then how come we continually hear so much about Jewish deaths during WW2 and so very little about the c4,000,000 people from other ethnic groups who were killed? Or about all the Russians who were killed (the lion's share of the death toll no less)?
Pat is just another cock knocker who thinks he has all the answers to the world's problems.
He's got an ego, no doubt. I would agree that he's too easy on Jews for the most part as well.Braddock wrote:
Pat is just another cock knocker who thinks he has all the answers to the world's problems.
Still, he says the things that most of us are thinking but don't have the balls to say.
He makes the occasional good point but about 90% of the stuff that comes out of his mouth is hate-filled, generalisation-based codswallop. He just strikes me as an annoying cunt who hates everyone who doesn't fit in with his worldview. Does he have anything nice to say about anyone or anything? I mean for fuck's sake Pat, change the record... it's very easy to be an armchair critic. For someone who has broken free from the shackles of religion he spends an awful lot of time worrying about it.Turquoise wrote:
He's got an ego, no doubt. I would agree that he's too easy on Jews for the most part as well.Braddock wrote:
Pat is just another cock knocker who thinks he has all the answers to the world's problems.
Still, he says the things that most of us are thinking but don't have the balls to say.
Last edited by Braddock (2009-01-26 15:17:17)
He's already explained why he talks a lot about religion though. To me, he's basically like a British George Carlin. Carlin said a lot of spiteful things too, but that's what made him funny. Carlin also talked a lot about religion.Braddock wrote:
He makes the occasional good point but about 90% of the stuff that comes out of his mouth is hate-filled, generalisation-based codswallop. He just strikes me as an annoying cunt who hates everyone who doesn't fit in with his worldview. Does he have any nice to say about anyone or anything? I mean for fuck's sake Pat, change the record... it's very easy to be an armchair critic. For someone who has broken free from the shackles of religion he spends an awful lot of time worrying about it.Turquoise wrote:
He's got an ego, no doubt. I would agree that he's too easy on Jews for the most part as well.Braddock wrote:
Pat is just another cock knocker who thinks he has all the answers to the world's problems.
Still, he says the things that most of us are thinking but don't have the balls to say.
Condell is in the same vein, IMHO.
George Carlin was funny though.Turquoise wrote:
He's already explained why he talks a lot about religion though. To me, he's basically like a British George Carlin. Carlin said a lot of spiteful things too, but that's what made him funny. Carlin also talked a lot about religion.Braddock wrote:
He makes the occasional good point but about 90% of the stuff that comes out of his mouth is hate-filled, generalisation-based codswallop. He just strikes me as an annoying cunt who hates everyone who doesn't fit in with his worldview. Does he have any nice to say about anyone or anything? I mean for fuck's sake Pat, change the record... it's very easy to be an armchair critic. For someone who has broken free from the shackles of religion he spends an awful lot of time worrying about it.Turquoise wrote:
He's got an ego, no doubt. I would agree that he's too easy on Jews for the most part as well.
Still, he says the things that most of us are thinking but don't have the balls to say.
Condell is in the same vein, IMHO.
Condell is no better than O'Reilly on FOX in my opinion. He just comes across as someone who loves himself and is a bit of an attention whore to be quite honest. Have you seen his website? Get over yourself Pat, you're a failed comedian who has discovered that controversial comments get a lot of hits on YouTube... well done mate.
Pat isn't right almost all the time! He makes the same broad-stroke generalizations that many 'haters' use against Islam - that to be Muslim must mean you maintain an extremist Muslim ideology where you hate "the west" and degrade women blah blah blah. He fails to take into account the vast majority of Muslims, then in the same breath mentions that those same "moderate Muslims" aren't doing enough to change the world's view of Muslims. It gets old and it is ridiculously ignorant.Turquoise wrote:
How else do you explain this though? Wilders might be pretty hateful, but what happened to the freedom of speech? Also, think about this... If a Muslim MP said the same things about Jews, would we see the same furor?ghettoperson wrote:
No, you just agree with his interpretation of reality.Turquoise wrote:
Yes, because common sense isn't so common. Pat is right almost all of the time.
Is it really that hard to differentiate, or should we count all Muslims fully integrated in Western societies as baddies too? Do we really need to listen to Pat Condell to know there are some horrible people in this world that commit acts of violence and discrimination in the name of ideology?
I find him funny as does a lot of Youtube.Braddock wrote:
George Carlin was funny though.Turquoise wrote:
He's already explained why he talks a lot about religion though. To me, he's basically like a British George Carlin. Carlin said a lot of spiteful things too, but that's what made him funny. Carlin also talked a lot about religion.Braddock wrote:
He makes the occasional good point but about 90% of the stuff that comes out of his mouth is hate-filled, generalisation-based codswallop. He just strikes me as an annoying cunt who hates everyone who doesn't fit in with his worldview. Does he have any nice to say about anyone or anything? I mean for fuck's sake Pat, change the record... it's very easy to be an armchair critic. For someone who has broken free from the shackles of religion he spends an awful lot of time worrying about it.
Condell is in the same vein, IMHO.
Condell is no better than O'Reilly on FOX in my opinion. He just comes across as someone who loves himself and is a bit of an attention whore to be quite honest. Have you seen his website? Get over yourself Pat, you're a failed comedian who has discovered that controversial comments get a lot of hits on YouTube... well done mate.
He criticizes Islam itself, but if you'll notice, he often differentiates between average Muslims and the extremists. More than anything, he criticizes the Koran, just like he criticizes every other scripture.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Pat isn't right almost all the time! He makes the same broad-stroke generalizations that many 'haters' use against Islam - that to be Muslim must mean you maintain an extremist Muslim ideology where you hate "the west" and degrade women blah blah blah. He fails to take into account the vast majority of Muslims, then in the same breath mentions that those same "moderate Muslims" aren't doing enough to change the world's view of Muslims. It gets old and it is ridiculously ignorant.Turquoise wrote:
How else do you explain this though? Wilders might be pretty hateful, but what happened to the freedom of speech? Also, think about this... If a Muslim MP said the same things about Jews, would we see the same furor?ghettoperson wrote:
No, you just agree with his interpretation of reality.
Is it really that hard to differentiate, or should we count all Muslims fully integrated in Western societies as baddies too? Do we really need to listen to Pat Condell to know there are some horrible people in this world that commit acts of violence and discrimination in the name of ideology?
So, for the most part, his main beefs are with religion in general, spineless acts of self-censorship, and extremism.
Each to their own I guess... I find him painfully unfunny (as do a lot of people on YouTube). I actually only realised he was meant to be a comedian when I read about him on Wikipedia.Turquoise wrote:
I find him (Pat Condell) funny as does a lot of Youtube.
So he attacks generalities rather than getting bogged down in the reality of detail and real life? Bravo Pat. The fact is most people of faith get along pretty okay with the rest of us, why doesn't he devote some of his little videos to that fact every now and again?Turquoise wrote:
He criticizes Islam itself, but if you'll notice, he often differentiates between average Muslims and the extremists. More than anything, he criticizes the Koran, just like he criticizes every other scripture.
I myself am a committed non-believer by the way... I just think this guy is a cock knocker with an inflated sense of self-importance.
The OP of this thread is why he says what he does. When political correctness inspired by religion causes the degradation of free speech, someone should speak up. Condell does that.Braddock wrote:
So he attacks generalities rather than getting bogged down in the reality of detail and real life? Bravo Pat. The fact is most people of faith get along pretty okay with the rest of us, why doesn't he devote some of his little videos to that fact every now and again?
I myself am a committed non-believer by the way... I just think this guy is a cock knocker with an inflated sense of self-importance.
More people should.
To put it more bluntly, more Dutch MP's need the balls to defend the freedom of speech, because if they don't.... well, have fun living under a nanny state.
So then should we allow any type of speech? Should people be allowed to bait and incite hatred under the guise of "free speech"? Comparing anything to Nazism will incite hatred, bottom line.Turquoise wrote:
The OP of this thread is why he says what he does. When political correctness inspired by religion causes the degradation of free speech, someone should speak up. Condell does that.Braddock wrote:
So he attacks generalities rather than getting bogged down in the reality of detail and real life? Bravo Pat. The fact is most people of faith get along pretty okay with the rest of us, why doesn't he devote some of his little videos to that fact every now and again?
I myself am a committed non-believer by the way... I just think this guy is a cock knocker with an inflated sense of self-importance.
More people should.
To put it more bluntly, more Dutch MP's need the balls to defend the freedom of speech, because if they don't.... well, have fun living under a nanny state.
I think the fact this person (Wilders) is a representative of the government is an important piece as far as why this is being litigated.
....and if the people elect him, he is entitled to say what he feels like.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
So then should we allow any type of speech? Should people be allowed to bait and incite hatred under the guise of "free speech"? Comparing anything to Nazism will incite hatred, bottom line.Turquoise wrote:
The OP of this thread is why he says what he does. When political correctness inspired by religion causes the degradation of free speech, someone should speak up. Condell does that.Braddock wrote:
So he attacks generalities rather than getting bogged down in the reality of detail and real life? Bravo Pat. The fact is most people of faith get along pretty okay with the rest of us, why doesn't he devote some of his little videos to that fact every now and again?
I myself am a committed non-believer by the way... I just think this guy is a cock knocker with an inflated sense of self-importance.
More people should.
To put it more bluntly, more Dutch MP's need the balls to defend the freedom of speech, because if they don't.... well, have fun living under a nanny state.
I think the fact this person (Wilders) is a representative of the government is an important piece as far as why this is being litigated.
That is what democracy is. Censorship is NOT democracy.
Yes, you have a right to be a Nazi. As repugnant as that ideology is, there's no way to prosecute it unless violence is involved. Inciting a riot is much more specific than what Wilders is doing.
I am all for free speech... but ironically Pat Condell is living proof of its downsides!Turquoise wrote:
The OP of this thread is why he says what he does. When political correctness inspired by religion causes the degradation of free speech, someone should speak up. Condell does that.Braddock wrote:
So he attacks generalities rather than getting bogged down in the reality of detail and real life? Bravo Pat. The fact is most people of faith get along pretty okay with the rest of us, why doesn't he devote some of his little videos to that fact every now and again?
I myself am a committed non-believer by the way... I just think this guy is a cock knocker with an inflated sense of self-importance.
More people should.
To put it more bluntly, more Dutch MP's need the balls to defend the freedom of speech, because if they don't.... well, have fun living under a nanny state.
Perhaps, and so is Wilders, but you have to be consistent in protecting free speech.Braddock wrote:
I am all for free speech... but ironically Pat Condell is living proof of its downsides!Turquoise wrote:
The OP of this thread is why he says what he does. When political correctness inspired by religion causes the degradation of free speech, someone should speak up. Condell does that.Braddock wrote:
So he attacks generalities rather than getting bogged down in the reality of detail and real life? Bravo Pat. The fact is most people of faith get along pretty okay with the rest of us, why doesn't he devote some of his little videos to that fact every now and again?
I myself am a committed non-believer by the way... I just think this guy is a cock knocker with an inflated sense of self-importance.
More people should.
To put it more bluntly, more Dutch MP's need the balls to defend the freedom of speech, because if they don't.... well, have fun living under a nanny state.
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Dutch MP to be charged for "insulting" Islam