by Pat Condell
So I hope you can see why I have trouble embracing this god of the desert, this god of death that you seem to be so fond of, and I hope you can understand why I want nothing to do with him whether he exists or not. I simply don’t share his values. I find them to be quite literally inhuman.
So I really don’t care what he’s got to say about anything, and if he came clumping down from heaven right now in a big pair of hobnail boots, waving the Book of Judges in my face, I’d simply tell him what I tell every other evangelising prick I meet: “No thanks, I’m not interested in your phoney salvation. I prefer damnation. Now piss off, I’ve got some sinning to do.”
Peace, if that’s not too blasphemous. Wouldn’t want to hurt anybody’s precious feelings.
* Yes, I know I’ve placed the Tower of Babel and the Flood in the wrong order and that negates everything I’ve ever said. I take it all back. Praise the Lord.
36.
Sharia Fiasco
February 10, 2008
Well, it seems that the Archbishop of Canterbury is shocked at the reaction to his verbal suicide bomb.* He received quite a lot of abuse. One person even called him a Judas, which I thought was a little unfair. What did Judas ever do to deserve that kind of abuse? Yes, OK, he betrayed Jesus, but the Christian Church has betrayed him every day for the last two thousand years, and nobody seems to care about that.
The Archbishop is a very clever man, but he’s clever in a useless way, because he lives in a bubble. All this stuff is theoretical to him. None of it will impact on his life in any way, so he can well afford to be magnanimous about it.
Personally, I don’t think it will affect his credibility, because I don’t think he ever had any in the first place, but I think his words are important because they’re symptomatic of a wider malaise in British society.
Whenever there’s a clash between Islamic culture and the indigenous culture here in Britain (yes, I did use the word indigenous, as opposed to Islamic, i.e. alien and foreign – just thought I’d clear that one up), whenever they clash, the indigenous culture is always presumed to be in the wron in the interests of community cohesion, of course.
For example, polygamy is illegal in Britain, but Muslim polygamists not only get away with it, they now also receive extra state benefits for their extra wives.
Hate speech is banned in Britain, for everyone except extremist Muslim imams, who are free to preach hatred against Jews and homosexuals because if we required them to obey the law they might be offended.
I would say that we ought to be ashamed of ourselves, but of course we already are, which is why all this is happening.
Western society has its faults, as we all know, and as the Islamists themselves never tire of pointing out, but personally speaking they’re faults that I can live with. Islam on the other hand has faults that I can’t live with and I won’t live with under any circumstances, and a lot of people in this country feel exactly the same way.
The reason that we don’t want any aspect of sharia law in our society is because it’s a manifestation of clerical fascism, and because it favours men over women, which makes it a violation of civilised democratic values. And the reaction that the Archbishop received, which obviously did affect him (which just goes to show what a bubble he really does live in, and it also explains why so many Muslims were puzzled by his remarks), but the reaction is an illustration of the anger that people feel at not being allowed to express an honest opinion about Islam in our society, because rather than calling things honestly by their name, we’re always encouraged to hide behind cowardly euphemisms to avoid offending people who’ve got nothing to be offended about.
Just last week, for example, we were issued with special politically correct guidelines about how we should refer to Islamic terrorism lest we give the false impression that it’s got anything to do with Islam. We’re talking about terrorism carried out in the name of Islam, by Muslims, and justified using their holy scripture. But apparently it’s got nothing to do with Islam. Well, I’m sorry, but just because every Muslim doesn’t support it doesn’t mean it’s not Islamic.
People say you can’t judge Islam by its followers, but that’s like saying you can’t judge a football team by its results. Islam is its followers. Because there’s no central authority the Koran is open to interpretation by men who, being human, will always interpret to suit their own cultural prejudices. So Islam is its followers. It’s a representation of how they interpret their holy book, and therefore the only way it can be judged is by their behaviour.
Unfortunately right now for all of us (that’s Muslims and non-Muslims alike) the driving force behind the religion is Saudi Arabia, where most of the terrorist money comes from, and where many of the so-called community leaders in Britain get their funding. And this particular brand of Islam preaches intolerance, hatred, and righteous bloodlust to children.
And people like the Archbishop, who think that every situation can be resolved by respectful dialogue even while the people they’re talking to are stepping on their faces, these people are part of the problem, not the solution.
The solution is not more appeasement, dialogue and debate. The solution is to enforce the law equally and impartially for everyone, regardless of whether it’s inonvenient for some Muslims. The solution is to prosecute those who incite terror, to close down the mosques and deport the imams. Any sane society would be doing this automatically.
We need to stop treating Islam like a special needs case. If I were a Muslim I’d be insulted by it. The police should stop consulting with these so-called community leaders before raiding premises or making arrests. They should stop pussyfooting around in mosques. If a criminal is hiding there, go in and get him out.
There should be no more pandering to Muslim sensibilities in the public arena. No footbaths in public washrooms, no separate days for swimming where nobody else is allowed, no special job conditions that don’t apply to others, and nobody should be allowed to teach children or appear in court while wearing a ridiculous mask.
There should be no restrictions on non-Muslims, like when Scottish Health Service staff were forbidden to eat lunch at their desks during Ramadan in case somebody happened to be fasting nearby. And there should be no cultural sensitivity of any kind involving Christmas or pigs or dogs.
In fact, just a couple of weeks ago the classic children’s story of the Three Little Pigs was censored by a committee of English middle class bedwetters desperate to show how culturally sensitive they are at everybody else’s expense.
And it’s a classic story. We all know the story, I’m sure. The three little pigs, they’re building their houses, one of brick, one of wood, and with a naivete that would embarrass even a dhimmi Archbishop, one of straw.
And we all know what happens. The big bad wolf comes along and blows down the first two houses, but he can’t blow down the brick one, so he flies an airplane into it and blames the Jews.
Isn’t that it? No? Gosh, you know it’s so long since I read the story, I guess I’ll have to go back and read it again, that’s if I can find a copy that hasn’t been pulped in the interests of community cohesion.
Peace to everyone, especially to all those Muslims who are as embarrassed as I am by this cloistered bubble-headed fool of an Archbishop.
* He said it was inevitable that Britain would have to accommodate sharia.
37.
Take a Cruise, Tom
February 22, 2008
One religion, if you’ll pardon the expression, which has been in the news lately is Scientology, which I have to say I don’t know very much about. It’s not nearly as high profile here in Britain as it is in America. I don’t think any celebrities are involved, at least not yet.
From what I can gather it was founded by a science fiction writer, which might help to explain why they believe that human beings are burdened by entities who are part of the fallout from some ancient intergalactic genocide, and that practising Scientology is a way to rid yourself of
the influence of these entities.
So pretty much your standard religious bullshit, then. You’re contaminated and need to be cleansed by experts, for a price. The original sin common to most religions, it seems. There’s something wrong with being human. Well, well, who would have thought it?
Some people consider Scientology to be a sinister cult, and, well, even if it is, we’ve never had a problem with sinister cults in the past. We’ve positively nurtured them and allowed them to grow into the monstrous dogmas that currently plague every aspect of life on this planet, so why are we so upset about this particular bunch of lunatics?
And shouldn’t people have a choice? Let’s say you’ve got a taste for religious insanity, but not the mainstream kind, and you’re casting around for something a little different, because you don’t want to follow the crowd. What are you, a sheep? Of course not. Now you’ve got a cool alternative. You’ve got your Scientology.
And although people do talk about it in a negative terms, it does have positive aspects which I think we should acknowledge. For example, they haven’t initiated any mass suicides or mass murders as far as I’m aware, and I think that’s a very positive thing.
However, as with all fanatical religious cults, it does have its negative side. For example, they’re notoriously litigious by all accounts, which means they probably do have something to hide. And they also have a reputation for harassing people who criticise them, which is very negative if it’s true, and I’m not saying it is – not yet, anyway.
Also, I have to say that if a member of my family were to join any organisation that urged them to reject their family and friends and turn their back on the life they knew, I’d say that would be a very negative thing. And I think anyone prepared to do something that unnatural would be operating under a powerful negative influence.
However, having said all this, I still find myself attracted to Scientology because it ends in “…ology”, and it contains most of the word “science”, which gives it a vague air of authority to gullible uneducated people like myself.
And if you want to know the secrets you have to join the gang. I mean, what would it cost me anyway? A few hundred, a few thousand? OK, maybe a few hundred thousand, plus my sanity, but everything in life has risks.
I’m certainly not worried about being brainwashed. Are you kidding? I’m a Catholic. I’ve been done. I’ve been through the full rinse cycle. Fluff dried, ironed and folded. So don’t talk to me about being brainwashed.
So yes, I’m keen to find out more about this religion, but unfortunately there is one small obstacle, and that is the poster boy himself, Mr Tom Cruise. I just have such a serious problem with his movies, because he always seems to be playing somebody who’s taller than he really is, and this just doesn’t work for me. In the back of my mind I’m thinking: “This guy’s acting tall. Why is he pretending? What is he ashamed of?”
Being small is fine. There’s nothing wrong with being small. I know lots of small people, and they’re all wonderful.
If Tom Cruise played small movie heroes it would do small people’s image a lot of good on this planet, but no, instead he chooses to perpetuate the illusion and reinforce the stereoty that tall is good and small is bad.
If he’s capable of this kind of moral dishonesty in observable life, what’s he going to be like when it comes to the mysteries of life?
And if he’s literally not prepared to stand up for the little guy, I have to ask myself: Is this the kind of person I want to be associated with, and how much can his religion really offer me?
So yes, although I’d like to find out more about Scientology, I’m afraid this guy is just in the way, and I really don’t see a way past this.
If he were to jump into a little space pod and disappear off this planet to pastures new, taking his ridiculous movies with him of course, well then I might be inclined to examine Scientology a bit more closely, but until then I’m afraid it will have to remain a big fat mystery to me. Oh well, you can’t win them all. Nanu nanu.
38.
Appeasing Islam
March 8, 2008
According to a recent opinion poll many Muslims say that the way for the West to have better relations with Islam is to show it more respect. And who said Muslims don’t have a sense of humour?
Given that Islam is officially above criticism in the West, it’s hard to imagine how we could give it any more respect short of closing down all the pubs, growing beards, and beating up women who don’t want to dress like nuns…
Ah yes, of course. Silly me.
I think many people in the West are now realising that Islam has already been given far too much respect, especially here in Europe, where according to another poll, people now see it as a threat to their culture.
They carry on accommodating its every demand of course, but this not because Islam is welcome in Europe – far from it. It’s because people have been conditioned by the lie of multiculturalism to believe that what they should think is more important than what they do think.
So, although people will criticise Islam in private, they know that to do so publicly, in other words to be honest about their feelings, would instantly make them racists and Islamophobes and Nazis and disgusting imperialist ethnocentric fascist bastards grinding their jackboots into the faces of the innocent and the weak. So best not make a fuss. You want to beat your wife and mutilate your daughter? Be our guest. We’ll even subsidise it, because we want to be your friend. What’s that? You want to destroy our corrupt society? Well, that’s our fault, not yours. Here, have some more money.
This film* that’s coming out in Holland shortly which has got the whole country in a state of heightened terrorist alert is yet more proof that everything in Europe now needs to be measured against the possibility of Muslim violence. Every play, every film, every art exhibition, every magazine article – in fact our whole culture is now subject to Muslim approval.
But then this is Europe, and we have a history of appeasement and caving in to threats. Radical Islam knows this, and is playing us like a violin. They know that Islam will never get blamed for anything in Europe, no matter what happens. So that, for example, when the Danish press reprinted the cartoons recently, which was followed by a week of rioting by Muslim youths, Copenhagen’s chief of police refused to admit that it had anything to do with the cartoons. He said it was because they were bored. Yes, that’s right, they all rushed out and set fire to the city every night for a week for something to do. If only they’d had a table tennis club.
The whole thing happened because three Islamic fanatics were caught planning to murder the cartoonist. Imagine how bored they must have been.
Oh yes, also, a newsflash for European journalists. An anti-Semitic attack by Muslims on Jews is not a conflict between communities. In case you hadn’t noticed, Islam hates Jews. Even if Israel didn’t exist Islam would still hate Jews. Their holy book tells Muslims that they should hate Jews.
So I think you’ll find what’s happening is not a conflict between communities at all, but a violent unprovoked racist attack by Muslims on Jews, because they’re Jews. Just thought I’d clear that one up for you so that you can report it accurately next time, if you bother to report it at all.
If we were serious about respecting Islam we would give it an honest reality check. Islam needs to adapt to Europe, not the other way round. I know a lot of Muslims agree with this and they make the effort to adapt and to rub along with everybody else, which is great and it’s very welcome, but we all know that a lot of others don’t, which is why many European cities have large Muslim ghettos controlled by religious bigots where indigenous laws and values are increasingly unwelcome; places full of people who have no intention of integrating and who want nothing less than the end of our civilisation, while we pander and defer to them thanks to a biased press, a complacent judiciary, and the kind of politicians you wouldn’t wish on your worst enemy. Actually, you probably would.
And this situation
is as much a threat to the freedom of ordinary Muslims as it is to everybody else. And it’s a clear indication that what we need in Europe now is not more respect for Islam. It’s less respect for Islam, and more respect for ourselves.
We need to stop pretending (because that’s what we’re doing pretending) that all cultures are equal, when we can clearly see that they’re not.
Islamic culture is not equal to western culture. It encourages violence against women, against Jews and homosexuals. It sanctions polygamy and marrying old men to young children in a disgusting travesty of human relations. Anyone in the West advocating these kinds of values would very quickly find themselves in jail.
It’s not equal. It’s inferior. And given radical Islam’s openness about its totalitarian agenda, this is not something that should be encouraged in any way. It should be discouraged by firm legislation, and by rigorous enforcement of the law. Remember the law?
Now I know that I’m going to be accused of racism and Islamophobia by the usual self-righteous pinheads, but I don’t mind, because those words have no value in this context. One has been neutralised by repeated dishonest misuse, and the other is just a barefaced lie concocted by the political left in tandem with the religious right in a marriage of convence which is quite simply beneath contempt.
A phobia is an irrational fear. Resisting Islam is not irrational. Pandering to it is irrational. Indulging the lie that Islamic culture is somehow equal to western culture while ignoring the victims of that culture is more than irrational. It’s downright criminal.
And if you really want to talk about racism, then look no further than the poisonous fiction of multiculturalism, a divisive and patronising racist ideology.