View Thread

Who is here? 1 guest(s)
 Print Thread
Pat Condell video removed by YouTube
Skeeve
Seems that someone had their feelings hurt over a recent video from Pat. YouTube removed it from his channel.

So, I obtained a hardcopy, converted it to .avi and uploaded it to our server.

http://atheiststo...hp?url=158

*Edit

Oh, and if you think the fundies stir the shit up in the US, watch that video and see how well the Muslims are forcing their "laws" on GB.

*edit II

reset link
Edited by Skeeve on 10/04/2008 17:49
"The world is my country, and do good is my religion." - Thomas Paine
 
neilmarr
I've been afraid for some time that something like this would be pulled on straight-talkin' Pat. Hey, Skeeve, could you explain to this technodunce how to play the video you put up? Cheers. Neil
 
catman
I can't play it either. QuickTime says I need something I don't have. Maybe i can view it somewhere else.
"If I owned both Hell and Texas, I'd live in Hell and rent out Texas." - General Sheridan
 
neilmarr
Sorry I'm so dumb with that kinda stuff, Skeeve. If anyone else has trouble, you can watch the video on Pat's website at: http://www.patcon...

Must say that I'm surprised YouTube decided to black this particular piece. As far as I can see (and I've watched everything Pat's ever posted), it's pretty mild in comprison to some of his others.

Maybe it was something to do with his fun references to 'barking mad' and 'pig ignorant'. We all know how upset Moslems get about unclean dogs an' hogs.

All power to Pat's elbow.

Neil
 
catman
neilmarr: I came back here from Condell's site to let you know that you could view it there, but as usual you were a step ahead of me!

One or more of the Moslem enemies of reason must have complained or threatened YouTube. I must say that I am sorry that the latter caved to the demand(s).
"If I owned both Hell and Texas, I'd live in Hell and rent out Texas." - General Sheridan
 
Skeeve
Yeah, all his vids are on his site, haven't checked yet to see where it's hosted. If it's in the US, he should be OK. I put it here in case his server was in the UK.

It's in DiVX format, so you're probably lacking the codecs.
"The world is my country, and do good is my religion." - Thomas Paine
 
willie
I've never been at all impressed by Condel and have watched only a few of his films, a long time ago, so I don't know if this one is particularly offensive. But it is as bombastic, ill informed and ignorant as what I have seen before from him.

While I have a great deal of sympathy for his views, the way he revels in his disdain and own ignorance leaves me cold.

The way he presents the idea that sharia law 'is now operating, with the full backing of the law' is at best disingenuous. Sharia 'courts' are operating under the 1996 Arbitration Act. In the same way, and with the same restrictions as all other groups that operate under the provisions the act provides.

The Arbitration Act is subject to British law, not parallel to it. A sharia court has no power over the legal rights of any individual. Sharia courts have no jurisdiction on criminal offenses, prosecutions, or not, are subject to the CPS. Sharia courts have no power to grant, or refuse to grant, a divorce --what it can do is rule on the religious status (whatever that means) of a marriage-- Only the civil court can preside on the legality of a marriage. To suggest we are 'accommodating Saudi Arabian legal principles' is simply stupid and inflammatory.

Would I personally trust a muslim council? No. Would I like to see sharia scraped along with all religious dogma? Yes. However presenting it as something it's not serves no purpose other than polarizing the debate --and inflating Condels already large ego.

Other bullshit comments from this particular film include.
...eagerness to fragment our the fabric of our society...
whether our society is indeed fragmented is open to debate, but only an idiot would suggest it was fragmented by a concerted eagerness.
I think we all know, that entire country is mentally ill.
Apart from the arrogance of professing to know what 'we all know', this is clearly just a crass generalisation. I would hate to think that anyone would judge the whole of the UK as a nation of ranting bigots, on the grounds people like Condel exist in the UK.
I was out buying beer, not because I particularly enjoy beer, but because I know it offends islam
Pathetic. I'm aware that he could be joking, but based on his inability to deliver a joke effectively, we have to assume that a large percentage of viewers will think he is serious --as I suspect he really is, hiding behind a facade of humour.
It didn't seem to bother the muslim shop keeper, maybe he was just being polite
Or maybe most muslims aren't the violent, deranged extremist Condel makes out. Or maybe the shop keeper wasn't muslim at all, just a darky.
...one small child who described them as letterbox ladies, which I thought was rather inventive
Sounds unlikely to have been invented by a small child, sound to me more like the kind of remark picked up from an adult. Or made up by Condel and attributed to a child because even he can see how pathetic it sounds.
...but it was also deeply offensive...
He presumes, presumably.
It was lucky neither woman heard the offensive and insulting remark...
Again, projecting. Then after disparaging the women for something that (I guess he would agree) may not be their choice, he continues to assume they would take an unreasonable and intolerant stance. Based on his own prejudice against what he thinks they represent.

Sorry to tear into this, I only dropped in to make a quick comment and got carried away. I know Condel is a favorite among many atheists, but for my money he is nothing more than a self serving publicist, driven by his own ego and a pathetic fear of what he is too ignorant to understand. I certainly don't relate to him as an atheist spokesman, let alone a ration human being.
 
neilmarr
Whatever your feelings about Pat Condell, Willie, the fact is that any recognition of Sharia Law (or any other theological law for that matter) is a step backwards into the Dark Ages.

To allow such courts to operate at all in the West lends the strict Islamic code (unchanged for 1,300 years) a respectability it does not merit here.

Hopefully, we will never see again the old Jewish and Christian trick of religious courts passing sentence and then using secular authorities for its execution. Thousands, perhaps millions, died on the recommendation of religious courts ... including Jesus Christ (if we accept the tale), Joan of Arc and countless other poor wretches who stepped out of line and angered religious establishment.

Already, we see in Europe secular courts excusing terrible crimes on the grounds of religion ... a jdge in Germany recently ruled against a woman's divorce action against an abusive husband, for onstance, on the grounds that his brutal daily beatings were sanctioned by the Koran.

How much more will a secular court be swayed if it is asked to ratify or even merely take into account the decision of a religious 'court', strictly applying the laws of ancient scripture?

And imagine the pressure upon those in communities where these courts sit to abide by and/or be shamed by their decisions.

This is hypotherical:

The US government allows the establishment of Protestant Courts. They have no [i]legal power. The Court of Elders in Hammer Rock, Kansas, rules that seventeen-year-old Ellie May Meister has sinned in having a child out of wedlock. Their sentence is that the local evangelical church congregation send her to Coventry, have nothing at all to do with her.

Ellie May is snubbed by her family and the entire Hammer Rock community. She leaves home with her child for the city, where she works the streets, becomes a crack addict and her and her child die.[/i]

All quite legal. All because of the ruling of a court that assumes its credibiliy and right to exist by Federal government sanction.

Really want to go there? We cannot allow non secular courts the slightest credibility in a secular state. They should not be encouraged -- they should be outlawed.

The world struggled hard and long to free itself of the inteference of religion in law. Any move toward now recognising its validity in any form is abominable and suggests an acceptability of religious ruling on matters that are already fully covered by hard-won secular courts and state laws.

If it is really the case that Sharia courts will have no power or influence (and what utter nonsense that is!), why have them at all?

Neil

PS: I'm going to carry this post over to the 'Mohammed's Cult' section for wider response, Willie. Hope nobody minds. N
Edited by neilmarr on 10/04/2008 03:06
 
Skeeve
Hopefully, Pat will show up here one day and post to this thread. I've sent him a message or two via YouTube...

I've followed all the links he's posted with his videos, and everything he's said has been backed up by reporting in thetimesonline.co.uk and telegraph.co.uk.

Maybe living in the UK, willie has additional information we don't have access to.

I enjoy Pat's videos, personally.
"The world is my country, and do good is my religion." - Thomas Paine
 
Skeeve
BTW, YouTube has restored this video. They have got to have a better way to control complaints.
"The world is my country, and do good is my religion." - Thomas Paine
 
willie
Skeeve wrote:
Hopefully, Pat will show up here one day and post to this thread. I've sent him a message or two via YouTube...

I've followed all the links he's posted with his videos, and everything he's said has been backed up by reporting in thetimesonline.co.uk and telegraph.co.uk.

Maybe living in the UK, willie has additional information we don't have access to.

I enjoy Pat's videos, personally.
It's not a case of additional information Skeeve, it's simply the process of reporting news for a desired effect rather than being factually accurate. 'Dog bites postman' isn't as good a story as 'Dog mauls postman in savage attack. Dogs are know to be carriers of rabies'.

It would be good to see Condell post here, although I doubt he will. I get the impression he prefers to be seen and heard than engage in dialog.
 
willie
neilmarr wrote:
Whatever your feelings about Pat Condell,
I don't simply disagree with Condell because of some deep seated dislike of him, I'm actually fairly indifferent. I disagree because he is ill informed. It's true I'm not keen on bigots of any description, I find him bombastic and ignorant. But that has no bearing on what is factually accurate, or not.
neilmarr wrote:the fact is that any recognition of Sharia Law (or any other theological law for that matter) is a step backwards into the Dark Ages.
Recognition of any religious dogma (any dogma) is always a bad thing. There are many valid arguments against Sharia Law, Condell does nothing to further any of them. Whats more, this kind of knee jerk reaction risks throwing the baby out with the bath water.
neilmarr wrote:Really want to go there?
I hope this is a general question and not the type of dichotomy Condell serves up. Of course I don't want to go there. That doesn't change the fact Condell is still ill informed. His description of the law is inflated, and his attitude makes his inaccuracies even worse. With his assumption that all muslims (and anyone he presumes are muslim) are intolerant, extremist, bent on inflicting barbaric practises on us and thus worthy of of being barracked is, to my mind, close to shouting fire in the proverbial crowded theater.

While his frankness may amuse the more astute viewer, the fact remains that bigotry tends to breed bigots. More bigots we don't need.

Most of the rest is duplicated in the Mohamed forum. I'll respond some more there. Cool
 
neilmarr
There's a thread running in the 'Mohammed's Cult' section on the question of Islam's credentials as a now recognised part of the West's legal system, so I'll not drag it out here.

And I make no apology for recommending this new Pat Condell video, in which he thanks YouTube and his supporters for reinstating his once-banned last recording:

http://www.youtub...-KHHKuVVRc

In the other thread, we've concentrated -- quite properly and cool-headedly, I think -- on the issue and not Pat Condell's delivery or motivation.

But now that we're back here, I'll just say that I find no fault in either. I am, likewise, steaming mad about every single foray of religion into secular society.

I am not a bigot. I am not a racist. I am an equal opportunities atheist. I detest the insidious intrustion of all religions without favour.

Neil
 
catman
I couldn't agree more. Thnk you for posting the link, neilmarr.

willie: Condell doesn't consider all Muslims as intolerant and barbaric. Rather, he considers their religion intolerant and barbaric, much as Christianity is. Likewise, many Christians don't observe the letter of the law laid down in Leviticus and elsewhere.
"If I owned both Hell and Texas, I'd live in Hell and rent out Texas." - General Sheridan
 
neilmarr
I've just been in another forum I've belonged to for some time -- The British Council of Ex Muslims -- and it's fair to say that Pat Condell is not without his fans there, either.

One or two posters were not keen on his description of Saudi Moslems as 'mentally ill', but if you take a look you'll see that their criticism is mild and that objection to Condell by those who know the Moslem community intimately are the exception rather than the rule.

I was in there this morning, by the way, to look at the reaction of ex moslems to the recognition of sharia courts. Opinion is very stongly against.

Here (verbatim) is a typical post: ***women will be pressured into using these courts. Of course, most men will chose to go to these courts, because according to the Sharia they are superior beings who get full custody of the children and do not need to pay alimony***

Neil
 
willie
catman wrote:willie: Condell doesn't consider all Muslims as intolerant and barbaric.
In that one clip he assumes the women in burkas would naturally be offended by a child's comment and would naturally act with intolerance. He also assumes the shop keeper, whom he admits to baiting purely because he is muslim, must have a fundamentalist attitude toward alcohol and thus accuses him of hypocrisy. He also describes the right to apply scriptural laws that also coincide with UK law, as 'accommodating Saudi Arabian legal principles'.

It's a fine line whether it's the religion or follower he is attacking. But one thing is for sure, violent attacks, on the people who are deemed to fall into this specific section of our society, are on the increase here in the UK. I have no doubt fueled by his kind of bigoted ignorance.

Neil Argumentum ad populum is not by itself a compelling argument.

women will be pressured into using these courts. Of course, most men will chose to go to these courts, because according to the Sharia they are superior beings who get full custody of the children and do not need to pay alimony
But it is expected these oppressed woman will find the power and self determination, against their religious indoctrination, to start legal proceedings in an environment completely alien.
The sharia question has moved. Multiple threads and appeals of might is right add nothing to your person indignation.
Edited by willie on 10/10/2008 15:21
 
catman
willie: It seems to me to be a huge stretch to state that violent attacks in the UK are 'fueled by his kind of bigoted ignorance'. I can't argue that some attacks are caused by bigoted ignorance, but I don't consider Pat to be bigoted or ignorant.

I'm certainly not a fan of bigoted ignorance, but I find it safe to generally assume, subject to revision in particular cases, that a Muslim shopkeeper is bigoted, if not ignorant, simply by the fact that his religion teaches him to be so.
"If I owned both Hell and Texas, I'd live in Hell and rent out Texas." - General Sheridan
 
neilmarr
And here's Pat's latest (today) video. I guess he's expressing thoughts most of us here share ... but he puts them well, so it's worth a listen, I think. Neil

http://www.youtub...jZ-lSn0A3M
 
catman
Quite worth a listen. Most of the comments concerning it are asinine, so it's best to ignore them unless one wishes to luxuriate in stupidity. Thanks, Neil.
"If I owned both Hell and Texas, I'd live in Hell and rent out Texas." - General Sheridan
 
derF
Well everyone is entitled to their opinion. And in my opinion Condell's videos have a certain smell about them. They have the smell of truth about them.
I'll drink to that. Or anything else for that matter.
 
Jump to Forum:

Similar Threads

Thread Forum Replies Last Post
[VIDEO]A Very Special Thanksgiving Special YouTube 3 12/08/2013 14:37
Video - Dale McGowan at FreeOK2013 Why atheism? 3 07/07/2013 18:10
Philosophy of Time Video Interesting Articles and links 7 10/14/2012 12:05
Video - Chuck Norris's dire warning of an Obama re-election Election 2012 (US) 5 09/04/2012 19:55
False DMCA: Fix this Youtube! YouTube 1 08/14/2012 18:24