WARNING: The following is an attempt at sarcasm. It is also an attempt to stimulate thought.
Before reading, please watch both of Pat Condell's clips: Islam in Europe and What about the Jews?
Pat Condell is an atheist and a comedian. He's against religious coercion wherever it happens and by whomever it happens. Muslims, Christians, Jews - they all get a piece of his mind. He recently put out a video about Islam in Europe, but I must admit he surprised me.
Why?
For that, let's go back to Pat Condell's video about the Jews. Condell likes the Jews since as he says, "whereas Muslims and Christians want everybody else to believe what they believe, Jews don't give a damn what you believe as long as you leave them alone." The anti-religious-coercionist's friends, so to speak.
His gripe then? Jews insist on having Jerusalem, which, according to Condell, is an Arab town. Why do they want to start a nuclear war over a town which should be razed down in any case?
I am not going to debate Condell about the reasons why Jews are so attached to Jerusalem. I doubt Condell is really interested or cares about history and culture. Not when it's not his own, of course.
Condell does care about European civilization though. He feels Muslims are attacking his civilization and at that point, the same reasoning that he applies to the Jews doesn't apply to him or other Europeans.
You want to start a worldwide war over a couple of cartoons and you say the Jews are mad for wanting to live in Jerusalem? You're against banning a protest against the Islamization of Europe but want to give in to Ahmadinejad when he threatens to wipe Israel off the map? Your logic fails me.
I think the Europeans would do themselves a big favor if they came to their senses and let go of their western civilization. Keep Europe secular, by all means. But you don't need Brussels, London, Amsterdam or Paris.
Europe has proven itself. It's not to be trifled with. We get that now. But Brussels is not a European town. It's an Arab town and it's time we all started to live in reality, before reality imposes itself on us in the most unpleasant manner.
You have a problem with Sharia law, Condell? Then move to a country which doesn't contemplate implementing it. Don't drag everybody down with you.
You're bigger than that, Condell.
Oh, and when England does implement Sharia law, maybe the (Islamic) world will even thank you for it. Wouldn't that be a turn up for the books.
Salaam.
Update (The Non-Sarcastic Version):
Judaism is a religion, but long before it was your everyday religion, it was a nation with a living culture. If you want to give Jerusalem to the Muslims and sacrifice Israel and Jewish nationhood on the alter of 'making peace', don't be surprised when those same Muslims later demand that the European cities where they're a majority will be run the Muslim way. Israel cannot survive as a nation or as a culture without Jerusalem, much like England cannot survive without London or France without Paris. This is even more critical for the Jews. Without the national ties to the land, as signified by Jerusalem, they have no right to be in Tel Aviv or Haifa either, as Pat Condell would like to believe.
If you think "making the world happy" is a good enough reason to sacrifice one's civilization, don't be surprised when the same is demanded of you.
10 comments:
What!!!!
Pat Condell made some very relevant points but whoever wrote this article was incomprehensible. I agree with the previous person. "What!!!"
I hope this post is designed to "stimulate debate"... otherwise, you've lost your mind.
It is simple. The author is applying Condell's argument for the Jews to the Europeans.
A very basic trick really.
Regards,
Snouck
What the hell is this article about? It makes no sense. If Jew's belong in Palestine (now known as Israel the illegal state) then what were they doing in Europe? Why did they want to go to Palestine only when they realised that Hitler (the Christian) wanted them extinct? Why could the British not keep them as refugees in UK or other parts of Europe? How can the world allow refugees in Palestine (Jews) to claim Palestine as a country for themselves? If the Jews can claim Palestine for them selves in though they are refugees from Europe then refugees from other parts of the world whom have entered into Europe should eventually claim a country for themselves (once China has over taken America as Superpower). Like all refugees the law states that once danger has been wiped out refugees should be allowed to return home, so why don't Europe request for the Jews to return to Germany (is it because Europe knows they are trouble makers)? But I guess I wont get answers for these question as the Infidels and Kafirs are infidels and kafirs.
Israel has existed longer than Palestine. Palestine has never existed as a state. It is an invention. The name was created by the Romans to abuse the jews who rebelled against them. Palestinians & Jews are very closely related by their DNA. Palestinians are closer to Jews than they are to Arabs according to their DNA. The conclusion to be drawn from this is that palestinaisn are Jews who converted to Islam. Sad but true.
"(once China has over taken America as Superpower" byInfidel&KafirWatch
You better certainly run for the hills. There will be no stopping the China nation. Be very afraid, you who hates infidels. No paper tiger here.
Do you use toothpaste? Mattel toys? pajamas, pet food? to name a few...
What Pat Condell needs to address is the fact that while Western democracies preach human rights and democracy, they go around engaging in regime change and supporting brutal dictators and kings who do their bidding.
What Pat Condell needs to address is that while Western countries have passed laws that prevent the exploitation of their own workers, their corporations go into developing countries and pay slave wages to manufacture goods.
What Pat Condell needs to address is that while Western countries have passed laws to protect their women and children from violence and sexual exploitation, Western men go to poor countries on what are euphemistically called “sex tours” to commit unspeakable acts with women and children. (Countries that have laws against this hardly ever enforce them.)
>> What Pat Condell needs to address is the fact that while Western democracies preach human rights and democracy, <<
I think you meant to say "Western democracies *practice* human rights and democracy".
>> they go around engaging in regime change and supporting brutal dictators and kings who do their bidding. <<
"regime change" was used in the context of removing Saddam Hussein (a dictator, not a democracy). The US also ousted the Islamic totalitarian state of Afghanistan. Yes, the US does support bad people, although I often find that the US does this most consistently when the population itself is culturally backwards and unlikely to create a better government (e.g. Saudi Arabia). I fully expect that if King Faisal of Saudi Arabia were removed from power, an Islamic totalitarian state would take his place. All decisions are a choice between options, and sometimes there are no "good" options. Stop pretending that the US can come and setup wonderful, human-rights-protecting democracies in backwards, poorly-educated, religiously brainwashed societies.
>> What Pat Condell needs to address is that while Western countries have passed laws that prevent the exploitation of their own workers, their corporations go into developing countries and pay slave wages to manufacture goods. <<
There have been moves made in that direction (see the Cambodian MFA agreement under Clinton). Keep in mind, as well, that corporations lobby the governments to prevent third-world countries from increasing their costs. Our governments are overly influenced by these people, but that doesn't mean we lose the right to protect the gains we've made in setting up (internally) decent societies. Also, while wages may be low, they are competitive with other working opportunities in those countries. The fact that the countries would be worse-off without those "slave wages" shows that they are a net benefit for those companies to be there.
>> Western men go to poor countries on what are euphemistically called “sex tours” to commit unspeakable acts with women and children. <<
Probably not any more "unspeakable" than what happens to women in Islamic societies. Obviously, the solution is for Western countries to send a police officer on vacation with every Western male to make sure they are following Western practices while they are in Southeast Asia.
So far, I'll I've heard from you is bitch, bitch, bitch. You take spotlight off the well deserved criticism of Islamic culture by mudslinging the West. That's great. I'll remember not to run to your house when the Islamists impose sharia law and attempt to kill me because I dare to say their god is fictional and say their religion belongs in the 6th century. Apparently, the West can't have an opinion until we act like angels. On the other hand, *foreign* killers and terrorists won't get any criticism from you - you're too busy looking the other way. No doubt, they'll take away my freedom of speech, but not yours, since you're a pretty good apologist for them.
To the last anonymous person,
The United States helped Saddam Hussein into power and supported him, financially and strategically, when he was committing his worst atrocities.
The United States recruited and trained Muslim extremists to fight its proxy war against the Soviet Union. The defeat of the Russians facilitated the collapse of the Soviet Union, which resulted in making the United States the number one super power in the world. In the meanwhile, millions of Afghans had been killed and the country was left in ruins.
Israel supported and allowed to flourish Hamas, as rival to the secular Yasser Arafat.
By the way, the United States, has engaged in regime change and/or mass killings not only in the Muslim world, but also in South America, Asia, and Africa
India has many of the problems that are often pointed out in the Muslim world. It persecutes religious minorities, oppresses women; has slavery , has anti-Semitism, has anti-Western sentiments, and even child sacrifices (See http://civillibertarian.blogspot.com/2006/10/horror-of-indias-child-sacrifice.html ). It has a child malnourishment rate worse than sub-Sahara Africa, yet India is always praised as the largest democracy in the world.
Post a Comment