• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you want to see Anjem Choudery in America?

Republic_Of_Public

Republic_Of_Public

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2009
Messages
2,922
Reaction score
343
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
My preference is to let him but only as long as he stays there. And as the invincible Pat Condell points out, 'Andy' may be a hypocritical laughing stock but he's invaluable at exposing what Islam really is. At least he's honest in his lunacy.







The kind of planned idiocy Anjem wants to see is in full foul action across the Muslim world. Only here is he considered the maverick.

afghan-university-students-shout-anti-us-slogans-and-hold-a-banner-reading-no-democracy-we-want-just-islam-during-a-demonstration-in-kabul-on-october-25-2009.jpg


Like Pat, I thought they already had: Anjem Choudary to lead White House protest calling for Muslims to 'rise up' | Mail Online

Not without consequence: Counter Protest to Anjem Choudary Sharia Rally in Washington DC | Stand Up America



nic_globaltrends2020_radical_islamic_activities.gi f


Dunno about you but I'd prefer the West to remain non or anti-Islamic in the way it runs things. Just a finnicky little quirk on my part!
 
Last edited:
Republic_Of_Public said:
My preference is to let him but only as long as he stays there. And as the invincible Pat Condell points out, 'Andy' may be a hypocritical laughing stock but he's invaluable at exposing what Islam really is. At least he's honest in his lunacy.


Click to expand...


Unlike you, Pat Condell makes it clear that it's not ALL Moslems that behave that way, just the ones Choudery and his extremist brothers espouse.

I've got no problem with anything he says there.
 
Andalublue said:
Unlike you, Pat Condell makes it clear that it's not ALL Moslems that behave that way, just the ones Choudery and his extremist brothers espouse.

I've got no problem with anything he says there.
Click to expand...

Probably the most sensible piece Rops ever posted. But, of course he wont realise that :)

Paul
 
gunner said:
Probably the most sensible piece Rops ever posted. But, of course he wont realise that :)

Paul
Click to expand...

I found this on Condell's site...made me laugh.

page11_2.jpg


Look closely, it appears people are worshiping at his feet!
 
Andalublue said:
I found this on Condell's site...made me laugh.

page11_2.jpg


Look closely, it appears people are worshiping at his feet!
Click to expand...

And do you think its got a lob on:lol:

Paul
 
Unlike you, Pat Condell makes it clear that it's not ALL Moslems that behave that way, just the ones Choudery and his extremist brothers espouse.
Click to expand...

I never said all Muslims behave that way either. Debating something true would be a good start.

And I do realise how good it was, hence the posting.



And do you think its got a lob on
Click to expand...

Only if there are children nearby. The only live mosque in the world needs to follow its 'prophet' exactly!
 
I'd like to see Choudery anywhere else but Britain.
 
Last edited:
Those people praying at the wall are Jewish, since that's the "wailing wall" in the pic. I wonder if Condell is antisemitic as well as Islamophobic, or just ignorant.
 
Manc Skipper said:
Those people praying at the wall are Jewish, since that's the "wailing wall" in the pic. I wonder if Condell is antisemitic as well as Islamophobic, or just ignorant.
Click to expand...

Well, he's certainly anti-religious, so that would take in Judaism and Islam. I don't think there's anything wrong with his funny postcard. Saying the Dome of the Rock looks like Humpty Dumpty from that angle is insulting no one. His YouTube rants are just that, rants. He makes the odd good point and then spoils it with gratuitous insults, but we all do that occasionally, don't we? My problem with him is that I think he thinks he's being humorous, when he's just being insulting. He thinks he's being deep when he's being incredibly crass, and in countering the forces of intolerance, he seems to think that the way to do it is by being even more intolerant.

I've seen it claimed on DP that there's virtue in being intolerant of intolerance. Unfortunately adopting that attitude merely makes you another intolerant person that others shouldn't tolerate. It's a self-perpetuating cycle that someone eventually has to have the balls to break.

Oh btw, this is a good riposte to one of Condell's rants...
A Response to Pat Condell
 
Last edited:
Condell is the tabloid voice of atheism and he's very good at what he does. I get the impression most atheists are ready to move on the from the era of the angry patronising anti-theist at all levels of discourse to one that engages respectfully with people of all beliefs - respectfully that is, as long as it's not about inserting that belief into policy.

I'll tolerate the intolerant, so long as they're not trying to insert their intolerance into law. And "Andy" earns my intolerance.
 
Last edited:
Ben K. said:
Condell is the tabloid voice of atheism and he's very good at what he does. I get the impression most atheists are ready to move on the from the era of the angry patronising anti-theist at all levels of discourse to one that engages respectfully with people of all beliefs - respectfully that is, as long as it's not about inserting that belief into policy.
Click to expand...
Yup, he's a bit like Dawkins without the degrees, isn't he? I think most thinking atheists I know have moved on from this slightly adolescent desire to insult and shock. Condell seems to think that insults are more valid than arguments. I tend to think the opposite.

I'll tolerate the intolerant, so long as they're not trying to insert their intolerance into law. And "Andy" earns my intolerance.
Click to expand...
Wajja whatty wa-how what? What has Andy Pandy ever done to you to earn your intolerance? He maybe gave Teddy and Looby Loo a hard time, but what did he do to you?
 
Ben K. said:
I get the impression most atheists are ready to move on the from the era of the angry patronising anti-theist at all levels of discourse to one that engages respectfully with people of all beliefs - respectfully that is, as long as it's not about inserting that belief into policy.
Click to expand...

This atheist certainly doesn't. Theists deserve to ridiculed and patronised when they make idiotic claims for themselves. When they voice their religious beliefs it's fair game. It's the battle of ideas that made our society what it is today, and why the churches are empty. There is no respect for the belief in fairy tales and idiotic dogma's, the weird obession with sexuality theists often display. It's people like Condell who simply voice the opinion of anti-theists alike, among my contemparies such a popular -ism.

I'm sure andy pandy dislikes Condell, but I couldn't find any sound argument to accompany his dislike. Is he funny or isn't he funny, andy couldn't even decide on that. He found the postcard funny, which I find a little disturbing for a man his age. Personally I find Condells 'rants' a lot funnier than his postcards, but I tend to share his anger, and then its a lot easier to appreciate the sarcasm of his rants.
 
Djoop said:
This atheist certainly doesn't. Theists deserve to ridiculed and patronised when they make idiotic claims for themselves. When they voice their religious beliefs it's fair game. It's the battle of ideas that made our society what it is today, and why the churches are empty. There is no respect for the belief in fairy tales and idiotic dogma's, the weird obession with sexuality theists often display. It's people like Condell who simply voice the opinion of anti-theists alike, among my contemparies such a popular -ism.

I'm sure andy pandy dislikes Condell, but I couldn't find any sound argument to accompany his dislike. Is he funny or isn't he funny, andy couldn't even decide on that. He found the postcard funny, which I find a little disturbing for a man his age. Personally I find Condells 'rants' a lot funnier than his postcards, but I tend to share his anger, and then its a lot easier to appreciate the sarcasm of his rants.
Click to expand...

Do I like Condell? No, not much. I certainly don't find his YT rants funny; they'd have to have comedy in them to be funny, but I find them interesting. When I've read something from a really stupid Moslem/Jew/Christian about faith or the will of God or such like, I feel a bit of that angry outrage like he does. The feeling passes. I'm a grown up, I can control my emotions most of the time and I recognise that reason and rationality will defeat bigotry and ignorance eventually. Insults achieve nothing except to make you feel better, but if you want catharsis beat up a cushion.

Did I find the silly postcard funny? Yep. Briefly. But then again, I find poo jokes funny, because I'm not THAT much of a grown up.

Back to Condell. I understand his outrage at the extremes of religious bigotry, but his intolerance of religious sentiment is bordering on that same degree of bigotry. Hitchens and Dawkins can come over like this too. Just as he berates religious types for simple-minded bigots, he doesn't differentiate between the huge variety of approaches to freedom of thought amongst theists. To him they just seem to be all the same.
 
Andalublue said:
Do I like Condell? No, not much. I certainly don't find his YT rants funny; they'd have to have comedy in them to be funny, but I find them interesting. When I've read something from a really stupid Moslem/Jew/Christian about faith or the will of God or such like, I feel a bit of that angry outrage like he does. The feeling passes. I'm a grown up, I can control my emotions most of the time and I recognise that reason and rationality will defeat bigotry and ignorance eventually. Insults achieve nothing except to make you feel better, but if you want catharsis beat up a cushion.
Click to expand...

You're an optimist, and I despise optimists. Maybe its because I grew up in the most secular and liberal country in the world, freed of religious hogwash. In the 90s in NL, you couldn't predict the murder of a local village fool like Theo van Gogh, who was tenfold worse than Condell ever be, and guess what; I also found him funny. You couldn't predict that in 2011 we would be talking about female circumcision, about 'honour' killings, about dumbfounding antisemitism and gay bashing, especially in the gay capital of the world, Amsterdam. The fact we're not moving forward does annoy me, but I can't cry everyday. Absurdism, learn to appreciate it! Yes, I'm ranting.

Did I find the silly postcard funny? Yep. Briefly. But then again, I find poo jokes funny, because I'm not THAT much of a grown up.
Click to expand...

Then who are you to judge humor. Leave it to me.

Back to Condell. I understand his outrage at the extremes of religious bigotry, but his intolerance of religious sentiment is bordering on that same degree of bigotry. Hitchens and Dawkins can come over like this too. Just as he berates religious types for simple-minded bigots, he doesn't differentiate between the huge variety of approaches to freedom of thought amongst theists. To him they just seem to be all the same.
Click to expand...
Why should he? If I say I don't like Korean food, do you assume there's not a korean dish I would like. Or vice versa, if I say I love Korean food, do you assume I like every Korean dish? We can't escape generalisations, otherwise every speech would have that Castro quality of taking far too long. It seems you have a hard time understanding that it's not about the individual and his beliefs, it's only about the beliefs, and Condell trying his best to show their absurd qualites.

/rant
 
Djoop said:
You're an optimist, and I despise optimists. Maybe its because I grew up in the most secular and liberal country in the world, freed of religious hogwash. In the 90s in NL, you couldn't predict the murder of a local village fool like Theo van Gogh, who was tenfold worse than Condell ever be, and guess what; I also found him funny. You couldn't predict that in 2011 we would be talking about female circumcision, about 'honour' killings, about dumbfounding antisemitism and gay bashing, especially in the gay capital of the world, Amsterdam. The fact we're not moving forward does annoy me, but I can't cry everyday. Absurdism, learn to appreciate it! Yes, I'm ranting.
Click to expand...
Yes you are. Why would growing up in a godless country make you despise optimists?

Then who are you to judge humor. Leave it to me.
Click to expand...
Go on then, make us laugh. Think of it as an audition for the role of DP's comedy critic.

Why should he? If I say I don't like Korean food, do you assume there's not a korean dish I would like. Or vice versa, if I say I love Korean food, do you assume I like every Korean dish? We can't escape generalisations, otherwise every speech would have that Castro quality of taking far too long. It seems you have a hard time understanding that it's not about the individual and his beliefs, it's only about the beliefs, and Condell trying his best to show their absurd qualites.

/rant
Click to expand...
If he weren't so free throwing insults around about the believers rather than the beliefs, then I might agree with you. It's true you can't avoid generalisations, but you can avoid making them your entire schtick.
 
Andalublue said:
Yes you are. Why would growing up in a godless country make you despise optimists?
Click to expand...
Because I used to be one, untill it changed for the worse.

Go on then, make us laugh. Think of it as an audition for the role of DP's comedy critic.
Click to expand...
Nothing to prove here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvOS9vsccJs

If he weren't so free throwing insults around about the believers rather than the beliefs, then I might agree with you. It's true you can't avoid generalisations, but you can avoid making them your entire schtick.
Click to expand...
Can you pick one out, name me one of those insults you detest so much.
 
Andalublue said:
Wajja whatty wa-how what? What has Andy Pandy ever done to you to earn your intolerance? He maybe gave Teddy and Looby Loo a hard time, but what did he do to you?
Click to expand...

"Andy" is Condells pet name for Anjem, though I'm uncertain if you're confused by this, Djoop is, neither are or you both are.
 
Last edited:
Andalublue said:
And that's you?
Click to expand...
No, that's my idea of funny. Hans Teeuwen, a dutch legend.

Yes, when I can be bothered to sit through a few more of his vids, I will.
Click to expand...
A few? You would only need one, you wouldn't even have to see it through. An example will do nicely thank you. Just trying to understand your sentiment.
 
Ben K. said:
"Andy" is Condells pet name for Anjem, though I'm uncertain if you're confused by this, Djoop is, neither are or you both are.
Click to expand...

Just look at Anda's profile..., couldn't care less about Anjem.
 
Ben K. said:
"Andy" is Condells pet name for Anjem, though I'm uncertain if you're confused by this, Djoop is, neither are or you both are.
Click to expand...

Yes, Ben I did make a mistake, thinking you were referring to me rather than Anjem Wotsit in that post. I don't think Djoop was. I daren't mention it to him tonight though, cos he's in a bit of a mood. :mrgreen:

I'm sure he'll be fine tomorrow.

Andy Pandy says it's time for bed. Or was that Zebedee?
 
Djoop said:
This atheist certainly doesn't. Theists deserve to ridiculed and patronised when they make idiotic claims for themselves. When they voice their religious beliefs it's fair game. It's the battle of ideas that made our society what it is today, and why the churches are empty. There is no respect for the belief in fairy tales and idiotic dogma's, the weird obession with sexuality theists often display. It's people like Condell who simply voice the opinion of anti-theists alike, among my contemparies such a popular -ism.
Click to expand...


And yet I have plenty of political and social disagreements with people that I feel strongly about, but I wouldn't engage with them the way many prominent anti-theists do with theists today. The ridicule is employed too easily, the valid points all too often lost within emotive attacks. I don't think the worst points of disrespectful left-right political debate needs to be incorporated into theological debate, which the famed anti-theists seems keen on doing.
 
Ben K. said:
And yet I have plenty of political and social disagreements with people that I feel strongly about, but I wouldn't engage with them the way many prominent anti-theists do with theists today. The ridicule is employed too easily, the valid points all too often lost within emotive attacks. I don't think the worst points of disrespectful left-right political debate needs to be incorporated into theological debate, which the famed anti-theists seems keen on doing.
Click to expand...

Do you ever ask yourself the question why? Why do they do that you think?!

With every strategy I use in life I always ask myself this simple question: "How is it working for me".

But I'm in a bit of a mood, and I'll pay the price tmow morning.
 
Djoop said:
Do you ever ask yourself the question why? Why do they do that you think?!

With every strategy I use in life I always ask myself this simple question: "How is it working for me".

But I'm in a bit of a mood, and I'll pay the price tmow morning.
Click to expand...

Because they believe there is evil in this world and they believe their opponent causes, directly enables or tacitly enables it, left or right, atheist or theist. I've seen Dawkins and Hitchens both reduce the Northern Irish conflict to a religious issue, just so they can tar their religious opponents with enabling evil. It's all too simplistic and naive. You can cringe when someone blames Stalin and Hitler on atheism and guffaw at the simplistic claim, but don't expect to appear any more reasonable claiming that Europe wouldn't have come to conflict with itself and others around it without religion.
 
Ben K. said:
Because they believe there is evil in this world and they believe their opponent causes, directly enables or tacitly enables it, left or right, atheist or theist. I've seen Dawkins and Hitchens both reduce the Northern Irish conflict to a religious issue, just so they can tar their religious opponents with enabling evil. It's all too simplistic and naive. You can cringe when someone blames Stalin and Hitler on atheism and guffaw at the simplistic claim, but don't expect to appear any more reasonable claiming that Europe wouldn't have come to conflict with itself and others around it without religion.
Click to expand...

The soil of Europe is drenched with the blood of the Inquisition. Without it, we would have never had the Enlightenment, in that sense we owe it all to religion...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom