Guardian

Pat Condell’s take on the Guardian


H/T Armaros

I don’t agree with everything Pat Condell (a British writer and comedian) says, and I personally think that his anger sometimes blurs what is, otherwise, often quite sober analyses of the injurious effects of political correctness on efforts to fight Islamic extremism, but his take down of the Guardian is simply spot-on and needs to be heard.

16 replies »

  1. Condell’s anger is of a righteous nature and the propellent to what makes him so unique amongst a swathe of grey acceptance.

    However, his simmering, non violent and controlled emotional response contrasts nicely with that of the ones he so disparages thus putting him on a completely different plane.

    He’s not asking for beheadings, rape or the multifaceted methods of death so well exposed at the cartoon demos, all he asks is for a bit of honesty in piercing the swathes of disinformation which clouds Islam wherever it lays its bony fingers.

    From nowhere to the many thousands of hits he receives on You Tube indicates a resonance. And if anyone cares to view his site, goes to comment they’ll see from the grotesqueries of offence his Muslim audience dishes out, precisely what he talks of.

    For them free speech is a one way street with shariah compliant gatekeepers and he’s having nothing of it.

    Precisely how it should be.

    • I don’t agree with everything Condell thinks either, but I think he should be required viewing for everyone because he challenges the mainstream discourse in an accessible, easy to understand manner.

  2. Andy Gill

    You’re right. I’ve been a long time admirer of him. I wonder if does any shows in public?

  3. I can see why Condell appeals to CiFWatch readers. Like many contributions here his piece consists of a lack of any reasoned argument together with a large measure of vulgar abuse. His disparaging references to the BBC, for example, are ‘content-free’, in that they lack any reference to anything actually broadcast by that body. He is correct in saying that the ‘Yes’ campaign in the recent referendum was largely organised (not very well) by left-wing politicians. He might have added that the ‘No’ campaign was funded by the right wing Conservative party, consisted in the main of misrepresentation and lies and was backed by the overwhelmingly right-wing gutter press in the interests of their capitalist masters.

    • “…the overwhelmingly right-wing gutter press in the interests of their capitalist masters.”

      The color Red… like bulls, a lot of people keep getting attracted to it even though it’s bound to get them killed when their heads slam against the wall of reality. (100,000,000 deaths to Marxism’s name… and counting!)

    • sencar, would you know a “reasoned argument” if you fell over one?

      You’ve never given any indication here before that you would

    • sencar for your information I was active in the No2AV campaign along with other members of the Labour Party, including a number of former Cabinet Ministers. So your characterisation of the AV Referendum campaign as a Left-Right fight is not only wrong it shows a lack of knowledge that is surprising. I was also present at the opening of the ballot boxes in my home city, we had the voting for the Welsh Assembly on the same day, and I can tell you that the No vote was right across the board and does not fit in with your simplistic and wrong description.

      • 1) I said that the ‘Yes’ campaign was “largely organised ….. by left-wing politicians”. That is true. The Liberal Democrats took an official ‘Yes’ position and its senior MPs campaigned actively. Nick Clegg, its leader, was kept under wraps a bit because he was so unpopular personally. Labour took a neutral position officially but its leader, Ed Miliband, actively supported ‘Yes’, as did a majority of Labour MPs. All minor left wing parties (Greens, Plaid Cymru etc) were ‘Yes’ supporters.

        2) I said that “the ‘No’ campaign was funded by the right wing Conservative party”. In fact 42 of the 53 named donors to the ‘No’ campaign were also donors to the Conservative party. The ‘Nos’ were very reluctant to reveal funding details, so the bias towards Conservative funding may be greater than this figure suggests.

        3) I said that the ‘Yes’ campaign was “backed by the overwhelmingly right-wing gutter press”. In fact The Sun, the Daily Mail, The Times, the Daily Express and the Daily Telegraph all took a ‘No’ position. Anyone familiar with the British press will know that these are the main right wing papers.

        If you think I’m wrong on any of these specific points, please say so.

        • I said that the ‘Yes’ campaign was “backed by the overwhelmingly right-wing gutter press”. That obviously should read “‘No’ Campaign”.

          • sencrap,

            Pat Condell is speaking about YOU. About the prickery bubble you inhabit.

            Just as people in Persia are sick of the islamofascist regime, the good people in the UK are getting sick of the prickery that pretends to speak for all of the UK.

            The only question is which regime will be overturned first. The islamofascist regime in Persia or the prickery regime in the UK.

            P.S.
            http://www.boycottscotland.com

            It’s about Pan Am 103

        • sencar over 200 members of the PLP (Parliamentary Labour Party) supported the Labour No2AV campaign, including John Reid and David Blunkett, both former Home Secretaries and John Prescott former Deputy Labour Leader and Margaret Beckett former Foreign Secretary and also a fomer Deputy Labour Leader. If you want to tell me that Margaret Beckett is Right-Wing that will confirm your lack of knowledge.
          If you think the Lib Dems are left wing when they are supporting this Government then you are confused, although it is true to say that the Lib Dems support oranisations like PSC and BDS, but this doesn’t make them left wing just bloody obnoxious.

          • You can only get 200 by counting members of the unelected House of Lords. Even the Labour No lobby only estimated 100+ elected Labour MPs as supporters. Lib Dems in the country and most of the MPs are certainly well left of centre, whatever their leaders may say/do in order to preserve their toehold on coalition power. You may not like PSC and BDS but you can’t really say that their supporters in the British political context are not predominately left wing.