Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chock
Well, there are some good points (some bad ones too), but do you think he has spotted the irony of complaining about the Muslim Council of Britain being 'self appointed spokesmen', and then claiming to speak for Britain himself? Probably not.
 Chock |
He does not rip his argument into worthless pieces by shreddering it all into "me", "British citizen No. 2", "British citizen No.3" and so on - which is a much loved tactic in the time of mass media to cause distraction and making a view, argument, whatever: useless and powerless by breaking it into a myriad of mini-points that only have one purpose: to deflect concentration on the essential and hinder the view towards what the important heart and core of the issue is.
And the heart and core of his issue is that the Muslim Council does not wish for the values that Britain by its European history and trsditon stands for, and has been formed by, and also: that their set of values clearly are more barbaric and inhumane and unacceptable than our ones. the worth of values is not totally arbitrary, it is not totally free for definition. Some things cannot be made an object of consensus or debate without loosing your own ethical credibility. Some things remain to be bad, no matter from what "cultural" perspective you look at it - and often "culture" is just a foul excuse to reap respect although there is no culture and values at all. And Pat Condell obviously - and I think: rightfully - is very much certain of the justification and value of his and our Western and European ethical basis. From that he reserves the right to insist on that people coming to us and not fitting into these valöues and cultural context, should pi$$ off again, instead of trying to impose their primitiveness and medival barbarism onto us. And that includes christian fundamentalism and churches as well as islam.
I will not criticise him for that position - exactly the opposite I do.