A senior Channel 4 executive defended the broadcaster’s decision to provide extensive coverage of the most significant event in the Islamic calendar by suggesting that Ramadan was of greater interest to its viewers than the “blanket coverage” given to the 60th anniversary of the Queen’s Coronation by its rivals.
It would seem that Channel 4’s dhimmitude is pretty much complete, then…
Channel 4 said the prayer will be transmitted “directly into British living rooms at the exact time Muslims prepare for their first prayers and as they begin their fast every morning during Ramadan.” Delivered by leading muezzin Hassen Rasool, it will air every morning during Ramadan.
Not mine, it bloody well won’t.
It’s disgraceful NOT in my living room it won’t and I shall NOT be watching anything on channel 4 ever again!
Just as no rational, intelligent person could believe in pedoMo’s fabricated faith, no rational intelligent person watches Channel 4.
“a deliberate act of “provocation” aimed at viewers who associate Islam with terrorism and extremism.”
There is a very good reason why people associate Islam with terrorism and extremism and it has nothing to do with racism or bigotry.
“…who associate Islam with terrorism and extremism…”
Never thought of it that way:- you mean it has OTHER associations?
“you mean it has OTHER associations?”
Other than terrorism, extremism, mysogyny, bigotry, brutality, homophobia, pedophilia, authoritarian governments and suppression of free speech, what has Islam done for us?
That is unfair, it gave us the enlightenment in the West, admittedly it did it by besieging and taking over Constantinople and scattering its people, especially to Venice where the Renaissance began, so I think that by brutally besieging and then invading a sovereign nation the Turk did create the Enlightenment.
Channel 4 trolling the nation again? *yawn*
They clearly didn’t learn any lessons from the ‘Undercover Mosque’ furore..
I plan on carrying around a good supply of BLTs during this particular period, just to show my appreciation of the cult commemorations. I may even wear my Porky Pig or “I (heart) Tel Aviv” T-shirt, if the sun actually manages to shine!
“I (heart) Tel Aviv”
Sounds good:- it’s up there with “I (spade) my cat” or “I (club) old ladies”… 😉
“I (heart) Tel Aviv”
Or “Judea and Samaria is forever Israel”
Yeah.
I’ve got an old Cure T shirt somewhere, can’t quite remember what song it is for, one of the their early ones though
Well I have to put up the broadcasting of sports that I have no interest in so I fail to see why the broadcasting of religious mumbo jumbo I have no interest in should be counted a worse offence!
Still if it provokes an aneurism in the those freedom haters who use their night terrors about Islam to justify authoritarian laws, then good. Let there be 5 millions burst blood vessels across the curtain twitching moronocity of Middle England.
Perhaps Channel 4 (and all TV channels, in fact) should go further and play it five times a day, every day, forever – interrupting programmes to do so? That’ll work wonders for community cohesion.
“Perhaps Channel 4 (and all TV channels, in fact) should go further and play it five times a day, every day, forever – interrupting programmes to do so?”
You think? Dunno how that follows from my post but whatever lights your wick.
“That’ll work wonders for community cohesion. ”
Is that the function of TV? To promote “community cohesion” or other made-up bogus PC bollocks?
While I share your abhorrence for sport being broadcast, especially when scheduled programmes are curtailed because of a god-damned stupid football match, you cannot draw a comparison between entertainment enjoyed by the masses and the blatant proselytising of superstitious mumbo jumbo.
And if it’s authoritarianism you want, look no further than Islam; a deeply right wing, profoundly authoritarian cult that is violent to the point of being lethal towards non-believers, apostates, homosexuals and women. How anyone could try to justify a defence of this nastiness, defies belief.
“While I share your abhorrence for sport being broadcast, especially when scheduled programmes are curtailed because of a god-damned stupid football match, you cannot draw a comparison between entertainment enjoyed by the masses and the blatant proselytising of superstitious mumbo jumbo”
Do you really think that’s what it is doing? Proselytizing? I can’t seriously see many people getting converted to Islam by watching Imans drone on in Arabic. Now if they were showing training camps with recruits brandishing cool H&Ks then I could see it.
“And if it’s authoritarianism you want, look no further than Islam; a deeply right wing,”
I am more concerned by the authoritarianism of those who would seek to “protect” me from Islam. Tyranny always claims to be about protecting our freedoms, protecting us against threats, Islam being the latest in a long line of excuses. If Islam were a serious threat to my freedom then I would be worried about it. It is not. The serious threats to my freedom arise from the same quarter they have always arisen from: the comfortable, arrogant and entitled elite that misrule us.
“How anyone could try to justify a defence of this nastiness, defies belief.”
Who is defending it? I am completely indifferent to it.
Proselytism comes in many forms. This is no different in principle to the Jehovah’s Witnesses who knock on your door. Both are attempting to thrust religion down your throat and both are equally unwelcome as far as I am concerned.
As for authoritarianism, I oppose all of it, no matter where it comes from – so yes, I will point out that Islam is authoritarian, reactionary and extremely right wing. Indeed, it makes our home grown clowns pale into insignificance. But, yes, I despise them, too, because I don’t need protection from Islam, what I need is for them to stop protecting it from open dissent and criticism for fear of causing offence. What is needed is lots of offence delivered good and hard up every Imam’s jacksie until they get the message loud and clear that freedom of speech trumps the paper thin constitutions of their made-up god and nasty, violent prophet.
Could you give examples of this “authoritarianism of those who would seek to “protect” me from Islam”?
As we have argued before, if people want to believe that a thoroughly nasty little shit who pretended that god was talking to him is a prophet of a god then that is their right. Equally, if a television station wants to be deliberately provocative then, providing it isn’t using taxpayers money, it should be free to do so, just as people are free not to watch such crap. However, what is truly authoritarian is a government that bans people who want to come to the UK and point out the obvious association between Islam and terrorism.
Channel 4 is funded by the taxpayer. This little sectarian stunt is on your tax pounds.
“Channel 4 is funded by the taxpayer.”
Muslims also pay taxes.
Jews, Hindus and Sikhs also pay taxes. Why don’t they get this excessively fawning coverage?
“Jews, Hindus and Sikhs also pay taxes. Why don’t they get this excessively fawning coverage? ”
I am sure I have seen religious broadcasting on behalf of all of those groups. Being an atheist and not having an obsessive hatred of Muslims, I can’t say I pay much attention to the relative differences in air time Muslims get. However assuming that they do get more, it might have something to do with the fact that there are 2.8 million Muslims in the UK, which is nearly three times more than the total of all the others.
“Could you give examples of this “authoritarianism of those who would seek to “protect” me from Islam”?”
Where have you been for the past 15 years? Labour tried to force compulsory ID Cards on us on the excuse that it would prevent (Islamic) Terrorism. We have unprecedented surveillance of our electronic communications, again defended on the basis of protecting us from (Islamic) terrorism. You can’t take a photograph in London without some cretin of a PCSO or police officer telling you it is against the terrorism act. Have you been vacationing on Venus?
“Equally, if a television station wants to be deliberately provocative then, providing it isn’t using taxpayers money, it should be free to do so, just as people are free not to watch such crap”
I do not want to watch football on TV. It TV stations want to be deliberately provocative and show such vulgar low-brow crap then they should be free to do so only if they don’t use tax payers money? Does that argument fly as well?
The problem with my argument is that football supporters also pay tax as do Muslims.
I don’t believe in any state funding for broadcasting, it should all be funded by those who want to watch it. Those who want to watch football can pay for football shows while those who want to watch party conferences can pay for that and any who want to see Muslims at prayer can pay for that.
“such vulgar low-brow crap”
What an utter snob you are.
There are about eight full-blown Islamic TV channels already here in the UK – six of them are Sunni (several are Salafist and they pump out pure hatred every day) and two are Shia.
Basically, the religious channels tend to be very intolerant indeed. Some of them have been banned here.
“There are about eight full-blown Islamic TV channels already here in the UK – six of them are Sunni (several are Salafist and they pump out pure hatred every day) and two are Shia.”
Pure hatred, eh? Avid viewer, are you?
“such vulgar low-brow crap” What an utter snob you are.
No, I have a brain. Football is vulgar low-brow crap. Fact. And since I pay for it you can go fuck yourself if you don’t like my exercising my right of free speech to condemn it.
No, I have a brain. Football is vulgar low-brow crap. Fact.
Opinions cannot be facts. You infer that the 100s of millions of people all over the world who love football don’t have a brain so you are an utter snob (and a complete wanker). Fact.
Much as I detest football – indeed all ball games – I have to agree. It’s a matter of taste, nothing more.
Pat Condell has it right in his most recent video, “Singling out a billion Muslims”.
Muslims need to be able to take criticism. Vitriolic, hard, mocking, offensive and brutal criticism. They need to accept that only devout Muslims and some sympathisers care about their savage, supremacist, fascistic religion and that no-one else does.
If you want vile christian proseletysing try THIS
http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/street-preacher-interrogated-by-police.html
… and read my comment well down the page.
I’ve been working down in Wombledon this week & have encounterd these vile creeps.
Noting at all to choose betyween them, as far as I can determine.
What IS it with religion, that rots the brain & makes people so deeply unpleasant?