I never saw the documentary so I don't know if it was Daily Mail crap or not but George came across badly in that 'interview'.
He isn't the first politician that couldn't make the jump from politics to being an interviewer.
Galloway on BBC Politics (tuesday 7th oct)
George's central argument was that the documentary would not have been made against a christian church and so was islamophobia.
I don't believe that at all there have been plenty of documentaries about the fundie christians. George is looking for the invisible protection that religions no matter how sick and dumb have had under the banner 'respect peoples beliefs'. The vast majority of people in Britain don't go about talking to an invisible cloud person based on ancient superstitions. When these superstitions then start to involve attacking people based on their sexuality or whatever then we have every right to object.
George constantly finds himself in the position of blindly protecting the beliefs of people who don't believe in affording that right to anyone else.
I don't believe that at all there have been plenty of documentaries about the fundie christians. George is looking for the invisible protection that religions no matter how sick and dumb have had under the banner 'respect peoples beliefs'. The vast majority of people in Britain don't go about talking to an invisible cloud person based on ancient superstitions. When these superstitions then start to involve attacking people based on their sexuality or whatever then we have every right to object.
George constantly finds himself in the position of blindly protecting the beliefs of people who don't believe in affording that right to anyone else.
Just as the vast majority of Muslims don't attend fringe meetings for extremists that happen to take place at the Mosque/community centre. It was deliberate for the doc-makers not to show that though, wherein lies their desire to feed the flames of Islamophobia. It's not what was in the programme, but what was left out.seshme wrote:The vast majority of people in Britain don't go about talking to an invisible cloud person based on ancient superstitions.
As I said I never saw it but who wants to watch a documentary about someone making a cup of tea, well maybe the people that make Big Brother, but generally you make them about stuff that is interesting or unusual.
In the last year there must have been about half a dozen about that odious tosser Fred Phelps and the God Hates Fags cult. You wouldn't hear Galloway whining about that as unrepresentative of the Christians...
In the last year there must have been about half a dozen about that odious tosser Fred Phelps and the God Hates Fags cult. You wouldn't hear Galloway whining about that as unrepresentative of the Christians...
yes, TV tends to glamourise things - in this case by zooming in on a small group to make it seem larger. That's exactly the problem...
The reason why the Phelps' stuff wasn't criticised in the same way is because it's obvious to every person brought up in what is ostensibly the Christian west that they are a bunch of cunts - the same can't be said for people's much narrower perception of Islam.
The reason why the Phelps' stuff wasn't criticised in the same way is because it's obvious to every person brought up in what is ostensibly the Christian west that they are a bunch of cunts - the same can't be said for people's much narrower perception of Islam.
Although this was a below par Galloway debate, Henshaw performance was also very poor & evasive, and in no way did he “completely destroyed” Galloway. It was Henshaw who got agitated first, and then avoided any meaningful rebuttals by repeatingly shouting out loud his “can you name me a Vicar” question. The Old Testament point has obviously gone over your head, so I suggest you watch the interview again.seshme wrote:To be fair Henshaw completely destroyed Galloway whose only argument on the subject was to shout about what is written in the Old Testament ignoring the difference between what is written in an ancient superstitious text and what is actually taught in churches.
Calling any criticism of muslims Islamophobia is like calling any criticism of Israel antisemitic.
Sorry your anti-Semitic analogy does not hold water either; judging a whole religion based on the actions of some person or a group of people makes you a bigot, but criticising the official State Terrorism of the Apartheid State of Israel does not make you a bigot.
No, Galloway’s main point was to pull up somebody, who in the current siege climate most British Muslims are under, regularly contributes to the constant barrage of anti-Muslim rhetoric pumped out in all forms of media. A dramatic hyped up portrayal of some unpleasant extremist individuals, that leaves an already whipped-up anti-Muslim population thinking that what they are watching is representative of Islam, so further dehumanising Muslims & generating greater hostility towards them.seshme wrote:George's central argument was that the documentary would not have been made against a christian church and so was islamophobia.
Going back to the initial subject of this Thread, i've had the chance of a little follow-up of confronting Kamm, under my moniker of "A half truth is worse than a lie";
https://www.hurryupharry.org/2008/12/12/ ... ent-266596
https://www.hurryupharry.org/2008/12/12/ ... ent-266596
