We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Robert Kilroy-Silk, freedom of speech and the pressure-cooker effect

According to this Guardian article and the this one in the Independent the Labour MP turned talk show host, Robert Kilroy-Silk, is under fire for having written an anti-Arab article. I have read the Sunday Express article concerned on a forum but have not been able to find it in linkable form.

Predictably the Commission for Racial Equality is making noises about lawyers and prosecutions and public order. I will be amazed if they actually do anything. The point of the CRE’s threats is not to carry them out, but to have a chilling effect on the next person who wants to write in a similar vein.

(The issue of whether Mr Kilroy-Silk should write as a freelance while working for the BBC is a separate one which I shall ignore here.)

Here is something the CRE and other race relations bodies ought to remember but will not: freedom of speech and relatively good race relations go together. In fact it is broader than that. Freedom and relatively good race relations go together. Pogroms happen under tyrannies. I call it the “pressure-cooker effect.” The conclusion that free speech promotes racial harmony is not obvious at first sight. Words lead to deeds, one might think, and so, obviously, harsh words will lead to harsh deeds. Nonetheless you may make some headway among sceptics if you ask them whether in their own lives they think it better to bottle up resentments or to voice them before they become explosive.

Do a little mental scan now of those countries where freedom of speech has reigned longest and is most secure – aren’t they also the countries that people of all races are desperate to get into? Partly that is because free countries are rich (riches being consequence of freedom) but it is also because they are the places where race conflict means a riot not a massacre.

Now do a similar mental scan of those physical areas and institutions within the free countries where race is an ugly issue. You will find the PC crowd have been active for decades in these areas. Yet things never seem to get better. The Commission for Racial Equality never seems to report success any more than the Race Relations Board did before it. I find it hard to believe that all of this failure is just a cynical ploy to keep their jobs. Most people mean well, even race relations advisers. It’s just that, unfortunately, some attempts at cure do more harm than good.

I am not saying, “restrictions on freedom cause racism”. Race hatred is older than political freedom. What I am saying is “restrictions on freedom disable the safety valve”.

When people have had no practice, and cannot get any practice, in saying legitimately harsh things about a non-western culture – yet feel them anyway, and with reason – then it is no surprise that when speech finally bursts out it is all a mish-mash of good points mixed in with prejudice.

Which is more or less what I think of Kilroy-Silk’s actual views. Seeing as he has his own TV show, he himself cannot be said to have been prevented from getting practice in being critical about Arab society in a nuanced manner. (Nor was there anything stopping him from doing the minimal research necessary to know that the Iranians are not Arabs). However the general level of the dialogue is low. There is a disconnect between the actual danger and evil of Islamo-fascism and the nicey-nicey way the media talk about it and I see his angry hammering as a product of that. He sees plain savagery and sees it called militancy and he thinks, by God, I am going to say what I think.

I support his right to free speech without qualification. But is his article one to be proud of?

Yes and no. Here is a typical paragraph:

What do they think we feel about them? That we adore them for the way they murdered more than 3,000 civilians on September 11 and then danced in the hot, dusty streets to celebrate the murders? That we admire them for being suicide bombers, limb amputators, women repressors?

Part of me says, Yep. Damn straight. Arabs did dance in the streets. Most terrorists are Arabs. Scarcely any other part of the world has punishments more barbaric than those in Arab lands, Saudi Arabia in particular, and no other part of the world is more misogynistic.

However I do not like the way that the word ‘them’ shifts its meaning. Sometimes it means the actual 9-11 attackers, sometimes the large numbers of Arabs who clelebrated the murders, sometimes the whole culture as manifested by its most spectacular and violent expressions.

I call it lazy, bigoted and emotive reporting when I see lines like “…the America that shoots schoolchildren at Columbine and executes them in the electric chair.” I made that example up, but I bet you can find real parallels. (You could try a Google for “George Bush’s America” or “John Ashcroft’s America.”) In places Kilroy Silk’s article shows exactly this tendency. The last line, oddly not quoted in either the Guardian or the Independent, really was offensive: “…That says it all about which country deserves the epithet loathsome.”

All in all I didn’t admire the article. But every morning there is a new crop of articles written from the other side that display every one of Kilroy-Silk’s faults and then some and they don’t have Trevor Phillips calling the cops. Nor should they. They, too, are the steam from the safety valve.

That was meant to be the end of the post, but I can not resist saying how struck I was by a quote (in the Independent article linked to above) from Professor Haleh Afshar, a Middle Eastern expert at York University:

“[Professor Afshar] said the article displayed a dangerous “ethnocentricity”. She added: “He does not have a history that goes beyond September 11. The world begins on September 11 for him but I would like to tell him that the world actually began 3000 years before Christ.”

172 comments to Robert Kilroy-Silk, freedom of speech and the pressure-cooker effect

  • Charles Copeland

    It does look as though Kilroy-Silk felt he had to exercise his inner swine dog (as the Germans say) by stereotyping more or less all Arabs as virtually subhuman. Perhaps he’s been tuning in to ‘Little Green Footballs’ too often. And he certainly knows how to play to the Sunday Express gallery. His denigration of an entire race is simply over the top. If he had made the same comments about Islamists he would merely have been stating a truism. But you can choose to be an Islamist whereas you can not choose to be an Arab: either you are born that way, or you aren’t. I reckon Kilroy-Silk’s vilifications apply to no more than 90% of all Arabs.

    His reaction reminds me of Jews who say that ‘the Germans’ were the cause of the Holocaust, or again of Germans who say that ‘the Jews’ were the cause of the Gulag. Both statements are of course true in a statistical sense (in that most leading Nazis were Germans and most leading Communists were Jews, and in that a large minority of Germans supported the Nazis and a large minority of Jews supported the Communists) and yet it is somehow both absurd and unjust to condemn an entire ethnic group for the crimes of individual members.

    Why didn’t he have the guts to say something objective and unprejudiced ‘the Koran sucks’ or ‘Islam sucks’ and leave it at that?

  • Millie Woods

    The York University middle eastern ‘expert’ has a major credibility problem. Arabs in Mesopotamia establishing the first city state? I don’t think so. They weren’t Arabs. Case closed.
    However five thousand years or so ago, Jews created a mono-theistic religion and the last time I looked the Jews were still a creative and innovative force in the world whereas those once so wonderful Mesopotamian Arabs…

  • Verity

    The CRE has already reported Mr Kilroy-Silk to the police for speaking his mind, and Thought Hitler Trevor Phillips (who only last week was opining on how divisive encouraging people to bring racial suits is) is quoted as saying: “However, given the extreme and violent terms in which Mr Kilroy-Silk has expressed himself, there is a danger that this might incite some individuals to act against someone who they think is an Arab.” Ah, yes, just so long as the fascism is to “protect” people from something that “might” happen, it’s all right then.

    I believe Mr Kilroy-Silk lives in a land where freedom of speech was formerly cherished and fought and died for. He has a right to say what’s on his mind. End of story. He didn’t incite violence – despite Adolf Phillips’ fear that some people “might” think he had. He spoke his mind.

    When the Tories get in, they must dismantle this revolting organisation. Meanwhile, I suggest the equally revolting Trevor Phillips pop over to Saudi Arabia to find out more about freedom of speech and lack thereof.

    Natalie Solent’s comments about the value of safety valves are well taken, but she should not have had to make such basic observations in a free country.

    Professor Ashnar talks in standard loony leftie terms: “He does not have a history that goes beyond September 11″ she said, presumably knowing absolutely nothing about Mr Kilroy-Silk other than what she’d just had read to her. On closer inspection, her statement is bonkers. Does she mean Kilroy-Silk stopped living on Setpember 11? Did she mean to say “before September 11″? Does she know that in Britain the usage is 11 September? Does she know the exact date the world began 5,000 years ago? Is she totally bonkers?

  • Martin Adamson

    Does Kilroy-Silk actually “work for the BBC”? Doesn’t he work for a production company whose material is bought by the BBC and then transmitted by them?

    And are his anti-Arab rants any worse than Tom Paulin’s anti-Jewish rants?

  • ed

    *[Professor Afshar] said the article displayed a dangerous “ethnocentricity”. She added: “He does not have a history that goes beyond September 11. The world begins on September 11 for him but I would like to tell him that the world actually began 3000 years before Christ.”*

    Nope. For the Chinese the world started a lot earlier than that. Which is another bit of “my ethnic group started before yours. Nyah!” nonsense. Gotta love it. The final refuge of the incompetent and the idiotic.

    As for blaming all Germans for the Holocaust, there’s plenty of evidence to support that. Not to be anal about it but the entire theme behind the Holocaust is that it was mass murder organized as an industry. In order to support that industry many, if not all, concentration camps were located near large towns. Amazingly obtuse of the local population to notice tens of thousands of people going in, and nobody coming out. Where did they think those people went to? Out flying with Peter Pan? On vacation along the Danube?

    Even during the post-WWII era nobody believed the German populace that they didn’t know what was happening in the camps. It’s simply not believable in any way. If there was any ignorance at all, it was a wilfull ignorance at best and a proactive desire not to know.

    Addtionally I’ll point out the massive number of slaves used by the Nazis for factory workers. Again you’d have to be obtuse not to notice them. Or the fact that there was a substantial turnover.

  • Mark Holland

    Professor Haleh Afshar, a Middle Eastern expert at York University Light bulb moment.

    I wrote the following on the 10th of February last.

    #23 mark holland 2/10/2003 03:51AM PST

    The brakes on my car are knackered so I took the train to work this morning.

    There was a young guy and his dad sat on the seat opposite me. It sounded like the son was going back to university after the weekend. He said that he had to do an assignment about “The resurgence of Islamic whatever with respect to the USA and Isreal”. Oh yea? Thought I, “It’s due to Reaganomics apparently”.

    “RUBBISH!” I said – barging in on their conversation. “The Iranian revolution took place before Reagan even got in”. It’s a shame we didn’t have longer to talk as I had to get off at the next stop – I could have ranted (where did Khomeni live before going back to Iran?) – but I did learn he’s doing politics at York University. I reckon he should get his money back as he’s being brainwashed.

    I remember the guy saying his professor’s name, as if I’d know it, it was Arab and it was a she.

  • Verity

    ed – Your comments are well taken and should command the brief attention span of even the very disconnected Ms Afshar. Someone exercising his right of free speech and having a go at an ethnic group (however unfair it is to condemn them en masse) verbally and practically an entire nation complicit in murdering an ethnic group are very, very far apart.

    Saying what you feel like saying does not lead to mass murder or the desire to exterminate an entire race, no matter the self-serving hysterics. Free speech has worked very well in Britain since before (or maybe she meant after, who knows?) Kilroy-Silk “had a history”.

  • Sandy P.

    The views expressed by the author are not necessarily the views of this corporation.

    There’s precise disclaimer language, the Sunday Express should have used a tag line.

  • Reid of America

    Kilroy-Silk said ““Apart from oil – which was discovered, is produced and is paid for by the west – what do they contribute? Can you think of anything? Anything really useful? Anything really valuable? Something we really need, could not do without? No, nor can I.”

    I didn’t read the article but the excerpts I have seen are the truth. When did offending Arabs by telling the truth become a crime? As the saying goes: “You want the truth? You can’t handle the truth!” The Arabs are incapable of seeing the reality of their existence. Israel is the all purpose scapegoat for this denial.

  • Ben

    http://www.mcb.org.uk/letter60.html
    article at bottom it is now in linkable form

  • David Gillies

    One measure of a country’s dynamism is the amount of foreign language material it translates. This is vital for the flow of ideas and for technological growth. It’s worth noting that Spain translated more material last year than the entire Arab Middle East did since the fall of the Abbasid caliphate a thousand years ago.

  • Bombadild

    I am very interested in the examples of Arab contributions listed by the Independent at the bottom of the article.

    It seems to me both disturbing and very telling that none of those things (assuming that they are accurate) took place more recently than 2000 years ago.

    What positive things has Arabic society/culture contributed to the world … lately?

  • Reid of America

    The Independent article mentions both Mesopotamia and ancient Persia in defense of Arabs. Neither were Arab.

    Arab civilization started with Mohammed and his military conquest that spread the language and culture of a remote desert tribe from the Arabian peninsula. All the scientific discoveries of the Arabs occured in the lands that were conquered. But the high cultures of the conquered lands were all snuffed out within 200 years as the intolerance of Islam took hold.

    So-called Arabic numerals that are universally used today were taken from the ancient Hindus who were the first to use the decimal system.

    The only contributions from Arabs have been negative to the world at large from the time of Mohammed to the present day.

    Do the Arab defenders want the truth? They can’t handle the truth!

  • Haleh Afshar is a BBC favourite who is always self-righteously ranting against the “Islamophobia” of our media and people. She’s a charming woman herself, of course, being an open supporter of the terrorist group Hezbollah.

    The conclusion that free speech promotes racial harmony is not obvious at first sight. Words lead to deeds, one might think, and so, obviously, harsh words will lead to harsh deeds. Nonetheless you may make some headway among sceptics if you ask them whether in their own lives they think it better to bottle up resentments or to voice them before they become explosive.

    As Sigmund Freud said, civilisation began when the first man threw not a spear, but an insult.

  • Haleh Afshar is a BBC favourite who is always self-righteously ranting against the “Islamophobia” of the British media and people. She’s a charming woman herself, of course, being an open supporter of the terrorist group Hezbollah.

    The conclusion that free speech promotes racial harmony is not obvious at first sight. Words lead to deeds, one might think, and so, obviously, harsh words will lead to harsh deeds. Nonetheless you may make some headway among sceptics if you ask them whether in their own lives they think it better to bottle up resentments or to voice them before they become explosive.

    As Sigmund Freud said, civilisation began the first time a man threw an insult rather than a spear.

  • Verity

    Interesting how the BBC seems to feel the licence fee payers are interested in obtaining instruction on civilised behaviour from a favoured cadre of bitter, bossy, preachy, hectoring third world immigrant women. Jasime Alihibai (or a word to that effect)-Brown is another one. There may be a few more whose names I’ve never felt it worth a split second out of my life to note. Their self-righteous opinions are jaw-achingly predictable, self-serving, self-righteous and eventually – one can only hope – self-destructive. Of additional interest (in a boring way) is, coming from backward, bigoted societies, what on earth they think they have to teach advanced Western people. Or perhaps they mistake bemused tolerance for interest …

  • >It does look as though Kilroy-Silk felt he had to exercise his inner swine dog (as the Germans say)

    Charles: trivial and off-topic, but “Schweinhund” is simply not used any more – I haven’t heard anybody say it ever in the five years I’ve lived in Germany. These days “der innerer Schweinehund” (slightly different word, note the extra e in the middle) is used, but refers to laziness and apathy rather than anger. “Schweinhund” in the sense English people think it has is, like most of the German I learned at school 25 years ago, at best utterly obsolete if not downright wrong.

    (Education Blog material there for Brian, potentially, regarding the hopelessness of learning languages in schools / from books)

  • Martin Morgan

    Charles Copeland says: “most leading Communists were Jews”. There were a few Jews in Lenin’s politburo – Trotsky, Kamenev, Zinoviev, Sverdlov – but all were marginalized, dead or exiled before 1929. Most leading Communists then and later were not Jews. Even those who were Jews under Jewish law had, by becoming Communists, rejected their own people.

    Damned if we do, damned if we don’t.

  • Andrew Duffin

    Kamenev and Zinoviev were the defendants in Stalin’s first great show trial, in the thirties. I think they lasted a bit longer than 1929. But I suppose it depends on what you mean by marginalised.

  • steve

    Seems Kilroy’s had his show dropped by the BBc now too, and a Commons motion has been tabled denouncing him. See: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3383589.stm

  • A post about who will and who will not be immediately persecuted for ‘incitement’:

    “You’ll Be Arrested If You Say That (Unless You’re an Imam)”

    And just 10 seconds ago, on Radio 4, Trevor Phillips said (referring to the Sunday Express) “nobody reads the damn thing.”

    So nobody will be incited to anti-Arab violence, then.

  • Supervixen

    There is a difference between using the *wrong* words, and offending a whole race of people by saying they’ve contributed nothing to the world, they are wife beaters and are responsible for the deaths of thousands of people!

    If someone had expressed similar views, in all seriousness, about ALL white people, ALL Europeans or even ALL Britons, I’d feel justifiably angry, wouldn’t you?

  • Bombadil

    If someone made that comment about white people, I might reply:

    Computer technology, Empiricism, Advanced Medicine, Universal suffrage, Codified Civil Liberties, Women’s Rights.

    I certainly wouldn’t be defensive about the contributions people of European descent have made, and are making, to the world.

    I am not suggesting that Arabic peoples have not made, and are not making, such contributions as well. I am simply asking: what are they contributing lately (say, within the last thousand years)?

  • Verity

    What Bombadil said.

  • Alan Millar

    I take it that Trevor Phillips will now be lobying the Al Jazeera press to sack any Arab journalists who express anti-western opinions through the columns of the ‘Arab News’ or ‘Al Jazeerah’ daily newspapers.
    This would naturally apply to the presenters of the ‘Al Jazeerah’ TV news station.
    Or does the equality only apply to ‘minority races’ (who, incidentally, are now in the majority in certain areas)?

    To quote Billy Connolly: “The only person you can get away with making a joke or a remark about these days is a WHITE / HETEROSEXUAL / MALE!

  • noel moore

    Almost every article used by our islamic brethren, watches, cars, planes, guns, you-name-it…..comes from where? When did you last buy an article with a “made in syria” label?
    Islam has, unfortunately, never benefited from a much needed Reformation. I do believe that most Moslems are as reasonable & peaceful as their christian/jewish/buddhist/hindu etc. brothers. A minority brings terror to an already miserable World. The message to all muslims should be: get your bloody house in order and do to your radicals as they would do to us…..and YOU.

  • Sam G.

    Robert Kiltoy-Silk has spoken the truth, and the truth hurts.

    Just look at the list of Arab Nobel Prize recipients:

    1-Literature, 2-Peace (if you still count-in Arafat), 2-Chemistry, 2- Medicine

    Now look at the Jewish ones: 10-Literature, 8-Peace, 22-Chemistry, 13-Economics, 44-medicine, 31-Physics

    In my opinion the Palestinians deserve the Nobel Prize for medicine – they have created a genetic miracle. Imagine turning a whole people into suicide bombers, thieves, rapists, liars, and lynchers – all of this achieved within two generations.

  • John Garside

    In a week in which we’ve seen research predicting that our civilisation is about to wipe out roughly a third of the world’s species, I suggest that belittling Arab civilisation is somewhat dumb.

    http://www.newkerala.com/news-daily/news/features.php?action=fullnews&id=4273

  • plevene

    Open letter to Mr. Kilroy-Silk,
    I was surprised (and frankly disappointed) to see that you have apologised for your “anti-Arab remarks” in a way that could imply you had indeed been speaking with prejudice!

    Would it not have been more correct to say that, while you certainly did not wish to cause offence to anyone, these were nevertheless the facts as they appeared to you at time of writing?

    You would of course be happy to hear of different facts – and thereby stand corrected. Therefore the Muslim council etc.should provide you with all the information that would refute your opinion. In other words, if the Arabs have contributed to the world – inventions, aid, medical breatkthroughs, etc. etc. they should say so. If the stories of female mutilation, honour killings, suicide while killing innocent people taught as the highest of aims etc. were all non-existent or highly exaggerated – then the Muslims should say so. If indeed they condemn these practices they should also say so. And if they have an explanation as to why every single trouble spot in the world has as its common denominator an Arab participant, then they should by all means present it.

    I know that the BBC, in its usual craven way, did not back you up – but please don’t destroy my faith in your integrity by following their cowardly example!
    PL

  • Lofte

    Just wanted to add a quick note of support to the condemmed, ive found it funny that places to add support for kilroy are limited, while places to denounce are many.

    I for one have had enough of being told what is acceptable free speech and what isnt, especially when abul Hamza amoung others is left spouting anti-western rubbish in our very own country.

    In response to the above open letter, i to am shocked to hear he has basically been forced to recind his comments and apologise, when will this madness end?

  • the infidel

    “I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the end your right to say it.” Voltaire.

    It would appear that freedom of speech has died in the UK.

    We can be called dhimmi, Kufr, infidel or worse.
    be villified for our beleifs and culture.

    we are a race that dare not speak its name or show its flag we would be branded as rascist.

    enough is enough, Kilroy silk was right in what he said and he should be supported

    our democreacy and tolerance are being used against us it is time to call a halt to this

    the infidel

  • This dhimmitude thing at the BBC reminds us of the chilling effect that political correctness has on free debate in academia.

  • Amanda W

    I found myself reading some of the comments on this site with a great sadness. Charles Copeland for example appears to believe that ‘only’ 90% of Arabs are ‘suicide bombers, limb amputators and womenrepressors’. Reid of America states “The only contributions from Arabs have been negative to the world at large from the time of Mohammed to the present day.” And on and on go the attacks by those of you who have chosen to write. It doesn’t help to hate, it doesn’t help to condemn a whole race of people or their culture. Criticise governments – by all means. The UK government, the US government, the Israeli government, the Saudi Royal family, the Egyptian government. All those would be fair criticisms.

    I would understand if people on this site simply believed that Robert Kilroy-Silk had the right to express his own views. But the number of you that have so much hate in you is scary, Why?

  • William Hicks

    Since when did anyone have the right to say someone could not express his or her opinion. This is a democracy, with free speech, and the right to be who or what you like provided it is within the laws of the land. Kilroy did not break any laws, he simply said what most of the poeple in this country are feeling. The quotes used by the media as usual are taken out of context for the sesationalism of a headline. Well done Mr Kilroy-Silk, about time we had a voice speaking up for the residents of this country, you have gaiined a new viewer, (if you ever get back on T.V that is!)

  • Terry Jones

    I can only agree with the majority of comments which, in a nutshell, misquote Voltaire. We deserve to be shafted by all and sundry when we even go to the extremes of changing our laws to suit ‘Ethnic Minorities’. The case of the turban on a motorcycle is a typical one. The government then wonders why there is racial tension… What happened to ‘When in Rome do as the Romnas do’?

  • Mark o

    I applaud the comments made by Kilroy-Silk.The facts are there for everyone to see yet he is condemmed for saying them. I wish all the mamby-pamy pc do-gooders would pack their bags and go to live in the free,open-minded,non-repressive islamic countries where i am sure they will benefit from their 1,500 years of tyranny.
    Remember “The will of Allah” on september 11 as quoted by the peace loving fraternity. Could that be used in the same context as the recent earthquake in Iran (the axis of evil) . Oops i shouldn’t say that i’m a middle aged atheist white man living in a democracy that would make me a racist . Get rid of religion and you will be part way to some degree of sanity in this world.

  • Basil

    Well put Amanda W.

    I totally subscribe to the Voltairean edict here and think the Beeb may have gone OTT by pulling his show for the time being (though, as a government institution, there hands would have been tied). He’s welcome to spout whatever ill-informed drivel he wants (and the Sunday Express is welcome to recycle it six months later…)

    But what a truly loathsome bunch so many of you have shown yourselves to be. Kilroy-Silk’s article contained some of the most offensive garbage I have seen in some time. The sort of thing that has seen no small number of Zionazis jumping with joy on these pages (to say nothing of the newly-arrived Arabophobes).

    RK-S has already conceded there were factual errors (never mind the pejoratives) and still you red-necks and hayseeds cling to the article like gospel; so desperate are you to see your racist outlook reflected in the mass-media.

    God bless you bumpkins, keep reading The Sun, Daily Mail et al.

    (“William Hicks” – is that your surname or an adjective?)

  • Carl Callaghan

    It is ludicrous that Kilroys comments have brought his show to be axed and caused outrage. What happened to freedom of speech? I completely agree with what he said, the fact that the same article was printed in April 2003 and went unnoticed shows how undemocratic we have become in 9 months.

    This is as stupid as when a pub landlord was made to take down a St George flag from his pub.

  • Anthony Bridges

    Firstly, I have very little time for Robert Kilroy-Silk or his wretched programme. Nevertheless, I defend to the death his basic human right to free speech. Kilroy-Silk was only expressing his opinions and was not ‘exciting’ anybody to do anything.

    Remember how the law-abiding Irish citizens of this country were often insulted by the UK media when IRA terrorism was at its height? I do not remember any complaints then.

    The real victors of this sorry saga are the Trevor Phillips’ thought police, far-right Parties like the BNP, and even the terrorists themselves.

  • Ernest de Silva

    Not one newspaper or commentator has described Kilroy Silk’s comments as virulently anti-semitic, which is what they are. I wonder why?

  • fabien

    Computer? China
    Empirism ? is it a good invention
    Medecine ? China, Africa
    Suffrage ? late 20′s
    Civil liberties ? ask a non white 20 years ago if he could be a doctor or lawyer and practise, ask a woman if she could work as a boss in an office or hight responsabilities
    Nobel peace ? may be some country need to prove some thing to other
    rapist, thieves ?? are you talking about the americans in vietnam or the Christian soldiers in bosnia
    So many effort made by the “democratic countries” for their best comfort and still no sign of positive result for the poor in their own country and the one far away.
    Yes the attitude of the richest Arabs country are questionable
    but its up to the government to stop their money dance with them. but then its hard to bite the hand who feed you so generously, after all tou have to sell this big toys.
    Mr Reid with your” can you handle the truth” its a kind of truth you would have proclaim as a revisionist truth, an arab is born arab not muslim.

  • Bombadil

    Computer? China

    ?? Possibly the abacus was invented in China … but the general-purpose programmable computer is singularly the invention of Europeans and descendents of Europeans. Charles Babbage, Alan Turing, Bletchley Park, ENIAC, UNIVAC, etc.

    Empirism ? is it a good invention

    Yes, absolutely. Do you like the electricity you are using, on the computer you are using, to post to this comment thread on the internet? Empirical methodology was critical to developing the science underlying all those things.

    Medecine ? China, Africa

    Advanced Medicine … notice that Africa doesn’t send doctors to Europe to help treat outbreaks of disease there. The West sends doctors to Africa, where presumably they still have access to their traditional medicines, to treat the plethora of illnesses there which have been largely eradicated in the west.

    Suffrage ? late 20′s

    Yes … so what? That is within the last 1000 years.

    Civil liberties ? ask a non white 20 years ago if he could be a doctor or lawyer and practise, ask a woman if she could work as a boss in an office or hight responsabilities

    Codified Civil Liberties. Bias and discrimination still exist, as in every society. That is why it is so important to have Codified Civil Liberties.

    Nobel peace ? may be some country need to prove some thing to other
    rapist, thieves ?? are you talking about the americans in vietnam or the Christian soldiers in bosnia

    ????? I can’t parse that bit … are you replying to something?

    All of the above avoided the original question: what has Arabic Culture contributed to the world within the last thousand years?

    Here, I’ll start: the writings of Kahlil Gibran are very nice. Arabic culture added some elements to chess as it passed through on its way from India to Europe.

    But that really isnt much to show for all that time. What else?

  • Bombadil

    By the way, on further reflection:

    Civil liberties ? ask a non white 20 years ago if he could be a doctor or lawyer and practise, ask a woman if she could work as a boss in an office or hight responsabilities

    is just patently ridiculous, at least if you are talking about the UK, or the United States (as far as I know personally). 20 years ago is 1984, chum. There were a lot of non-white people and women doing all of those things 20 years ago. Maybe you meant 40 years ago?

  • Rabih

    I am kind of surprised to read all these comments on this web site. one would think that people in the 21st century are more likely to be more aware of what is going on around them, other than solely being driven by media.
    My dear friends, maybe it is true arabs are now going through a down period, but one can never deny that arabs have put a solid base for what we call today Medicine, physics, chemistry, astronomy, engineering and so many more..
    Life is a cycle, everyone makes a contribution, it is true arabs these days are not doing much, but keep in mind that each civilization builds on what its predecessors had accomplished.
    I am sure a lot of you know Thomas Edisson, Alexander Graham Bell, but none of you have heard of Ibn Sina, al-khawarizmi, al-razi and so much more.

    Without these people, our lives today wouldn’t be the same.
    arab civilization

    your link text goes here

  • Bombadil

    I never said Arab culture hadn’t made contributions. I asked what they had contributed lately (1000 years). Your reply seems to suggest: nothing, they are in a down cycle.

    If that is true, why is Kilroy-Silk’s article a problem?

  • Whisper

    Has anyone actually read this article? If so, where? I don’t feel I can comment until I’ve seen what he actually said rather than what he’s been interpreted as saying by various groups with their own axes to grind. I’ve seen headlines reporting his insult to Moslems but no extract I’ve seen mentions Moslems. He’s been quoted as claiming his article refers to arab states rather than arabs, a big difference.

  • Alan Millar

    In answer to some of the points raised since I last posted…
    The reason it’s so hard to find sites in support of Kilroy is that the ‘Politically-Correct Brigade’ have unfortunately become the majority. When questioned, they agree with many of the relevant FACTS raised by Kilroy, but would never dream of saying it. Thay have willingly gone with the P.C. flow and surrendered their right to freedom of speech.

    To answer AMANDA and BASIL…
    The hatred in the postings here isn’t directed globally at Arabs. It isn’t hatred either. It is anger.
    Anger at the way our lifestyle and standing in our own country is being eroded in favour of these peoples.
    Would you feed & take care of your neighbour’s children, then give the leftovers to your own?
    I’m afraid, like it or not, the basic instinct of survival is still indelibly stamped in all of our DNA.
    Until this alters you will always have this type of reaction against anything which we (rightly or wrongly) perceive to be a threat to our existence.
    It’s called Human Nature.

    To quote LOFTE…
    Almost everyone I have spoken to (the ones who are not afraid to say it, that is), have…
    ‘had enough of being told what is acceptable free speech and what isnt, especially when Abul Hamza amoung others is left spouting anti-western rubbish in our very own country.’

    By the way LOFTE, the government pays him around £100,000 a year in benefits for the privilege of expressing these extremist views against them. MAD WORLD OR WHAT?
    Where was Trevor Phillips when Abul Hamza was spouting HIS racial & religious hatred?

    I lived in Saudi for 7 years. We had to pray in secret. Churches, chapels and any showing of Christian worship was a punishable crime against Islam.
    Yet muslims in London & Birmingham worship in some of the largest mosques in the world. (I think the largest in Europe is in London…don’t quote me)

    How can diplomatic relations allow such one-sided concessions? Money I’m saddened to say. The Saudis were paying around £14m for each Tornado fighter, and God-fearing America were raking it in from the oil. So who gives a damn about OUR equality when there’s that kind of loot at stake?
    Well it’s payback time guys… lets face it. In a few years time we will experience what being a minority is really like.
    I got no unemployment benefit when I returned because I hadn’t fully paid my NI stamps while abroad. It didn’t count that I HAD paid 21yrs Tax & NI before I left.
    Yet an asylum seeker could get immediate income support on arrival, having contributed nothing.

    With regards to history…
    Hey, wasn’t it the Americans who sold the Indians whiskey… then sold them guns? Look at how they eventually did quell them ‘pesky injuns’. The ‘Native Americans’ were almost wiped out.
    Assuming I can still quote from the Bible without being accused of religious bigotry…

    Hosea 8:7 ‘For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind: it hath no stalk: the bud shall yield no meal: if so be it yield, the strangers shall swallow it up.’

    Have the American government learned nothing?

    Let’s get this current Asylum and Aid mania into perspective…
    Charity does and should always begin at home.
    I would willingly help someone push their car regardless of their skin colour or religion… I just don’t expect to have to give him mine if it can’t be repaired. Even if he & his family do need it more than me and my family.
    We don’t hate them.
    We hate the system that allows them to be more equal than us.

  • IC1 UK

    Comment deleted. This blog is private property (unlike the BBC) and thus racist epithets are not welcome because, well, we say so. We don’t much like Trevor Phillips either but kindly attack the arguments and not the man

  • dan

    greetings from california! saw hoop-t-do on local tv report.

    in my opinion kilroy-rice is absolutely correct!

    he has NOTHING to apoligize for!

  • The point is that fuss about the Kilroy-Silk piece – and why no furore the first time it was printed? – is being made with the deliberate aim of curbing speech.

    And there are specific political factors at play here

  • Mr. Charles Copeland,

    The statement that “Most Leading Communists Were Jews” has no basis in fact what so ever, and I strongly suggest you take a Russian history course or at least read a credible book on the subject. The Jews, due to the fact that they were so viciously persecuted in Russia, did support Communism, a system which at least in theory would finally grant them equality and respect, in large proportions, however, the majority of both leading and regular members of the party were ethnic Russians.

  • Irena Blalszkiewicz

    Must just say something about Kilroy and his comments about ‘Politically Correct’ I totally agree with him. Everyone it seems are treading on egg shells in this country afraid to utter anything for fear of ‘offending’ someone. I guess we could offend virtually everyone with anything we say these days. I’ve given up on ‘Politically Correct’ Ive got so confused with whats right and wrong Ive gone back to the good ‘ole days. We’ve all gone made with it.
    I speak my mind and I make no apology for it any more. Did you know that ‘Brainstrom’ has been exonorated. The Epileptic society denounced any knowledge of ever saying that it could offend people who had epilepsy, in fact they use the term ‘brainstorm’ and had no idea where it originated…. probably some do-gooder! So its official – you can you ‘Brainstorm’ – I go with Kilroy, why should he be penalised for having an opinion and voicing it. And the BBC are total ‘woosess’ for taking the program off, here we are again, walking on egg shells!!

  • Steve Vedmore

    I would like to offer my support for Mr Kilroy Silk.
    Freedom of speech doesn`t Kill people, Turning the wrong way down a street in one of Englands Northern towns seems to be a life or death throw of the dice,
    I am sick of all this PC with regard to our non British cousins, what we say amongst us all should be taken equally, good and bad, its just talk,
    I am Welsh and have been brought up in a cosmipolitan dockside area, People must learn to get on and respect eachother, Talk is Talk, Kilroy should be allowed like anyone else to speak as he feels.

  • OpinionsAreNotFacts

    Kilroy has every right to say he doesn’t like arabs because he is perhaps racist, and probably never knew an arab or had an arab friend. However, to say that arabs never gave us anything means that some stupid people out there may actually believe this, and for this factual inacuracy alone he deserves to be banished from the media. For the introduction of alogorithmic modelling into maths which has made things like this web forum possible ,the Arabs deserve a fairly long sabatical in my book.
    sites like this encourage an unfortunate tendancy for people to overvalue their own opinions, some opinions aired here are based on pure fiction and distortion like the claim about translations made earlier, where is this person getting their ‘facts’ from.

  • DP

    It is very difficult if nigh impossible to quantify a relation between race and intelligence. What is more likely is that there is a relation between intelligence and the prevailing culture. It is a fact that Arabs, whether Muslim or not, have lived in the closed system of an Islamic culture. In such a culture, questioning is not part of the ethos. Thus when one posits a lack of creativity in Arabs, what one is really implying is the closed Islamic social system, and ‘Arabs’ is a mere shorthand.

    Then there is the additional fact that invention and particularly invention in abstract thought, arises only in settled societies. This is plainly obvious, as a nomadic herder society, just does not have the resource or the time to sustain an individual’s indulgence in abstract thought. OTH, a settled society does, and encourages individuals in this mode of activity.

    Thus all the great inventions of mankind rise from settled societies and none from the nomadic tribal ones. The inventions and discoveries from the ancient world come from settled societies such as Greece, Mesopotamia, Persia, India, China and ancient Egypt. And none of them are Arabs. Arabs were, right until the nineteenth century, essentially tribal nomadic societies. One sees this even now in wealthy Saudi Arabia, as rich Saudis play/pretend being nomads.

    These two social situations in the Arab-cum-Muslim world, may be the reason for the lack of any lasting human creativity from that region.

    Whatever maybe the reasons for such a lack of creativity, what Kilroy-Silk wrote, is not on the whole wrong. And even if he were, there is no reason to subject him to harassment of this sort.

    Islam and the Koran is in dire need of a thorough fisking and kow-towing to the likes of the Muslim council of Britain, does nobody any good.

  • DP

    OpinionsAreNotFacts:
    The Arabs DID NOT INVENT ALGEBRA. Mathematics has a long history of development in Greece, China, India and Mesopotamia. It is typical of Arabs to claim that Mesopotamians were Arabs. They were not.

    To be fair, the Arabs did introduce the decimal number system and the concept of zero to Europe. But both these inventions were the product of Hindu mathematicians. The Arabs were the messengers rather then the originators of the message.
    The one mathematician that the Arabs claim as their own is Al-Khwarizmi. He certainly lived in the area of Baghdad but was not an Arab, but Persian.
    The title of his text on Algebra got distorted in translation to Arabic, and thus we have Algebra. This text, containing some solutions, were not the product of his mind, but a collection of the works of others. He could be regarded as the Editor.

    But even in the field of Algebra, the Greeks and Hindus, several centuries prior to Al-Khwarizmi, were more advanced then he. For instance Al-Khwarizmi solved quadratics but these were developed by the Hindu mathematicians who gave general solutions rather then particular ones. Al-Khwarizmi also ignored negative solutions, as he did not understand the concept of a negative number. This despite the fact that Hindus had the general solutions and the concept of negative numbers.

    Given the trade routes of the time, it is conceivable that Al-Khwarizmi got most of what he wrote from India. It is also conjectured that Al-Khwarizmi travelled to India to study Maths. Quite possible. And in any case Al-Khwarizmi was a Persian and not Arab.

    Given the primitive times, it is unlikely we will ever know the exact truth, but I find the Arab mentality of stealing other people’s ideas and claiming it as their own, very distasteful. Though it seems to go with the general nature of Arab tribal society, where brigandage is considered a honourable profession. It is unfortunate that such a trait persists even to the modern era.

  • Snooo

    Oh dear.

    Freedom of speech… Great and all that. Say what you like.

    But if Rod Liddle can be sacked by being anti-Countryside Alliance, then Kilroy should likewise get the boot for even more openly partisan and frankly xenophobic.

    Some the arguments which are backing up some of his throwaway comments here sadden me into thinking that a rather frightening proportion of the country agree with this kind of discourse. By using the nobel prize – a western instition exsisting within the paradigm of western academa and culture – to claim that Arabs have done nothing for modern civilisation is utterly rediculous and shortsighted.

    As for Kilroy, well, it wasn’t a particularly good show anyway….

  • Alan Millar

    Having contributed to, and followed the posts in this highly thought-provoking forum about Kilroy, I suddenly had a thought…

    ISN’T IT GREAT?

    No matter what side of the fence you’re on, you are free to come on here and argue the toss all day long, without fear of having your door kicked in and your computer stuff smashed up at any moment.
    And what’s more… we’re all alive and uninjured at the end of it… and if you’re totally honest, a little more educated in the process.

    I thought the BBC’s ‘Have Your Say’ page… subtitled “Your chance to debate the issues and ask the questions that matter”,
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/default.stm

    may prove to be a good starting page to show that there are some people supporting Kilroy. However, apparently you can’t have your say on THIS news item (arguably one of the biggest headlines of the week) since it doesn’t appear anywhere, even after I sent an e-mail requesting that we should all be able to debate the subject.

    Sorry BBC this won’t do. You became involved in this affair when you took the show off the air. Indifference and burying your head in the sand now is as loathsome as you perceived Kilroy’s remarks to be.
    The page now has a response from Mr. Kilroy stating… “I’m disappointed that the BBC didn’t feel able to support me.”
    “I said to it that I understand its need to say that the column is nothing to do with it and the views are nothing to do with it, but my impartiality on the programme has never been a problem.”

    Sorry mate… you’re on your own. You should move to Channel 4 if you want to air innovative or controversial views.
    The Beeb will keep their heads down on this one. It’s too hot to handle for their liking.
    The only ‘dangerous’ person they’ve given a job to is Jeremy Paxman… and he’ll be warned over what he can & can’t say on this one.
    Or will he value his freedom of speech too much to heed them?
    I await this week’s Newsnight with baited breath.

    Quote:
    ‘The death of democracy is not likely to be an assassination from ambush. It will be a slow extinction from apathy, indifference, and undernourishment.’
    Robert Maynard Hutchins (director for Encyclopædia Britannica)

  • Alan Millar

    If you wish to read the full article it is printed in it’s entirety at this link…

    http://www.mcb.org.uk/letter60.html

    Reading it is sure to throw up a few more points for discussion.

    Incidentally, I tried to find it using Google… but was told ‘Your search – “christian council of saudi arabia” – did not match any documents.’
    I then realised how stupid I was, and entered “Muslim Council Of Great Britain” and got 338 results.
    No surprise there then.

    Naturally it is a letter of complaint to the BBC from the Muslim Council Of Great Britain…

  • basil

    DP – I find your very gross and inaccurate generalisations very distasteful, indeed. But then, you are on the RK-S bandwagon, so I would expect the same level of inaccuracy.

    Did you write that yourself, or cobble it from ‘Orientalism for Dummies’?

    Alan Millar – at least you have been literate and mannered in your post. No less offensive, mind – but mannered. As such, you merit a considered reply.

    There is a disenfranchised proletariat rump whose opinions are informed by this sort of xenophobic, populist crap. They have been around for a lot longer than the Arabs have been in Britain. Whether it involves beating up on the Irish, folks from the Caribbean or sub-continental Asians, such folk have never needed too much prompting.

    You don’t need me to cite the instances of anti-Arab/Moslem violence that has been perpetrated on your isle in the last few years. And, before you assume I’m talking from afar – I lived in London for over five years.

    My god man, just look at some of the dribble of people who share your opinion. From ‘Dan in California’: “In my opinion kilroy-rice is absolutely correct”

    … there are a number of morons who haven’t even read the damn thing, don’t even know who Kilroy-Silk is and are still desperate to pin their colours to his Arabophobe masthead. I didn’t think Littlejohn needed a prop, but there you go…

    I would be utterly fascinated if to see what kind of ‘support’ RK-S would have garnered from you folk if he whipped out a few gross and similarly offensive generalisations about the ‘other’ semites…

    “It was the wrong e-mail attachment” indeed.

  • bataille

    Right, okay Basil. Put your money where your mouth is: immigrate to Saudi and try to lead the same life you lead in the UK or some other modern western state, so long as they’re still either western or modern. Try to pratice Christianity or a non-Islamic religion openly. Try to date. Go ahead, make the attempt to express your well thought out opinions on issues of the day. Good luck mate.

  • Alan Millar

    Nice one BASIL

    The violence you mention is indeed a sad reflection on the inability of some people to communicate.
    I’m disappointed we have almost had to go ‘underground’ to discuss this issue. The forums on the mainstream news sites are avoiding it like the plague.
    We teach by talking and we learn by listening. Violence is not a form of communication.
    I hope I’m speaking for most of the Kilroy-Silk supporters when I say we are not all rushing to join the BNP.
    We only want to maintain our national identity, rights and equality in our own country without every little non-PC slip of the tongue being pounced upon.

    Where did the phrase ‘Politically Correct’ come from anyway? The two words are a contradiction in terms.
    Maybe it was a mis-spelt e-mail that originally said ‘Politically Corrupt’!

  • Andy

    Bataille

    Try using your vote if you’re black in Florida.
    Try praying in school in the USA.
    Try becoming a CEO if you’re black in the USA.
    Try becoming President if you’re black in the USA.
    Try staying off death row if you’re innocent but in the wrong place at the wrong time and black in the USA.

    Try being an Arab, for that matter, and doing any of these.
    Or try being an Arab in the camp in Cuba, held without trial and not given the rights either of a civil prisoner or a prisoner of war. Liberty? Truth, Justice and the American Way?

    It’s great to be rich and white in much of the western world, much as it’s great to be in the Ba’ath party in much of the Arab world. Hell, enough money, you can buy a Presidency in either of them…

  • Alan Millar

    BATAILLE …your observations apply to not only Saudi but many other oppressive countries.
    The other form of communication I forgot to mention is the peaceful demonstration or protest.
    Try organising or taking part in one of them in Saudi, Saddam’s Iraq, or indeed any country run by a dictatorship.

  • basil

    Alan, it pains me to admit it, but we might even reach consensus on this one!

    I take your point that this is a hot potato; i haven’t been able to find much on the mainstream sites in terms of forums. And I appreciate the need for a more robust debate on the issue of national identity, without walking on egg-shells.

    But it doesn’t change the fact that RK-S’s sentiments were incredibly crude. Do you think it right to tar an entire people with the broadest of brush strokes? Because that’s what he did. He *could* have said there are elements of extremism that need to be addressed. But he didn’t… he said Arabs were “suicide bombers, limb-amputators, women repressors”.

    He went on to confuse Arabs with Iranians and gave us this charming notion: “They should go down on their knees and thank God for the munificence of the United States”. I’m sitting here, trying to think of a sentiment that would better play into the hands of the extremists and for the life of me, I can’t…

    Does he regret those words? Only insofar as it will impact upon his career. And all the qualifications in the world (“I was only referring to the regimes”), won’t change the fact that he was happy to voice such sentiments in the first place.

    Bataille, it’s barely worth dignifying your dribble with a response, but it pleases me no end my post irked you to that extent… :^)

    But I must say, I find it hysterically amusing that you’ve cited Saudi as the best option for me – the one regime that is propped up by the west more than any other. Oh, the irony is killing me!

    Have you ever been to the Middle East? Because I most certainly have… and – wait for it, because this will truly rock your world – it is not the homogenous block you and the likes of RK-S make it out to be.

    There are differing levels of free speech across the board. Saudi is not the same as Lebanon, for example… and yes, it is entirely possible to openly practice Christianity in parts of the Middle East. Not all of it, I will readily concede, but most certainly sizable parts of it. Because – and I have to repeat this, as it is clearly a paradigm-shifting sentiment for you – they are *not* all the same!

    Utterly mind-blowing, isn’t it?

  • fawlty

    god knows how you people ever got an armada together basil ;)

    I see no immensely offensive stuff in his article, I also see it as incredibly outrageous to take his show off the air, he’s been doing that show for so many years, he always tried to defuse racism/bigotry in his shows when it came up whenever I watched it, in an understanding way btw, not a ‘SILENCE you will be taken out and shot for voicing your opinion’ but in a way more in the vein of ‘let’s keep civilized, and think a sec before you speak, and we are all humans after all, look at yourself’ etc
    So to take a dump on a guy who has proven his reliability so much for the BBC is about as rude as you can get I think.

    As for the Arabs, I think that yes, I see how he says ignore those that say the west is loathsome and the Arabs are nobel, yet at the same time nod approvingly if someone blows himself up to kill a few western people, I think that it is indeed what we westerners term ‘civilized’ to have a little less of that.

    The muslim community often says ‘that’s not typical muslim’ but isn’t it? isn’t allah all about ‘destroy the infidel dogs’? Now I know many muslims in the west aren’t like that, but to draw a silly parallel, if a catholic is pro abortion can he speak for the religion then?

    If we attempt to speak of arabs OR muslims as a group then we must take reality into account somewhat, the reality of averages, and indeed of loudmouths too, because even if they are a minority as the moderate muslims in the west claim, they all too often run the show in this world, be it in the east or west or anywhere.

    I think the apology of kilroy might have been wrong but it again illustrates his attempt of keeping civilized.
    I say a column is a column and is there to be a little controversial, to stimulate discussion, nothing wrong with that.

    I think the anti-racism guy showed his real and ugly NAZI-like face during this event, and the BBC their cowardly yellow belly.

    Oh and if the muslims want to equate arabs with religion, please don’t do that to the west, I and many more are atheists and proud of it dammit.

  • basil

    ay up ‘fawlty’ (what, are you my evil mirror image?)

    i’m just going to cite your passage…

    “isn’t allah all about ‘destroy the infidel dogs’?” and leave it at that.

    I could say isn’t Christianity about “crusades” “child-killing embargoes” and “cluster bombs”? Trouble is I can see it for the irretrievably stupid statement that it is.

    You really need to read less A4-sized literature, old bean…

  • It is a crazy world we live in. Kilroy has a right to freedom of speech, I have the right to agree or disagree with his or anyone’s opinion on anything, There is far too much big brother rubbish going on, people are leaving the UK by the bucket load, they are sick to the back teeth of having their human rights dumped on by politically correct idiots. Kilroy should set up his own digital channel and put two fingers up at the BBC, who are being stupid over this in my opinion, well ott, Linda

  • fawlty

    I’m sorry to tell you I used the old bean and didn’t repeat any a4′s at all, and yes and no, indeed the christian bible is also full of vile stuff, however the western christians preach a very much altered bible and think ‘god’ and ‘jesus’ is all about peace nowadays.

    As I stated I am an atheist, so don’t counter my argument with ‘the christians aren’t bad?’ because I do not consider the west as ‘christian’ as much, although Bush is pretty much a religious nutter I hear, we still have separation of state and religion somewhat I hope, I’ll read the news later to see if they got rid of that yet though, sigh.
    I’m certainly am not going to defend christianity with any great effort, but common, listen to any religious leader, the muslims aren’t exactly selling allah as a nice chap.

    I have personal experience with foreign muslims and their poorly hidden disdain for non-muslims is hardly a secret.
    You should hear the things their sons call western women on the street for instance..

    And being an atheist is something I would not go shout on the streets in any arab nation frankly, would you? or any religious nation to be honest, or a Bush fundraiser..

    pfft now the morning show is having a go at kilroy, trying to paint him as a silly ridiculous nutter, amusing, as if sunday morning show hosts are selected on intelligence or any other worthwhile quality apart from being dull

    The reason I mention the ‘infidel dogs’ is because that’s not a cry of a few extremist, it’s a common view, whereas that crusades business ended years ago for most of us (apart from Bush and Tony perhaps?)
    as for embargoes? hmm, got a point with that one, as for cluster bombs ya, another good point, westerners are pretty much sodding idiots too :(

    O wait, I could argue the embargo was UN and voted for by arabs/muslims also, although I agreed with saddam at one point when he said he met all stipulations and it should be ended, it was Bush who is as you know rather insane that would not budge.

    And soon we will have reached the middle ages too, still, at this time some remnants remain of civilization (I think.. perhaps) so we got a slight edge :P

  • fawlty

    Oh I want to add one thing in the interest of honesty, I think that guantanamo bay thing is as barbarian as any cutting off hands etc.
    Perhaps more so.

    The simple destruction of 2 buildings is cascading us into the middle-ages.

  • basil

    Fawlty –

    Damn, what are you doing being so reasonable? I was ready for a stoush on this one… :^)

    I think we’re in agreement that religion is a cloak of justification for some pretty vile things, be it in the name of Islam, Christianity, Judaism – you name it and someone will find a passage to justify it.

    I will say this much however – you’re letting your own belief system (and let’s face it, atheism takes just as great a leap as faith as monotheism…) and disdain for organised religion (and their attendant cultures) colour your judgement.

    What RK-S spewed out was quite offensive, it really is as simple as that.

    I’m not the first and won’t be the last to observe there would have been such a furore if he had directed even a *quarter* of that sort of invective in the direction of ‘Jews’ or ‘blacks’ in the west. And it strikes me as disheartening that someone as clearly intelligent as yourself would want to align yourself with such bile.

    But that’s the neat thing about Arabophobia – it’s the one form of bigotry that’s still OK across the board. You can be the most fervent anti-Arab and still keep your right-on credentials.

    For a long time it was the Jews, then the Germans (who still appear to be fair game, but only with the red tops) and now – since, I don’t know, let’s say 1948 – it’s the Arabs. Human nature, I know, but deeply dispiriting all the same.

    I can’t really have a go at you, as we appear to have too much common ground. Except I’m an agnostic… hedging my bets and all that!

  • fawlty

    Hmm, I can’t deny my views are ‘coloured’ by my uhm, views ;)

    And yes, it was racy what he said, not offensive in a big way in my view, but surely stopping his show and suing him etc over this is too much, it’s racy but not racist in a legal sense I think.

    You show me any article in any national paper that is not offensive to at least 1000 people in some way.

    And he said it was written during heated times, and accidentally resubmitted at this time

    I wonder, do you agree he was always devoid of any of this ‘bad’ behavior on his show?

    I’m not especially anti-arab btw, well I am anti many people ‘t is true, but I only single out arabs on odd days :D

    I didn’t write the article, what offends me severly is pulling his show and falling all over him to this extend, if people said ‘sod off fool’ that would be ok in my book, it’s just how this is handled.

  • Olt

    Western civilisation is worth defending.

    The Left wants to destroy Western civilisation, because it is “capitalist”…it has no qualms about aligning with Islamists.

    Like Saruman aligning himself with Sauron, the Left believes it can emerge victorious.

  • basil

    Ay up Fawlty,

    Straight to your points…

    > it’s racy but not racist in a legal sense I think.

    Now, I don’t want to get too smug on this one, but this somewhat proves my point. In that I think what he wrote was *very* racist. And it gets back to my earlier point about Arabophobia being OK – people just don’t see it as such because they’re inured to it. It’s the done thing.

    Bear in mind, he never made the disctinction he’s trying to delineate at the moment (now that his career is on the line). Namely, this referred to *all* Arabs.

    OK, time to get explicit – transpose ‘Arabs’ with ‘Jews’ and replace the cliches “suicide bombers, limb-amputators, women repressors” with “money hoarders, land-grabbers, industry-dominating”.

    Are you offended? Because both lines of reasoning make me sick to the pit of my stomach.

    If you still don’t find it offensive, then I say congratulations, you are a well-rounded misanthrope!

    But I would put it to you that a sizeable majority of folk jumping up and down with joy at RK-S’s sentiments would have been appalled at my suggested replacements (and rightly so). And there’s the rub…

    > You show me any article in any national paper that is not offensive to at least 1000 people in some way.

    I can’t argue with you there – indeed you’re probably being conservative with your numbers… :^)

    > And he said it was written during heated times, and accidentally resubmitted at this time

    Yes, but it was actually subbed the first time, to take out the more contentious stuff. This time it appeared in all its bigoted glory…

    > I wonder, do you agree he was always devoid of any of this ‘bad’ behavior on his show?

    Hard for me to say. When I was living in London I actively avoided his show – it was somewhat lowbrow and gave me a migraine. Having said that, he always came across as a closet bigot. In that he could be quite small-minded, but was quick to clip people over the ear if he felt they were getting a bit out of line. Which is another way of saying he had the lexical ability to tart up what he was saying, whereas his constituency – dozy housewives and the chronically unemployed, from what I could see – weren’t always blessed with his ‘subtlety’.

    But I take your point that it could have been handled with a little more common sense and it’s all OTT.

    I would love to have seen someone like, say, Hanan Ashrawi take him on in a debate. That would have been far more satisfying. Not only female, but Christian to boot! And a proud Arab… that would have confused him no end. Then she would have torn him a new arsehole (intellectually speaking)

  • fawlty

    hmm, well frankly I see countless cases of the same about jews, and what about Livingston about Bush. and many people about americans for instance
    It’s all views, many/most I disagree with, but sure, speak your mind.
    It’s only a problem if it entices hate in the sense of going out and killing people or making their lives miserable in extreme ways, well I think he was a bit late for that, didn’t the parliament and the US president and senate and congress etc etc already do that?

    In america they have papers that are I hear largely dedicated to blaming the jews for most everything, from the weather to tooth decay btw.

    Freedom of speech is a precious gift for all, for the arabs for the muslims for jews for you and me and everybody, let’s be a little careful with it he.
    I think the caution should lie in favor of freedom not with a few being offended.

    True btw, show is lowbrow and all, but he contained himself excellently and the freaking BBC should stand with their people, I mean since the first publication he made countless shows didn’t he, no-one complained, this is all a bit lame

    I bet he wouldn’t have run away from a discussion btw, he’s every day in discussion after all, that’s what I mean, if it is so bad let’s expose it in a fair and open way, glad we agree

    btw thanks! I am a misanthrope, show me a flaw in that view and I’ll be impressed.

    As for land-grabbing, let’s stay away from that in this discussion, I think you can see why, too religiously orientated for my taste anyways :/

    hmm, I think this stuff is getting a bit too much about fawlty and basil now come to think of it, perhaps I should STFU a while.

    Closing words though (you saw that coming I bet) did you actually read the whole article? because sometimes I wonder if you use these extreme descriptions if we read the same thing.

  • Aeryn

    Mr.Kilroy-Silk was absolutely right!!! But hey,…the truth hurts.

  • Vladimir

    Where will I find (in Internet) the Article of Robert Kilroy-Silk in Sunday Express?

  • Vladimir

    Where will I find (in Internet) the Article of Robert Kilroy-Silk in Sunday Express?
    Thanks

  • Alan Millar

    FAWLTY…
    You made an interesting point when asking ‘did you actually read the whole article?’

    Maybe all people postings to this forum from this point on should open by stating if they’ve read the article or not.
    Tying in “READ IT” would help us all.
    I posted the link to it already but here it is again.

    http://www.mcb.org.uk/letter60.html

    There certainly are a lot of unnecessary generalisations in his statements, but there are also a lot of (conveniently?) unpublicised FACTS in there as well…
    “We have thousands of asylum seekers from Iran, Iraq, Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries living happily in this country on social security… …there is not one single British asylum seeker in any Arab country.”

    On a lighter note, his rant at the end of the article with regard to ‘loony’ George Galloway and the ‘other half’ of his crazy-gang act Clare Short is absolutely hilarious :-)

  • disenfranchised

    By using the invented term – Zionazis, Basil has in an instant, disenfranchised any point he was trying to make, by demonstrating that he is an anti-semitic bigot.

    It has become a favourite ploy of the Palestinians and certain left wing elements to try to demonise anyone who doesn’t agree with their particular, warped brand of politics liberally mixed with terrorism.

    The right to freedom of speech is supposed to be enshrined in law, and yet unless you are non-white you cannot make any comments that might criticise the behaviour of people or states who seek to destroy our way of life and our system of supposed democracy.

    The BBC had no right to suspend Kilroy-Silk’s Show – a decision made after an orchestrated campaign by the people that he was writing about – he did not make any non-politically correct comments on his show, and until such time as he has been proven to have broken any laws, by what he wrote in the Sunday Express, they have no right nor reason to take action

    Basil, please do carry on using the invented term “Zionazis”, because you simply destroy any basis for your warped point of view by insulting another state and people. But hey, it must be OK, because they are jews and not arabs (sarcasm intended)

  • Alan Trinder

    Will all those left leaning journalists who endlessly smear America and Americans along with Jews and Israel now face the sack? Will all those Muslim “community leaders” who articulate their hatred of “the West” now find themselves unemployed? Of course not. – this is a blatant case of double standards.

  • OpinionsAreNotFacts

    here is another unfortunate misinterpretation.

    DP wrote :

    OpinionsAreNotFacts: The Arabs DID NOT INVENT ALGEBRA.

    This statement only shows the readers inability to actually read. In my original post I only mentioned alogorithmic modelling of problems, nowhere did I mention algebra. It is exactly this sort of inaccuracy that I would say earned Kilroy the sack, and rightly so. Don’t let your prejudice blur your ability to actually read what’s on the page.

    If DP would like further clarification of the difference between an alogorithm and algebra , I know a very good arab maths professor….

    Can someone actually clarify who Arabs are. some people seem to say that Iranians are Arabs some say that they’re Persians,
    Can we safely say that if we suspect an Arab of making a contribution to civilisation we can reclassify them as Persian ?
    What are Palestinians ?
    If they’re Arabs that means that 60% of Iraelis are Arab Jews.
    What have they ever done for us eh?

    I’m confused, I’m not sure who to hate anymore.

    Anyway I think we’re missing the real issue here… what did the Eskimos ever do for us eh ?
    Forty words for snow, I think they’ve got a lot to answer for.

  • Dan

    Hi dear OpinionsAreNotFacts;

    Just to answer your question about Iranian… Iranians are not Arab. Iran has a long history of almost 7,000 years since the Aryans immigrated to the Iran Heights. Aryans gave their name to this land and called it “land of Aryans” or Iran and known as Persia.
    In 1931 the Kingdom of Persia changed its name to the Kingdom of Iran.
    Cyrus (Xerxes) The Great (550 B.C.) was the first emperor who conquered Elam and gave Jews freedom, He was also the first one who declared and practiced human rights. In the Great Persia Empire from East China to Libya, many nations were coexisting and all were declared free to practice their own religion and follow their own traditions and customs.

    To tell you the truth Iranians do not like, when people call them Arab! For some is like insulting them!! Saddam killed over 1 million of them and was supported by Egyptian and Jordanian soldiers and politicians of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

    There are some Arab scientists but not Khwarizmi, Ibn Sina, Omar Khayyam, Razi, or Biruni… they all Persians (Iranians).

    Everyone has a right to freedom of speech, everyone have the right to agree or disagree… but we should remember something people can not choose their ethnic or colour
    Best Regards
    Dan

  • Personally I agree with Kilroys views. Sorry to say that but there it is, it’s quite sad that he’s had to retract his comments.

    Political correctness is what it’s all about now :(

  • it’s wrong to make generlisations about any race true or not. we are all humans and are the product of our individual societies. it should be obvious to anyone with an iq over about 70 that all religion is fiction and it’s not the way to get us all living together in peace. all religions should be phased out and all promoting of any religion banned. you don’t need religion to understand the difference between right, wrong, what is ethical and fair. all religion by it’s very values and beliefs causes people to switch of their imagination and close their mind to thinking anything that does not fit the religion. try it yourself, speak to someone religious and try and get them to even accept there may not be a god, they won’t, they have all been brainwashed. i accept their may be a god but i’ll belive when someone proves it. 6 billion people on the planet, very few with secular educations. really, why do we care what kilroy says, it’s about time we had some realistic debate on this subject anyway.

  • Donald F. Acton G.M.

    Having just read through all the contributors to this page I find the points I wished to make have already been covered more than adequately than I , a mere Anglo Saxon white male who has served this country for most of his adult life ,suffering health problems as a result who’s father served in Burma during the last world war and whos’ grandfather was the last surviving member of the Sherwood Foresters during the first world war. Why did my family serve this Country ?
    Why did so many of our comrades lay down their lives , well it certainly wasn’t so that Trevor Phillips and his merry band of quangos can tell us what we can and cannot say. Did I read somewhere recently that he was going to get his money soaking team to concentrate on race relations and not on chasing prosecutions against those enjoying their RIGHT to free speech?
    Donald F. Acton G.M.

  • donald, i feel for you and all like you, i’m 37 and you sound simular to my father. i left england 2 years ago because i had enough of paying the high taxes and the high cost of living in a society that appears to have given up it’s vaules to a load of left-wing nambiepambies. if people want to come to the uk and contribute i welcome them all but they don’t need to bring their backward religions with them. i feel so strongly about this and i know many others with the same view. why do i feel so helpless to do anything? what can i do?

  • Steve

    I have read many of the comments with interest but few have addressed the issue of what else was said: “suicide bombers, limb-amputators, women repressors”.

    This is what much of this ‘storm’ is based.

    What has happened is Kilroy has mistakenly made mention of true things without making the appropriate references thus opening the door to criticsim from the PC crowd.

    Please, just do one thing for me and explain these few facts:

    1. What is Shariah law and what is the penalty for theft?

    2. There was an incident a few short years ago where wives of prominent arabs all gathered at the local shopping mall wearing their legally prescribed burkhas and took to the wheel themselves. They were all arrested. What does this show as to the attitude towards women in Saudi ARABIA?

    3. With all of the suicide bombings that have happened the world over, what is the overwhealming nationality of the majority of these people and what is the well known reward in heaven for these ‘martyrs’? What was the nationality of the 9/11 ‘pilots’ and plotters for example?

    If you answer the above questions truthfully, then you will see that Kilroy was not only correct in his assertions but you have just proven to yourselves that what he claims is actually enshrined in Arab religion and as such in their very legal system.

    Those that criticise what was said fear the truth.

  • mark o

    Who let the lunatics take over the asylum?

  • Denis

    It seem certain Arabs weren’t the only ones celebrating the carnage of 9/11.

    See: http://la.indymedia.org/news/2003/11/92910.php

    in particular http://ww1.sundayherald.com/37707

    It seems some things are just taboo.

  • barrie schrier

    please explain to me why it is that abu hamza, the traitor, can rant and rave spit his vile poison against this country that houses him feeds his wife and kids possibly still pays his benefits gets police protection while he preaches in a public street which i supposed is closed for his benefit, enjoys freedom of speech slagging of CHRISTIANS, JEWS, and HINDUS, and yet the bbc, in (LOWER CASE)
    and those tossers in the cps, yes them, are giveing poor ROBERT KILROY SILK such a hard time, we all now no who the kilroys are! and it aint you ROBERT, still just think the beebs loss will be ITVs gain????????????

  • DP

    Opinionsarenotfacts:
    ‘Algorithmic modelling of problems’ as you coyly put is, was invented by the Greeks and Hindus. And that amounts to the invention of Algebra. Have the courage and try not hide behind petty fogging trivia.

    BTW, can you mention any Arab mathematician of the first rank in the last 300 years?

    I also wrote that there could be other reasons that may be the cause why creativity has been absent from the Arab/Muslim community. And they have nothing to do with race but a culture that does not accept a questioning attitude.

    Basil: The problem is not one of race but of culture. Christians find it very difficult to practise their faith in most Muslim countries. And of course their is variability in that, from Saudi Arabia to Jordan. But in all Muslim nations there is open hostility to all other faiths. By trying to be oh so liberal and understanding, you are doing no favours to the many in the Arab and Muslim world, who are trying to break the closed mindset of the Arabic/Muslim world.

    PS to you both: I will not reciprocate cheap insults of a personal nature.

  • J Carr

    It’s a pity that Kilroy had to express the essence of the truth in such ham fisted way. We need an articulate champion.
    Let us start by defining the word ‘racist’.

  • DP

    OpinionsarenotFacts

    Persians are an Aryan race. ‘Arab’ is a general term applied to people who speak Arabic but in racial terms are quite different. For instance, Egyptians are in general not Arabs nor are the Berbers or the Lebanese. But as in most countries, there has been a mixing of races.

    The problem that exists in the Islamic world is not a matter of race but of culture. I for one, am totally against classification on the basis of race. But it must be obvious that creativity in a society arises when that society welcomes and encourages a questioning attitude. For instance, when the Vatican silenced Galileo, it signalled that a questioning mind would have no place in the Catholic world. It is no surprise then, that innovation and originality fled to Protestant Northern Europe and Britain in particular.
    Encouragement and tolerance of a questioning attitude, in historic terms, has been signally absent in the Arab/Muslim world and is probably the reason, in historic terms, why so few mathematicians and scientitists have come from that region.

  • Snooo

    barrie: Abu Hamza doesn’t have a contract with the BBC. Nor, as mentioned on the Samizdata weblog, do Fisk or Pilger.

    Also: If a similar thing had been spoken about Jewish types, then it would have attracted as much outrage, possibly more. I imagine if Tom Paulin had been such a bigot in a newspaper with a large subscription then it would have been noted.

    The assumption that the left wishes to destroy western capitalism in favour of islamic suicide bombers seems to be one engineered from arseholes such as Galloway and fringes of the STWC. If anything these creeps serve the neo-cons more than the neo-cons do themselves, by justifying the pro-war rhetoric by portraying the opposition as authoritian and un-Western. Galloway et. al by no means represent the whole of the anti-war/left in this country. Therefore, its easy to portray being anti the Iraq war as being anti-Western civilisation, as these so-called leaders support Hussein, Islamists etc.

    And isn’t this what this is all about? Generalisations that don’t hold. The article stunned me only a few times, the rest of it could probably be found in many other issues of the Express or Mail. Even with the edits which K-S suggested should have been made, its still in many ways offensive. The fact that it is headlined “We Owe Arabs Nothing” isn’t much of a good start.

  • george

    IT seems to me that it is a good time to bury the kelly report, or is it just a coincident that his (Kilroys) comments come out at the same time as the Kelly report was due to be published, and when it was first written some month ago trevor phillips took no action, Strange.

  • Gaye Rose

    This should not be taken out of context like alot of things are. I happen to like Robert Kilroy Silk, although his programmes are becoming a little too argumentative and loud and he is not in control of his audiances.

  • nonethnocentric

    Judging from some of your letters, your hatred towards Arab seemed clear. ..especially Bombadil and Reid!
    My only query is why did you guys stopped where you did? Why don’t you take it further and ask what contributions have the chinese, indians, africans or the polynesians have contributed towards world civilization over the past 1000 years? Why not also ignore the fact that over the past 900 years, while european states have been able to grow and learn from their own mistakes the rest of the world (with the exception of china, japan, thailand and turkey) have been subjected to colonization and political interference by various european states and different times?
    Why cant we except that individuals are born into a culture whether they like it or not, and our perception of life are inherently different? We all have faults but being ethnocentric is not the answer to solve our differences.

  • basil

    Disenfranchised, all your post hase demonstrated is that you are an anti-semitic bigot. The Arabs are semites, old chum…

    By getting all hot and bothered over the term ‘Zionazis’ – given Zionism has long been discredited as a racist movement – and *desperately* wanting to defend RK-S’ bigoted bile, you have has, “in an instant” negated any point you were trying to make.

    I’ll just quote your passage:

    “The right to freedom of speech is supposed to be enshrined in law, and yet unless you are non-white you cannot make any comments that might criticise the behaviour of people or states who seek to destroy our way of life and our system of supposed democracy.”

    I’m not even going to comment on that one and just leave it there, to glisten… it reads like a clarion call for the BNP.

    “Basil, please do carry on using the invented term “Zionazis”, because you simply destroy any basis for your warped point of view by insulting another state and people. But hey, it must be OK, because they are jews and not arabs (sarcasm intended)”

    My warped point of view? What, that a piece entitled “We owe Arabs nothing” and grouping them all together in the most disgusting of slanders is racism? By comparing it to racism against Jews – read all my posts, darling… – and determining that all types of gross generalisations, be they against Arabs, Jews, Blacks – whatever – is wrong?

    From what I can fathom, your tack seems to be “hey, it’s OK to make the most disgusting generalisations about the Arabs – because they’re Arabs”

    Your priorities are all wrong, pal. I have *plenty* of Jewish and Arab friends – what about you?

    PS To Alan Millar et al, of course I’ve read the entire thing and, yes, the passage about Galloway and Short is pretty funny and, indeed, well-written.

    To DP – I think you’re simplifying things somewhat, by saying there is open hostility in all Muslim countries. Because you seem to ignore those countries where the religious sectors *do* get along, as though they were inconveniences. Your posts have read like a primer in Orientalism. Just out of curiousity, have you ever spent an extended amount of time in the Middle East? This isn’t a rhetorical question, I’m genuinely interested.

  • Jwarrior

    Amanda W, Basil and other dhimmitudal fools,

    If you love the arabs so much, go live with them!

    Every word of RKS’s article was spot on! I used to hate the guy, but have now found a new respect for him because he has the balls to say what the rest of us will only think!

    When the Islamofacists start bombing in our cities, it is people like you who will look like fools! When the suicide bomber steps next to you on the bus, are you going to say to him ‘Please Mr Bomber, I like arabs, please don’t blow me up’? Do you know what the terrorists answer will be? BOOOOOOM!

    These Islamic facists don’t give a fuck about the west, you, me or anything. They only care about bringing Islam to the Kufr and killing Jews! You can’t reason with that! They are on a holy mission in their own eyes and nothing you can say about your love for arabs and muslims will change that (unless you convert to Islam!).

    We need to take a stand now and not show weakness because Islamists thrive on the weakness of their opponents. It is views like yours that show the terrorists that we in the west have weaknesses. The terrorists blow people up and you say ‘don’t be nasty to the Muslims, its racism!’. You give them the defences that they need to continue doing what they do! The muslims kill us and when someone states the fact, people like you cry racist and the Muslim terrorists laugh all the way to the bomb factory!

    These people only understand force, they don’t care about diplomacy, your love of arabs or anything else! They just care about killing in the name of Islam.

    Sure, there are plenty of honest, hard working, decent Muslims around who want to live in peace. Good luck to them, they are welcome here, but if they are not prepared to face their own extremist brethren then we need to do it for them. And if we need to do it for them becuase they don’t have the power, balls, guts, determination etc, then that makes them just as guilty as the one’s that are strapping bombs to themsleves and blowing us up! As mentioned above, the average German who stood by doing nothing during the Holocaust was as guilty as the nazi that shot the Jew in the head! Why? Because he did nothing!

    Now you can call this racism, but i think it’s a case of calling a spade a spade! If Zen Bhuddists were blowing me up, I would say Zen Bhuddusts are blowing me up, but they aren’t, the Muslims are! If stating the truth about terrorism is racist then there is no hope for our future.

    Open your eyes before its too late! This isn’t about racism! Its about the fact that islamists want to murder us and you are helping them do it by excusing THEIR actions and branding those people who have awoken to the dangerous sitation we are in as racists!

  • Jwarrior

    Oh and Basil,

    FOAD, you Jew hating cunt!

  • I see that Andy thinks that it is still 1955 in Florida. I assure you that black people can and do vote here, and no one chases them away with dogs. And there are plenty of black CEOs here. But don’t let facts get in the way of your hatred.

  • Jwarrior

    Basil said: Your priorities are all wrong, pal. I have *plenty* of Jewish and Arab friends – what about you?

    You have Jewish friends? I feel sorry for them! Do they know how you refer to Jews in Israel?

    Do you not think calling zionists nazis might also be racist? Or is it that you can call Jews whatever you want and not feel bad about it?

    Are you not making a massive racial generalisation yourself? Which is exactly what you are moaning at other people for doing?

    Have you been to Israel? Do you know that there are many black Ethopian Jews in Israel, not to mention Israeli arabs, Bedouins and Druze all of whom have their own religions and communities, but are all Israelis?

    So how can Israeli Jews or ‘Zionists’ be called racist? People of all religions and colours live in Israel, which is more than can be said for the average Islamic country.

    You are an idiot and a hypocrite.

    You are the type of person that laps up all the media bollocks and believes everything he hears from the manipulated and manipulating media. In other words you are a zombie who laps up the leftist/arab propaganda he is fed without ever actually basing opinions on first hand evidence!

    Please take my advice from my previous post! The world would be a better place without you!

  • Jwarrior

    edward,

    Hitler already tried your suggestion and look what happened there.

    Humanitarianism is still a religion. It’s just a religion with no G-d.

    Furthermore, Humanitarianism says that the highest form of intelligence in the universe is the human. If this true, then both us and the universe are on a one way ticket to destruction.

  • edward is a nasty little fascist actually… ban religion? What the hell give you or any other advocate of banning this or that belief the right to make your views the ones the state will use force to impose? And no, I am not a believer myself, I just wonder why you think using the violence of state to suppress things you dislike is legitimate?

  • jwarrior, appreciate what you have said, you’re bang on, westerners in general are very gullible in the way you describe until you live outside the uk for a few years you don’t appreciate how much. i have lived in eastern europe for the last two years and it’s amazing the stories i’ve heard about people fooling our immigration system just so they can steel in the UK, it’s one example but people from outside do laugh at how soft we are on these issues. perry, get your facts right before you call me a fascist my friend. i said phase out religion and ban the promotion of it, i did NOT say ban it. religion is a cancer of the mind so the best analogy is that of that banning of cigarette advertising. the kind of thing i’m talking about is like so. teaching of history of religion is fine but any teaching of religion as fact should be banned. ban all fund raising for religion.

  • hey, someone tell me what a blogroach is pls?

  • basil

    Jwarrior – where, oh where, to start? Your logic is so simplistic and you do make the most inane of assumptions about me, to bolster your poorly-conceived arguments.

    > Do you not think calling zionists nazis might also be racist? Or is it that you can call Jews whatever you want and not feel bad about it?

    Nope, darling, that isn’t the case. I’m not the only one to call Zionism a form of racism. It’s been determined as such for some time now. Not just by the UN, but by a number of Jews around this planet. Oh that’s right – you call them “self-haters” don’t you? Orwell would have laughed. Hey, just out of curiousity, given you’re a recent convert to the RK-S stable – what did/do you think of Meir Kahane?

    I don’t call Jews whatever I want… Not all Jews are Zionists and it is an utter spit in the eye to those who aren’t to assume such. Thus, I’m happy to concede I don’t hang around with Zionist Jews, because I think they are racist. Just as I wouldn’t consort with Zionist Christians (and there are a few). But I have plenty of Jewish friends. I’m sorry to confuse things like that for you, but them’s the simple facts, sir.

    Let me ask you straight out – do you have any Arab friends?

    > Have you been to Israel? Do you know that there are many black Ethopian Jews in Israel, not to mention Israeli arabs, Bedouins and Druze all of whom have their own religions and communities, but are all Israelis?

    Yes, I have been to Israel (1996 was admittedly the most recent visit) and it’s a well-known fact that black Ethopian Jews are the butt of real racism in Israel and that there is an unspoken heirarchy within the country, be it between Ashkenazis and Sephardis and whatever…

    > Please take my advice from my previous post! The world would be a better place without you!
    > You are an idiot and a hypocrite.
    > FOAD, you Jew hating cunt!

    And you are adorable… you Arab-hating thing, you. Do you mind if I wind you up some more? I reckon you could do *even* better, on the personal abuse front. It far outstrips the logic of your arguments. You ought to spend more time on this tack; you’ll give me less to pick on, that way…

    I love all of this planet. That includes Jews, Arabs, blacks, whites, Asians and so on.

    I think what RK-S said was utterly reprehensible and I stick by those sentiments. If you want to promote his line of thinking, well that’s absolutely fine.

    But don’t shy away from the reality that RK-S was referring to *all* Arabs when he penned his emetic bile and that is what *you* are promoting. And that is racism.

    > You are the type of person that laps up all the media bollocks and believes everything he hears from the manipulated and manipulating media. In other words you are a zombie who laps up the leftist/arab propaganda he is fed without ever actually basing opinions on first hand evidence!

    I have more first-hand evidence than you can ever imagine, old bean… I have travelled extensively throughout the Middle East (79, 85, 95, 96 and next year hopefully). What about your good self?

    Sweetheart, I happen to *work* in the national media, you deluded dear. I know a closed mindset when I see it. Someone who laps up that which tallies with their worldview and filters out that which clashes with it.

    Hugs and kisses, mwah! mwah! mwah!

  • disenfranchised

    Basil, the more you say, the more you show your limitations

    You state:

    “By getting all hot and bothered over the term ‘Zionazis’ – given Zionism has long been discredited as a racist movement – and *desperately* wanting to defend RK-S’ bigoted bile, you have has, “in an instant” negated any point you were trying to make.”

    In your opinion and that of your palestinian compatriots, Zionism may be discredited, because the rights of the jews to their own country doesn’t concur with their views, that they have no rights at all, and should be pushed back into the sea.

    I did not defend Kilroy’s words, I defended his right to freedom of speech – you and your mob mentality have determined that anything that doesn’t agree with your point of view, must be stifled.

    You are correct on one point (don’t let it go to your head) semitic does include the arabs, but the term anti-semitic is usually deemed to mean anti-jews(not by you of course).

    Your vitriolic diatribe against Jwarrior and others, merely amplifies your failings and extreme prejudice.

    You state that you work in the media – I really fail to see any relevance – does that mean that somehow you must be right and the fountain of all knowledge because of that.

    Do us all a favour – repeat all your wonderful views in print, because then, you can be referred to the appropriate authorities for prosecution.

    Basil, is your surname Fawlty? or Hun?

    As Phil Silvers once said ,when someone told him that one of his friends was a jew – I wonder how you have kept him as a friend.

    If you have to state that one of your friends is a particular creed, then you are obviously a prejudiced bigot – why would you even consider their creed? I won’t even dignify your question with a response, it is beyond contempt.

  • kc

    KILROY you have great guts in telling the truth, i am a dedicated viewer of your show and hope you will soon be back on air, hopefully ITV.(BBC you NO DOUBT WILL LOSE VIEWERS). your replacement for kilroy show was another BORING gardening programme, my t.v quickly switched channels and will stay switched until this is resolved and we see you back. i have read all reviews on this page and see that the majority are with you.

  • gordon buckman

    how interesting this debate is. also how revealing, ie the left-liberal doctrine shines through in some posts. the issue in point is freedom of speech. the liberals are all for this freedom,providing it is within liberal-left parameters. i personally agree with some of what rk-s said, it is his generalisation of arabs that is incorrect. however i defend his right to say it whatever the content of the article (i have read it). the thing that bothers me about the whole p.c. concept is this idea of taking offence on behalf of others, i really don’t understand it. also as for the British National Party, i support them in the respect they are becoming a civil rights group for whites who are feeling disenfrachised by the pc brigade. on a final note i say what i like and if anyone is offended then they can move out of earshot. i am non pc and i am quite happy to be labelled as such. call me any ‘ist’ you like, i don’t care, why? that is because i respect anyone’s right to hold an opinion and express themselves however they see fit. whether i agree or not is irrelevant. just don’t denounce me when i speak my mind, because i don’t care.

  • “Most terrorists are Arabs”

    Where on Earth do you get the evidence for that kind of claim?

    Leave aside the question of where one draws the lines between “terrorist”, “guerrilla” and “freedom-fighter”. Do you know, to the nearest hundred (the nearest thousand even?), how many terrorists there are in the world? and how many of them are Arab terrorists? Perhaps you would like to survey them and get them all to tick a nice little box marked “Ethnic Identity”.

    As one poster here has very sensibly written in his handle, “Opinions are not facts”. Don’t treat them as if they are.

  • Thunder

    Ive been reviewing this situation and I personally believe that we should withhold our TV license until such times the Nazis in the bbc stop censoring our newspaper’s a job that they are not fit to do or paid to do. What say you?

    I thought that Book-burning was a thing of the past it looks like I was wrong!

    When we live in a country that petty tyrants like Trevor Phillips can get a man sacked for speaking his thoughts then we need to be concerned.

  • gordon buckman

    i agree wholeheartedly there thunder. the biggest threat to social harmony in this country is the c.r.e., and the likes of trevor philips in particular. with the bbc not far behind. the sooner the c.r.e. is disbanded the better. this is one of the first things a BNP government would introduce. the BNP will also call the bbc to account. its anti-white british stance cannot go on indefinitely, i am a member of the said party and i am proud to be so. finally i am not a racist or xenophobe, homophobe or any other pc insult. i am a white englishman who loves his countries heritage, and wishes to see it preserved. so why has no one insulted me on here yet? have i hit a nerve somewhere?

  • Brush

    I agree with some of the statements in Kilroy’s article. When thousands of people in New York were dying horrifically in those terrorist attacks, there were many Arabs/Muslims jumping for joy burning the American flag. These weren’t terrorists, they were ordinary people, such is the hatred for the west. What do the muslim council of Great Britain feel about these people? Do they condemn muslims who have sympathies for Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda?

    The use of the word ‘Arab’ is a bit vague also. Exactly how many people can be classified under this heading? And what geographical areas are ‘Arabs’ to be found? Yeah I know it’s the middle east but where exactly?

    With regards to women repressors, just look at the Pakistani communities here in Britain. Women aren’t allowed to express themselves freely, so it’s not just the Arabs that do this. I do blame religion for a lot of this, so Edward has a point.

    I don’t know if anyone could reason with fanatical terrorists. We can only go off what we see on TV or what we read. Maybe prior to 9/11 the general public had vague ideas of the arab/muslim world, but afterwards, the images of these terrorists and the scenes of women, men and children in the Arab/Muslim world celebrating changed many peoples views. Kilroy is just echoing the sentiments of many people. The BBC made a hasty decision is suspending his show.

    These lunatics that kill innocent people in the name of Allah are in a minority but it’s the ‘ordinary’ people who have sympathies for these crackpots who I am worried for. There are many good people in that part of the world who aren’t violent by nature and want everyone to live peacefully. If Kilroy had included something to this effect in his article, we wouldn’t be having this storm in a teacup.

    I could not care less about George Galloway or Clare Shore.

    Bring Kilroy back you image conscious politically correct drones at the BBC!

  • Andrei

    Sadly, I couldn’t find the article in question anywhere on the Net – too bad. But as far as I could make out its main fault was the usual sloppy tabloid junk-journalism handling of facts (like not bothering to check things like Iranians not being Arabs). But that’s probably because it’s intended for an audience that wouldn’t notice such flops anyway. The kind of people that ask whether the correct way to pronounce “THAT COUNTRY” is “Iraq” or “Iran”. BUT that doesn’t effect the main point of the discussion. I CAN give an answer as to whether Arabs had given anything to civilization. There was the matter of some medicine, philosophy and architecture but THAT WAS 700 YEARS AGO! Since that time – practically nothing to show except for the impressive rabbit like reproduction rate. Kind of scarce, isn’t it?

    As for the wonderful York based Arab scholar woman, I would like to ask a rhetorical question of my own. Can she think of an ARAB country where she would be professor at a University? No? Hell, let’s even make it an ISLAMIC country (don’t say “Turkey” cause they’re secular). Still no? Well perhaps Tunisia, though I’m not sure. Although I was surprised by their “women’s rights” drive during a recent visit. But if she ever secures such a position, I would strongly recommend that she keep out of the rural areas while touring with her lectures on the vices of Western journalism. The local men just may not “get it”.

  • thunder

    HUMAN RIGHTS act
    Article 9 Freedom of thought,conscience and religion

    You are free to hold a broad range of views,beliefs
    and thoughts, as well as religious faith. Limitations are permitted only in specified circumstances.

    Article 10 Freedom of expression.

    You have the right to hold opinions and express your views on your own or in a group. This applies even if they are unpopular or disturbing. This right can only be restricted in specified circumstances.

    This specified circumstances makes no mention of the said person by the name of Kilroy Silk to my Knowledge. Unless someone else knows different!

  • cecil brown

    I fully support Kilroy,he did nothing wrong quoting
    Words spoken by the Arabs, truth hurts,
    We are supposed to be living in a country of free speach,well are we? or does the law of the land jump out and silence us with a threat of prison.
    Where oh where is this freedom of speach?
    If I said I dont like that black b…….d would I be penalised for calling him Black or for saying that he is a B…..d?
    Its time this countries egotists, realised that we do not live in a free country,we are being taken along a road of a police state,into oblivion of what an Englishman holds dear to his heart,a country where
    what we put in we get back threefold.
    I have served my Queen and country so that we can all live in peace and safety and if the call came again,even being a pensioner,I would serve again.
    for the same principles.
    We are too soft in this country,sitting back and watching as all races take over our beloved land.
    It is time those in charge got their priorities right.
    England for the English.
    If my remarkes upsets anyone,then I will stand up for my rights. We are the Bulldog breed,and stand with our heads up high.
    My full support for Kilroy,and hope that English fair play wins in the end.

  • OpionsAreNotFacts

    DP – nice use of the word coyly.

    I think the fact that all this Maths stuff and medicine and atronomy was recorded in Arabic at a time when Europe was still grapling with something to write on, shows evidence of a sigfnificant culture, although I suspect you may tell me otherwise.
    As for lately, well, having already made contributions to the noble arts of maths medicine and astronomy some Arabs have decided to apply themselves to the noblest art of them all, Football.
    Zinadine Zidane, the Worlds greatest footballer, as voted by his peers around the world, has made no small contribution to the world, and even lead his adopted nation to a World cup victory; ask any Frenchman the day after winning the most coveted prize in world sport ‘what did Arabs ever do for us lately?’, and he may have mentiond ZZ.
    There is also so much music and art from the Arab world that is influential throught western pop culture so Kilroy was just plain wrong when he said Arab countries have never given us anything.
    he also clains -

    the Arab countries put together export less than Finland.

    this is parading as fact. It is totally false.

    His opinions don’t bother me, he has every right to be bigotted, freedom of speech and all that, but anyone making false claims deserves to be discredited.
    If I employed him on a show like his , I would have to seriously question whether he would be able to maintain a position of perceived impartiality/credability by the public.
    All people in the public eye have to follow the ‘rules’ whether they want to or not, I think the ‘rules’ are akin to common decency, and are the grease that allow the wheels of civilised society to turn. If we all went round telling everyone what we really thought of them, there would be carnage!

    oh, and in the spirit of ‘common decency’ I apologise DP for my opinions on your reading abilities.

  • sameer

    Smooth Talker Who has Been in Hot Water Before

    By Ju-Lin Tan, PA News

    Robert Kilroy-Silk is best known as the silver-haired, smooth-talking presenter who has fronted his own morning chat show for 17 years.

    The former Labour MP for North Knowsley was described as a fiercely ambitious politician and was even viewed as a potential future prime minister.

    But in 1985 he decided to resign from Parliament to move into the media world.

    Since November 1986 he has hosted BBC1’s Kilroy and is known for his lively and often controversial studio audience discussions.

    The 61-year-old presenter, dubbed “the housewives’ favourite”, also had a shortlived career as a quiz show host on ITV’s Shafted.

    He owns a hugely successful production company, The Kilroy Television Company.

    Despite his charm, some of Kilroy-Silk’s comments off-air have landed him in hot water on a number of occasions over the years.

    In 1992 Kilroy-Silk was forced to apologise to the Irish people and EC Commissioner Ray MacSharry over “racist” comments.

    The former MP had described Mr MacSharry as a “redundant second-rate politician from a country peopled by peasants, priests and pixies” in his Daily Express column.

    Ireland’s Ambassador to Britain Joseph Small condemned the “gratuitously offensive and indeed racist remarks”.

    Kilroy-Silk subsequently made a formal apology and accepted that his comments were both “offensive and unjustified”.

    The then editor of the Daily Express, Sir Nicholas Lloyd, also apologised to the Irish people.

    He said: “The Daily Express dissociates itself and I disassociate the Daily Express from his opinions, which I think go some way to slandering the entire Irish nation.

    “Kilroy himself is by background and family Irish. His mother is Irish, most of his family are Irish. He could travel on an Irish passport, and I don’t know quite what got into him.”

    In December 1998 Kilroy-Silk showed he did not take too kindly to criticism.

    The presenter lashed out at the Broadcasting Standards Commission, saying that its £2 million budget would be better spent on the National Health Service.

    His comments came after the commission described his morning chatshow as “victim entertainment”.

    Kilroy-Silk has also been known for his angry outbursts in the past.

    During his political career, he once had to be restrained in the Commons Division Lobby following a disagreement with fellow Labour MP Jeremy Corbyn.

    The presenter does not always take himself too seriously.

    He once admitted: “I’m paid an awful lot of money, which is why I continue to do it, but it’s not exactly brain surgery, is it?”

    Kilroy-Silk, who has two children with wife Jan, has enjoyed an enormously successful career, but shadows have emerged in his personal life.

    In 1990 his son Dominic was jailed for 10 months in Ford Open Prison after pleading guilty to a £350,000 mortgage fraud.

    Five years later it was reported that he had a secret love child, conceived with an art teacher during his tenure as an MP.

    Now Kilroy-Silk has been thrust into the media spotlight once again with his controversial article about Arabs that has sparked widespread fury.

    Following the suspension of his talk show, it seems the presenter’s future now lies in the hands of his employers.
    http://www.news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=2391796

  • Matt

    Yes this is racist. Racism is the inentional bias against an ethnic group based on stereotypical falsehoods. Yes, some Arabs danced in the streets after 9/11, but that was a 15 second clip on TV. You really believe everything you see on TV?
    Kilroy is entirely entitled to his opinion and to free speech – other people are equally entitled to voice their opinion of his lazy generalizations and racism. The Express is as free to keep paying him to write this crap as the BBC is to suspend is show.
    And as for the Middle East not exporting anything useful – considering the terrible condition of the land in a large proportion of the countries there, and the huge divide between rich and poor and the lack of education in many states, it isn’t surprising that their exports are not all they could be. But since when have human beings had to justify themselves by their ranking in world economics? Mr Silk’s entire output appears to be utterly lacking in quality – maybe this publicity attempt is trying to cover that fact up.

  • OpinionsAreNotFacts

    DP funny that Galileo titbit.

    Or should I say ironic as hundreds of years earlier ‘Arabic speaking’ scientists were being encouraged by Isalm to develop Astronomy. And I suppose the greatest irony of all
    Abul Hasan, another ‘Arab’ invented the telescope according to a Cambridge university website.
    I think further research will show your assertion that Islam repressed science is untrue, look up Shi’a Islam with respect to it’s relationship with scientific endevour, as I understand it they were the ‘protestants’ of the Islamic world in respect to science.

    Anyway all religions have progressive and repressive influences, seems to be the nature of the beast so to speak.

  • JG

    Of course, Robert Kilroy-Silk should not have directed his comments either at the Arab populace or at Arab states: It is the religion called Islam that is the problem.

    The Christians were just as bad a few hundred years ago and could be again, but for now the benign forces of democracy, consumerism, capitalism and responsible drug-taking are keeping it at bay in the west.

    But unfortunately, Islam is at war with the west as we speak. They are recriuting massively and entering western countries in vast quantities (normal just before a war). They are deploying propoganda and targetted strikes (called terrorism, but also exactly what you do pre invasion).

    The Koran illustrates some basic aspects of the war plan, but the specifics are really handled on an ad-hoc basis (more true of real wars than the protagonists like to admit).

    Can we fight off this attack? Our ability to do that reilies on our ability to understand that we are being attacked in the first place and how. Unfortuantely we have certain internal weaknesses in our own society: let me explain…

    Political correctness was originally invented as a reaction AGAINST many of the vices of Christianity (racism, xenophobia, fear of disabilities and sexism), and it has largely worked.

    Similarly, left-wing politics (soft socialism/liberalism/labour movement) can be seen as a useful counter-balance to the rather soulless fundamentalist capitalism advocated by Jews.

    And so we had a sort of balance. However, sadly, Islamic propogandists have learned how to expolit both political forces for their own purposes. They gently persuade left-wingers in the west that their dictatorships are really “socialist republics” and they tell the western PC mob that they are in some way a “victim group”.

    In order to stand up against Islam, we rational westerners must negotiate a moral maze of devious complexity. If we criticise religion, the Muslims, Christians and Jews will all come down on us. If we criticise Arabic states, the leftists will give us hell. If we criticise Arabic people (who, as group, ARE to blame for not doing enough to restrain the spread of Islam) we are branded politcally incorrect.

    My view is that the correct thing for the sensible westerners to do is to address our internal problems first. Once Islam sees that we can get our own house in order, they may not attack at all.

    There are unfortunately 3 fronts to fight even inside our own western cultures, and these can be symbolised by 3 people I know, but I will obscure their names so they don’t kill me in my sleep:

    Person X: Is not islamic, but has many islamic friends and a little Arabic blood. Person X supplies a continual stream of islamic propogana in what should be normal friendly conversation. The reason for this is simple: Person X’s friends are VERY persistent in manipulating person X’s opinions. What to do? Competing for person X’s mindspace would just bring us down to the same level. The correct thing to do is to make it clear you are there for them should they have a change of heart. Why? Because Islam depends on people percieving NO choice in their opinions.

    Person Y: Person Y is a socialist in thought and deed. He will for example borrow my money in a time of crisis without paying me back, but ensures that his own generosity is unquestioned by giving undisclosed amounts to far-away charities by direct debit. Naturally, America is evil to him, and even the comedy-socialism of the old Iraq would have been preferable. Such views tend to fade after exposure to the working classes of western countries, where the view that “yes we’re poor but we’d still rather have our freedom than some f**king socialist nanny-state run by middle-class intellectual snobs” is surprisingly prevalent. Sadly Y type people avoid such exposure on the whole.

    Person Z: Would be the PC hitman, who knows that the war in Iraq was mearly a crusade by bible-bashing-Bush (most dangerous person in the world). Anyone who has tangled with PCs will know that it can be an unplesant experience, the whole idea of PC being to deploy ad-hominum techniques in a stereotypical way (“you’re a racist so you stink”). While PC people can be truly generous with material things, they are normally selfish with opinions. Cut them no slack. If they can’t see why modern Muslims are just as bad as (if not worse than) the Chrisians of the Crusades, the Inquisition and the burning of witches, then you should tell them they are plug-heads; directly, repeatedly and without compunction.

    With any luck, if we can sort out our own affairs, we will seem less of a juicy target to the Muslims. Maybe they will have a Renaissance or something and could turn out to be really nice people, and if so we’ll be really glad we didn’t have to Nuke half of them just to protect our way of life.

    JG

  • wonga

    Two questions for Kilroy’s show (if it returns):

    1. Why is Kilroy a racist-being?
    2. How should we stop Kilroy from being a racist-being?

  • Terence

    I think most people are missing Kilroys point. He has explained that his article was poorly edited, and the thrust of his article was that many Arab states, or regimes are barbaric, oppressive and stuck in a violent middle ages. Lets not deliberately ignore the undeniable truth of that statement in hysterical cries of “Racism”.

    Criticising a Muslim or Arabic state or regime is no omore racist than the abuse hurled at the American peoples/nation by any number of columnists on a daily basis.

  • David McDonald

    All the BBC needed to do was have a spokesman to say on air that Kilroy Silks comments were not shared with the BBC. I say well done Mr Kilroy Silk and shame on the BBC for being cowards in the face of pressure. Reshuffle the heads of the BBC and get his show back on the air. When the truth needs to be said there will be nobody left to say it.

  • Deanne

    All those countries who quite rightly opposed Aparthied some years back, show not the slightest interest in doing anything about the segregation and abuse of women in Muslim countries. Oh I can hear them say “but its their culture” But what is more important, culture or human rights?

  • J. Cooper

    I am completely behind Mr. Kilroy-Silk, he has not lied in his column, and whatever happened to freedom of speech in this Country. Even if you tell the truth there is someone waiting to bring you down. Every good wish Robert.

  • Roboute Guilliman

    It’s pure ignorance what Kilroy Silk purports, Most of our information on the Romans, Greeks, Mathematics, Optics, the writings of the great philosophers like Aristotle and plate and mathematics came from the Arab civilisations in the middle ages, That information was the catalyst for the Renascence.

    we (in the west) owe a vast debt to the arabs.

  • Person Y

    Fact is, if Bobby Silk really wanted merely to criticise, say, the Saudi Arabian government, he could easily have done it – many others have. He preferred (or his alleged “clumsy editor” did) to smear millions of people as mass murderers, “limb amputators” and the rest, because it made his original, April column more excitingly controversial. Whether or not an Arab invented the computer is irrelevant: condemning millions of human beings you never met and know nothing about is called “bigotry” even if they are deluded enough to believe in God.

    By the way, why all this daft throwing around of the epithet “nazi”? Reality check – the Nazis systematically murdered around ten million people, including six million Jews. Trevor Philips, last time I checked, hasn’t. Nor have Zionists. Stalin had a pretty good stab at it. The only candidate around these days would be Osama, constrained as he is by the lack of a state’s resources. Can we have a bit of perspective here? Otherwise it’s kinda an insult to the dead.

  • elaine duncan

    I totally disagree that Kilroy should have been taken off the air. We live in a democracy which encourages freedom of speech. I am not racist in any shape or form and I agree that his comments, relating to some Arab groups, not Arabs as a whole was his fundamental right to free speech. In fact his comments on the minority of Arab regimes are in fact the truth but again this country is punishing this human right. I totally agree that everything should be done to deter racism, on all sides, but this is Political Correctness, unfortunately again, taken to the extreme. I have watched Kilroy for many years and have never heard him being racist and has always been objective in all aspects of his show.

  • Saadi

    Richard Desmond is Kilroy’s employer

    As the Kilroy article was written for and printed several times by Richard Desmond’s newspaper I ‘d like to point out that Desmond is a child of asylum seekers who has consistently attacked asylum seekers on the front pages of his newspapers (Express and Star) but only the ones from Muslim countries.
    As Jew and a Zionist he has a vested interest in stemming the destabilising flow of Muslims into this country, which is understandable.

    Someone who was a guest of some Jewish media barons in the US in the 1960s, told me once, that one of them said to him that Joseph Goebbels – whom they believed was himself Jewish or part Jewish – had taught them that if you own and control the media you can tell people what to THINK.

    Robert Maxwell, Desmond’s predecessor who also had a vested interest in controlling the mind of the British public famously had headlines in the Mirror saying there was no Mordechai Vanunu and there was no Israeli nuclear programme.

    Few British people remember the terrorist past of the Jewish state, (they even despatched people to kill British cabinet ministers in the early days), their belief in the goodness of Israel and the badness of Arabs, undoubtedly has been implanted by the Zionist press barons such as Murdoch and Conrad Black. Needless to say the Zionist or Jewish ownership and control of the British media has worked out well and is never a subject for discussion in polite society.

    Saadi

  • Snooo

    Saadi, mate…

    Kilroy might have been offensive but you take the piss.

  • basil

    > Basil, the more you say, the more you show your limitations

    Hmm indeed. I’ll deal with those lofty sentiments in a moment…

    > In your opinion and that of your palestinian compatriots, Zionism may be discredited, because the rights of the jews to their own country doesn’t concur with their views, that they have no rights at all, and should be pushed back into the sea.

    Nope, I happen to think that is one of the most disgusting notions going around. Sorry to disappoint you, but that’s the reality of it. Just as I think that bulldozing houses and creating settlements is quite objectionable. I’m really sorry to make things confusing for you like this, but what can I say?

    > I did not defend Kilroy’s words, I defended his right to freedom of speech – you and your mob mentality have determined that anything that doesn’t agree with your point of view, must be stifled.

    Aaah, this is simply too easy… Do yourself a favour – read my initial posts (before this careered way off-topic) and see what I think about RK-S’ right to free speech. Whilst I didn’t agree with his sentiments, I cited Voltaire. That’s right, I defended his right to freedom of speech. You really want to think about some of your writing, before you hit “post”. What were you saying about mob mentality?

    > Your vitriolic diatribe against Jwarrior and others, merely amplifies your failings and extreme prejudice.

    “Vitriolic diatribe”? OK, one more time and *slowly* – I’ll quote jwarrior’s bile and you see if you can find anything in my posts that approximates his foul-mouthed dribble. Here you go:

    > Please take my advice from my previous post! The world would be a better place without you!
    > Amanda W, Basil and other dhimmitudal fools
    > You are an idiot and a hypocrite.
    > FOAD, you Jew hating cunt!

    Again, “Disenfranchised”, please take a deep breath and *think* before you send.

    > You state that you work in the media – I really fail to see any relevance – does that mean that somehow you must be right and the fountain of all knowledge because of that.

    *Sigh*… I didn’t feel I had to spell it out – the post was long enough as is – but for your own benefit, here’s goes… Jwarrrior suggested I was a “zombie” who lapped it up from the “arab/left media”. The point being that I am anything but and that I get to see an awful lot of stuff over the wires that *doesn’t* make it onto our screens, newspaper, radio etc etc. i don’t purport to be the fountain of anything. Comprehend? Good, now let’s move on.

    > Do us all a favour – repeat all your wonderful views in print, because then, you can be referred to the appropriate authorities for prosecution.

    And what opinions, pray tell, would have me referred to the authorities? Cite me something specific…

    > Basil, is your surname Fawlty? or Hun?

    Oh yeah – what were you saying about limitations?

    > If you have to state that one of your friends is a particular creed, then you are obviously a prejudiced bigot – why would you even consider their creed?

    Erm, because you have tried to intimate that I am an anti-semite. Pretty simple, actually.

    Disenfranchised, you’re clearly an intelligent soul, but these are incredibly lowbrow arguments.

    It would be nice if we could get back to the matter at hand. The reason I made the ‘Zionazi’ jibe in the first place, was because some of the “dancing in the streets” that followed RK-S’ article. I found it utterly objectionable and still do.

  • Dave F

    Blimey, I’ve finally been completely defeated by this ramblin’, rantin’ troll-riddled, labyrinthine thread.

    I come to Samizdata for a bit of clear thinking, even if I don’t agree with it. The point was whether or not Kilroy’s freedom of speech was being lynched from the nearest lamppost, wasn’t it? I have read the piece, and it is a confused sort of rant, referring randomly to Arabs, rulers, Arab regimes, etc, by turns. But ineptitude is surely not a hanging offence. Someone gave me Michael Moore’s new book, whose title I shan’t bother to reproduce here, for Christmas (god knows why). He seems to have the same sort of random thought generator as Kilroy Silk, and he does tend to spray his invective liberally across entire groups of people. If K-S is a hate merchant, so is he. But I don’t think that is fair to either of these two semi-conscious gents.

  • mark M

    There are some places in the world ,dangerous places, where only two things will stop you being blown up or shot, they are, a red cross flag or a flag bearing the letters ‘BBC’. Incredible as it may seem, I have seen it with my own eyes. This is some testament to the high regard with which the BBC is still held around the world. Mainly for their attempt at balanced and fair reporting.This is something all British people should fell some pride in.
    Do you really think those correspondents are thanking Kilroy right now for exercising his right to free speech?

  • Gabriel

    kilroy should have shut his mouth. if he wanted to make a politic statement he should have stay in politic and do something with the different gouvernement or work with international organisation. his colum in the express are all whinges and his program are never constructive made with a bunch of lunatics. he should enjoy his 2*2m houses after so many years and not destroy the diplomatic work done by professionals. all this just make clear how many brown shirt still exist in this Country after so many dead in the last big war.
    if all arabs were so hatefull there will be bombing everywhere at this time.

  • disenfranchised

    Basil – publish the whole lot, your thoughts are really just too wonderful not to share them. We are all so impressed with your IQ and incisive and mature arguments.

    BTW you must have confused “Dancing in the Streets” with the aftermath of 9/11 and “Dancing in the Streets” in the Middle East.

  • basil

    Aaah, ‘disenfaranchised’ i do believe yours is shorthand for ‘I schmucked up, made too many incorrect attributions/assumptions and thus have no comeback’…

    > We are all so impressed with your IQ and incisive and mature arguments.
    >> Basil, is your surname Fawlty? or Hun?

    Sort of speaks for itself doesn’t it?

    As for the “dancing in the streets” – guess what? – it was an ironic reference to the reprehensible behaviour of some Arabs in the aftermath of 9/11, hence the quote marks. I thought that was *incredibly* obvious, but there you go.

    Difficult blighter, aren’t I?

    Ciao and peace out.

    PS Before I forget, RK-S is a bigoted idiot, with a track record of racism against the Arabs. A wee but of research will uncover his ‘previous form’.

    It was an ill-considered piece and very racist. Whilst the Beeb may have gone OTT, as a national institution with its attendant charters, their hands would have been tied.

  • fawlty

    Mark M:
    Yes it seems people still didn’t catch on to the state BBC has reached, they still give them some sort of respect, but let’s face it, we know it’s went CNN and cheap and common as soon as BBC-24 started
    (I am speaking of BBC news/newsreoprters at this point, not regular BBC)

    on a lighter note:
    Gabriel wrote “diplomatic work done by professionals” ROFL

    professionals, that’s rich

  • Supervixen:

    “If someone had expressed similar views, in all seriousness, about ALL white people, ALL Europeans or even ALL Britons, I’d feel justifiably angry, wouldn’t you?”

    No offcourse not, i would shrug my shoulders and laugh about it, i would most certainly not try to bring police-action against the person who said it, we (the West) have as a society grown beyond that type of over-reaction, and the “arab world” (and the BBC obviously) should do the same and not constantly focus on the percieved “victim-status” of the aforementioned “arab-world”

  • And if in fact the word: “state” was omited after the article was resubmitted for print, then this whole brouhaha comes to nothing.

  • Rogal Dorn

    “By the way, why all this daft throwing around of the epithet “nazi”? Reality check – the Nazis systematically murdered around ten million people, including six million Jews. Trevor Philips, last time I checked, hasn’t. Nor have Zionists.”

    The Zionists (in isreal) have (and do) commit vast amounts of Ethnic Cleansing of palestinans, and concentration and torture camps, They’ve created a two tier state and they run a vicious and illegal occupation.

    Also, The very foundation of isreal (the bombing of the king david hotel) was on terrorism and the murder of it’s own citizens, Just like hitler and the Nazis.

    Also, zionism, It in itself, Racism. since it’s an Exclusionary ideologly.

    So, While Zionism is exactly nazism, it’s followers have commited many Nazi like Actions, as I already pointed out above.

  • thunder

    Kilroy-Silks banned from the BBC for an article the Sunday Express had not edited. Today should
    Page 3 be banned Clare Short ! Bloody frightening

    ———————————————————
    Newspapers must only print News that is approved by the ministry of propaganda.

    Any newspapers critical of the government will be closed down.

    Editors must be German citizens and not married to Jews

    All radio broadcasts must be approved by the ministry of propaganda.

    Source Nazi press Laws

    ———————————————————

  • Jaghatai Khan

    “So, While Zionism is exactly nazism, it’s followers have commited many Nazi like Actions, as I already pointed out above.”

    So, While zionism isn’t

    That should be.

  • disenfranchised

    Oh Dear Basil – you really are full of it – Bye Bye

  • disenfranchised

    Jaghatai – The Nazis committed mass extermination of millions of jews, gypsies, political malcontents and others.

    There really is no comparison, but then propaganda repeated enough times will become convincing to those who wish to believe.

    I guess it must be OK to send suicide bombers because the propaganda machine can call them martyrs.

    BTW the West Bank (long after it was inhabited by the jewish people since biblical times) was part of Trans Jordan which then became Jordan, after a deal with the British. King Hussein of Jordan gave the Palestinians a home in Jordan, until they tried to overthrow his country, and assasinate him, whereupon, his troops threw them out. Finally, he decided to relinquish control of the West Bank in favour of the palestinians

    Your so-called Zionists gave Arafat everything that was asked for, but then he decided to ask for the “Right of Return”, which would have meant that Israel would have a majority population that wasn’t jewish, effectively ending the State of Israel.

    When they wouldn’t give him this new condition, he started the latest intifada, instead of compromising.

    I have sympathy for both sides, and there are very many decent people on both sides of this sorry conflict, but this tit for tat violence is conveniently disguised by blaming everything on the “Zionists”.

    You use the word Zionism as if it is an insult – it actually means:

    the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel, advocated, from its inception, tangible as well as spiritual aims.

    So by trying to belittle Zionism by degrading its meaning to something bad, you are effectively saying that there shouldn’t be a State of Israel.
    A State that was mandated by the UN.

    It is such a waste of human life and effort to continue in conflict, but if the only solution seemingly acceptable to the people that you obviously sympathise with, is, to end the State of Israel, then it must be obvious that there cannot be peace.

    I do not know what the solution is, but I do know that everyone is suffering, and it is far better to compromise and live in peace – unfortunately I can’t see this arising in our life time as there are too many entrenched views.

  • fawlty

    Listen, when the average person calls someone a nazi he means ‘someone who thinks he can force people to conform and someone who is against freedom in an extreme way’
    The issue of the killing of jews etc. is very seldomly refered to when one calls someone NAZI.
    Perhaps schools should teach this at basic language skills, seems too many people are not familiar with basic speech.

    NAZI:

    A n. 1 A member of the National Socialist Party in Germany, led by Adolf Hitler from 1920 and in power 1933–45 (Hist.); a member of any similar organization. M20.

    2 A believer in the aims or doctrines of Nazism or in any similar doctrines; a person holding extreme racist, esp. anti-Semitic, or authoritarian views or behaving in a brutal or bigoted manner. M20.

    notice the second part

    “OR authoritarian views OR behaving in a brutal OR bigoted manner”

    source: New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary

  • fawlty

    Oh and what are known as the zionist in Israel are extremist idiots from america that the average Israeli isn’t so fond of to say the least, they are idiots combining american stupidity with extremism and religious justification (which is disputed by the many in the jewish faith seeing they believe the torah specifies it’s not yet time to return to zion until their messiah says it’s time) who prefer to live on occupied territories NOT recognised by the UN and who all (oh look a generalisation) carry an UZI

    And while I’m at it, I hear muslims on BBC and CNN etc. etc. all the time use the term ‘the west’ often followed by various accusations, who’s grouping and generalising you said?

    Perhaps we should agree on a percentage, how about if 85% of a group does something we can ‘generalise’ it? is that acceptable? or do you prefer 95%?

    Or perhaps less, like in “the british speak english” refering to only 75% tops :P

    (I’m a bit hot-tempered today, perhaps like kilroy was when he wrote a certain article, perhaps I too should be charged and fired and put in jail eh NAZI’s)

  • Basil

    Disenfranchised – I should say bye bye, but I won’t.

    You have made some salient points on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

    However, I think you’ll find there’s a little bit of disagreement on the issue of “giving Arafat everything that was asked for”

    The offer is usually portrayed as the Palestinians receiving 96% of the West Bank. But of course, the figure is misleading. The Israelis did not include parts of the West Bank they had already appropriated.

    Moreover, the Palestine that would have emerged from such a settlement would not have been viable. It would have comprised about half-a-dozen chunks, with huge Jewish settlements in between – a Middle East Bantustan. The Israeli army would also have retained the proposed Palestinian state’s eastern border, the Jordan valley, for six to 10 years and, more significantly, another strip along the Dead Sea coast for an unspecified period.

    Which isn’t exactly my idea (or other, much more importantly) of an independent state.

    Btw, you are absolutely right in that there are many very decent people on both sides of the conflict.

    And guess what? I include you among those, regardless of your opinions of me. I just felt you hade made some strident misrepresentations of my views that had to be addressed.

    Hey, if we keep talking, instead of blowing each other up, we may well get somewhere…

    But RK-S is an arsehole – no deviating on that one!

  • disenfranchised

    Basil & Fawlty

    Some good points – I even like some of them

    Fawlty, I don’t think that you are completely right about the zionists and their not recognising Israel.

    There are extremists in Israel – the ultra-orthodox hassidic jews who wear those weird clothes that everyone incorrectly associates with all jews – they refuse to have anything to do with the State of Israel, except take handouts for their studies; they also have complete military exemption, and so never fight except amongst themselves, and so most of them probably don’t have guns. They are waiting for the messiah before accepting that they deserve a state, and in fact some of them think that even then they shouldn’t have a state, because of their religious beliefs.

    I did take the trouble of looking up the word Zionist on the web, and you will find it is what I said in my previous missive – so probably a bit of mix and match in your previous statement, but if we separate out the various bits correctly, then I broadly agree with some of your comments.

    The whole topic of Zionists was in response to Basil’s Zionazi jibe, which I take exception to.

    Basic premise – let’s all get along, and not try and kill each other and not thrust our own creed or religion down everyone elses throats – which means that Israel has the right to security and peace, as much as we do, and as much as the Palestinians do.

    Basil, you probably, broadly agree that Camp David and what followed should have been a good thing, but you don’t then go off and start an intifada because it doesn’t go completely your own way, that just puts everything back to way before Oslo, and you can’t expect your enemy to accept peace terms that mean the end of their existence (ie Right of Return) – you also have a Palestinian Authority who will not or cannot exercise control over their terrorist organisations, and who show children’s cartoons extolling the virtues of being a martyr and killing Israelis.

    I personally hate extremism of any form, and in particular religious extremism. I also loathe half-truths put out as fact by various propaganda machines, and biased journalism as sometimes exercised by the BBC (they seem to be very pro-arab, and fairly anti-israeli).

    In the case of Kilroy, they appear to have been pressured by various muslim groups, including the MUslim Council of Britain (I thought we already had a parliament) and various palestinian web sites. This is just outrageous whether you agree with Kilroy’s views or not.

    Gentlemen, I have really enjoyed exchanging views, but all I originally intended was to find Kilroy’s Article, so that I could read it (which I have)

    Forgive me if I don’t respond to any further postings, but I have more mundane things to do – like work!

    Good luck to you all

  • Mark M

    Maybe al jazeera will give him a job.

    Now that’s a show I would watch.

  • DP

    The Arab world did not invent concepts in Math or astronomy, they simply imbibed these from the Greeks and Hindus. The Arabs, in fairness, certainly did write them as a whole and preserved the knowledge of the Greeks as well as, passed on the mathematics of the Hindus to Europe. Even here, most if not all of the work in this area was done by Persians, Jews, Greeks and Christians, who found themselves living under Islam.

  • DP

    The Arab world did not invent concepts in Math or astronomy, they simply imbibed these from the Greeks and Hindus. The Arabs, in fairness, certainly did write them as a whole and preserved the knowledge of the Greeks, as well as, passed on the mathematics of the Hindus to Europe. Even here, most if not all of the work in this area was done by Persians, Jews, Greeks and Christians, who found themselves living under Islam.

  • Orson

    I’ve read half of all comments on this board, and am yet to read to brazen truth that the Kilroy-Silk affair calls us to see:

    The Islamic expansionist war of religion has been re-engaged. We Americans, euphemistically, call it the War on Terror – but in truth, it is a re-igniting of the War on Islam that Islamists and “fundamentalists” have been waging against the West at least since 1979.

    And I am an unabashed Westerner. Therefore I am unoffended by Kilroy-Silk’s honesty assessment of the virtue of our enemy.

    A Bush rightly said – borrowing from the Old US West sense of earnest propriety – you’re either with us or against us. What’s the matter with you $%^# ignorant limeys’?

    It’s well past due to get real about what’s going on and what’s at stake: your civilization and all that’s good about your way of life.

    –Orson
    PS I brook no apologies or excuses for the fact that the US leads this war effort; if you are pro-western, then this is your war, too.

  • fawlty

    Sure, drag Bush into this, talk about a lack of civilisation, freaking monkey in the white house, if that’s our civilisation I am very much tempted to think I should support ‘the other side’

  • fawlty

    PARIS, France (CNN) — Hundreds of Muslims protested in Paris, London and other cities Saturday against the French government’s plan to ban religious symbols — including headscarves — from state schools
    Protests were also held in other cities in France and around the world, including Nice and Toulouse, France; Amman, Jordan; Istanbul, Turkey; and Beirut, Lebanon.

    Sure kilroy is racist because he ‘generalises’ LMFAO
    freakin protest in libanon/turkey/england/jordan about a french internal matter, and muslims call eachother ‘brother’ and ‘comrade’ etc all the time, who are we kidding, and how do we manage it.

  • slaw

    Hi all
    Looking over this page I am shocked at the number of people that seem to think that because Saudi Arabia is blatantly unfair to non Muslims, Britain should do the same to non white people. So in other words we are as good as them?
    As for the hook man whatever his name is, I don’t remember him having a TV show and news paper column. He only came into the public light when the sun had him in the paper everyday.
    sigh!

  • Ult

    Read this article:

    http://cgi.citizen-times.com/cgi-bin/story/45896

    You will notice a very interesting piece of info in this article, one which the mainstream media has COMPLETELY IGNORED.

    Why has the media ignored this?

    I’ll tell you why; because it is not politically correct (it offends the Feminists and the Multiculturalists), and does not fit into the “acceptable worldview” of the media.
    The media elite decides what we can or can’t see, hear, or think (that’s why Kilroy has landed in trouble).

    Kilroy will have difficulty moving to another channel because he has now broken the media’s “rules of acceptability and correctness” and his name will thus be Mud.

  • MARY

    I am really worried that at the moment if people voice their worries about whats happening to their countries either regarding mass immigration, asylum or speaking their minds people jump on you calling you a racist or fascist. Anyone who disagrees on these sensitive issues are silenced. I really think that the world is in a sorry state and I think the future is really black for the first time in generations. Ok Left wingers Capitalism is bad BUT whats your alternative. We´ve seen what legacy the Soviet Union has left the world. Next there will be Siberian type concentration camps built by the politically correct for anyone who disagrees with their dogmas. Kilroy has a right to write what he wants and so do I and so does evrybody else.
    MYRA

  • Ult

    We can only solve problems by facing up to the truth, however much we may not like it.

    Political Correctness prevents us from facing the truth and tackling problems, it sweeps them under the carpet and says that anyone who talks about these issues is a racist.

    I despise people who contort the world and it’s harsh realities, into their worldview, conveniently ignoring that which disproves their worldview.
    Trevor Philips is one of these people (others include Orla Guerin, C4′s Jon Snow and Lindsay Hilsum).

    Kilroy supposedly broke the rules of impartiality, but the BBC advertises in the Guardian, and many of it’s journalists are so obviously left-leaning it beggars belief. Why is John Kampfner allowed to work for the BBC AND the Left-wing New Statesman?

    (BTW I am no right-winger by any means, and deeply dislike Bush, but I smell bigoted Anti-Americanism in the BBC’s news coverage).

  • Dhimmi

    The last time i checked, monkeys did not graduate from Yale and have a Masters in Business Administration. In fact no prior president has.

  • If the right people adopt a monkey you’ll see it repeated dhimmi.

  • fawlty

    Instead of people taking bush’s yale connection as ‘he’s not a monkey because monkeys don’t go to yale’ I think it’s time to view it as ‘he is a monkey therefore it is evidence monkeys goto yale’
    It is appropiate to to use evidence at hand rather than conjecture.

  • roy smith

    The BBC is not the only anti america news agency. Infact the only pro-american news agencies that I know, are those that belongs to USA..(CNN, Fox). In UK during the Iraq war, there were more antiamerican coverage by ITV,Sky news and Channel 4 than BBC. Maybe the truth hurts!

  • ww

    some thing for you all

    “Now after 56 years the truth emerges. The Israelis were waiting for an opportunity to expand beyond the partition borders. The Palestinians did not flee but were driven out. There was not one but 24 massacres. “Transfer” or “Ethnic Cleansing” was (Israeli PM) David Ben Gurion’s unwritten policy.

    An Israeli historian Benny Morris has access to IDF archives and the integrity to speak. In a January 8 interview in Ha’aretz, Morris says:

    “Twenty-four [massacres]. In some cases four or five people were executed, in others the numbers were 70, 80, 100. There was also a great deal of arbitrary killing. Two old men are spotted walking in a field – they are shot. A woman is found in an abandoned village – she is shot. There are cases such as the village of Dawayima [in the Hebron region], in which a column entered the village with all guns blazing and killed anything that moved.

    “The worst cases were Saliha (70-80 killed), Deir Yassin (100-110), Lod (250), Dawayima (hundreds) and perhaps Abu Shusha (70)”

    read more

  • fawlty

    hmm ww, this is no secret, in fact there was a big uprising in israel about incidents like that and they had to take some steps to stop it, not that it’s not still bad, but if you quote history also mention the objection of the israeli population when it went too far, and while we are at it, how about the wars the arab nations started… but this thread isn’t about israel, this is about England and censorship of british writers eh
    If you insist on going on a tangent, let’s talk food, what’s better, pizza or chips :]

  • Derek Taylor

    Citizens of the countries which have embraced the concept of freedom of speech should not fall into the trap of apologising for its existance – especially to those who do not believe in it. Why the hell should we? We are only saying what we believe and if that is proved wrong now and again then we have to eat humble pie now and again. But that’s all. Better that though, than being citizens of countries who deny that right – by threatening them with a fatwah, or stoning or whatever else those barbarian states do to their wretched populations.
    The Kilroy-Silk apology is only to be expected from such a man because he genually believes he has hurt somebody’s feelings. But isn’t that what all wellbred English gentleman tend to do? Yet that doesn’t mean he should have to abandon his democratic rights in the process. Nothing is worth that – surely? This man has his finger on the pulse of the nation, if not the entire West, and anyone worth their salt should back him, because if not, he may one day wished he had.
    In fact the man should return to politics where if nothing else, he can he can use his persuasive talents on those Wet, Left or PC Mps who would sell this nation’s soul for the next barrel of oil.
    God, its good to be an Englishman every 100 years or so. I haven’t seen such backbone since Churchill.

  • Alex

    Fawlty —- ‘he is a monkey therefore it is evidence monkeys goto yale’
    Thankyou so much Fawlty , you have made my day.

    Anyway, I am half Pakistani half Irish (so I’m spoilt for choice when it comes to terrorist groups to join), my children are half Algerian, I was born in London (centre of known universe) and am a Londoner to the core, obviously Kilroy’s comments were quite hurtful to someone like me.
    My father is a muslim and is the most peaceful man I have ever met, and much of the representations of Islam I see on this page and in the wider press are totally alien to my experience. I find it humourous that we revel in our freedoms and democracy yet pre-war 80% of public opinion was against action without UN backing, and yet we were still dragged into it by a hanful of politicians. Funnily enough the common people were able to assess the threat posed by Iraq better than our inteligence services.
    So that’s democracy ?
    Someone said that Kilroy’s comments don’t insite hatred and violence. hmmm– from what I can see he’s insited plenty of hate on this forum – all you little englanders have really come out to air your biggoted stench.(I can feel the hate brewing up in me now – see)
    As for violence, has everyone forgotten that little white kid(brainwashed by you Kilroy Silk types) who went round bombing London a couple of years ago. My kids were walking past that bit of Brixton Market just 10 mins before the nail bomb went off.
    Luckily the rest of us know that you sad little people are a dying breed. Your children all come down to London and love multiculturalism , it’s a breath of fresh air after the stale inbread life that is rural England. Sure it seems scary to the uninitiated, but the younger generation know that there’s a very bright future ahead for the world once you ‘old school’ have kicked the bucket and taken your ‘backward ways’ with you. And that includes racists of any colour or creed.
    God knows where you get your ideas about muslim countries from, off Sky News probably.
    My cousin is in a Death Metal band in Karachi, sure the regilious idiots over there call him a satanist, but who really cares what they think, he knows God doesn’t take it so seriously, why don’t the media focus on progressive muslims, ‘cos Islamaphobia is necessary at the moment for the US to stave off the threat of the Euro. If OPEC follow Saddams move of Nov 2000 and swith oil trading to Euro’s as it will next year probably, (if the EUROZONE can convince Iran they will protect it from US) the US economy will crash overnight and bye bye US military, the sooner that happens the better IMO. The rest of the world can get on with building a bright future for all our children.

  • Derek Taylor

    Oh dear. This particular samizdat debate looks like its running out of steam. Check the last few entries since I was last on. Is it really little me who has brought this debate to an end? Or is it because RKS is yesterday’s news? Can the freedom-of-speech aspect of his otherwise notoriously honest account of Arabs and Muslims not be worth championing? Don’t let it fall asleep because of lack of input from the champions of free speech out there. Let’s see if I can liven it up a little. Okay, be patient with me.

    That Robert Kilroy-Silk has a loose tongue and likes to hear himself speak, is no secret to anyone. But to spark off an international furore by inflicting on the world that basest of all human offences – the speaking of one’s own mind – is RKS’s right. At least in the UK it is. His rhetoric concerning ‘Arabs’ could have been toned down but like everyone in life, RKS has to learn that negative remarks can only, by definition, breed negativism in the listener. But, deep down the uproar caused cannot simply be about insulting Arab or Muslim nations or people. What RKS said was about; (a) verifiable facts and (b) fair comment. Arabs and Moslems themselves have a long history of blood curdling curses aimed at infidels so – what’s good for the goose . . . But RKS is our favourite son: He’s a one-man UN, the Appeal Court and daytime TV marriage counsellor thrown into one – don’t they know that? He’s a man for all subjects but hopefully not a man for all seasons. Surely he’s only been doing his job for crying out loud? Which is to promote debate, to encourage debate, and even for 15 TV years to supervise debate on his show (now closed thanks to the PC Gestapo). Come on you new guys at the BBC. Don’t you see that once you start gagging journalists (or anyone) we may as well pack up our bags and go back to the cave or start swinging from trees again.

    What’s happened is simply this; RSK actually had the nerve to voice his own feelings, based on plainly observable, (and to him) disgusting facts. The downside; that RKS made a couple of minor errors, can easily be blamed on his researcher or his geography master. But he got the main issues spot on and has now discovered that he has hit the mother of all nerves. The man’s laser-like beam has seared into the very souls of hypocrites everywhere, especially those in denial about (strangely enough) exactly those self-same observable and disgusting facts that he dared observe and mention!

    Reporters are supposed to tell it like it is. I mean, could he have possibly said something on these lines; No, Saudi Arabia does not amputate limbs? No, Nigeria does not stone to death females unfortunate enough to have been made pregnant by a rapist or even an adulterer? No, Afghanis do not blow up ancient and priceless monuments? No. Palestinians do not encourage young suicide bombers? Would that be what people want? I doubt it. Or he could have mentioned another salient fact; that Moslems represent overwhelmingly the majority of would-be immigrants to the West – especially to the supposed mother of all Satanic states – the good old USA.

    On the surface, that last fact, so paradoxical and beyond understanding to us in the West, prompts the obvious question: Why is it that such huge numbers of Moslems even want to come to the so-called infidel West? What do we have here that they lack in their own countries? (Good question). Could it remotely be such concepts as freedom of speech and universal suffrage? Whatever it is, their fundamentalist leaders still insist that we are the enemy (don’t they?) or do my eyes and ears deceive me? But if the great majority of individual Moslems (yes – the very ones getting stoned and amputated) want the same freedoms we take for granted, then they should be bloody well thanking RSK for mentioning the unmentionable. Thank him for raising it – at least in our newspaper columns – because everyone knows its instant death to mention it in their columns. So on their behalf, and Arabs and Moslems everywhere – Thanks RSK

    The really bizarre thing here is that RKS (ex-lawyer, ex MP) really wants Moslems everywhere to enjoy the same freedoms which he already has (or had). Then hopefully, they would instantly want to stop amputating limbs, stoning unmarried mothers, blowing priceless artefacts to smithereens and killing their own flesh and blood. He actually cited nothing more than fairly typical examples of everyday Moslem life – so why all the uproar when someone tells the truth? We in the West would dearly love to know why Moslem extremists hate us so much – it might even change our opinion of them. But how far back in history do they want to go? If they really are trying to tell us something or sell us something, can’t they do it with words, instead of swords, stones and bombs, not to mention fuel-laden jets? Do they not understand that simple words and vigorous dialogue and debate (however unsavoury) are the sharpening-stones of the universal inquiring mind? Is it really that difficult for even extreme Moslems to grasp the fruitfulness of deep, insightful conversations and the benefits that are reaped from such healthy discourse? Unfortunately, we have to accept, that for them, it might be rather difficult. Because once they start debating such barbarous medieval acts, they might start questioning other aspects of Islam as well. They might start looking at the Koran as we now look at our Bible; seeing it as too extreme and largely outdated for living in the 21st century. And lastly, they might look more closely at their leaders, the controlling Mullahs and Imams who, ala Rip van Winkle, are firmly entrenched in the seventh century AD – when Mohamet wrote the Koran. It’s only through new laws, new views and new ideals can the Moslem have a chance of moving forward. Let’s face it though, the task they face is akin to us in the West trying to get 21st century ideals across to Alfred the Great. So let’s all make a start NOW.

    But, notwithstanding, do we really want our journalists (or even Arab ones) to start dishing out watered down, distorted versions of the facts – without any historical input or contemporary comment whatsoever? Isn’t it their job – while dodging bullets or brickbats – to tell it just like it is? They know their stock rises or falls a propos the accuracy of their reporting. They quite understand and accept that their public, their peers, their bosses, their government and even their judicial system will pounce on them from a great height, if and when they cock it up, but that’s what reporters do – they take risks – God bless them. A journalist’s personal opinion, superfluous or not, can still be an issue worth debating surely? Does he really have to be sacked? Why couldn’t they just disassociate themselves – as newspapers and magazines routinely do? Reporting the truth, on the other hand, can never be a debatable issue – it’s a 100% essential feature of their job.

    By sacking RKS, the BBC have unwittingly committed the self-same destructive act that any dyed-in-the-wool despot would have done, in any of the Arab or Moslem countries you could care to mention. They have got rid of the only man worth saving. And, it’s a sad day for everyone (especially those amputatees and suicide bombers in the Middle East) because the BBC should have been among the first to defend that sacred tenet of human rights (freedom of speech) while still crying our for more of the same in the Middle East. Instead they have, in effect, fatwah’ed RKS, as surely as if they had cut out his tongue. So now, please let’s hear some sensible comments from our Moslem friends – and rhetoric from our foes. Come on, its a free world for us all (at least on the Internet) so let’s start THE REAL DEBATE.

  • bobby

    the yarl wood centre that got burnt down one of the inmates is getting legal aid to sue the home office for her breach of human rights? what if she is really a bogos asylum claimer? she may get her 50.000 she claims that she wants? if she has come into the country under false pretence she should get nothing at all i read this in the mail on sunday 10 th oct 2004 page 42 my oppinion britian a joke robert from scotland, ps let look after our own people first, kind regards to all,

  • Bombadil

    Was just re-reading this old comment thread, and couldn’t help chuckling at this from Andy: “Try becoming President if you’re black in the USA.

    D’oh! Hahahahahahaha.