<< CARR QUITS ~ MAIN ~ ROOT CAUSE LOCATED >>

DECENT WHITE FOLK BLACK

All Christians are white. Well, David Marr seems to think so:

Anti-vilification laws aren’t the answer. In Victoria, two hellfire Christian preachers, Danny Nalliah and Daniel Scot, are facing jail after preaching against Islam in the aftermath of September 11, 2001. Ever since, they’ve been fighting an action brought by the Islamic Council of Victoria under the state’s new Racial and Religious Tolerance Act.

That’s the pesky thing about these laws that show almost zero tolerance for religious and racial intolerance: they can be turned against decent white folk.

Do your research, Dave. Mistakes like this can get you mentioned on Media Watch.

Posted by Tim B. on 07/26/2005 at 09:09 PM
  1. Bad week for Marr after making an utter dill of himself on Insiders by signalling his defeat in debate with Bolt by pitifully resorting to the rascist slur.

    Posted by slatts on 2005 07 26 at 10:24 PM • permalink

  2. Hellfire? All they did was quote from the Koran… oh, never mind

    —Nora

    Posted by The Thin Man Returns on 2005 07 26 at 10:32 PM • permalink

  3. what should we do with Leviticus and its call for homosexuals to be put to death?

    OK Dave, next time you pass a Christian Church on Sunday, and the guy inside is exhorting his congregation to stone the pillow-biters because Leviticus says so, be sure to let me know.

    Posted by cuckoo on 2005 07 26 at 10:39 PM • permalink

  4. I hadn’t seen Danny Nalliah but I had read he came from Pakistan, and was a Muslim convert to Christianity.

    Oops.

    Well, if you squint a bit lot, they could be white…ish.

    Posted by kae on 2005 07 26 at 10:48 PM • permalink

  5. Racial and Religious Tolerance Act?

    Is that one of those laws that only seem to apply if the “intolerance” is shown by Christians, towards the poor oppressed Muslims or (insert any minor “protected” religion here)?

    Meanwhile, the local imam can call for the eradication of the entire Christian population….and the appeasers say: Oh. It’s just a concept. They don’t really mean it!

    Posted by rinardman on 2005 07 26 at 10:52 PM • permalink

  6. That’s the pesky thing about these laws that show almost zero tolerance for religious and racial intolerance: they can be turned against decent white folk.

    Well, Dave, that is exactly what most of these laws are designed for.  In the US, Hate Crimes (a.k.a. Thought Crimes) are specifically designed to make sure white males spend more time in jail.  I remember a racially motivated crime that occured a few years ago, and the Native American community was shocked to find out that one of their own was charged with a Hate Crime.  Only white males are supposed to be subjected to those types of laws.  The idea is to enforce tolerance and multi-culturalism. 

    What matters to the Left is whether or not racism or intolerance exists.  What matters is that it is “the right kind” of racism and intolerance (i.e. Politically Correct hate). 

    And for those of you who didn’t click on the “research” link.  The pastors are not white.

    Posted by EvilDave on 2005 07 26 at 10:54 PM • permalink

  7. Damn, they’re letting the coloureds practice Christianity now?

    I wonder what the rules are over at the church of scientology?

    Posted by Looneyc on 2005 07 26 at 10:56 PM • permalink

  8. Oh and I agree with Slatts, Marr’s performance on insiders on pathetic, but it was hardly a debate, more like trying to discuss the finer points of Shakespeare with a rapid dog.

    Posted by Looneyc on 2005 07 26 at 11:01 PM • permalink

  9. Make that rabid dog.

    Posted by Looneyc on 2005 07 26 at 11:02 PM • permalink

  10. Looneyc, I never thought of Marr as a rapid dog, more a mangy cur in need of a good kicking.

    Posted by mr magoo on 2005 07 26 at 11:12 PM • permalink

  11. Apart from his silly mistake about white folk, I didn’t think there was anything wrong with Marr’s article.
    Is there anyone here who actually supports the obnoxious anti-free speech vilification laws?

    Posted by Lionel Mandrake on 2005 07 26 at 11:14 PM • permalink

  12. D1 and D2 are definately dusky- Dave is a duplicitous dickwad, a dunderhead and a deadshit.

    Posted by Habib on 2005 07 26 at 11:15 PM • permalink

  13. You would have thought the last name “Nallah” would be a tip off to Marr.

    Posted by Aging Gamer on 2005 07 26 at 11:24 PM • permalink

  14. #3 Cuckoo,this Leviticus dude still has his followers IF you believe Roy Morgan Research and the results of their Mapping Homophobia in Australia.Linda Morris in the SMH today reveals that raging homophobia is alive and well amongst Baptists who were found to be 68% anti-gay and Evangelical Christians (62%).Catholics were the least anti-gay of the religious set but no percentage was disclosed.Most interestingly Islam wasn’t even mentioned so I suppose we must presume that Muslims are totally tolerant and harbour no homophobic tendencies whatever,which I find amazing,but which no doubt is music to the very attractive ears of David Marr.

    Posted by Lew on 2005 07 26 at 11:24 PM • permalink

  15. Lionel, I think it has something to do with Glasshouses and stones?

    Posted by Looneyc on 2005 07 26 at 11:26 PM • permalink

  16. Are “anti-gay” (which might mean believing homosexual marriage is not the best environment to raise children, foe example) and “homophobic” the same thing and to be used interchangeably?

    Posted by Susan Norton on 2005 07 26 at 11:35 PM • permalink

  17. The lefties are the most bigoted, prejudicial nutwads in western society, bar none. “All you religious nuts are tight-assed white guys that can’t dance and therefore don’t want anybody else having fun” is rote at this point.

    As to Leviticus as some kind of “gotcha”, it just shows more of the ignorance underlying the prejudices. Christians follow the teachings of Christ as represented in the NEW TESTAMENT and specifically the gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John). Old testament works are context, and were amended by Christ’s teachings, and are specifically not the teachings of Christ.

    Posted by Ursus on 2005 07 26 at 11:38 PM • permalink

  18. Isn’t this exactly the language of the imams - the same wild generalisations, the same sweeping hatreds based as much as anything on race?

    Ummm ... no David, not really. They (Imams) hate us because we aren’t them and want us to either die or submit to their beliefs.

    We (Christians) would very much like others to believe what we do, but can live with our neighbours if they don’t. I guess it must be our annoying habit of putting our point of view across that’s the equal of an imam’s hate speech.

    Seriously, in 30+ years of being a Christian, I’ve never heard it said, condoned or implied that non-Christians are less than others, or deserve to be put to death for their views.

    Posted by 2BarRiff on 2005 07 26 at 11:40 PM • permalink

  19. #18. Mr Z

    I think it’s to do with turning the other cheek. Most Christians do it. And live and let live.

    Most Christians are also able to think and make decisions for themselves without having to ask a ‘religeous leader’ what to do and what to think.

    Posted by kae on 2005 07 26 at 11:52 PM • permalink

  20. Do your research, Dave. Mistakes like this can get you mentioned on Media Watch.

    Um, no, it can’t.  This is exactly the sort of situation that causes lefties’ brains to explode.  We want to support the Muslims cuz it’s multicultural but that means we have to lock up the Aborigine (?) and the Pakistani and that’s racist but we want to support the Muslims because,,,

    Inevitably they are reduced to the simple expedient of denying the ethnicity of their victims.  The preachers can’t be people of color, they simply can’t.  Miguel Estrada is not a “real” Hispanic; Condi is not a “real” black woman… and thus they can march on eyes bravely shut into the shredder…

    Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 07 26 at 11:52 PM • permalink

  21. Looneyc — Scientology?  If your check clears, you can be fuschia if you want…

    Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 07 26 at 11:54 PM • permalink

  22. What a shame for Lefties like Marr that these particular Christains aren’t available in white!

    Posted by Brian on 2005 07 27 at 12:02 AM • permalink

  23. In other censorship-related news: Criticism of suicide bombers censored at the UN.

    The International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU)...

    ...today attempted to call on the United Nations to condemn
    killing in the name of religion, but were prevented from doing so by the heavy-handed intervention of Islamic representatives. The IHEU call, at today’s meeting of the UN Sub-Commission on Human Rights in Geneva, follows moves by Islamic clerics to legitimise the current wave of terror attacks.

    At this afternoon’s meeting, IHEU representative David Littman attempted to deliver a prepared text in the joint names of three international NGOs: the Association for World Education, the Association of World Citizens, and IHEU, but was prevented from doing so by the intervention of Islamic members of the Sub-Commission. After repeated interruptions he was unable to complete his speech.

    Islam: religion of - ;) - peace.

    Posted by C.L. on 2005 07 27 at 12:03 AM • permalink

  24. Speaking of Racial and Religious Tolerance (sic) in this fine city of Melbourne, my little tacker is in family day care for a few days a week while I either spend too much time on the blogs or go and do a bit of work.

    Her carer’s oldest boy (14) has been getting hassled as school for being….. white! I’ve suggested to her that she brings charges against the school under this joke of an Act. The young man is definitely not happy about being called a “white this” or “white that”, but nobody seems to be doing anything about it.

    According to the text of the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act of 2001, you can be charged just for upsetting someone. I think she should go for it.

    For those who like a bit more detail, you can read the Act in its entirety here.

    Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2005 07 27 at 12:17 AM • permalink

  25. FWIW the two Daniels have a fighting fund appeal up on their site.

    Nicky and I are happy to give up our weekly drinking budget to this good cause

    —Nora

    Posted by The Thin Man Returns on 2005 07 27 at 12:21 AM • permalink

  26. She should definitely go for it. i used to think that racial vilification legislation was justified - having been the target of such slurs.

    I’ve since come to believe that more speech is the answer to offensive speech.

    As for Marr - what a fool, but I seriously don’t expect Media Watch to pick it up.

    Posted by Adam on 2005 07 27 at 12:22 AM • permalink

  27. Somewhat OT : Does anybody here think that the UN serves any real purpose?

    Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2005 07 27 at 12:31 AM • permalink

  28. Somewhat OT : Does anybody here think that the UN serves any real purpose?

    Equally somewhat OT:  No.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2005 07 27 at 12:37 AM • permalink

  29. I don’t know how many homosexuals have been put to death by white Christians, acting on the word of Leviticus, lately, but if Marr is interested in REAL homophobia, he should take a look at these Iranian teenagers being hanged for being gay. Before they were hanged, they were given 228 lashes each. Warning: the images are disturbing, and I believe there are even more disturbing images floating around.

    Posted by zscore on 2005 07 27 at 12:51 AM • permalink

  30. David Marr’s blunder reminds me of his failure to criticise Margo for her “****** in the woodpile” comment.

    Posted by Andjam on 2005 07 27 at 01:23 AM • permalink

  31. Andjam — “Rabbis?”  (jes’ kidding, everyone knows she said “Howard,” right?)

    Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 07 27 at 01:37 AM • permalink

  32. Lew - “Most interestingly Islam wasn’t even mentioned so I suppose we must presume that Muslims ...”

    The southern suburbs of Sydney are heavily populated by Muslims. Seems as if this survey covered only Christians and non-believers, which makes it entirely worthless..

    Nilknarf - “Her carer’s oldest boy (14) has been getting hassled as school for being….. white!”

    This happens all the time in Muslim areas of Sydney - the blue-eyed, white blonde female children of a friend of mine were unmercifully threatened and harassed by Muslim kids at their busstop every morning. Their crime apparently was being fair and beautiful. Much of this stuff is sheer jealousy and resentment - I could give you a dozen examples but that would be ‘Muslim-bashing’, wouldnt it.

    Posted by dee on 2005 07 27 at 01:48 AM • permalink

  33. marr is a total idiot. he has proved it over and over again.
    To Marr , quoting verses from the koran constitutes racial villification.
    Whatever the Idiocy of Victorian laws say, islam is NOT A RACE and quoting directly from a “Holy book” must never be allowed to constitute an offence, otherwise we might as well start singing “ring a ring of roses” like the Brits did before freedom of speech.
    On this very subject today, LGF have an item on sami al arian, the master of taqiya in Florida, who thank god is now on trial.
    It is indeed a prime example of how such muslim will expertly use every democratic right against us.
    Victoria should hold its head in shame for passing such dhimmy laws which will be exploited to the hilt by Muslim leaders from now on.
    My deepest Sympathy for these heroic BLACK preachers.If they go to jail we should all act by sending messages and gifts to them.
    And Marr, do your homework before you write such Cr*p.
    http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=16822_Kaufman-_What_I_Saw_at_Al-Arians_Trial#comments

    Posted by davo on 2005 07 27 at 01:49 AM • permalink

  34. #27,  Nilknarf Arbed: A large portion of the American blogosphere believes that it’s past time to call in the bulldozers and shove the UN into the East River.

    I happen to be of that particular stripe :).

    Posted by mamapajamas on 2005 07 27 at 02:00 AM • permalink

  35. Interesting how Marr mixes inciting violence with expressing opinions that may bring someone to hate another person. I hate Eddie McGuire and I’m in an environment that encourages me to hate him, but I would never commit violence against him.

    Posted by drscroogemcduck on 2005 07 27 at 02:03 AM • permalink

  36. mama
    The UN will never even be able to condemn Suicide bommbings in western countries let alone heaven forbid,in Israel.
    They are completely under the control of rogue Muslim states.

    Posted by davo on 2005 07 27 at 02:04 AM • permalink

  37. #14

    I was astounded by that study. There are as many Muslims as baptists in Oz according to the ABS, and yet Baptists are singled out as the most homophobic with no reference to any other religion other than the Christian flavours.

    Posted by duncanm on 2005 07 27 at 02:17 AM • permalink

  38. I’ve drawn the Marr blunder to Media Watch’s attention, but breathholding while awaiting inclusion in the program would not be wise.  Just imaging if, say, Janet Albrechtson had made such an error!

    I dunno, drscroogemcduck, I might make an exception in the case of King Eddie.

    Posted by ozpat on 2005 07 27 at 02:23 AM • permalink

  39. Sorry - I left the “Fuc” from the front of Eddie’s title.

    Posted by ozpat on 2005 07 27 at 02:25 AM • permalink

  40. love is colour blind

    Posted by captain on 2005 07 27 at 02:29 AM • permalink

  41. Davo, I read somewhere today… I can’t remember where… that a lot of the left think that the UN is an organization that will eventually lead to a United Federation of Planets, just like on Star Trek.  I have a feeling that this observation is truer than it might seem at first glance.  Most of the lefties I know are dreamers living in Neverland who don’t seem to realize that the world is NOT at the point where we can have an organization like that which is effective if that organization is willing to allow totalitarians to run amock and is unwilling to exercise what authority it has in a meaningful way. 

    In the last 50 or so years, the UN has been involved in only two wars out of the 120 or so that were fought (despite all the screeching that the Iraq war is somehow “illegal” because it wasn’t sanctioned by the UN, despite all of the other wars other nations fought without permission from Big Nanny); those were the Korean War and the Gulf War. 

    In both wars, the combatants were separated and the basic problem (totalitarian agressors) was left unresolved.  We are now having to deal with the unresolved Gulf War, and will eventually have to deal with North Korea in one way or another (hopefully via diplomacy!).  This is hardly good management of affairs, and a piss poor record for the UN.

    But this will be my last comment on the UN on this thread; let’s not divert this thread away from the topic of lambasting the so-deserving David Marr and Orwellian “thought crime” laws :).

    Posted by mamapajamas on 2005 07 27 at 02:30 AM • permalink

  42. Phillip J Fry: DOOP? What’s that?
    Professor Farnsworth: It’s similiar to the United Nations from your time, Fry.
    Fry: [Confused]  Uh ...
    Hermes Conrad: Or like the Federation from your Star Trek program.
    Fry: [Realizing]  Oh!

    Posted by Quentin George on 2005 07 27 at 04:58 AM • permalink

  43. Marr /ma/, v.t., to damage, deface, ruin, impair, disfigure. (from old gay mafia or failed priest dialect)
    /sarcasm.

    Posted by blogstrop on 2005 07 27 at 05:11 AM • permalink

  44. I’m in favor of no-mocking laws for religions.

    Posted by rhhardin on 2005 07 27 at 07:17 AM • permalink

  45. #32 The southern suburbs of Sydney are heavily populated by Muslims

    Just how heavily? Only 1.5% of the population is Muslim, according to 2001 census.

    Posted by pog-ma-thon on 2005 07 27 at 07:28 AM • permalink

  46. New Rule For The UN
    If you are not a properly elected government you do not have a vote. You are reduced to observer status. No membership of committes, commissions, no status, titles, no power to do anything at all.
    Sovereignty should derive from the people, and without their imprimateur, governments are just usurpers.
    Sorry ‘bout that, china.

    Posted by blogstrop on 2005 07 27 at 07:28 AM • permalink

  47. Many young people today with time moving on and no history lessons at school- other than the usual “social studies” anti Vietnam -anti Australian stuff- believe really strange things like Britain will come to our rescue if anyone invades us etc.

    Posted by crash on 2005 07 27 at 08:26 AM • permalink

  48. A large portion of the American blogosphere believes that it’s past time to call in the bulldozers and shove the UN into the East River.

    If The Donald gets the contract to remodel the UN building, maybe we can persuade him to relocate it in Baghdad or Darfur or Paris.

    Posted by nofixedabode on 2005 07 27 at 08:55 AM • permalink

  49. Secular leftists think anyone with religious faith is cracked but they will go into bat for Islamism because they think the real motive for the loathing of it is racism.

    Terrorists need help from their Islamist networks and the tacit consent of too many in Muslim communities. How pleased they must be to be getting support as well from useful idiots like Marr who have turned multiculturalism into a Trojan horse for murder.

    If Marr knew more about religion or culture he might be capable of the kind of discrimination that now seems to put you in court but his real obsession is the validation of his view that Australians are racists and need proper coercion by would-be cultural commissars like himself.

    A pox on him.

    Posted by Inurbanus on 2005 07 27 at 09:59 AM • permalink

  50. “Fake but accurate” is the new standard for the moonbat left “journalist.”

    Posted by Latino on 2005 07 27 at 10:13 AM • permalink

  51. rhhardin:

    I’m in favor of no-mocking laws for religions.

    What about:

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

    Posted by ErnieG on 2005 07 27 at 10:26 AM • permalink

  52. Marr saw those pictures.  He just assumed it was soot from their last cross burning…

    Posted by jic on 2005 07 27 at 11:59 AM • permalink

  53. What about:

      Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

    Fascist!

    Posted by nofixedabode on 2005 07 27 at 03:55 PM • permalink

  54. “A large portion of the American blogosphere believes that it’s past time to call in the bulldozers and shove the UN into the East River.”

    Many years ago, one of the gee-whiz factoids about the Saturn-Apollo Vehicle Assembly Building at Cape Kennedy was that the VAB “doors” were large enough to permit the UN building to pass through.  I always wondered if that meant it was a hidden agenda of NASA that the real purpose of the Saturn-Apollo Program was to eventually put the UN Building into orbit.  (Or, preferably, to give it escape velocity and point it toward the sun.)

    Posted by Bruce Lagasse on 2005 07 27 at 07:15 PM • permalink

  55. Daniel Scott is Pakistani, Daniel nalliah is Sri lankan I think

    Posted by W i l l i a m on 2005 07 27 at 08:59 PM • permalink

  56. I think we’re all being too hard on Marr.  I mean, they seem decent and they are folk.  Two out of three isn’t so bad, is it?

    Posted by jic on 2005 07 27 at 09:58 PM • permalink

  57. Bruce Lagasse — How about oops, almost into orbit while pointed at Tehran or Riyadh…

    Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 07 27 at 10:24 PM • permalink

  58. Bruce Lagasse — In WMD terms, think of it as a FOBS, a Fractional Orbit Baptismal System…

    Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 07 27 at 10:26 PM • permalink

  59. #45 “Only 1.5% of the population is Muslim, according to 2001 census”.

    I checked the actual article in the SMH - it divides ‘deep south’ from merely ‘south’, so you’re right, 1.5% is correct if you dont count the other southern suburbs such as Liverpool, Fairfield and Banktown - all these suburbs are largely Muslim. There is actually very little difference between results from south and southwest on the diagram. I got lost on the way to Liverpool one night, we drove through street after street of shops with Arabic names and people of Middle Eastern appearance - but this survey just happens to concentrate on the ‘deep’ south where there are not so many Muslims. Another obvious setup targeting Christian groups - if intolerance to gays is the thing they want to demonstrate, why not include the other southern suburbs in the survey? Or is it only Christian ‘intolerance’ they are interested in?

    Posted by dee on 2005 07 28 at 12:58 AM • permalink

  60. We on the right should always use the word “homophobic” in inverted commas (or qotes for our US visitors).  The suffix “phobia” means “fear.”  The vast majority of us have no fear of homosexuals, only disgust or distaste at their sexual practices and the silly, campy lifestyle that some of them lead.  Personally, I dislike homosexual activists who seem to be more in favour of the rest of us accepting homosexuality rather than just tolerating it. I also hate the whole idea of men dancing the chocolate cha-cha, as Sir Les Patterson once called it. But, I have no fear of homsexual activists or buggers. 

    In fact, I would dare to opine that most of the people who are labelled “homophobes’ by the activists and their media flunkies are just like me; they think that homosexual activists are self righteous gits and that sodomy is an abomination.  This does not imply any fear, only disgust.  So I suggest that anyone who uses the word “homophobic” without inverted commas be pulled up by the rest of us and given a quick lesson in proper English usage.

    Posted by Toryhere2 on 2005 07 28 at 03:26 AM • permalink

  61. Marr is the only person i can think of who would provoke me to violence on sight.

    Posted by Astonished on 2005 07 28 at 04:05 AM • permalink

  62. Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Members:
Login | Register | Member List

Please note: you must use a real email address to register. You will be sent an account activation email. Clicking on the url in the email will automatically activate your account. Until you do so your account will be held in the "pending" list and you won't be able to log in. All accounts that are "pending" for more than one week will be deleted.