<< SILENCE ALLEGED ~ MAIN ~ FLYING FISK PUTS WAR INTO WARMING >>
LOCAL MOVIE DILEMMA EXPLAINED
Pakistan’s Mohammad Shehzad reports on the Bush visit:
At least he came. He did not act like the hero of Pakistani movies who comes from a city, visits a village, falls in love with a village girl, promises to marry her, goes back to the city and loses his memory in an accident and never returns to his beloved!!
Er ... can we have a little context, please, Mohammad?
(This is the dilemma of Pakistani romance movies.)
Oh. Oh, I see. Thank you.
UPDATE. In other obscure foreign cultural news, please relive the Oscars with Jim Treacher.
UPDATE II. Another subcontinental journalist, Karamatullah K. Ghori, notes spontaneous Muslim anger:
The Danish affront to Muslims’ universal sensitivity about the sanctity of the Prophet Mohammad’s (PBUH) persona and the reverence it commands in the heart of every believer was deliberate and provocative in the extreme. It was a far more calculated mischief than Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses. No doubt, the backlash from Muslims of all hues is so much more spontaneous and sweeping than was the case when Rushdie set about to measure the depth of Muslim sentiment regarding their Prophet.
Spontaneous? It took the protesters five months. Angry reaction to this post should be observed around July 2008.
Well, I for one share Mr. Shehzad’s (and Mrs. Bush’s, incidentally) relief. Imagine what a scandal an adulterous, amnesiac Republican president would cause.
Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 03 06 at 10:20 AM • permalink‘Bush snatched bread from our mouth’
This particular Mohammad wants democratic rule in Pakistan, and seems to have expected Bush to give it to him…or at least press Musharraf for a democracy.
Hmmmmm…..building democracy. Does this sound familar?
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 03 06 at 10:20 AM • permalinkDammit, Shehzad forced me to link to this…
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 03 06 at 11:37 AM • permalinkOh yeah, I forgot to link this before:
Scroll down and see the cricket ball Dubya should have used during the most important part of his Paki trip :D
Hold on—I’m trying to think of something that happened five months ago to get spontaneously mad about. That was Oct. 6—a couple of days before my birthday.
HEY! I’M AN OLD FART! HOW DID THAT HAPPEN? IT’S BUSHITLERCHIMPEROO’S FAULT!
Posted by Monroe Doctrine on 2006 03 06 at 05:22 PM • permalinkwow, that K K Ghori article is hard to stomach. He throws it all in there. He even saves some space for holocaust denial.
But the kicker: he thinks that new laws in the UK against glorifying terrorism are anti-Muslim! What does that tell you?
K K Ghori, can you join your own dots?Posted by daddy dave on 2006 03 06 at 05:47 PM • permalinkHas anyone (let alone an Islamic literalist) seriously read Satanic Verses cover to cover - we doubt it.
Posted by WeekByWeek on 2006 03 06 at 05:53 PM • permalinkThose Muslim demonstrations against the Danish cartoons were about as spontaneous as the ones the Chinese used to have celebrating Mao swimming the Yangtze River. I’m afraid that what they chiefly accomplished was to convince many people in the West, especially in the US where exasperation with the continued terrorism in Iraq is growing, that Muslims are nothing else than a bunch of vicious, spoiled children apt to murder and riot over trivia. I say trivia because there was no rioting when the cartoons were originally published, and no rioting in Egypt when an Egyptian newspaper reprinted them last October. The whole thing is a put-up job, organized at the meeting early this year of the Organization of the Islamic Conference.
Bush and the dreaded Neo-cons are the best friends Muslims, especially Arabs, have. They are just about the only people in the world who think them fully adult human beings, able to rule themselves. Everybody else thinks Arabs and most Muslims are a bunch of vicious ragheads who need a bloodyhanded tyrant like Saddam to control them, lest they make trouble for the rest of us. This bodes ill for the Muslims, especially the Arabs. Many people are going to start concluding, to use John Derbyshire’s phrase from National Review Online, that piles of rubble cause no trouble.
Every riot, every church burned down, every murder in the name of jihad, every idiotic spewing of stupid conspiracy theories by Muslims, every piece of evidence for Iranian intransigence and bad faith, convinces more people in America that trying to catalyze consensual government in the Arab/Muslim world is a fools errand. Every one of these acts means there are fewer and fewer of us supporting Bush’s cause, and more for the piles of rubble alternative of choice the next time we are attacked.
Posted by Michael Lonie on 2006 03 06 at 10:35 PM • permalinkMichael — So, since there is no hope of coexistence with Muslims, it should be evident to a man of your intellect that we have one of two choices:
1. We are truly screwed no matter what we do.
2. We need to kill between one and two billion people.
Which one do you endorse?
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 03 06 at 11:06 PM • permalinkRichard, you’d be amazed at the number of people I’m hearing advocating #2. The more people hear about the Danish Khartoon Fiasco, the less the want to suffer their issues.
Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2006 03 07 at 04:49 AM • permalinkWbW: I have read the Satanic Verses cover to cover and it was not Rushdie’s best work. It does make me laugh that Muzzies are calling the riots “spontaneous”...they would have been in the 7th century but are a bit slow in the 21st.
Posted by Andrew Ian Dodge on 2006 03 07 at 07:01 AM • permalink1. We are truly screwed no matter what we do.
2. We need to kill between one and two billion people.or version 3- the West prevails without resorting to wholesale slaughter. option 2 should be a very last resort.
Posted by daddy dave on 2006 03 09 at 07:29 PM • permalink
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
Well that’s Dubya for ya -indian giver…