"Muslim terrorist leaders threatened to forcibly convert Britney Spears and
Madonna to Islam and warned if they resist, their heads would be cut off for "spreading Satanic culture," according to a new book released today.'If I meet these whores I will have the honor – I repeat, I will have the honor – to be the first one to cut the heads off Madonna and Britney Spears if they will keep spreading their satanic culture against Islam,' said Muhammad Abdel-Al, spokesman and senior leader of the Popular Resistance Committees terror organization....
The Committees' Abdel-Al accused Madonna and Spears of 'spreading this culture by the Americans as part of the war against Islam.'
'If these two prostitutes [Madonna and Spears] keep doing what they are doing, we of course will punish them. First we will call them to join Islam. But if they keep what they are doing ... we can stone them or even we can kill them if they keep ... tempting men in order to put them far from Islam. ... A prostitute woman must be stoned or must be eighty times hit with a belt.'
Abdel-El said even before Islam takes over America he would personally kill Madonna and Spears if he ran into them. He boasted he would 'be the first one to cut the heads of Madonna and Britney Spears.' "
http://www.jihadwatch.org
http://wnd.com/news/article
Having read that, I suspect you too feel like a virgin for the very first time. Uh, anybody got Madonna's phone number? I mean, she's probably looking for a guy who'll go out with her, right, with all this fat wah floating around in the soup of Human existence. I just happen to be available. Hey, not for long, and definitely not for no babe who doesn't have a good head on her shoulders.
4 comments:
Well, you can joke about it with the easy psychologizing (and reproducing the liberal sexologists' prejudices against chastity - usually those accused of sexual frustration in our culture are Christian but the evident fact that religious people are often frustrated should be juggled with the fact that so too are the sluts...), but I don't doubt there are many guys out there with houses full of wives, and some who spend plenty of money on whoring (hypocrites abound), who would agree with the sentiments expressed by this guy you quote who is only a nutter within our more relaxed world view.
One doesn't have to be sexually frustrated, in your unlaid sense of the term, because what is at issue here is control over (or surrender to) *representations* of the sacred (and, arguably, nothing is more sacred than the erotic) which concern us even when we have the power of feminine beauty in our very hands - no doubt it concerns us even more at such charged moments: often, one really doesn't want one's whore to be a whore, if you know what I mean... on the other hand, some guys like the sadistic pleasures of buying what they consume... some like to see their wives in lingerie, some not...
In any case, the point is you can get all the sex you want, say you are the owner of the Playboy Mansion, and still be fascinated with controlling erotic images of women (and quickly again wanting more sex). It's like the Gnostic who's taken all the thirty-three degrees and is still looking for that special symbolic key that will open all doors and finally bring him satisfaction/peace. The guy whose "control" takes the shape of publishing porn, while talking up freedom and desire, is not very different from the guy obsessed with banning porn and chopping heads. But it's when men start worrying about their daughters that they get most worked up about the Madonnas of the world...
It is less an issue for the truly chaste. But even the traditional Christian understanding of the Satanic - i.e., the tempter/temptress - might be in accord with this "Muslim" characterization of the two gals. It's just that in the Christian view, one doesn't overcome Satan by satisfying a bloodlust, but rather by loving a loving God, and indulging in things like chaste love, with one woman, for life. I don't seriously follow pop culture, but wasn't that Britney's line not so long ago? And isn't that why she's a target for everyone, slut and virgin alike? Ultimately, this Muslim's problem is not with Madonna or Britney, with getting laid or not (however much the problem can be exacerbated in a culture where women, either as whores or potential wives, are kept inaccessible to many young men) but with the power of the sacred to get him riled. Otherwise, he might just say that we'll rape the whores, night after night, once we take over America. But he says we'll chop them up. And such a power of the sacred over him can only be defeated through a certain kind of relationship to God that Islam seems to have trouble providing. God is love. If you don't know that, you're lost, whether in Babylon, Beirut, or Burnaby. Of course it's easy to say, hard to know. And therein lies the problem, ahem!.!
Well, that's again all well and fine, but regardless of our personal feelings or lack thereof regarding the personal lives of 'celebrities,' we don't, as a rule, make it state policy to behead girls who act out phantasies for the public, whether Oedepus mother or Antigone. That's kind of the bottom line for me.
A Death Culture of abortion and suicide and disease and disgusting behavior is a culture going to die; but the same culture is not a culture of murder, that being for me a significant difference. And for most, including the writer above.
What makes it impossible to like about the Muslim world is not that they have values unlike urs, some of which, as Peers points out, are pretty normal in a sane world, but that they take it upon themselves to act out murder agianst anyone at all they dislike for any reason that pops into their otherwise empty heads. Madonna is not responsible in any real sense for pop music and its influence onthe west, and she has every right within our system to do as she and the market will do within the positive laws. Don't like it, don't buy her records. It's simple. but we don't, for the most part, decide to invade another's nation to behead women because we disapprove of their sexual behaviour. We don't invade other nations for the sake of controlling their behaviour at all, unfortunately, unless they are a threat to our nation, regardless of the threats they are to their own people, eg, North Korea or Sudan or Rawanda or Nazi Gemany. Some things are the legitimate choices of idiots and losers, and those things are not the public's concern, even if they offend the public at large greatly and deeply; but some things are, and those things, such as slaughtering civilians at random, seem to pass by without comment.
The post above has nothing to do with sex, no moreso that it has to do with me really hoping for a date with Madonna. It has only to do with the blind hatred of the Muslim world toward all that is not Islamic. They hate Madonna, they hate Mickey Mouse. Donald Duck, if you've noticed, doesn't wear underwear as often as does Britney Spears. I would shudder to think of what the Muslims plan for him. Pushing over a stone wall on him I think is the most likely outcome. And it is as crazy and repulsive to stone Donald Duck as it is to threaten to behead Madonna. We have laws against such things, even though we as a society do not like fathers walking around half naked in pubic. We live with some and often many things we dislike, but we don't whip ourselves and our children into frenzies of hatred and suicidal madness to the point we murder at random to express our frenzied dislike of things we dislike.
Whether we wish to explain away the slashing and burning of Botticelli paintings as the expression of a need to preserve the sanctity of family or whether we look on the perpetrator as a madman, the fact remains that a world of art, whether high or popular, whether the distant intellectual exercise of painting or the low theater of Madonna, is not for all to decide all at once. I like this, you like that, and that's not a matter for anyone to decide against another. Those who would behead Madonna will be those who behead Botticelli paintings in the next slash. They won't stop there. They'll move on to Donald Duck. They'll kill you, they'll kill me, they'll kill there children, and then if there's time, they'll kill themselves. And they won't do it to my favorite dance tunes to get the old booty shakin'.
There is controlling the ill behaviour of others in public, which at a giant stretch we might see the jihads as doing; and then there is a mad hatred of all things, good, bad or indifferent, which the post above illustrates with giant strides. The jihadis are not merely expressing a nature revulsion toward a moral laxity and a degradation of common Human sexuality and its right place in the world; they are raging and frothing in a fit of murderous rage against the world of life itself just because they like it, a blood-lust to replace the sex-lust they cannot cope with in a mature manner. Madonna is theatre, not significantly different from Ephigenia, though perhaps not so well performed. Sacrifice is the same regardless, unless it's murder for its own sake. And it is the simple joy of killing people for the fun of it that motivates the jihadis above. All the pseudo-religious crap they pull to cover it up is see-through. They like killing and smashing, just like children who have a tantrum. They don't like seeing their mothers as sexual beings who attract the gaze of adult men. They kill them, the mothers. They would come and kill our mothers had they the chance-- just for fun; and no nothing makes it acceptable even if mom really is a slut.
The lust of jihadis is one of fear of not being able to control those they lust after. They lust for that which they cannot have, ie Madonna. They know, as I do, that Madonna is not so hot for them. Tehy know, the Muslims do, that they can't really ever have a girlfriend, women even in marriage being denied to them as friends and partners. So the lust goes on unsatisfied, made malignant till there is a rapist culture of violent brutes who want to expunge all female sexuality so it no longer torments them. Kill what they cannot have, not ever for a second realizing that Madonna is a theatre performer. They stab women to death a bus-stops in London because of this. It's a culture of mental illness, and it spreads to the world at large. Burkas for Hillary. It won't stop because the more repressed the Muslim men are, the less it takes to excite and enrage them. There is no end to the madness of this repression, only a blood-letting that feeds on itself. Better to let Madonna prance around and hoot and holler and dance. Most men are embarrassed, but most of us also realize it's done for the sake of teenage girls, not for us.
for mature men and women, sex is for adults in its proper place and within proportions of Human experience. Going nuts and threatening to kill a girl for prancing in public is insane and evil, and those who do make such threats deserve nothing less than first our outright derision and laughing scorn; then they deserve to be beaten; and then they should be hanged from lamp posts, if I may be so bold.
We should rightly begin by laughing at those who are so infantile that they cry at the thought of their mothers being sexually attractive. And if they threaten to kill their mothers for being, then we should, as normal human beings, kill the sons and fathers of those who would kill women for being. Irresponsible women are not the fare of society's right. Too bad for them, and also for Donald Duck, that pervert.
And having said all that, if i can't get a date with Madonna, will someone please send my Donald's number? I'm still looking for a date for Friday night.
I agree. Madonna and Britney serve a purpose, even if it's not for me, most of the time. They help defer potentially dangerous desire through fantasy. But, to play devil's advocate for a moment, one might argue that a Muslim talking up beheading of a celebrity no one really thinks he is seriously planning to behead (because he can't; if he could, maybe, but he can't...), is not very much different: deferring potentially dangerous desire through fantasy. But there is a difference here, and it's not only - though we can't forget this - that some Jihadis do actually go about beheading but also that the idea of beheading Madonna is sicker than the idea of modelling one's sex life on hers (though if everyone were living like Madonna someone would have to lay the law down, or society would fall apart...). THere is a point at which most people gag, even if we allow, in our society, some very violent forms of porn - if they don't involve children.
So while I agree with pretty much everything you say, Dag, it's not entirely clear to me - beyond your evident and reasonable belief that Islam, in some shape or form, is becoming a threat to the West - what makes the Jihadi fantasy beyond the pale. Is it because we believe he might actually do it, or because we have every right and reason to discriminate against one kind of fantasy in favor of another?
I can't figure out how to make links here in the comments section or I'd put in the piece a day ago on the women beheaded for being prostitutes in Pakistan. When I look at a concept and see that the bottom line, regardless of anything else we might say about it, leads to summary or with a 'tribal council's' say-so, murder, the cutting off of a person's head, a vile thing to do even to a chicken, let alone a living Human being, then I have to say, this is too wrong. I can't find myself too exercised over a couple of Pakistani village women slaughtered like animals in Pakistan. There's only so far I can extend my empathy, and it ends with those more or less like myself, though my sympathies go further and farther. I can get mightily excited in a bad way about Madonna being threatened for the simple reason that she has a face in my mind's eye's vision. She speaks my language, lived in the same town I did at the same time, and is a girl, regardless of what her personal qualities might be. She is, at the outside, one of our own, and therefore deserving of our protection under threat from aliens, in this case Muslims, and they regardless of whether they hail from Swedish ancestors and from the distant reaches of New Westminster. One World Kumbayah or not, a girl my age who speaks English and comes from the mid-west is my own group. That she is personally recognizable is all the more reason for me and for most Westerners, to be revolted and horrified that savages from a distant land and a distant time would consider making a threat against her and by extension all our our women and girls who might displease the Muslim vision of reality. By singling out a prominent girl from our own culture and threatening to cut her head off is to degrade the entire population of non-Muslims in the West. To pick on a middle-aged dancing girl and threaten to cut off her head is to spit in the face of every man in the West, which is what the point likely was. But regardless of the deeper or wider meaning, to speak like a monster against a girl is to go past anything most of us can recognize as Human and to alienate the life of the speaker from our lives. And it's also laughable. The fools who went on about this killing Madonna and Britney Spears are a joke. I burst out laughing when I first encountered this story.
We could make a Kantian paradigm out of Madonna, and in so doing we'd find ourselves flustered pretty quickly. But in the world of people Madonna is right to do what she does on the stage for those who decide to pay for her performances, leaving me a cheap seat to watch a bunch of old Oedipal wrecks in peace. Frankly, Kant can't make a good case for Oedipus either, not to think of it for many outside -- ah.... So we trudge along in the hope of not ending up as universal Madonnas for one final fling before we all get bad knees and poor eye-sight. Elitist, yes, and rightly so given that Madonna in her way is the best of the best among those who perform as she does, with some harm, granted, and some delight to the group who need their cathartic jollies in the mass stands. No, it ain't for me, and it ain't for most, and it ain't for the jihadis to decide for us what we do or don't do. That's for us do decide, and we don't, which is the problem for us and for the jihadis as well.
Madonna is for young girls, and it's a bunch too bad they like her, bad for them, for us as a society, bad for the future if Madonna is seen as a model of right behaviour. But we can't twist the arms of children all the time to make them like Doris Day or Jeannette MacDonald. Our own kids, well, doubtful. We can't really make kids do as we would, not in a world of phones and automobiles, the world in which we live.
Then let's expand this slightly to the point in the top post on the E.U, those who send out the police to stomp on the people who do rebel, the rebels with a cause, those with bad knees and poor eye-sight, the old folks who just say no to drugs and fooling around, who wish for a society of responsible and productive social behavior.
You can't make kids like Doris Day today, but you can beat the hell out of middle aged folks and send them to jail. We can't blame Madonna for that. As much as girls wanting to be more attractive than every other girl, police and their masters want more control than all other police and the masters of others. It comes to a social consensus. How much will we reasonably put up with?
I put up with dancing girls without any great moral pangs. I have serious trouble with the state beating passive dissidents. But it's the nature of things that police do that if they can, if there is no boundary that keeps them from doing so. That boundary has to be the tolerance and decision of the people, in the case of Madonna and the police, nearly non-existent today in the West. The one is not quite trivial but not more serious than we care to make it in our personal lives; the other is a serious threat to the lives and well-being of all citizens in the West. Madonna might be responsible for some bruises and headaches, but the police running rampant on by-standers is a sign of terror in the making. Kids can be bought off cheaply with Big Macs and circuses, but when the State attacks adults for dissent against state policies, then we have no longer a Republic but a fearsome force of disorder in the guise of a state. Far better the seeming dysfunction of adolescents than the order of out of control states.
Control is a far different thing from self-control. One can be taught and learned, the other, of course, neither. The point of the one is to created independent people, the point of the other, of course, not. And if people don't learn self-control, then within the boundaries that we could have if we care, we could act in our own defense as a society. To control for the sake of controlling, that leads us to death squads. In Europe? As I recall, that has happened there somewhat recently. It's the nature of things if we let nature take its course.
And Nature does take its course without boundaries, growing like weeds over every cultivation.
Comes to mind Mr Kurtz. Belgium, Congo, and the Heart of Darkness. Madonna is the heart of cotton candy that appeals to the hearts of girls; tis the heart of darkness that appeals to the Belgian Kurtzers. To enter into the realm of decay and primitivism and to rule unchallenged while ones strength lasts, to prove ones superiority over the nature of things while one can, to rule men as one will, and to do so in Brussels! How good life can be. while it lasts, and while one can pretend that all is good.
Recreating the Heart of Darkness in the heart of Europe, and doing so with the delusional idea that one is doing some great thing, pretending one is creating a varied garden of Earthly Delights potted with people from exotic locales, it is the multi-culti dream of Darkness.
One might stand outside The Plan and see the nature of things in disharmony with ones own vision of right behaviour, of women flaunting themselves, of weak men and wanton women, and one might see oneself as a Man of strength and bravery who can keep his own from rape and murder while the weak cannot. And why not take them, kill the weakling men, rape the wild women. Bring order to the universe gone astray from the Path of Allah. Start with the more egregious sluts like Madonna and rape and corral the rest. In the world of the primitive, in the heart of Muslim darkness, there is only rape and murder. It's the nature of things untended-- or tended toward the savage. If one is strong, then the weak are prey. And if the strongest of the weak allows the strong to enter in to rape and kill, then go and rape and kill, for that is the Way of Allah. And hey, there's lots of welfare too.
We put up with it. We listen to laughable and foolish primitives expressing laughable and foolish common Human traits. We have lost our sense of Life as it is. It is the nature of Nature to rape and plunder and kill and enslave, to live as one can and as one may in the Heart of Darkness. We pretend along with the EUrocrats that all is well. Except those who don't, and those end up on the sidewalk beaten.
The question is how to make the strong strong for Reason and Democracy rather than the strong strong for rapine and plunder. Is the Leninists programme so much at odds with the Jesuitic? No, it's not. But is it good, or even good enough? At what point does a desperate Europe need a desperate party? Time will tell us too soon. This cannot go on. It won't. Someone must win either way. It's the nature of things. It's not a Kantian world of universals. Too bad it's more a Leninist world of Darkness and power.
So we must talk. We must be as good as we can be in the hope of right resolution to ensure the Marats among us stay in their tubs and soak. If we do nothing and the Marats keep writing to the People, someone will read and someone will come out to look around, and they will see into the darkness, unblinded. Then....
Till then, let's dance. Let's have an enjoyable evening of chat and hopeful discussion. I always look forward to that. An evening of Light.
Post a Comment