January 24, 2006

Politics: There is No Cannibalism in the Navy!

And when I say none, I mean there is a certain amount. Yours, etc. Captain B.J. Smethwick in a white wine sauce with shallots, mushrooms and garlic.

I know, I know: politics is the topic of choice right now. But forgive me, as I have just encountered a movie review with the wonderful title of, I kid you not, You can't fight Islamism with gay cowboys, by Andrew Longman.

How can I possibly resist? Clearly, I can't.

First, a few quibbles about the title. Is "Islamism" really necessary? As a word, I mean. "Islam" would do perfectly well and sound (and look) better in the bargain. That could be the point, I suppose: make the supposed enemy sound strange (see also: assassins having three names), and they're easier to dehumanize. Us vs. Them is always a safe bet for rabble rousers, but why didn't they go with "Muslimaniac" or "Mohammedemon" just to be as inflammatory as possible? And let's face it, it's tough to fight anything only using gay cowboys, except maybe stereotypes. Wait, wasn't one of the Villiage People...? Okay, so you can fight stereotypes and musical taste using gay cowboys, but really that's about it. I suspect fighting "Islamism" with straight cowboys wouldn't have done much either, so would they really have been more effective as a deterrent to alien theology? And weren't you fighting terrorism, not Muslimism (or whatever)? Just asking.

For those not willing to read the entire article, I understand: you don't have any tissues handy to dry your eyes, or perhaps are afraid that gales of laughter will burst recent stitches. For your sake, I'll take a single line that I think epitomizes each paragraph and then add commentary.

You can't fight Islamism with gay cowboys."

Well, what more really needs to be said?

What precisely is inspirational about the story of Nate Saint if the very person who portrays him in the movie cannot be moved to imitate Mr. Saint?"

Actors, apparently, should not be allowed to act like anyone but themselves. Anthony Hopkins, you're put on notice.

Sodomize the Marlboro Man to great music and call this heroism?"

Given the quality of music you know you couldn't call it porn...

Iran, the Islamist suicide bomber nation, has expressed at every turn the perfection of its xenophobia for all nations not itself."

Jealous that America's lost it's #1 position?
That was probably unnecessary.

"Has it occurred to these craven fools in Hollywood that there are precisely no, exactly zero, cultures who have survived their own homosexualization?"

What qualifies as "homosexualization" in this case? Or, for that matter, culture? (And why isn't "homosexualization" capitalized?) I suppose if everyone was gay, then yes there would be an issue with reproduction, but good lord, man! I'm sure some of us could take up the slack, so to speak.

In a time of war?"

Do not question! There is a war on! Eastaisa is our Enemy! Eastasia has always been our Enemy!

I am confident that the American people will rise up and reject the xenophobia without and the deconstruction within."

an intense fear or dislike of foreign people, their customs and culture, or foreign things. Like, say, homosexuality. (I combined the last few paragraphs as they're quite short.)

But my favorite sentence? This:

There is a war on people and it is an ideological war."

For lack of a nail, a war was lost; and for lack of an editor, a dramatic image was made into War of the Worlds. The only question, I suppose, is did Tom Cruise act enough like a Scientologist for Mr. Longman's taste? And is Mr. Longman actually a long -



posted by Thursday at 11:20 pm


Anonymous Anonymous said...

You write: Is "Islamism" really necessary? As a word, I mean. "Islam" would do perfectly well ...

The fact that you typify the uneducated American who is ignorant of his own enemy is just too true and sad. An Isalmist is one who is actively devoted to the forwarding of political Islam, is a politico-religious activist. Most often they are violent and advocate the violent overthrow of all non-Islamist regimes. Many of them do not regard present day Muslim regimes as Muslim at all. A given Muslim is not at all necessarily an Islamist.

America is at war with Islamists.
That is separate and distinct from Muslims. But it is pathetic that you don't even know who is trying to kill you, who is trying to defend you. Worse you criticize someone who is trying to alert you to the fact that your enemy is trying to kill you and your enemy hates you because you produce homosexual propaganda. Sober up!

What? You think this is a big game? Stick your head in the sand and believe nice liberal things and they will just go away?

Islamism wants to take over and tell you, personally, convert or die infidel. Why not be really creative and quit hating the people who are trying to warn you?

8:59 pm  
Blogger Thursday said...

Yeah, my wife's already corrected me on the definition of "Islamism"; but thanks for the comment. It's "Uneducated Canadian", by the way, but who's counting?

Now let's try this again:

The wonderyutz that wrote the piece I commented on is most certainly NOT trying to defend me. He regards me as just as much of an "enemy" as said Islamists do, and would like to see me gone just as much. Not only will I criticize them, I'll mock and deride them, too. Watch Fred Phelps and his family picketing soldier's funerals, shouting that their death was "God's punishment" for America having homosexuals and tell me how, or even if, the man who wrote this is any different.

Of course, to claim the Islamists are trying to kill me, personally, because I produce homosexual propaganda is just as amusing. Do you really think they give a rat's ass what's in our media or our society? If they had such a hard on for gays (so to speak) they would have bombed the Hague or Vancouver. Or Hollywood, for that matter. Or do you think it more likely that there just might be another agenda behind this somewhere? The fanatics that you mention are simply that - fanatics. They're insane, just on a grand scale. It makes as much sense to be afraid of earthquakes as it does to be afraid of fanatics: there are precautions you should take, but to live in fear is folly.

It's also funny how America used to be at war with al-Qaida, then terrorists, and now Islamists. Neat how that worked, eh? By going from the very specific (which didn't allow enough leeway) to the very general (which was way too vague), we now have an enemy that's just right (get them sand niggers!). They even provide their own wacky bloodthirsty mobs! And beheadings! On tape for home viewing!

Think your country is actually at war with Islamists? Try a little experiment: ask any ten supporters of the war who the enemy is, and see how many different responses you get.

11:04 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home