There was an excellent article the other day in the Prague Post about the whole Jyllands-Posten ‘Mohammed cartoons’ issue. What a pity such sentiments seem few and far between in the craven media in Britain.
To many, the notion that a cartoon could provoke global riots, dozens of deaths, a $1 million assassination contract and vacillation among Western leaders seems like an abstract fantasy, a trip down the rabbit hole into a theater of the absurd.
But that perspective remains precisely what these protesters have attacked: the rejection of the idea that it’s justified – or even rational – to kill people over their speech, particularly a statement as trifling as a cartoon.
The purple elephant in the middle of this crossfire is the contemporary notion – or, more accurately, the Western one – that the values of most Islamic societies have modernized along with the rest of the world.
[…]
The West has naively greeted this scorpion with its Cold War handshake, believing that the virtues of peace and democracy appear self-evident; as if good intentions, by definition, will be good enough. But even the mainstream Islamic mindset has proven inscrutable to the West in a way that communism was mythologized to be but never truly was.
Good stuff. Read the whole thing.
Also, some of the people very much at ‘fatwa ground zero’, such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Salman Rushdie, are taking a stand against the new Islamic totalitarianism.
(hat tip to JP)
The Danish envoy to Dubai has said the Muslim “hurt” over the cartoons had “helped us to understand Islam”. Let’s hope he meant it ironically.
But there have been several remarks from politicians along this line and it is worrying that the onus is being placed on the West to understand Islam. There is no requirement that the Islamics take on board that we have freedom of expression in the West, and that we are not bound by their laws. I have been most disturbed by the circular Islamic infantile arguments – as in “It is against the law to depict [the prophet] Muhammad.” As though it were some universal law and not a law taken up by some desert nomads.
They are so brainwashed from birth, they cannot understand that their religion is only paramount to them. This is what’s behind the drive to force their barbaric shariah onto everyone else. This is the drive towards Dar-es-Salaam. It’s the will of allah that everyone on the planet live by his rules. (Good news for paedophiles, though. He married little Aisha when she was six.)
Hope he catches it soon
Bush Vows Bin Laden’s Capture During Surprise Visit to Afghanistan
Imran Khan: Toons worse than Holocaust
http://drinkingfromhome.blogspot.com/2006/02/imran-khan-toons-worse-than-holocaust.html
Imran Khan – this proves my point. He lived in the West, was apparently comfortable in the West, at ease with our habits, went to nightclubs. Married heiress Jemima Goldsmith, a Jewish gal.
But underneath, he is bonkers.
To describe cartoons, even with the three really offensive ones tucked into the portfolio by the busy, oily little imam, as equivalent to the torture and death of millions of Jews takes the breath away on the insanity register. And the mother of his children is Jewish, which makes them Jewish. The craziness is too much to compute – and he is regarded as “Westernised”.
Dave,
Jemima Goldsmith is a bit fit. No wonder she left that nutter.
Re Jemimah, I’m glad she got out alive. Of course, now she’s a Muslim (you can’t marry one unless you convert – muffled laughter) and she can’t marry a sane person unless he agrees to mutual insanity.
Two very brave women signed that petition that ran in Jyllands-Posten yesterday (what kind of Danish heroes are those guys, eh? Allah should lay some pastries on them – Danish pastries in Islamobonkers-es-Salaam have been renamed “Roses of the prophet Mahommad” – you could not make it up), everyone’s favourite heroine Hirsi Ali but also Manjit Irshad the Toronto gal who hasn’t deserted the faith, but speaks out against Islam in its current form. They are both so fine.
Ah but he played cricket Verity!
Surely the mark of a man who understands western culture and it’s subleties to the full! (that’s what the Foreign office, you know those faceless little bleeders who appear to represent the interests of forigners above the indidginous population would say)
Nope, just another fascist who hates women, loves money and status and would tamper with the ball at the drop of a hat if it won the game.
He’s still trying to be a “Politician” in Pakistan is he?
How’s he doing on raw talent without the Goldsmith Billions that greased the wheels previously?
I thini Ms Goldsmith is no pretty much apostate. So that’s OK, though I’d advise her to re-think any travel plans involving Riyadh.
Oh no!!!
I screwed up. Won’t repost, you can probably figure out what I was trying to say.
Iwas distracted because I was watching this at the time…
http://www.nefafoundation.org/
Sorry, the site doesn’t allow deep linking, just click on “Prophet Mohammed Cartoon Protest”.
I have a solution. Kill ’em all.
Of Imran Khan, Verity writes:
“But underneath, he is bonkers”
Imran Khan was a slippery, aggressive, self-righteous creep when he was playing cricket. He’s a stereotype: on the surface urbane and “genial”, beneath that, about as cuddly as your average king cobra.
That he is championing the Islamist crazies will be no surprise to anyone who was watched this loathsome specimen’s political career.
Frankly, he’s the sort of person who could give “Paki-bashers” a good name. He epitomises that which gave fire to their inchoate rage.
Verity writes:
“Two very brave women signed that petition that ran in Jyllands-Posten yesterday…”
Shhh! Don’t tell the BBC. It claims that appeared in a French newspaper.
Mustn’t been seen to be publicising that “anti-Moslem” Danish paper, must we?
GCooper – Imram Khan giving Paki bashers a good name – agreed. What a sleaze. But the revenge is, his children are Jewish. Something he has to live with. Imram, you take comfort from fact that the Muslim prophet’s genes of stupidity have not been passed on to your Jewish children.
We are at war, and unless we contain this war and fight it …
I read the Manifesto and came away with the impression that this group of is indeed a different kind of Muslim; more polished, more presentable, more Westernized — and more patient for the eventual domination of the world by Islam.
Verity,
So, how do we win the war? Any suggestions gratefully received because it would appear that Rummy and Condi are fresh out.
My personal feeling is that The West is going to have to get very nasty. And we also have to call a spade a shovel and not be too shy of calling this a war against Islam. A great many muslim already see it as that so it’s not like we’d lose too many friends (and if the friends we lose are Musharref and the Saudis who cares?)
The fact that we go into convulsions about someone flushing a Koran in Guantanamo just reinforces the idea in many muslim minds that the we are devided, weak and not sure of the justice of our cause.
I think General John Pershing had the right idea-
http://www.breakthechain.org/exclusives/pershing.html
Nick M – I think Rummy is sound, if he can get his policies through – but Condi is too busy giving work-out tips. You can see her tips on (I think CNN) where she demonstrates her exercise routines in the State Department gym.
We didn’t win the Cold War by empathising with the Kremlin. We declared ourselves their enemy and we were unremitting. We kept out nukes pointed their way and hinted that we might have a hair trigger temper. We never said the warmongers were a tiny minority. Reagan didn’t feel their pain. Neither did Thatcher. When Reagan won the election, he was asked what his plans were for dealing with the Soviet Union and he said, “My plans are, they lose, we win.”
In other words, we identified the enemy and named them the enemy. It is sheer cowardice on the part of Tony Blair and all the European leaders with the exception of Anders Rasmussen that they do not name the enemy.
We have to let them know we understand very well that we are at war with people who wish to conquer us and govern us as part of their foul caliphate and let them know this isn’t on the cards. Forget jaw-jaw.
Actually, I was mistaken above to say “forget jaw-jaw” implying that there has been enough talk, because there hasn’t been any.
Strong leaders, in other words, Anders Rasmussen, should tell the Muslim world that they have crossed the line and will have to step back. No more seething. They should be warned that their aggressive behaviour will cause consequences they may not like.
If the warnings do not work, and there is no reason to suppose that they will be effective now that the West has abdicated the high ground, then I would suggest action is the only way through this. But first of all, we need some straight, strong talk and some fair warnings.
Well said Verity. I just wonder about specific tactics. I am absolutely with you on the fact that they must be told that we won’t ever allow them to win.
Yes, sometimes that surprises me. In all honesty we had more negotiation with Hitler or Stalin. The people who naively say we should try diplomacy don’t understand that not only would that be diplomacy with some very nasty types, but diplomacy with people who don’t want to talk.
When I saw the protestors in London calling for an invasison of Denmark and subsequently “taking their women as war-booty” I felt a hatred more absolute than any I have ever experienced. I feel diminished by that. I should not hate, but I can’t help it with these characters.
Nick M – Why on earth shouldn’t you hate? What a PC notion! I hate wrongdoing and injustice. I just hate, loathe and despise it and I want to see the perps punished, by death if for murder, treason or rape of a child.
I did not say we should engage in negotiations with Muslims/Islamic countries. There is nothing to negotiate. They have nothing to offer that we couldn’t just roll in and take if we had to.
In addition, they’re liars. Taqqya and kitman. So no point in “agreements”.
When I said we should talk before perpetrating violence on them, I meant we should tell them our terms.
I don’t want to hate because it makes me hot under the collar. It means I’m not icy-cold in my judgements. It makes me a less effective problem solver. I guess I’m referring to a distinction between rational, intellectual hatred (which can be very useful) and the visceral jumping up and down hatred (which is less useful). I prefer to pity and mock these people. To hate them almost seems to make them a worthy adversary.
I don’t think, alas, they’re interested in our terms. Yes, I know of the fine muslim/arab tradition of lying to the kaffir. Big Mo himself said it was a good tactic. We can see a prize example of this coming from our friends in Iran. All they want is to stall diplomacy long enough so that they can unveil a nuke as a fait-accompli. Then we are really in the soup.
I favour military action after an absolutely clear ultimatum. The argument as to how this would play on the infamous “Arab Street” (or “Persian Street” come to that) is now irrelevant. I fail to see how they could hate us more than they do already. I think that is the take home message of Toongate. They hate the free world so much that there is nothing we can do but fight.
For me, the really big question is how to build a strong coalition against Islamists. How to get everyone singing from the same hymn-sheet. It would be grand to really co-operate with the Russians and Indians and Europe of course.
BTW I’m against the death penalty in cold blood, though I see nothing wrong with the “execution” of hostage takers, terrorist and the like on the spot.
“I don’t think, alas, they’re interested in our terms.”
Wrong. If we say, “if you don’t stop this lunatic, mindless aggression against our embassies, consulates, flags, military establishments like marine barracks, and businesses – as in HSBC and Arla – and people, we will visit you again, but this time packing nukes. Those are our terms” I think they would be interested.
Hi. I linked you to my list of supporters of the manifesto.
Manifesto Against Islam
Thanks!
Verity,
Again I think we’re singing the same song, but out of key with each other. I don’t think they’re interested in our terms wrt any kind of negotiation. I did say I favoured a clear ultimatum which seems to be what you’re saying too.
Oh, I’d leave HSBC out of it. I had to stop banking with them because they made a significant error, not in my favour. As far as I’m concerned, they can go hang too.
Who do we deliver the ultimatum to? It’s not very clear, alas. I think our first task is to seperate ourselves from the “good” Islamic states (i.e. the ones titularly on our side). If a key ally in the “War on Terror” is a state that doesn’t allow women to drive (The Saudis) then we’re buggered from the get go. I’ve often thought we should’ve invaded those nutters rather than Saddam’s Iraq.
Next, we have to make it very clear that the crescent moon will never fly over London or Paris. In terms of freedom to practise their religion, economic opportunity and standard of living muslims get it much better in europe than they would in any “Islamic Republic”. They really need to quit bitching. We must never stop letting them know that our civilisation has achieved glories: political, economic, scientific, military, artistic and of engineering of which they can only dream.
In almost all the great conflicts, at the end, the losing party acknowledged defeat. The muslims have yet to acknowledge Tours in 732AD. Perhaps nukes over Mecca (and how wonderful if all 5 permanent members ponied up the missiles) might do that. Then they might have sufficient pause for thought to realise that nobody likes them.
Islam is fatally flawed from the kick-off. Can we really end the globe’s second largest religion? Or reform it into something acceptable? It makes taking on Nazis or Soviets seem a walk in the park. It’s a tough call.
I have some fairly odd ideas for this, but I’ll leave those for a later post – afterall, this is gonna run and run.
I’d be curious to know why you think quite a number of Westerners have converted to Islam in the last few years. That is one thing I really can’t figure out.
Verity,
BTW (you probably know this) Mo might’ve married Aisha at six, but he (being a man of honour) waited till she was nine to “consumate” the marriage. I don’t know why, but that detail churns me up even more.
The purple elephant in the middle of this crossfire is the contemporary notion – or, more accurately, the Western one – that the values of most Islamic societies have modernized along with the rest of the world.
Picky, pointless point, I know, but I thought the elephant was in the room, not in the crossfire. Also, I never knew that the elephant was purple. Perhaps it’s a whole ‘nother metaphor.
Nick M –
Sorry about your personal experience with HSBC but the suggestion that this lessens the appalling nature of the bomb attacks on them in Turkey trivialises the whole discussion.
Who do we deliver the ultimatum to? I don’t like that word ‘ultimatum’. It sounds too dramatic and showy. Also, the word itself suggests that there is a choice: Do this or else. The message should be: Do this.
I prefer to think of it as explaining our terms to them.
You do this by calling all the Islamic ambassadors in all of the Western countries in for a meeting. Ideally, at exactly the same time. All over the Western world. (The Aussies would have to get up early, but somehow, I think that would be OK.) The Secretary of State or equivalent explains the terms – and says, “Now go back and call your governments. Lack of cooperation will cause bombing.”
Verity,
Sorry. The HSBC thing was a cheap shot. The important point, I guess, was I didn’t resort to violence. I just took my custom elsewhere.
Again we’re arguing over terms. What you suggest (and I like it, I really like it – if we can get enough countries on board and act as one – our Umma is stronger than your Umma etc.) is an ultimatum. Of course it is because they might just call our bluff and the birds will then have to fly.
What sickens me is that we are weakened in our position by the continual repeating that this ain’t a war against Islam. When ‘W’ dropped the term “infinite justice” (apparently a quality of Allah alone) for the war on the ‘stan I thought, “We’re buggered”. They would respect us more if we were more open as to our goals. Then they might listen.
It’s an ultimatum because I suspect there’s a bloody good chance it might come to nuclear fisticuffs.
I have another plan… A cunning one. How about carpet-bombing (with parachutes) the middle-east with the stuff they’ve been denied – radios, The Sun*, DVDs, porn, beer, contraceptives, bacon sarnies… Maybe enough people might realise what they’d been missing. A long-shot, but relatively cheap in the context of military action.
I was always struck by Aesop’s fable about the contest between the Sun and the Wind. Maybe we can make the old chap work for us now.
*Or for that special edition, should that be “The Sunni”?
Nick – Given that the mass murderers on London Transport last July had access to all the things you suggest as treats for Middle Easterners and I am sure availed themselves of it all, I don’t think carpet bombing is a goer. They take it as evidence against us.
See, their god never told them about all this stuff, so that means it must be WRONG – otherwise we would have had it all 1400 years ago.
Tony Blair is frightened shitless and every word he hisses just confirms it. He is a dangerous little dhimmi. ‘Please don’t hurt me; we will definitely take your views onboard. Not just onboard, SIR Iqbal (I got you that knighthood – remember?), you lovely intelligent, moderate, not to say low-key, man, and the lovely Mr Bungalwangla who is also on my advisory council. I am absolutely on your side because I know that Islam is a beautiful, peaceful, moderate religion. Did I mention “Please don’t hurt me?” Did you notice how, after the London Transport tragedy, I didn’t offer any words of encouragement or forward battle plans to the indigenous British at all – but offered words of comfort and succour to the Muslim “community”?” I am trying extremely hard to be your favourite infidel, and if there’s anything I can polish up on, please just let me know and I will do it instanter.’
Point taken Verity. If you want a laugh, try out one of the online fatwa banks were islamic “scholars” wrestle farcically with attempting to give rulings on C21 things on the basis of C7 writings.
On a more serious note some (apparently anon) “scholars” from Qom (Iran) have apparently released a fatwa to the effect that nuclear weapons are halal. And I always thought the blessed prophet was simply an illiterate, meglamaniacal pervert who smelled of camel piss. I never knew he was a pioneer of nuclear fission. Wonders never cease (plutonium be upon him).
D’ya think it makes a difference to the ayatollahs that very large chunks of nuke tech was worked out by Jewish scientists? Perhaps we could persuade them to develop a truly “Islamobomb” – then we could kick back for the next millenium and not worry too much.
Nick M – They weren’t really Jewish! They were Muslims, but they knew they would never get into the Manhattan project with Muslim names, so they changed them to Jewish names! Nukes are described in the Koran! Yes! But it’s all in code, so of course, it doesn’t look like a nuclear physics formula to the uninitiated. God gave Mohammed the formula, but told him to sit on it for 1400 years.
Verity, when you said it like that the scales fell from my eyes and for the first time I understood! Of course it was all down to Robert Al-Oppenheimer and his gang of shites. This is obvious, because everything, for all time, was described in the Koran by an illiterate camel-poker living in a desert in the arse-end of nowhere 1400 years ago. How could I have been so remiss!
Testing.
Sorry folks, I keep getting an “internal server error” so I never know if my post has gone through. I don’t think it’s at my end. Any info would be gratefully received.
Me too, Nick. I keep getting Error 404. Sometimes what I posted goes up anyway, and sometimes it doesn’t. You are not alone.
Me too.
Me too, I keep getting error 500 internal server error.
It took two tries to post this comment.
Hey, wait a minute! I get error 404 and Midwesterner, a comparative newcomer, gets 500? Suddenly he’s senior to me?
It’s a plot! Infamy! Infameeee! They’ve all got it infermee!
Maybe males get higher numbers than females. Are you wearing your burka gloves and posting three comments behind?
Nice word play. It took me a couple of reads to appreciate infamy/infermee. I missed it first pass. But, couldn’t you have, if nothing else, ridiculed my ‘mentally inane’ remark? I thought it at least deserved a mention.
HTTP 500 – Internal server error
Internet Explorer
Yet again.
The ‘infamee’ joke is from a Carry On film – Maybe ‘Carry On Up The Nile’.
“Carry on Cleo” – Kenneth Williams as Caesar(?) gets stabbed and says “Infamy, infamy, they’ve all got it in-for-me”. It’s probably the funniest line in the whole “Carry On” canon. Jeez, there’s some shockingly bad ones. Though I like the line from “Carry on Girls” where someone calls for an immediate “mass-debate”. I’m a Geordie. and was brought up on Viz. That’s my excuse for finding such puerile nonsense funny.
I’ll take that as a ‘no’, then.
Midwesterner,
eh?
I keep getting 500s too. Doesn’t stop me posting, just looks that way.
Nick M,
Our postings were simultaneous. My ‘no’ remark was for Verity.
I’m thinking that the server is overloaded or something. A lot of my pageloads (1/3) are terminating early and have to be reloaded. Sometimes there is a snippet of HTML at the point where the load ends early.
I did pull you up, Midwesterner about your ‘mentally insane’ remark, but I think it was on another thread and I think you may have posted it under a different name.
Nick M – Out of the whole Carry On oeuvre, I think that is the funniest line. And Kenneth Williams’s face as he runs through the palace with his wreath on his head … I love that line and use it often. Kenneth Williams killed himself because he didn’t want to have an operation. I mean. How crazy was that? If he had an operation and died, in his words, “under the knife” he would be dead anyway.
But he was a little crazy, because he wouldn’t allow guests to use his loo. He sent them across the street to the public loo in the tube. Even in the cold and the rain.
No, Verity. It wasn’t the ‘mentally insane’ remark by someone else. It was the ‘mentally inane‘ remark I followed it with.
Alas, to obscure or subtle I guess. My typo in the comment probably didn’t help.
Guess what, y’all! The loonie Saudis have just extended their ban on women driving to … golf carts! I wonder if they let them roller skate. Oh, wait a minute …
Re the ‘toons, Christopher Hitchens’ support rally outside the Danish embassy last week got a fairly good turnout, but the rally yesterday outside the Danish Consulate in Manhattan looks as though it really took off. And what a nice looking crowd of people. No faces contorted with rage. People well dressed, well groomed, well mannered. And it looks as though there are a lot of them. Well done, New Yorkers! (Link)
It would be nice if someone organised a British rally – although the police would probably refuse permission. Too incendiary. Might hurt the feelings of people calling for the destruction of Britain and dressed as suicide bombers. Thank god America is still the land of the free.
German cartoons of the Danish cartoons. Rather good. (Link) Hat tip: LGF.
Nice link Verity. So the krauts have a sense of humour afterall. It’s good to be reminded that, afterall, this all happened because someone drew a picture.
So political protest enters the Neiman Marcus phase. You remind me of Homer Simpson’s description of God, “Perfect teeth, nice smell, a class act all the way.”
Nick M – The Nieman-Marcus phase. V good!
And well mannered. Carrying polite slogans. Compare and contrast … The police moved them from the front of the consulate to across the street, and they obeyed nicely without shouting anything. I hope the Danes inside the consulate – and the embassy last week – took heart.
I hadn’t seen that quote from Homer Simpson. I love it!
Compare and contrast is hardly necessary. Back in ’82, during the Falklands crisis, when the US was (initially) trying to mediate, the NYT (I think) ran a cartoon showing US State department wonks pondering a map with the tag line, “OK, we’ll steer a middle line, a middle line between sound judgement and complete idiocy”.
The pro-Danish protestors are right, the fruitloop muslims are wrong, It’s that simple. We have this bizarre idea these days that everyone with a grievance has at least some level of valid point. This is total bollocks. Some people are just plain wrong. Middle lines are nonsense here as well.
I wonder at these folks. If they really want to live in an Islamic theocracy, I hear that plane tickets to Tehran have never been more affordable. There they could find their place in the “Sunni” – except, of course, the Iranians are a bunch of complete Shites.
They’re in Europe, breeding their brains out, to take over. This programme began 30 years ago. We’re now on the third generation – the suicide bomber generation. This is part of the reestablishment of the caliphate, and this time, they intend to take northern Europe, too. This is a worldwide programme. It’s not happening by acciddent.
All these incidents, which are accelerating, are not happening simultaneously by mistake. The outbreak of rapes and gang rapes in Sweden, France and Australia, the violence in France, Denmark, Australia, Holland, Britain.
Multiculturalism, whatever the hell that is, was imposed on the peoples of N Europe with their permission and with their having been consulted. The Islamics in all these countries have been encouraged to feel aggrieved and entitled. We have been complicit in the current jihad – which coincidentally, started 30 years ago, the same time the waves of mass primitives started landing on our shores.
Verity, just spotted your earlier post. Well, according to the Sunna and Hadith the roller-skating question is a ticklish one. Islamic scholars have spent man-decades on this very question.
The consensus is that roller-skating in a way that is not sexually provactive – i.e. in a full burqa and with no spins is acceptable. The use of inline skates isn’t acceptable as should be obvious to anyone from a reading of the “blading verses” of the Koran.
Any girl or woman who violates this ruling only has herself to blame for any injury, rape, or slightly scraped knee that results from partaking in this decidely un-Islamic practise.
A truly Islamic female will much prefer to exercise by lying on her back while her first cousin screws her in an attempt to outbreed the Zionist/Crusader scum. She must feel no sexual pleasure from this activity, but this is easily achieved by the removal of her external genitals with a broken Coke bottle (a rusty tin lid will suffice if the bottle isn’t available.)
Did you know that UK muslims have a 10 times greater rate of genetic disorders than the general poulation because of the prevalence of first cousin marriages?
Nick M – No, it’s not 10 times greater for genetic disorders. Pakistanis account for 3% of the births in the United Kingdom and THIRTY PERCENT of the birth defects. Don’t forget that all these first cousins are themselves the products of unions between first cousins for generations back into the twilight zone.
For the roller skating question, yes I take your points. So skating in a spangled leotard would be out of the question? Also, what about line dancing? Is it possible to execute the right cool moves in a shador, a burqa, thick woollen socks and bovva boots? I worry about their lack of exercise.
Verity, you bring up a question which has exercised the minds of imams (and indeed even the Grand Ayatollah of Fuqh-u-Said’Wais) for many years. The more liberal believe roller-skating in a leotard is acceptable as long as at least your brother-in-law is watching (and preferably masturbating – ‘cos it’s the nearest he’s gonna come to seeing a girl not wearing a tent before he’s married off to a cousin in Kashmir).
Having said that, this is absolutely not the case if the leotard is spangled. The spangles are against any rational concept of Islamic modesty.
The more orthodox imams just think that any right thinking folk ought to burn down the Danish Embassy. Just on general principles. And also because Sura 119 has a specific reference against making graven images by connecting together small plastic blocks. Especially those fiddly little 2 by 1 bits. May Allah preserve us from them!
I think that fits with a ten times higher incidence. I think your maths went a bit off kilter.
I’m not trying to mitigate. This is still spectacularly high. And this is UK figures – as recorded by the NHS. God knows what the situation in Pakistan is. Afghanistan… well I wouldn’t even wanna speculate.
There is a word for it (marrying within families) but I forget. Apart from the birth defects, it also helps perpetuate endless tribal conflict within the Islamic world. Other cultures regard marriage between warring families/clans as a way to close the loop. Not muzzie. Muzzie’s scimitar never gets sheathed.
The word for marrying within families is incest. The other word is consanguinity.
You didn’t address the line dancing issue. I worry because a man in a djelaba doesn’t wear a belt with his name tooled on the back, so has no belt hooks to hook his thumbs into. Same goes for a chador. Also, the thought of a western hat on top of a burqa just doesn’t bear thinking about. I think we have to sadly conclude that line dancing is out for the Islamic set.
Verity, I’m fresh outta fatwas, so we’d best conclude that line-dancing is unislamic (that’s the safest bet – most things are).
This is not an endorsement of line-dancing.
There was another word I heard for marrying relatively close relations. I’m buggered if I can remember, but it was endo- something as against exo – something.
Now (feel free to say I’ve lead a sheltered life) but I’ve never seen anyone sporting the burqa/stetson combo. I’m not saying I’d pay for it, but it would be a curious sight. Especially if accessorised with a fucking huge chunk of Lurpak.
Endogamy is marrying within your tribe or community. Exogamy is marrying outside your tribe. It doesn’t mean close relatives, as does incest or consanguinity. Polygamy means marrying more than one woman at a time, which is one of the few things that the Islamics approve of. Polyandry is having more than one husband at a time. Bigamy is marrying someone before you’ve gone to the trouble of divorcing your current spouse.
That about covers it.
Actually, that would be polygyny. Polygamy applies to either gender.
I dunno Verity, If it’s bigamy, it’s also bigayou.
Is that the Marx brothers?
Possibly. S J Perelman was a very witty writer.
Verity,
Uh!
Please explain.
Really.
He wrote their scripts. And is one of the funniest essayists in the English language.
To the individual who sent me the clever rendering of the EUrabian flag, I don’t have a blog so can’t disseminate it. Why not send it to Perry de Havilland of this parish, Emperor Mischa at the Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler, Harry’s Place, the Dissident Frogman, Laban Tall’s blog, Little Green Footballs, Natalie Solent, Blithering Bunny, Melanie Phillips, etc?
That was me Verity. I had previously sent it to Perry. Thanks for the new advice as to where I can stick my flag.