Showing posts with label Sharia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sharia. Show all posts

Monday, February 5, 2007

The War in Iraq and Paris Hilton


Paris




Reinventing the Taliban?


I saw a wonderful film this week, Reinventing the Taliban?, which showed some of the rich cultural life in Pakistan and helped me jump to my obvious conclusion about one major reason why radical Muslims hate the United States.




See: Reinventing the Taliban?, a a Discovery Channel Production.

When Sharmeen Obaid returned to Karachi after attending college in the U.S., she was alarmed by what she saw: a fundamentalist political party on the rise and strictly interpreted Islamic laws that were gradually eliminating freedom of expression. This program follows Ms. Obaid in her travels throughout Pakistan as she exposes inequity and injustice, particularly in regard to women, while seeking to understand why and how the Taliban's ideology is being given new life in her home country. A diverse sampling of pro- and anti-Taliban voices is heard, and footage of rallies and protests is included.

Sharmeen Obaid:
is a journalist and a documentary filmmaker. She was born and raised in Pakistan and has received her higher education in the United States. Her documentary films have been aired on Discovery Times channel and PBS/Frontline World. Her first documentary, "Terror's Children," addresses the plight of Afghan children living in refugee camps in Pakistan. The film won the American Women in Radio and Television Gracie Award and the Overseas Press Club Award this year. Sharmeen's second documentary, "Re-inventing the Taliban," is about the rise of religious fundamentalism in the Northwest Frontier Province of Pakistan. That documentary just earned her the Banff Rockie Special Jury Award. Her most recent film is "On A Razor's Edge," which aired on PBS Frontline World on March 25th 2004. It is a documentary about the recent peace movement between India and Pakistan.

The Players

Pervez Musharraf


Ms. Obaid describes Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf as progressive, and tolerant. Indeed, the clips she showed of him do confirm this. He is of Muhajir descent and considered to be the first Pakistani Muhajir to be able to get to the highest rank both in Pakistani government and military.

click to show/hide the rest of this section

The Taliban

Mostly Pashtuns, The Taliban are:
a Sunni strictly puritanical Islamist movement that ruled most of Afghanistan from 1996 until 2001, and are currently engaged in a protracted guerilla war against NATO forces within Afghanistan.

The word Taliban is the Pashto plural form of the Arabic طالب Tālib, "student". The group gets its name from the fact that its membership is drawn from the students of religious seminaries, or madrasahs, in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Osama bin Laden

Osama bin Laden is a Saudi Arabian militant Islamist and is widely believed to be one of the founders of the organization called al-Qaeda, responsible for terror, including the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center. In conjunction with several other Islamic scholars, bin Laden issued a fatwa (Islamic religious edict), that Muslims should kill civilians and military personnel from the United States and allied countries until they withdraw support for Israel and withdraw military forces from Islamic countries.

The MMA

The major fundamentalist Islamic Party in Pakistan is the MMA, Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal, an Islamic alliance between religious-political parties in Pakistan.
In the Pakistani parliament, the MMA is a coalition opposition, formed after Pakistan became a part of the "Global War on Terror". The coalition is united against the current government of President Pervez Musharraf because of his support for the United States' fight against what they consider to be global terrorism and allegedly putting the demands of the United States above the demands of his own people.

The MMA's
leaders are strongly opposed to the US-led anti-terrorism campaign in neighboring Afghanistan that ousted the Taliban from power. The group believed Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf had become a tool of US foreign policy. The MMA campaigned on promises to enforce Sharia law and in support of the withdrawal of US forces based in Pakistan in the campaign against international terrorism.

click to hide most of this section


From the Sacred to the Profane


Ms. Obaid's tour of Pakistan took us inside the people sympathizing with the fundamentalist MMA, with the Taliban, and with Osama bin Laden. It also took us, however, inside what she calls 90% of the country, the secular Islamists.


















The Taliban Sympathizers

were male-dominated, with women wearing Burkas and staying off the streets.

The Secular Islamists

See Liberal movements within Islam:
Since the 19th century, Muslim progressives have produced a considerable body of liberal thoughts within Islam (in Arabic: "interpretation-based Islam"; or "progressive Islam" - but some consider progressive Islam and liberal Islam as two distinct movements. These have in common a religious outlook that depends mainly on ijtihad or re-interpretations of scriptures. Liberal Muslims interpret the Qur'an and Hadith from their personal perspective rather than the traditional Muslim point of view. Liberals generally claim that they are returning to the principles of the early Muslim community and to the ethical and pluralistic intent of their scripture.

You have at one end of the cultural spectrum the fundamentalist MMA, and at the other end, the secular Muslims who allow sexy Pakistani models at the Lahore fashion show, slightly more demure than in the U.S., but still with the same half-naked, sexualized performances. In fact, one group of actresses covered in the film was putting on The Vagina Monologues.

click to show/hide the rest of this section

The Vagina Monologues is an Obie Award-winning episodic play written by Eve Ensler, which premiered at the off-Broadway Westside Theatre in 1996. Ensler originally starred in the production, playing all the various women who share their views about their vaginas with the audience; when she left the play it was recast with three celebrity monologists. The production has been staged internationally, and a television version featuring Ensler was produced by cable TV channel HBO.

The play, risqué in any culture, is an invitation only event in Pakistan. Beautiful Pakistani actress Ayesha Alam, who is a member of the troupe that is staging the production in India, told BBC News Online about the problems of showing it in her own country.
It was very difficult to perform the Monologues in Pakistan. It even got discussed in the national assembly. Many thought that the play was promoting promiscuity, was against our culture and our religion.

Ms. Alam has received death threats, and six playhouses in Lahore have been shut down due to the performances. Ayesha is brave in the face of other threats too, like someone throwing acid on her face. She says the majority of Pakistanis want nothing to do with extremist Islam, and their "narrow view," although their "popularity is gaining." Ayesha says that though the MMA is a minority, they are more powerful than their numbers because of death threats.

click to hide most of this section


Fundamentalism versus Secularism in Pakistan


My overall impression of Pakistan is that it is a wonderful country with an exquisite cultural background. One of the most beautiful arts is the magnificent male dancing. This is emblematic of the problems, though. Only males show up for anything important, including the dancing. This occurs even with the secular Muslims. With the fundamentalist Muslims it's even worse—with their women unseen anywhere, and when they do peek out, you catch them covered head to toe, some even without eye slits. According to Ms. Obaid and Ms. Alum, the MMA represents a highly motivated minority of millions and millions who are gaining momentum.

Why are They Angry? Why Do They Hate Us?


What then, is all the fuss? Why are these people so enraged? What motivates them to support Osama bin Laden, al-Queda, and the Taliban; cheer when U.S. towers fall; travel to the United States with evil in mind, and to Iraq; and strap bombs to their children's chests?

Control over Women; Order in the Family

It's obvious. The fundamentalists want control over their women. They view females as their property, and as sexual creatures that must be imprisoned. Their women must be covered head to toe, and not allowed out. They must be watched, and guarded. They will be punished if they stray. The man can divorce her easily. They want her to have no property rights, no voting rights, no sexual rights, no rights at all.












Paris burning












The Abomination of the West

The West, to the fundamentalists, is a nightmare. Western values bring sexy models, women dressing provocatively, strippers, whores, and the Vagina Monologues. Their biggest fear is Paris Hilton, an unchained, unleashed, unclothed sexual machine, without any purpose except to enjoy the flesh and wallow in decadence. This is their nightmare daughter, or wife.

Their women emulating the sexy models or Paris Hilton would mean, to them, the emasculation of the men, the breakup of family and tradition, and the end of order in society.


Family Values

The fundamentalist Muslims are fighting for family values! Not our family values, to be sure, but theirs.

An average American guy might understand this for a moment if he considers his view of strippers and prostitutes. This average American Joe might think exotic dancers and "whores" are just fine, but he doesn't want his girlfriend or his wife doing it. A lot of American men are not even happy about their partners going to Chippendales, or to a bachelorette party that has male strippers. American men can feel quite possessive of their ladies.

Fundamentalist Muslims feel they've got a good thing going. They have a patriarchy with the backing of law, Sharia. They are in total control. If they catch their wife cheating, they are allowed to kill her.

The advance of the West means an end to this control for them. Secularization is their enemy. They are fighting against the idea of Paris Hilton. They hate the West because of what she represents.


Disclaimer


click to show/hide the rest of this section


I'm not blaming Paris Hilton for the War in Iraq. I blame the fundamentalists. I'm fine with Hilton, ditz and all. Yet I do understand where the fundamentalist urge comes from. Men have always had a hard time not thinking of their women as property, even in the West. After all, though I love looking at Paris Hilton, and enjoy her antics from afar, I wouldn't want her as my wife, would you? (Except in California, where there is community property!)

Hope


I was pleased to hear that in Pakistan 90% of the people are secular Muslims, and that they don't support extremism. This is a great relief, if this is true. On the other hand, even the secularists there have a ways to go, it seems, when it comes to true freedom.

click to hide most of this section


Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:


Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.


Technorati Tags for this post:
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Thursday, January 25, 2007

Sundance Community Standards


Obscenity




Sex, Nudity, Bestiality, Child-Rape, and the Real Obscenity


Many religious folks are quite upset about the current Sundance Film Festival, which includes several films with sexual content, including full male nudity, a documentary about bestiality, and a Southern Gothic tale about the rape of a 12-year-old promiscuous girl.




I want to comment on these, but also on Robert Redford, the founder of the festival, whose opening remarks included a demand from President Bush to apologize to the American people for our involvement in Iraq.


Disclosure


When we're speaking of values, I have no moral authority, because I don't believe anyone has a corner on truth in this area. I can say what my values are, but I don't propose that these are the truth. So, I do have to respect how the religious people feel about this Sundance festival and these movies. In the interest of disclosure, however, my values are different on some of these issues. Again, I have a Catholic background, and had converted to Judaism to get married to an Israeli girl, but I also delved into New Age stuff, although I was never a fanatic. I believe in God, and feel we can learn much from many religions. I'm sure there are things in the Muslim religion that are instructive too, although I firmly believe that Islam needs a major reformation in order to rid itself of violence and radicalism.

No to Censorship


That being said, with regard to this post's topic, I am firmly against censorship. Furthermore, with regard to sexuality in film, I am on the liberal side, way on the liberal side, all the way to libertarian, and even libertine. I'm not against nudity in film meant for adults. I don't believe government has any business telling people what they can and cannot watch, or what kinds of films people can make. So, the films at Sundance now that have sexual content and nudity don't bother me.

Hounddog


My feelings about Hounddog, the Dakota Fanning film, directed by Deborah Kampmeier, that depicts Dakota as the 12-year old promiscuous girl who gets raped, are more complex. I believe that a tasteful exploration of this theme can be a benefit to society, as this type of event occurs so often in real life. I don't think that film should be prohibited from exploring such an important fact of life. On the other hand, I would be concerned if the rape scene or the movie itself were an excuse for prurient sensationalism using a young girl as a sex object. My understanding, and I have not seen the film, is that it does not go in this direction. The rape scene is done "tastefully," meaning not much is shown, just the girl's face and hand. Plus, the film is described as an honest attempt to explore the phenomena surrounding child abuse and rape.

click to show/hide the rest of the post

One other concern I might have would be the effect of making this film on the young actress, Dakota Fanning. She is, after all, a child. It appears, though, that this child is special. She is 12 going on 40. She seems to be one of the most levelheaded children in Hollywood, and she is vigorously and articulately defending the movie and her role, as if she were Erin Brockovich. So, I'm not really concerned about Dakota, and I think she can handle it.

Prurience


Let's say, for the sake of argument, though, that the film did offer prurient interest centered on the sexuality of a child. Other message films have actually done this with older children, as in Larry Clark's 2001 film Bully, and his 1995 Kids.

In Bully, for example, the young girls are shown nude often, even going to the bathroom, and in several hot sex scenes. It is decidedly prurient. Yet it offers a message. Bad behavior gets punished.

My take, again, though, is that I don't want these films censored. I think censorship is usually wrong. I judge that in a free society we ought to be able to make and see what we want. Again, I do approve of the ratings system, so that young folks don't see adult material.

With any movie that crosses the line into child pornography, there are laws to deal with this, and here I do approve of censorship.


Zoo


Which leads me to the documentary about bestiality, which is called Zoo, a film about men who have sex with horses. Sounds pretty sick, no? Yet, here is its description:

Documentary on bestiality premieres at Sundance Film Festival: South Florida Sun-Sentinel:

"Zoo" is a documentary about what director Robinson Devor accurately characterizes as "the last taboo, on the boundary of something comprehensible." But remarkably, an elegant, eerily lyrical film has resulted.

Zoo, premiering before a rapt audience Saturday night at Sundance, manages to be a poetic film about a forbidden subject, a perfect marriage between a cool and contemplative director (the little-seen "Police Beat") and potentially incendiary subject matter: sex between men and animals. Not graphic in the least, this strange and strangely beautiful film combines audio interviews (two of the three men involved did not want to appear on camera) with elegiac visual re-creations intended to conjure up the mood and spirit of situations. The director himself puts it best: "I aestheticized the sleaze right out of it."

Again, I'm an artsy-fartsy type guy, so they've got me curious with this description. Plus, I don't want this thing censored. If it's pornography, then label it as such, and let it be shown as such, with a suitable rating. Evidently, though, it's not pornography.

click to hide most of this post


The Real Obscenity of this year's Sundance


The really disgusting thing that happened at the Sundance Festival though, to me, is holier-than-thou, radical liberal Robert Redford demanding an apology for the Iraq War. In my opinion, Redford ought to get down on his knees and thank God for George W. Bush and his responses to 9/11, including Iraq. Redford and the rest of the limousine liberals would be the first targets of radical Islam if the terrorists could get out of the Middle East and turn their attention to America. Our President, though, is fighting them over there, keeping them away from our shores.

Can you imagine what the radical Imams would think of the films discussed in this post? These are the reasons they want Jihad and Sharia. They want men in charge and women covered head to toe (Hijab), subject to another kind of bestiality. Redford would be a marked man under Islamic law. He, though, is ungrateful to the country that gives him his wealth, safety, and freedom.

You, sir, Robert Redford, owe this country an apology, not for your festival's films, as some believe, but for your irresponsible and obscene politics.

Disclaimer: please, my Dear Liberal Friends, don't chide me for trying to shut down free speech. I'm not. Redford is free to say anything, anytime he pleases. He can promote any idiotic idea he has. No one is going to lock him up for it. I, though, and others, are free to respond to what he says.


Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:


Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.


Technorati Tags for this post: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,