Version with images below the fold: And as long as I’m “in a mood,” here’s another little ditty:
Ah, glorious Islam! PFFFFT!
Council of Islamic Ideology declares women’s existence anti-Islamic
Islamabad – Sharia Correspondent: The Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) concluded their 192nd meeting on Thursday [March 13, 2014] with the ruling that women are un-Islamic and that their mere existence contradicted Sharia and the will of Allah. As the meeting concluded CII Chairman Maulana Muhammad Khan Shirani noted that women by existing defied the laws of nature, and to protect Islam and the Sharia women should be forced to stop existing as soon as possible. The announcement comes a couple of days after CII’s 191st meeting where they dubbed laws related to minimum marriage age to be un-Islamic.
After declaring women to be un-Islamic, Shirani explained that there were actually two kinds of women – haraam and makrooh. “We can divide all women in the world into two distinct categories: those who are haraam and those who are makrooh. Now the difference between haraam and makrooh is that the former is categorically forbidden while the latter is really really disliked,” Shirani said.
He further went on to explain how the women around the world can ensure that they get promoted to being makrooh, from just being downright haraam. “Any woman that exercises her will is haraam, absolutely haraam, and is conspiring against Islam and the Ummah, whereas those women who are totally subservient can reach the status of being makrooh. Such is the generosity of our ideology and such is the endeavour of Muslim men like us who are the true torchbearers of gender equality,” the CII chairman added.
Officials told Khabaristan Today that the council members deliberated over various historic references related to women and concluded that each woman is a source of fitna and a perpetual enemy of Islam. They also decided that by restricting them to their subordinate, bordering on slave status, the momineen and the mujahideen can ensure that Islam continues to be the religion of peace, prosperity and gender equality.
Responding to a question one of the officials said that international standards of gender equality should not be used if they contradict Islam or the constitution of Pakistan that had incorporated Islam and had given sovereignty to Allah. “We don’t believe in western ideals, and nothing that contradicts Islam should ever be paid heed. In any case by giving women the higher status of being makrooh, it’s us Muslims who have paved the way for true, Sharia compliant feminism,” the official said.
The CII meeting also advised the government that to protect Islam women’s right to breathe should also be taken away from them. “Whether a woman is allowed to breathe or not be left up to her husband or male guardian, and no woman under any circumstance whatsoever should be allowed to decide whether she can breathe or not,” Shirani said….
Council of Islamic Ideology (Urdu: اِسلامی نظریاتی کونسِل) is a constitutional body responsible for giving legal advice on Islamic issues to the Government of Pakistan and the Parliament.
Here we are — in the 21st Century. Some of us live in the 21st Century, that is.
Now, could the article be satiric, along the lines of “A Modest Proposal” by Jonathan Swift? Probably is, and one hopes so. Nevertheless, Islamic misogyny is real; see “Is Islam Misogynistic?”, an essay by an Arab-American woman, for example.
Also, let us remember the following: if satire is to be satire, there has to be something terribly wrong, something terribly strong, so as to be worthy of satire.
Therefore, we must conclude that Islam today is predominantly misogynistic. Disbelieve that reality at your own peril.
THIS stupid! Listen to the patter, and watch people sign the petition: (with thanks to Mustang, who emailed me the link to the above video)
(If you must have politics, please scroll down)
The Brandenburg concertos by Johann Sebastian Bach (BWV 1046–1051, original title: Six Concerts à plusieurs instruments) are a collection of six instrumental works presented by Bach to Christian Ludwig, margrave of Brandenburg-Schwedt, in 1721 (though probably composed earlier). They are widely regarded as among the finest musical compositions of the Baroque era.
Bach’s dedication to the Margrave was dated 24 March 1721. Most likely, Bach composed the concertos over several years while Kapellmeister at Köthen, and possibly extending back to his employment at Weimar (1708–17). The first sentence of Bach’s dedication reads:
As I had the good fortune a few years ago to be heard by Your Royal Highness, at Your Highness’s commands, and as I noticed then that Your Highness took some pleasure in the little talents which Heaven has given me for Music, and as in taking Leave of Your Royal Highness, Your Highness deigned to honour me with the command to send Your Highness some pieces of my Composition: I have in accordance with Your Highness’s most gracious orders taken the liberty of rendering my most humble duty to Your Royal Highness with the present Concertos, which I have adapted to several instruments; begging Your Highness most humbly not to judge their imperfection with the rigor of that discriminating and sensitive taste, which everyone knows Him to have for musical works, but rather to take into benign Consideration the profound respect and the most humble obedience which I thus attempt to show Him.
The dedication page Bach wrote for the collection indicates they are Concerts avec plusieurs instruments (Concertos with several instruments). Bach used the “widest spectrum of orchestral instruments … in daring combinations,” as Christoph Wolff has commented. “Every one of the six concertos set a precedent in scoring, and every one was to remain without parallel.” Heinrich Besseler has noted that the overall forces required (leaving aside the first concerto, which was rewritten for a special occasion) tallies exactly with the 17 players Bach had at his disposal in Köthen.
Because King Frederick William I of Prussia was not a significant patron of the arts, Christian Ludwig seems to have lacked the musicians in his Berlin ensemble to perform the concertos. The full score was left unused in the Margrave’s library until his death in 1734, when it was sold for 24 groschen (as of 2008, about US$22.00) of silver. The autograph manuscript of the concertos was only rediscovered in the archives of Brandenburg by Siegfried Wilhelm Dehn in 1849; the concertos were first published in the following year….
(Weekend roundup post. For the definition of nincompoop, see THIS in the Urban Dictionary. Commenters are encouraged to post links that tell of more nincompoopery)
Links to read (more possibly added as the weekend progresses):
The resignation of Sharyl Attkisson, CBS investigative reporter, whose questions about Benghazi, Fast and Furious, Solyndra were not answered by the Obama administration
FBI Documents Detailing a 22-site Network of Jihad Training Villages Across the United States
No one I know on the right believes that capitalism is perfect. No one I know on the right thinks that our economy should operate without any regulation or oversight. What we do believe on the right is that they, who govern least, govern best. And while I think there should be oversight, we should pay as much attention to those who are doing the oversight, as we are to those whose corporate behaviors we intend to monitor. I am confounded by the fact that placing government in an oversight role is akin to hiring a fox to guard the hen house.
But what is it, exactly, that the leftist believes about the economy? There are several variables, of course. Some of these people are Keynesian ideologues who dream about a welfare state through industrial democracy. Others believe government should nationalize the economy and govern through central planning. One might recall that the Soviet Union tried central planning, too. Yet, some on the American left persist. It is the classical demonstration of insanity—at least according to Albert Einstein. Still other leftists are anarchist communists. Amazingly, while many of these people denounce globalization, they seek to impose it through their illogical support of the United Nations.
Still other leftists advocate in favor of Marxian economies. They seek to make a distinction between Marx the philosopher, and Marx the economist. I suspect they do this in order to mask their goal of imposing communism on the rest of us. It is convoluted even for leftists, which is why I think they frequently do not make any sense. They regurgitate the talking points, but they have no idea what the hell these words mean.
And then we are blessed with the left-libertarian, libertarian socialists, and the outright anarchists, who demand a decentralized economy run by trade unions, worker’s councils, and cooperatives —people I like to think of as fascists in mufti. Leftist will argue that a society without substantial equality will distort the development of not only deprived persons, but also those who privileges undermine motivation and their sense of social responsibility. It is a collectivist mentality, and might I add, the bane of a free society—for whom better to dictate to everyone else than the leftist with all the best ideas?
Ah, but there’s the catch. Leftist ideas are not the best ideas; among clear-thinking people, they are unfathomable. Who but a mentally deficient person can prefer regulation in place of free markets, or bureaucracies more than corporations, or government controlled insurance plans, rather than private insurances, and more government control over the economy rather than less.
We do have to acknowledge the consistency of the American left, however, for in spite of all that history tells us about the failure of communism and socialism in the 20th Century, American leftists remain committed to irrational notions. Still, we must remind ourselves that it was not an easy task to produce such troglodytes: it has taken more than three generations to brainwash these people. As we have seen, leftists live in a bizarre world. It is a world of opposites where progressive is regressive. It is the land of Cheech and Chong.
Listen carefully now; you may even hear the leftist protestations in the background. “The state of our economy proves that we need more government, not less.” Except that it was government that placed us in this position to begin with. At best, George Bush had it only half right. Reducing taxes is a good thing, but not while increasing government spending. Compassionate George seemed incapable of understanding that if taxation is a tourniquet around the neck of a robust economy, government spending is a gunshot wound to the head.
I personally think Milton Friedman had some very good ideas about free market capitalism, but I do not think he had all the answers. The problem is that, looking around, there is no one on the other side of this argument that can compete with Friedman. So where are all of those good ideas from the left? Answer: there are no good ideas on the left. If anything, leftist economic policy has made things worse —much worse.
When government policy seeks to diminish capital investments, no one in a proper mental state will want to risk their capital. Without capital, businesses cannot remain competitive. A non-competitive business is only a few steps away from closing its doors. This doesn’t matter to leftists, however. What matters is that government regulates businesses —for their own good.
Still, our topic is far too complex for the space allocated to a blog post. For example, we have not even touched upon corrupt government, which forces corporations to find some way of profiting within a sullied framework. If businesses want to survive in a corrupt environment, they have to find some way of accommodating the devil; and they do find ways.
Our question to the leftist provocateur remains: who will hire American workers when government bureaucracy replaces the American corporation? Who will pay salaries when businesses have been taxed or regulated out of existence? When businesses fold, when workers are unemployed, when the US no longer manufactures anything, when the economy is destroyed (we’re close to that now), then who will carry the tax burden for the United States?
Oops. I guess the left didn’t think about that. Maybe government will round everyone up and march them off to government-controlled factories, a la the Soviet Union. Yes, that should work!
(“Tales from the Classroom” is a feature posted occasionally here at this blog. All tales are true and present matters about which I have personal knowledge. The following tale relates the story of something that happened the first time that I as a student teacher was in sole charge of teaching a class — in 1973, at a school in an upper-middle-class and wealthy area)
The following paragraph from this recent essay at the Washington Post‘s web site prompted me to recall the first time that I took the helm as a classroom teacher of a high school class:
All of you former students: you did not design curricula, plan lessons, attend faculty meetings, assess papers, design rubrics, create exams, prepare report cards, and monitor attendance. You did not tutor students, review rough drafts, and create study questions. You did not assign homework. You did not write daily lesson objectives on the white board. You did not write poems of the week on the white board. You did not write homework on the white board. You did not learn to write legibly on the white board while simultaneously making sure that none of your students threw a chair out a window.
If only my first test as a teacher able to control a room full of students had been limited to the possibility of a student’s tossing a chair out a window!
Almost as soon as the bell had rung, Kerry, a ninth grader over six feet tall and an above-average student academically, stood up and announced to the entire classroom: “I’m gonna piss out the window!” He then proceeded to unzip.
I had visions of someone below our second-story window being doused.
I had visions of losing my university’s sponsorship of the required interval of student teaching.
I had visions of my losing any possibility of obtaining my teacher certification.
I don’t know how I kept my composure. But I did.
I didn’t even raise my voice or drop my vocal register into the gutteral range. I calmly stated: “The men’s room is down the hall.”
AOW: “That, too, is down the hall. In the men’s room.”
Laughter all around, and Kerry sat down. He never challenged me again. No disciplinary action was taken, either — at my request. No point in feeding a frenzy.
A few years later, I ran into Kerry at our local Wendy’s. He and I both laughed as we remember that day in the classroom. He said: “I wasn’t really going to piss out the window, you know. I just wanted to see how you would react. Good thing you didn’t say ‘boys’ room’. If you had, I might have had to prove that I wasn’t a boy.”
Those few moments in 1973 are moments that I’ll never forget.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 10,000 Baby Boomers reach retirement age every day.
There is a tsunami upon us, and America has not prepared for it. In fact, most individuals have not significantly prepared.
Aging Boomers is but one problem threatening our nation’s economy. See Robert J. Samuelson’s essay “America’s Demographic Denial” (March 2, 2014).
Even worse, America has become a nation willing to surrender individual freedoms.
America’s best days are over.
The weather here today, however, is going to be a real taste of spring. Therefore, I won’t be dwelling on the ugly realities but rather enjoying this earthly life, a gift that doesn’t last forever.
(If you must have politics, please scroll down)Mother Nature puts on a show: Yosemite HD II from Project Yosemite on Vimeo.A bit of information about Project Yosemite:The footage documents a hike lasting over 200 miles through the California park and w…