FLASH! From Liz Smith | 10/30/2009 3:40 pm
LIZ SMITH FLASH! A Question From National Review
Here we present a religious question from the opinion and editorial pages of the National Review magazine. And it’s a very good one, I think.
***
November issue of National Review: "We all know that Jihadists believe that pious Muslim males will be rewarded with 72 virgins in paradise. What will those virgins actually be like, though? Saudi cleric Sheikh Muhammad al-Munajid has been telling us on Saudi Arabia’s Al-Majd TV. Main point: They will be white. Very white. ‘Allah said that the black-eyed virgins are beautiful white young women … whose skin is so delicate and bright that it causes confusion. They are like precious gems and pearls in their splendor, their clarity, their purity and their whiteness.’
"We (at the National Review) confess to some slight confusion ourselves. Is there a separate afterlife for pious but unwhite Muslim females? If not, where do their souls go? If so, what’s their reward? Perhaps we all get new bodies in paradise, with the gals guaranteed to get white ones. Another possibility is that Sheikh Muhammad al-Munajid is a gibbering lunatic.
"This is, after all, the man who last year issued a fatwa against Mickey Mouse, whom he described as "one of Satan’s soldiers.’"
***
I just love fanatical religions, don’t you? They make so much sense.
***
November issue of National Review: "We all know that Jihadists believe that pious Muslim males will be rewarded with 72 virgins in paradise. What will those virgins actually be like, though? Saudi cleric Sheikh Muhammad al-Munajid has been telling us on Saudi Arabia’s Al-Majd TV. Main point: They will be white. Very white. ‘Allah said that the black-eyed virgins are beautiful white young women … whose skin is so delicate and bright that it causes confusion. They are like precious gems and pearls in their splendor, their clarity, their purity and their whiteness.’
"We (at the National Review) confess to some slight confusion ourselves. Is there a separate afterlife for pious but unwhite Muslim females? If not, where do their souls go? If so, what’s their reward? Perhaps we all get new bodies in paradise, with the gals guaranteed to get white ones. Another possibility is that Sheikh Muhammad al-Munajid is a gibbering lunatic.
"This is, after all, the man who last year issued a fatwa against Mickey Mouse, whom he described as "one of Satan’s soldiers.’"
***
I just love fanatical religions, don’t you? They make so much sense.

























130 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment
I agree it is an intolerant law. But it’s my experience it IS held up in practice. No Christians I know here have had a problem. Of course, that’s just my personal experience and the experiences of those I know. I haven’t read what Wikipedia has to say on it.
It is solely "the Muslims" that want to dominate rather than accomodate? Did you read that on Wikipedia too?
The United Nations Partition Plan did not create one state but two and while war was declared to prevent one of the states from coming into being, the fact remains it did. So where is the other state?
The Palestinian people deserved their own state. It in fact was promised to them by the United Nations in 1947. They did not declare war on the Israeli people in 1948. A fact few seem willing to accept. They have been as victimized as the Israelis by this attitude of other countries that they, rather than the Palestinians and Israelis, shall determine the fate of two countries.
There was a second state, Jordan. Plenty of the Arabs who had lived in Israel went there, but some of them caused so much trouble that the then ruler had them massacred in 1970. Since when are the rules of taken-over territory different for Israel than for Germany, Russia, the US, etc etc etc. Not to mention of course the Arabs. They are still claiming Spain so maybe they should take that before the UN too. While you’re at it Snooks, maybe the US should give up Texas and Baja California, plus New Mexico, Arizona, etc.
I just love it when people revise history to further political agenda - Jordan was not the second state created under the Partition Plan. As for the peoples involved thank you for pointing out one of the most important aspects of all of this which is the peoples themselves. Originally the term Palestinian referred to the Jews. The Palestinians of today were the Arabs but the Arabs themselves did not consider them Arabs mainly because originally they were Coptic Christians. In reality Jordan, Syria, Egypt and Saudi Arabia did not want any state created and merely wanted the land for themselves.
There is also the matter of oil which is the foundation of US policy in the region. Not only the refinery complex in Haifa which is key to the reestablishment of the original pipeline from Iraq to Haifa, which is really why we are in Iraq because that pipeline would allow us to bypass the Persian Gulf in the transport of oil, but the oil and gas reserves off the coast of Israel and we will not support a separate state simply because most of those reserves would become reserves of the Palestiniians rather than the Israelis. And that of course is what Madeline Albright was referring to when she said the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children were worth it. Some believe the policy that the oil reserves belong to us is correct. That policy is what eventually may result in Israel indeed being blown off the map.
We have plunged three countries into the Dark Ages of Islam on the basis of that policy. Iran, Afghanistan and now Iraq. And we have made formidable enemies in the process. But you keep revising history if it makes you feel better. History as it unfolds has a curious way of correcting the revisions.
And that one comment by Madeline Albriight sums up what is wrong with our country and there will be no 72 Chippendale dancers awaiting her. Her or Hillary Clinton. And tehre willb e no 72 virgins awaiting George HW Bush or Bill Clinton or George W Bush. They and so many others will find that the punishment of the Hague would have been preferable to what awaits them not to mention how history itself will record their legacy.
"I just love fanatical religions, don’t you? They make so much sense." This so-called religious leader’s comments are absurd, for there is nothing like this in the Koran (I’ve read it); it is his take, an attempt to sway or influence young men, and reveals his foolishness. Subsequent comments are also foolish. Whatever people understand or feel about religion is not related to this man’s claims.
Americans, on the whole, know little about Eastern religions and usually glean translated information to soothe themselves or to misrepresent what is actually written.There is no real understanding of the texts and the different interpretations, or practices of millions of people. We simply stereotype others to suit our own inclinations.
Frankly, writing or discussing this quote is a waste of time; for it reveals nothing relevant or important, and has been twisted by the media, as well as semi-literate people. And, don’t we welcome such idiocy, so that we can malign other and distract ourselves from facing real issues, such as our own idiocies?
Do you consider the discussion on this website enlightening or scholarly?
As for: " It is comforting to dismiss those who do not share your opinions as idiots, but not very enlightening."
You have no idea what my opinion is. ( Not all Moslems are Arabs)No offense but for someone who keeps telling evryone else to read you apparently do not follow your own advice and have very little knowledge of Islam. There are hundreds of peoples who follow Islam. Not just Arab peoples. And there are two main branches on the tree of Islam. The Sunnis who are primarily Arab at least in the Persian Gulf region and the Shi’ites who are primarily Persian at least in the Persian Gulf region. It’s not the Arab Gulf. That in itself might have given you a hint.
http://www.amazon.com/Muslim-Peoples-World-Ethnographic-Survey/dp/0313246394/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1257095152&sr=1-2
I am aware of the book because I helped edit and proof the galleys.
I’m not so current on this but isn’t it the other way around? The Arabs are primarily Sunni, rather than Sunni’s are primarily Arab? I’m guessing Indonesia, the Indian sub-continant, and perhaps even China have just as many Sunni’s- and that combined they still outnumber Arabs enough to make Sunnis NOt primarily Arab.
I agree this poster either has very little knowledge or Islam or is deliberatly misrepresenting it.