Who wants to sit through another George Clooney Bush-bashing vehicle?

If it's true, as we are forever saying, that girls just wanna have fun, Victoria's Secret knows where we live.

'Wish we'd written everything LGF commenter really grumpy big dog johnson [via Winds of Change] wrote about "United 93." His words echo the conversation we had with Tuck on the ride home from the theater yesterday:

This movie is not like anything I've ever seen in my life. This is a new template for cinema, borrowing from little with which we might be familiar. Filmed in a near real-time style of cinema verite, we are subjected to an immediate style, using handheld cameras and ad lib dialogue like little else I've seen.

But what makes this film so unique is the barebones nature and utter honesty of the director's chosen style. There's no plot, no character development, no lead actors, and for that matter no recognizable actors period in this movie. There is no attempt to embellish, dramatize or otherwise turn this docudrama into a "Hollywood" movie.

It is what it is, and what it is clearly is a triumph of a movie from director Greengrass. It took my breath away, and I still haven't gotten it back.

"No lead actors" was huge. Other than our fellow Americans of the hard left and their unwitting fellow travelers looking for a pretty face, who wants to sit through another George Clooney Bush-bashing vehicle? As some reviewer we can't seem to Google up said the other day, thank God there was no Tom Hanks or Susan Sarandon to distract us from the matter at hand.

If it's true as imams are forever saying that men don't want girls to have fun, Shukr USA knows where we don't live.

Now on to the matter of the woman behind the veil romanticized in our last post. From shukronline:

Here are Qur'ans Basic Guidelines on Clothing:

Clothing should not attract attention or used to brag or show off their wealth or social status. [Stop right there. Question: What happens to "the importance of being noticed" if social display is off base? Answer: Suicide bombing.]

Clothing must cover the entire body; only the hands and face may remain visible.

Clothing must hang loose so that the shape of the body is not revealed.

One can only wonder why God shaped us in his image in the first place, only to demand that we cover it all up. Unintelligent design? Our commenters were up in arms, wondering what Sissy had been smoking:

Teresa of Technicalities:

There's something so very sad about a woman veiled head to toe in America while her husband stands right next to her in regular clothing. No matter how loved she may be, she is in shackles.

Miss Kelly, who found "an extremely modest Muslim bathing suit in a National Geographic article yesterday:

IMHO, women who cover themselves head to toe are objectifying their bodies every bit as much those the women who are walking around skantily clad. To different effect, obviously, but similar dynamic.

We totally agree, but here's our point. Take it or leave it, how we women look is part and parcel of what David Attenborough in his awesome "The Trials of Life" BBC series calls "the relentless drive to continue the bloodline." Our purely speculative theory is that keeping the women's physical charms under wraps feeds the Muslim man's desire. How else to explain the explosion of the Muslim demographic worldwide, most alarmingly in Europe, where the native populations aren't having enough offspring to replace themselves?

Laura Lee Donaho of The Wide Awake Cafe brings up another important issue evoked by "United 93":

I feel like United 93 is a national memorial service and that so many Americans think it is too soon to be viewed is at the very least incredibly disrespectful. It's something brave people confront, and I used to think we were the home of the brave. But no more. There are so many squishy September 10th people in this land.

"The home of the brave" . . . that was Francis Scott Key's phrase in the song he composed on the morning after the Battle of Baltimore in 1814, when against all odds in the face of the British juggernaut, "our flag was still there," the very hymn to freedom now under assault by our amigos from south of the border who want to bypass our laws to grab a piece of the pie in the land of the free. Patrick Poole of Existential Space has the history:

Many Americans forget the circumstances surrounding the British assault on Fort McHenry in the misnamed War of 1812. Just weeks before the attack on Baltimore, the British had sailed up the Potomac and put Washington D.C. to the torch, forcing President James Madison and his Cabinet to flee for their lives. The burning of Washington in August 1814 was a demonstration of British military power intended to show America’s impotency. The British quickly sailed back down to Chesapeake Bay to capture the strategic port of Baltimore to issue the coup de grace and bring America to its knees and back under the dominion of the British crown . . .

But the British miscalculated. They didn’t underestimate the number of men or firepower of the American troops huddled inside Fort McHenry; it was the spirit and resolve of the American forces that the British misjudged.

Be sure to read the whole thing. It will renew your pride and faith in the "Shining City Upon a Hill." We're certain we could never be so brave. Here once more with feeling:

O say, can you see, by the dawn's early light,
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming?
Whose broad stripes and bright stars, through the perilous fight,
O'er the ramparts we watched, were so gallantly streaming!
And the rockets' red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there:
O say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

Michelle Malkin has documents and a clearinghouse of "United 93" takes from the blogosphere at her new blog Hot Air.

Comments

[goomp]

One of your best SISU. Here is hoping the people will show that we are "the land of the free and the home of the brave".

[HNAV]

thank you for the fine post...

i agree with Goomp, and pray this fine Nation will not retreat...

one simple movie, a 'drop' in the ocean of Anti-USA-Anti-Bush-Anti-Everything, we are served on a daily basis...

i do hope the film will live to some potential, at least care for the memory of those lost on that tragic day of 9-11...

[Laura Lee Donoho]

Sissy wrote, "Our commenters were up in arms, wondering what Sissy had been smoking".......

I don't know but I want some. Your review of United 93 was one of the most interesting I've read.

As always you layered into the review current events with your photos of the Muslim man and woman fishing. That was very topical.

While I wouldn't ever want to dress in such a fashion you managed to capture the affection between the couple. Reading sisu always stimulates thought.

[Teresa]

YAY! You're back!

"Our commenters were up in arms, wondering what Sissy had been smoking"

No not really *grin* I knew what you were trying to say - it's just that the Muslim decree to have women completely cover themselves has always irritated me - even in a picture like yours where the couple look to be very close.

I saw the bathing suit Miss Kelly had posted, but the problem is - it allows the shape of the woman to be seen - that is a big No No for these people.

The Muslim men seem to be not only afraid that their woman (or women as the case may be) will go out and sleep with any guy she can find, they seem to think that no man on the planet has any self control. (projection of their own warped minds?) Thus it's not a turn on to them to cover the woman up - it's more in the line of keeping their woman to themselves and only themselves. Such nice guys.

Attitudes like that are why the women of this country should be fighting even harder than the men against these people. If United 93 manages to refocus those who have lost that sense of looming disaster, it will have done it's job.