Words escape me #2
-
fat_boy wrote:
Your place of residence says Jordan. Do you expect me to know that you were born somewhere else?
No, but from your profile, you're very well traveled yourself; I'd have expected you of all people to know the possibility of that.
fat_boy wrote:
Its not about right and wrong, its about the facts.
If one perceives something to be true, they take it for a fact. Religions are a prime example of this.
fat_boy wrote:
And the fact is it is worn on the west as a symbol for political reasons.
That just re-states that its a matter of perception to the general populace in the west! Again, if something is perceived to be something other than what it really is, it doesn't make it right or factual and the only fact is that the perception is wrong.
fat_boy wrote:
This is totally irrelevant to the topic under discussion.
Agreed.
fat_boy wrote:
Its a private company pulling the add because of complaints, not the state making a law that oulaws the head scarf. This comment of yours about the constitution is totally irrelevant.
The point was that no one could force them in removing their ads.
"Every time Lotus Notes starts up, somewhere a puppy, a kitten, a lamb, and a baby seal are killed. Lotus Notes is a conspiracy by the forces of Satan to drive us over the brink into madness. The CRC-32 for each file in the installation includes the numbers 666." Gary Wheeler "You're an idiot." John Simmons, THE Outlaw programmer "I realised that all of my best anecdotes started with "So there we were, pissed". Pete O'Hanlon
Mustafa Ismail Mustafa wrote:
if something is perceived
Mustafa Ismail Mustafa wrote:
doesn't make it ... factual
Th4e FACT is that it IS perceived this way in the west. You might call it wrong to do so, but so what? The thousands of assholes who wear it as a political stance dont give a toss what you think, or whether the red or black one is better for keeping the samd and flies out of one's face.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
sorry for the typo, should be TPTB = the powers to be It's their right to pull the ad, but I don't think the complaints are that valid. For people who know these ONLY from AlQueida videos it's understandable but not reasonable. I know it for over 15 years as a simple indicator of "left or right", for the vast majority of people wearing it it merely means "sympathy for Palestina", "fuck capitalism" etc. As such, the Kufiya is not the equivalent to a swastik, but to a shaved head. Now, admittedly, the ad would probably be pulled if she did it with a shaved head - and people would complain that it discriminates against People After Chemo. FOF detection: Our "war on terror" is hampered by the virtual impossibility of recognizing the enemy. That's not because we are stupid, but because the problem is hard. So we try to simplify it to "towel on head, paisley around the neck". Not necessarily a bad idea, it just doesn't work. Now, clinging to a system that doesn't work is stupid. Trying to uphold it by trying to frighten the "good guys" into not wearing it is an outright waste fo ressources I don't think it's bad that the Kufiyah goes fashion mainstream (and if you haven't noticed, it does). "Look at that Osama guy, dresses like last years mall skank".
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
blog: TDD - the Aha! | Linkify!| FoldWithUs! | sighistpeterchen wrote:
It's their right to pull the ad, but I don't think the complaints are that valid.
So because the scarf has migrated, due to use in common fashion, from being a statement to being just an acessory, it has lost sufficient of its original meaning to warrant free use? Obviously all those who complained disagree with you.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
fat_boy wrote:
In your country yes
That would be Canada right? Because that's where I was born and spent the majority of my life. Funny, my mum is a Canadian too and I am a Canadian expatriate.
fat_boy wrote:
in the west it is used as a symbol of sympathy for the Palestinian 'struggle'.
Again, severe misunderstanding, just because the "perception" is different it doesn't make it right.
fat_boy wrote:
Palestinian 'struggle'.
How is it not a struggle? What do you know of the massacares that occur in Palestine? Of the exodus of thousands upon thousands of them? Of the apartheid being forced onto them? If you had a farm and it was your only source of livelihood and you fought so that it wouldn't be taken from you and you happened to kill off some of those who tried to it take away, you get branded as a terrorist? Interesting.
fat_boy wrote:
How, asuming you know about the US constitution, does that have anything to do with a private company and what it decides should go on its adverts?
Show's how much you know. Quote: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." [Source: Clickety[^]] So long as any expression does not impinge on another's freedoms (defamation or what have you) no one has the right to tear it down. They can complain all they want and even in the event of a public outrage no one can force them to anything. They can be convinced, and in their case being a for profit private organization they'll fold double quick.
fat_boy wrote:
Yes. If someone was to appear in a black ski-mask in an advert that was not related to mountain sports that would obviously be the perception, and the intent.
Very convincing.
"Every time Lotus Notes starts up, somewhere a puppy, a kitten, a lamb, and a baby seal are killed. Lotus Note
Mustafa Ismail Mustafa wrote:
Show's how much you know. Quote: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." [Source: Clickety[^]] So long as any expression does not impinge on another's freedoms (defamation or what have you) no one has the right to tear it down. They can complain all they want and even in the event of a public outrage no one can force them to anything. They can be convinced, and in their case being a for profit private organization they'll fold double quick.
That couldn't be more wrong. Private entities can limit your freedom of speech all they like. For the government to have the power to force private entities to tolerate speech they find disagreeable our counterproductive would be a gross abuse of state power.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
So, we had a little tongue in cheek discussion about the latest in a line of celebreties wearing a black and white checked scarf and whether or not she is showing tacit support for Palestinian terrosism or not. So, a little more research, actually gogling for images of the 'keffiyeh' bring up this: http://images.google.com/images?ndsp=18&um=1&hl=en&rls=GGLR,GGLR:2006-03,GGLR:en&q=keffiyeh&start=0&sa=N[^] And this: Ricky Martin donned a traditional red-checked keffiyeh with the phrase “Jerusalem is ours” inscribed in Arabic[^] So, what is obvious: 1) This scarf has become a left wing terrorist sympathiser fashion accessory in the west. 2) Kkeffiyehs come in many different styles and colours, and what Rachey Ray was wearing in that advert was certainly an example one. 3) Whether Rachel Ray was wearing it to make a statement, we dont know. 4) The advertising firm and dunkin donuts should have been aware of its use as a politicised fashion accessory and never let her wear it for the picture in the first place. 5) They were right to pull the add after public protest. 6) This scarf is a protest symbol worn by terrorists and has featured in videos where victiims have been beheaded. What I am surprised at is the reaction of so many people here who wouldnt have expected the add to be pulled. What planet do you live on?
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
A rather glaring example of how easily gullible people can be used to spread leftist propaganda. This explains most of the public support the left has on virtually every issue.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
A rather glaring example of how easily gullible people can be used to spread leftist propaganda. This explains most of the public support the left has on virtually every issue.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
So, we had a little tongue in cheek discussion about the latest in a line of celebreties wearing a black and white checked scarf and whether or not she is showing tacit support for Palestinian terrosism or not. So, a little more research, actually gogling for images of the 'keffiyeh' bring up this: http://images.google.com/images?ndsp=18&um=1&hl=en&rls=GGLR,GGLR:2006-03,GGLR:en&q=keffiyeh&start=0&sa=N[^] And this: Ricky Martin donned a traditional red-checked keffiyeh with the phrase “Jerusalem is ours” inscribed in Arabic[^] So, what is obvious: 1) This scarf has become a left wing terrorist sympathiser fashion accessory in the west. 2) Kkeffiyehs come in many different styles and colours, and what Rachey Ray was wearing in that advert was certainly an example one. 3) Whether Rachel Ray was wearing it to make a statement, we dont know. 4) The advertising firm and dunkin donuts should have been aware of its use as a politicised fashion accessory and never let her wear it for the picture in the first place. 5) They were right to pull the add after public protest. 6) This scarf is a protest symbol worn by terrorists and has featured in videos where victiims have been beheaded. What I am surprised at is the reaction of so many people here who wouldnt have expected the add to be pulled. What planet do you live on?
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
So, we had a little tongue in cheek discussion about the latest in a line of celebreties wearing a black and white checked scarf and whether or not she is showing tacit support for Palestinian terrosism or not. So, a little more research, actually gogling for images of the 'keffiyeh' bring up this: http://images.google.com/images?ndsp=18&um=1&hl=en&rls=GGLR,GGLR:2006-03,GGLR:en&q=keffiyeh&start=0&sa=N[^] And this: Ricky Martin donned a traditional red-checked keffiyeh with the phrase “Jerusalem is ours” inscribed in Arabic[^] So, what is obvious: 1) This scarf has become a left wing terrorist sympathiser fashion accessory in the west. 2) Kkeffiyehs come in many different styles and colours, and what Rachey Ray was wearing in that advert was certainly an example one. 3) Whether Rachel Ray was wearing it to make a statement, we dont know. 4) The advertising firm and dunkin donuts should have been aware of its use as a politicised fashion accessory and never let her wear it for the picture in the first place. 5) They were right to pull the add after public protest. 6) This scarf is a protest symbol worn by terrorists and has featured in videos where victiims have been beheaded. What I am surprised at is the reaction of so many people here who wouldnt have expected the add to be pulled. What planet do you live on?
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
What I am surprised at is the reaction of so many people here who wouldnt have expected the add to be pulled. What planet do you live on?
Oh come on. What BS. It's a freakin' scarf! The whole world has gone to hell in a handbasket overreacting to something so fucking trivial. Marc
-
peterchen wrote:
It's their right to pull the ad, but I don't think the complaints are that valid.
So because the scarf has migrated, due to use in common fashion, from being a statement to being just an acessory, it has lost sufficient of its original meaning to warrant free use? Obviously all those who complained disagree with you.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
Obviously all those who complained disagree with you.
Uh - dozens of right wing bloggers disagree with me? The pain! The pain!
fat_boy wrote:
So because the scarf has migrated, due to use in common fashion, from being a statement to being just an acessory, it has lost sufficient of its original meaning to warrant free use?
It is a scarf, to keep you warm. I don't have to pass some terrorist exam to get one. What it symbolizes is of course in the minds of people, independent what it is. The majority of people was oblivious to the scarf or it's meaning, Michelle wasn't. Fine for her. But since when was it her principle to make the majority bow to the minorities whim? She just made an ass of herself.
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
blog: TDD - the Aha! | Linkify!| FoldWithUs! | sighist -
Interesting. This is unheard of in the ME.
"Every time Lotus Notes starts up, somewhere a puppy, a kitten, a lamb, and a baby seal are killed. Lotus Notes is a conspiracy by the forces of Satan to drive us over the brink into madness. The CRC-32 for each file in the installation includes the numbers 666." Gary Wheeler "You're an idiot." John Simmons, THE Outlaw programmer "I realised that all of my best anecdotes started with "So there we were, pissed". Pete O'Hanlon
-
See this? You *are* capable of rationality. This is why I so mock you irrational behavior and statements.
You know, there are other ways of emphasising words.
-
fat_boy wrote:
Obviously all those who complained disagree with you.
Uh - dozens of right wing bloggers disagree with me? The pain! The pain!
fat_boy wrote:
So because the scarf has migrated, due to use in common fashion, from being a statement to being just an acessory, it has lost sufficient of its original meaning to warrant free use?
It is a scarf, to keep you warm. I don't have to pass some terrorist exam to get one. What it symbolizes is of course in the minds of people, independent what it is. The majority of people was oblivious to the scarf or it's meaning, Michelle wasn't. Fine for her. But since when was it her principle to make the majority bow to the minorities whim? She just made an ass of herself.
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
blog: TDD - the Aha! | Linkify!| FoldWithUs! | sighistLook at its usage in that rap video you linked to. It use there is offensive, as it is designed to be. How can you not see that and call it just a scarf? It is NOT natural atire for a westerner. The only reason it IS worn is as a political statement. That scarf is a symbol of death. Terrorist death. Beheading with a knife kind of death. Stoning death. Nasty, grim stuff.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
See this? You *are* capable of rationality. This is why I so mock you irrational behavior and statements.
-
I said the same thing in a different way and now its rational? Idiot.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
I said the same thing in a different way and now its rational? Idiot.
No, Idiot, you wrote something ... an entire post ... which was rational and in which your points logically followed. edit: Refusing to see reality[^] is not rational. And your reaction to my response to that post was even worse.
-
fat_boy wrote:
What I am surprised at is the reaction of so many people here who wouldnt have expected the add to be pulled. What planet do you live on?
Oh come on. What BS. It's a freakin' scarf! The whole world has gone to hell in a handbasket overreacting to something so fucking trivial. Marc
Marc Clifton wrote:
Oh come on. What BS. It's a freakin' scarf! The whole world has gone to hell in a handbasket overreacting to something so f***ing trivial.
Oh come on. What BS. It's a freakin' [reaction to politicized provocation]! The whole [leftist] world has gone to hell in a handbasket overreacting to something so f***ing trivial. :laugh:
-
Look at its usage in that rap video you linked to. It use there is offensive, as it is designed to be. How can you not see that and call it just a scarf? It is NOT natural atire for a westerner. The only reason it IS worn is as a political statement. That scarf is a symbol of death. Terrorist death. Beheading with a knife kind of death. Stoning death. Nasty, grim stuff.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
That scarf is a symbol of death. Terrorist death. Beheading with a knife kind of death. Stoning death. Nasty, grim stuff
You really have lost it, haven't you? I could do your entire rap on any prop in the ad. You might as well start claiming that every man who has a beard is a terrorist sympathizer. Or every muslim woman who wears a burka is expressing sympathy for all suicide bombers. Or that every member of the Green Berets is French. What a load of horseshit is dribbling from your lips.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
fat_boy wrote:
I said the same thing in a different way and now its rational? Idiot.
No, Idiot, you wrote something ... an entire post ... which was rational and in which your points logically followed. edit: Refusing to see reality[^] is not rational. And your reaction to my response to that post was even worse.
-
fat_boy wrote:
What I am surprised at is the reaction of so many people here who wouldnt have expected the add to be pulled. What planet do you live on?
Oh come on. What BS. It's a freakin' scarf! The whole world has gone to hell in a handbasket overreacting to something so fucking trivial. Marc
It used to be just a scarf until Arafat popularised its use and glorified the terrorist sentiments behind it. It is akin to the swastika in that the original meaning of the symbol bore little or no relation to what it came to mean. I agree that it is just a scarf but it has come to represent terrorism when worn by non-arabs. Of course the bizarre side is that it is standard head gear for many in the middle east and its roots go back even further. It is not the scarf that is the problem: it is what it symbolises.
-
It used to be just a scarf until Arafat popularised its use and glorified the terrorist sentiments behind it. It is akin to the swastika in that the original meaning of the symbol bore little or no relation to what it came to mean. I agree that it is just a scarf but it has come to represent terrorism when worn by non-arabs. Of course the bizarre side is that it is standard head gear for many in the middle east and its roots go back even further. It is not the scarf that is the problem: it is what it symbolises.
-
fat_boy wrote:
I said the same thing in a different way and now its rational? Idiot.
No, Idiot, you wrote something ... an entire post ... which was rational and in which your points logically followed. edit: Refusing to see reality[^] is not rational. And your reaction to my response to that post was even worse.
-
fat_boy wrote:
What I am surprised at is the reaction of so many people here who wouldnt have expected the add to be pulled. What planet do you live on?
Oh come on. What BS. It's a freakin' scarf! The whole world has gone to hell in a handbasket overreacting to something so fucking trivial. Marc
Marc Clifton wrote:
The whole world has gone to hell in a handbasket overreacting to something so f***ing trivial.
Not the world, just a few of the guys whose elevator doesn't reach the top floor.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface