Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
At 23:56 25-10-2002 -0400, Jon Gabriel wrote: No. When you have a discussion with someone, you need to agree on common definitions for terms. The disagreement was not about the *common* definition of the word; the disagreement was about whether or not an alternative meaning of a word has to be listed in certain dictionaries for it to be a *valid* meaning. So, do you refuse to accept that a word can have a valid meaning that differs from the most commonly used meaning? Not in the least. Yet, that is exactly what you are doing. You are dismissing an alternative meaning as invalid merely because it is not listed in your dictionaries of choice. Where do those dictionairies say that the meaning *they* give is The Only True And Correct Meaning To The Exception Of Everything Else? I only responded this time because I felt it would be rude to do otherwise. And appreciated, it is. I know someone who could learn from that attitude. Enjoy the last word. Thanks, I will. GRIN Jeroen That will be all van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
At 07:50 06-10-2002 +0200, Ilana Halupovich wrote: America in general is, after all, very pro-Israel, has a large Jewish community, and is in fact the only friend Israel has in the world. I understand that you don't watch Russian TV. G You understand correctly. We do not get Russian TV here. But even if we would, the few words of Russian I know are not enough to understand it... :-) So, when did Russia become good friends with Israel? I know many Russians have friends and relatives in Israel, but AFAIK the country itself is not exactly in bed with the Israeli regime. Jeroen Keeper of the Great Brin-L Archive van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
At 08:01 06-10-2002 +0200, Ilana Halupovich wrote: It's Jeroen displays opinions that are seemingly prejudiced against Israel usually that is. That is still not really correct, but at least it is a little bit less wrong that Jeroen displays opinions that are seemingly prejudiced against Jews. Sholom Aleichem, Ilana. :-) (Um, hope I got that last sentence right and not accidentally insulted you...) :-) Jeroen Speaker of Foreign Languages van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Teaching a pig to sing (was Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World)
At 18:25 04-10-2002 -0500, Adam Lipscomb wrote: I'm not asking for an L3 post - just a simple explanation as to why you insist your position is the correct one. I have already explained that a few times now. I see no reason to keep repeating myself. And the reasoning you give is incorrect, inane and illogical. Your claims as to the meaning of the term were refuted with definitions from the Merriam-Webster dictionary, as well as the Encyclopedia Britannica and, ultimately, the Oxford English Dictionary. I could write my own reply to that, but William Goodall already wrote something that qualifies as an excellent response to what you are saying, so I will just quote it here: Dictionaries are descriptive rather than prescriptive: that is they describe how words *are* used not how words *ought* to be used. Additionally they are inclusive rather than exclusive: if a usage is in a dictionary that means that some people have used the word that way, but if a usage is not in a dictionary that does not mean that the word has not been used that way by some people. You replied that the OED was wrong, Hm, looks like someone is intercepting my messages, rewriting them, and then sending them on to you. I did an search on OED and wrong on my messages, but in none of them did I reply that the OED is wrong. yet refuse to explain *why* you insist that your knowledge of proper usage of the English language is correct over the internationally recognized authority. First you say that my explanation is incorrect, inane and illogical, and then you go on to say that I refuse to give an explanation. How can an explanation be incorrect, inane and illogical if I never gave an explanation? English may not be my first language, but I do recognise a contradiction when I see one... IIRC, what you just did is known in English as painting yourself into a corner. :-) Anyway, I have already explained several times why I think my interpretation is correct. Now, this might be a shocking new concept to some people, but have you ever considered the possibility that both interpretations might actually *both* be valid? As William pointed out, the fact that a meaning of a word is not in a dictionary does not mean that the meaning is not used. Jeroen Likud Delenda Est van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
From: J. van Baardwijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2002 12:57:11 +0200 At 00:32 04-10-2002 -0400, Jon Gabriel wrote: sophistry n : a deliberately invalid argument displaying ingenuity in reasoning in the hope of deceiving someone [syn: sophism] Source: WordNet ® 1.6, © 1997 Princeton University ~~~ I'd say that's an accurate description of what he's doing. No, I am not using invalid arguments, nor am I trying to deceive anyone. I am trying to get the point across that a commonly used meaning of a word is not necessarily the (only) correct meaning. No, it's an apt description. You're deliberately defining a word in such a way that said definition disagrees with eight dictionaries, an encyclopedia and, incidentally, one that several native-English speakers on the list also disagree with. Instead of trying to disprove the written authorities, you refuse to post a shred of formal evidence that your position is accurate. Therefore, your argument is invalid because it is based on your false assumption (that the term 'antisemitic' refers to non-Jews). You are ignoring evidence that says it's invalid while refusing to post any of your own. That's sophistry. If you were really trying 'to get the point across that a commonly used meaning of a word is not necessarily the (only) correct meaning', you'd be substantiating your claim with something more than your own opinion. But, of course, I'm not the first person to point that out to you, am I? But hey, I am flattered to see that you believe I am displaying ingenuity! Thanks for the compliment! :-) I think you're being very creative. You seem to be verbally dancing in every direction but towards actually backing up your claims with formal evidence. (Which, btw, *I* did a couple of days ago.) Look, I'm not assigning you sinister motives. I didn't call you a holocaust-denier. I'm merely asking you to substantiate your claim with an authority that's as valid as the multiple ones posted to the list. Your lack of eagerness to do so speaks volumes about the strength of your argument. Jeroen Brains van Baardwijk I'd prefer to see Jeroen 'Maturity' van Baardwijk, honestly. Jon _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
At 18:56 03-10-2002 -0500, Adam Lipscomb wrote: Um, no. You appear hell-bent upon reserving for yourself the right to define words the way you *want* to define them. Which, of course, cannot be said about the pro-Israel crowd... I consider this reason enough to determine that you are not inclined to discuss this topic in good faith. Fine with me. I really do not have the time for this anyway; this Monday I have my Systems Development I exam (the fourth exam for my CompSci degree), so most of my time will go into studying today and this weekend. Jeroen Likud Delenda Est van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
At 20:30 03-10-2002 -0500, Robert Seeberger wrote: Your logic is flawed. There is no language (spoken language) on earth that conforms to mathematical precision. Well, then just in case I misinterpret the meaning of the word: Next time someone calls me anti-American (bound to happen again sometime), remind me to ask the poster if he means hatred of all Americans or hatred only of Texans. Just in case I misinterpret the meaning that poster attributes to the word anti-American... Jeroen Likud Delenda Est van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
At 01:30 04-10-2002 -0400, Jon Gabriel wrote: :-) What was it you had posted to the list incessantly a few months ago? I'm still waiting for Jeroen to post proof and documentation to these accusations? You'd think I'd remember it better from having seen it a few hundred times. :-) Since you remember that, you will also remember that the person asked to provide proof and answers consistently refused to do so. You will then also remember that pretty much everyone on this list held the opinion that there was nothing wrong with this consistent refusal. And if you remember that, then you will also remember that since that time, the policy of this list is that nobody is required to back any claims with any proof. Oh, and by the way, if you feel inclined, I'd really love to see you provide further documentation that the authors and publishers of the eight dictionaries whose definitions were posted to the list are biased and members of the pro-Israel crowd. Certainly in the case of American authors and publishers, such a bias cannot be entirely ruled out. America in general is, after all, very pro-Israel, has a large Jewish community, and is in fact the only friend Israel has in the world. Jeroen, if you can't prove me wrong, then second-guessing my motives rather than disproving my accuracy is a rather pathetic alternative to admitting your own mistake, wouldn't you say? If you are looking for a something pathetic, read The Fool's post (Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 21:24:58 -0500). Now *that* is pathetic. Jeroen Likud Delenda Est van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
At 21:24 03-10-2002 -0500, The Fool, once again true to his name, wrote: So now you are redfining the english language, even after someone has posted, the one and only definitive word meaning and usage from the unabridged Oxford English Dictionary. This is...Pathetic. Are you going to deny the holocaust next? Thank you. You have just proven again something I have been saying for years: that the pro-Israel fanatics will do and say *anything* in order to try and silence their opponents. Of course, this is extra easy for The Fool, as s/he is cowardly hiding behind a nickname and refuses to disclose his/her true identity, so that nobody can come after him/her. And then he calls *me* pathetic... Jeroen The only good Fool is a silent Fool van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Jeroen wrote: At 18:56 03-10-2002 -0500, Adam Lipscomb wrote: Um, no. You appear hell-bent upon reserving for yourself the right to define words the way you *want* to define them. Which, of course, cannot be said about the pro-Israel crowd... Ahh, so it's not *just* the Israelis, but all their friends, too? Wow, Jeroen. You sure do build up impressive enemies lists. Back to reality, though: are you or are you not willing to accept that the term anti-Semite is, despite the *apparent* meaning of the term, most commonly used to describe anti-Jewish attitudes? If so, then problem solved. If not, the please explain why you do not acknowledge the definitive source on word usage in the English language. Please attach links to scholarly papers you wrote to get you PhD in English, especially if they touch upon the inaccuracies you found in the OED. I consider this reason enough to determine that you are not inclined to discuss this topic in good faith. Fine with me. I really do not have the time for this anyway; this Monday I have my Systems Development I exam (the fourth exam for my CompSci degree), so most of my time will go into studying today and this weekend. Translation: I just realized that I lost here, but rather than admit it, I'm going to pretend I'm busy and hope this goes away. Jeroen Likud Delenda Est van Baardwijk Adam C. Crackheads Delenda Est Lipscomb [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Richard Baker wrote: I think that the pseudonymity of the Fool is quite reasonable. After all, he or she has a consistent identity and so a coherent reputation that messages can affect. And how can we prevent that someone creates a false ID in one of those free e-mail services, and start sending messages as if it were a real person? Or should we require a phone number and a physical address so that someone can get there and check if every listmember is real? [which would be interesting, if some list member claimed he was living in Iraq or Antartica] Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
At 07:23 04-10-2002 -0500, Adam Lipscomb wrote: Um, no. You appear hell-bent upon reserving for yourself the right to define words the way you *want* to define them. Which, of course, cannot be said about the pro-Israel crowd... Ahh, so it's not *just* the Israelis, but all their friends, too? From the start of this discussion, I have been not been mentioning the Israelis but the pro-Israel crowd as the set of people who IMO misinterpret the meaning of the word anti-Semite. Wow, Jeroen. You sure do build up impressive enemies lists. I have no problem with that. While I think the general pro-Israel crowd is not so much intolerant but merely heavily misguided, the fanatics in that group preach intolerance, and like every civilised human being, I despise intolerance. So, the only people on my enemies list are those that preach intolerance. Back to reality, though: are you or are you not willing to accept that the term anti-Semite is, despite the *apparent* meaning of the term, most commonly used to describe anti-Jewish attitudes? If so, then problem solved. I am not disputing that the term anti-Semite is often *used* to describe anti-Jewish attitudes; I am disputing that this particular meaning is the *correct* meaning. If not, the please explain why you do not acknowledge the definitive source on word usage in the English language. Please attach links to scholarly papers you wrote to get you PhD in English, especially if they touch upon the inaccuracies you found in the OED. Sorry, my PhD in English dates back to my pre-Internet years, so the documents are not available on-line. :-) Jeroen Likud Delenda Est van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Omnia wankerae delenda est? Marvin Long Austin, Texas Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, LLP (Formerly the USA) Two bits, four bits, six bits, a peso. If you're for Zorro, stand up and say so! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
At 09:58 04-10-2002 -0500, Marvin Long wrote: Omnia wankerae delenda est? Care to translate that into English? Jeroen Likud Delenda Est van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, J. van Baardwijk wrote: At 09:58 04-10-2002 -0500, Marvin Long wrote: Omnia wankerae delenda est? Care to translate that into English? I think it's more fun in grammatically incorrect Latin. Marvin Long Austin, Texas Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, LLP (Formerly the USA) Two bits, four bits, six bits, a peso. If you're for Zorro, stand up and say so! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
At 16:36 03-10-2002 -0500, Dan Minette wrote: Let me get this straight. English is a second language for you and you are claiming that the definitive source of English (OED) is wrong and you are right in defining an English word? J. van Baardwijk wrote: I am applying this horrible little thing called logic here. If X = Y, than -X = -Y. The fact that a lot of people accept that X = Y but at the same time believe that -X = -0.5Y does not make their interpretation valid. But your case is flawed as well, Jeroen. You assume that the anti in anti-semite means the opposite of or the negative form of, when in reality it means denial of or enemy of or someone who is against The truth is that words mean whatever they are commonly believed to mean, and that can change over time. The important thing is to make sure that all parties are working with the same set of definitions. -- Matt ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
From: J. van Baardwijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2002 10:49:36 +0200 At 18:56 03-10-2002 -0500, Adam Lipscomb wrote: snip I consider this reason enough to determine that you are not inclined to discuss this topic in good faith. Fine with me. I really do not have the time for this anyway; this Monday I have my Systems Development I exam (the fourth exam for my CompSci degree), so most of my time will go into studying today and this weekend. I know how important the degree is to you. Good luck! I would, of course, like to hear your response to my posts when you're done. We'll still be here when you finish. :) Jon GSV Remember, Windows Blue Screen of Death = Bad :)) _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
At 10:13 04-10-2002 -0700, Matt Grimaldi wrote: But your case is flawed as well, Jeroen. You assume that the anti in anti-semite means the opposite of or the negative form of, when in reality it means denial of or enemy of or someone who is against You have not been paying attention then. I define anti-Semite as a person who hates Semites. It should therefore be quite obvious that, to me, the word anti in anti-Semite means enemy of or someone who is against. Jeroen Likud Delenda Est van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World (NOW WITH APOLOGY! BUY NOW!)
At 09:46 04-10-2002 -0700, Adam Lipscomb wrote: you have apparently decided to use your need to study for an important exam as a pretext for halting your participation in this discussion of of the meaning and origins of the term anti-Semite, That part of your sentence is true... with the primary intent of avoiding having to admit to an incorrect (although understandable, for someone for whom English is not a native language) understanding of the meaning of the term. ...and that part of your sentence is false. There are essentially two reasons to halt my participation: one is the upcoming exam, the other is the fact that this discussion is not going anywhere anyway. Are you willing to accept that the definition of anti-Semite in common usage and general understanding is Jew-hater? I never disputed that Jew-hater is the common usage and general understanding of the word anti-Semite; I dispute that it is the *correct* usage. Jeroen Likud Delenda Est van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
From: J. van Baardwijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2002 11:16:23 +0200 At 01:30 04-10-2002 -0400, Jon Gabriel wrote: :-) What was it you had posted to the list incessantly a few months ago? I'm still waiting for Jeroen to post proof and documentation to these accusations? You'd think I'd remember it better from having seen it a few hundred times. :-) Since you remember that, you will also remember that the person asked to provide proof and answers consistently refused to do so. You will then also remember that pretty much everyone on this list held the opinion that there was nothing wrong with this consistent refusal. Sadly, I really couldn't tell what the rest of the list thought. I started deleting list e-mails en masse when you began maliciously mailbombing the list with the same phrase written over and over and over and over and over and over... well, you get the idea. His actions were childish and immature -- my four-year old niece has better manners than to taunt people, but _you_ didn't dignify yourself either. _Both_ of you clearly showed that you cared less about other people here than satisfying your own egos. I have cited this unfortunate time not as a personal attack, but to point out that _you_ have now been asked to provide proof and answers. You have not yet done so. You are also now making it seem like you have no intention of backing up your statements with documentation. The analogy could an appropriate one. The ball is in your court. I'm perfectly comfortable waiting until after your exam to see you backup your claims with some valid sources. But ignore me and/or post more unsubstantiated claims and your position will still be wrong. And if you remember that, then you will also remember that since that time, the policy of this list is that nobody is required to back any claims with any proof. Now, I may have been deleting e-mails en masse, but for the record, to my knowledge this has not in any way EVER been official policy here on the Brin-L list. I have seen no memo changing the nature of the etiquette guidelines in such a manner. This is a conclusion you drew about the list, and as far as I can tell it applies to only one incident. If you disagree with me, please post the relevant section of the etiquette guidelines that says that '.the policy of this list is that nobody is required to back any claims with any proof' . Otherwise, you're wrong. It's not list policy. Please acknowledge your error publicly or prove I'm wrong by posting the relevant section of the etiquette guidelines. Oh, and by the way, if you feel inclined, I'd really love to see you provide further documentation that the authors and publishers of the eight dictionaries whose definitions were posted to the list are biased and members of the pro-Israel crowd. Certainly in the case of American authors and publishers, such a bias cannot be entirely ruled out. America in general is, after all, very pro-Israel, has a large Jewish community, and is in fact the only friend Israel has in the world. Show me the sources and documentation that back up your claims. Otherwise, your _opinions_ can carry no weight. Jeroen, if you can't prove me wrong, then second-guessing my motives rather than disproving my accuracy is a rather pathetic alternative to admitting your own mistake, wouldn't you say? If you are looking for a something pathetic, read The Fool's post (Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 21:24:58 -0500). Now *that* is pathetic. Who cares about the Fool? My point still stands. You are second-guessing my motives because your arguments can't be backed up with documentation. I invite you to _prove_ me wrong. Jon GSV Stop Dissembling and Document Your Opinions _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
At 17:45 04-10-2002 -0400, Jon Gabriel wrote: And if you remember that, then you will also remember that since that time, the policy of this list is that nobody is required to back any claims with any proof. Now, I may have been deleting e-mails en masse, but for the record, to my knowledge this has not in any way EVER been official policy here on the Brin-L list. I have seen no memo changing the nature of the etiquette guidelines in such a manner. This is a conclusion you drew about the list, and as far as I can tell it applies to only one incident. If you disagree with me, please post the relevant section of the etiquette guidelines that says that '.the policy of this list is that nobody is required to back any claims with any proof' . Otherwise, you're wrong. It's not list policy. Please acknowledge your error publicly or prove I'm wrong by posting the relevant section of the etiquette guidelines. The fact that it is not in the Etiquette Guidelines does not mean it is not list policy. Erik Reuter consistently refused to back his claims with proof. This community did not criticise him for his blatant refusal to provide proof. I have since then repeated my statement on a few occassions, and nobody has ever disputed it. Therefore, the community has given it her silent approval. Nitpick BTW, there is also nothing in the Guidelines that says that claims must be supported by proof. /Nitpick Oh, and by the way, if you feel inclined, I'd really love to see you provide further documentation that the authors and publishers of the eight dictionaries whose definitions were posted to the list are biased and members of the pro-Israel crowd. Certainly in the case of American authors and publishers, such a bias cannot be entirely ruled out. America in general is, after all, very pro-Israel, has a large Jewish community, and is in fact the only friend Israel has in the world. Show me the sources and documentation that back up your claims. I am not saying they *are* biased, I am saying that the possibility can not be ruled out (and have given the reasons why). It is not possible to prove that the *possibility of bias* does or does not exist. Jeroen Likud Delenda Est van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World (NOW WITH APOLOGY! BUY NOW!)
At 14:08 04-10-2002 -0700, Adam Lipscomb wrote: I'm not asking for an L3 post - just a simple explanation as to why you insist your position is the correct one. I have already explained that a few times now. I see no reason to keep repeating myself. Jeroen And now, off to bed van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Are we back to this, again? -Original Message- From: J. van Baardwijk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 03:30 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World At 17:45 04-10-2002 -0400, Jon Gabriel wrote: And if you remember that, then you will also remember that since that time, the policy of this list is that nobody is required to back any claims with any proof. Now, I may have been deleting e-mails en masse, but for the record, to my knowledge this has not in any way EVER been official policy here on the Brin-L list. I have seen no memo changing the nature of the etiquette guidelines in such a manner. This is a conclusion you drew about the list, and as far as I can tell it applies to only one incident. If you disagree with me, please post the relevant section of the etiquette guidelines that says that '.the policy of this list is that nobody is required to back any claims with any proof' . Otherwise, you're wrong. It's not list policy. Please acknowledge your error publicly or prove I'm wrong by posting the relevant section of the etiquette guidelines. The fact that it is not in the Etiquette Guidelines does not mean it is not list policy. Erik Reuter consistently refused to back his claims with proof. This community did not criticise him for his blatant refusal to provide proof. I have since then repeated my statement on a few occassions, and nobody has ever disputed it. Therefore, the community has given it her silent approval. Nitpick BTW, there is also nothing in the Guidelines that says that claims must be supported by proof. /Nitpick Oh, and by the way, if you feel inclined, I'd really love to see you provide further documentation that the authors and publishers of the eight dictionaries whose definitions were posted to the list are biased and members of the pro-Israel crowd. Certainly in the case of American authors and publishers, such a bias cannot be entirely ruled out. America in general is, after all, very pro-Israel, has a large Jewish community, and is in fact the only friend Israel has in the world. Show me the sources and documentation that back up your claims. I am not saying they *are* biased, I am saying that the possibility can not be ruled out (and have given the reasons why). It is not possible to prove that the *possibility of bias* does or does not exist. Jeroen Likud Delenda Est van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
J. van Baardwijk wrote: Just in case I misinterpret the meaning that poster attributes to the word anti-American... Do you mean anti-U.S. or does the term anti-American include Canadians, Mexicans, Brazilians, Argentineans, Peruvians, Cubans etc. etc.? Doug 8^) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Julia Thompson wrote: I think that is a badder thing to do than (...) Speaking of which, you missed one such exception. Shouldn't it be worse, not badder? :) No, it should be ungooder newspeak maru Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
- Original Message - From: Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 6:25 AM Subject: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World Julia Thompson wrote: I think that is a badder thing to do than (...) Speaking of which, you missed one such exception. Shouldn't it be worse, not badder? :) No, it should be ungooder Oh, Alberto, you are about 18 years out of date. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
- Original Message - From: Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 7:51 AM Subject: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World - Original Message - From: Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 6:25 AM Subject: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World Julia Thompson wrote: I think that is a badder thing to do than (...) Speaking of which, you missed one such exception. Shouldn't it be worse, not badder? :) No, it should be ungooder Oh, Alberto, you are about 18 years out of date. Actually, you didn't get it right for 18 years ago, so maybe you didn't mean that. It should have been plus ungood. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Alberto Monteiro wrote: Dan Minette wrote: No, it should be ungooder Oh, Alberto, you are about 18 years out of date. Actually, you didn't get it right for 18 years ago, so maybe you didn't mean that. It should have been plus ungood. No, _plus_ is the prefix for superlatives. double plus good is very, very, good. Alberto Monteiro PS: I didn't get Julia's reply to my message. Maybe it's coming. No, it's not. :) I figure we don't need the OED for silliness, do we? Julia p.s. plus is not the prefix for superlatives, as the superlative is the highest degree of the quality or attribute denoted by the single word, and plus is merely a strengthener. (And under the definition of superlative is something having to do with change-ringing, which is an odd but possibly interesting topic) ;) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
The Fool wrote: From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] And I'm *not* going to shut down my window for the OED online now. :P ) Why would you have to? I've had upwards of 100 browser sessions open at the same time. If I have too many things open at once, I have a much harder time finding the one I want at a given moment. I don't like having more than 10 browser windows open, generally. Just my preference. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Dan Minette wrote: - Original Message - From: Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 8:28 AM Subject: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World Dan Minette wrote: No, it should be ungooder Oh, Alberto, you are about 18 years out of date. Actually, you didn't get it right for 18 years ago, so maybe you didn't mean that. It should have been plus ungood. No, _plus_ is the prefix for superlatives. double plus good is very, very, good. Right. And un is the prefix for negation. So, good is good; bad is ungood; plus good is better; plus ungood is worse; double plus good is best; double plus ungood is worstwell, sorta...it lacks the nuance, but that _is_ the point. :-) They never used triple, did they? Triple is a good one. As in, I triple dog dare you! Julia Different Story Maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Dan Minette wrote: Semite: 1 a : a member of any of a number of peoples of ancient southwestern Asia including the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs b : a descendant of these peoples 2 : a member of a modern people speaking a Semitic language So would that make an Anti-semite someone who detonates upon contact with a Semite? Ooh...that might actually work as a definition. :-) --Matt ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
The Fool wrote: From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Fool wrote: The task bar is resizeable. Yes, it is. I just have a harder time if I have to look through too many similar things to find what I'm wanting. If I could easily redo the icons so that I could tell at a glance that *this* one is the OED and *that* one is the 200K article I'm reading 10-20K at a time and *that other* one is the web search engine, and -- well, I could go on and on and on, but I won't -- the thing is, they all have the same icon, and if I could easily change that so as to be able to tell without having to actually read *text* of any sort to tell which one was which, or which 5 I should read text for, it would be different, but I just don't like having more than about 10 things on the taskbar with the same icon. Do you have a solution to that? If so, I'm interested. The taskbar 'buttons' (for lack of better term) also display the title bar text. By resizing the taskbar, the 'buttons' resize, showing more and more text. The point is, I don't want to have to digest text, I want to be able to look at a non-text graphic that tells me what something is. If I have more than 10 browser windows open, I *have* to look at the text to find what I'm after, and it's not worth having more than 10 open if I have to go to that much effort to find what I want. So unless I have 10 different browser programs installed, or 10 different available icons for the same browser, I don't want to deal with 100 browser windows open. Searching through the text of more than 10 things with identical icons is more trouble than it is worth *to me*. Evidently, you have a different opinion on the subject, which is fine. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Further definitions of the word Antisemitism are listed below. I didnt have access to the OED dictionary online as you need to pay a usage license of US $795! (But William posted one for us anyway. (Thank you) :) ) Heres what I found in a 5 minute search, and while I did remove extra line breaks, I havent edited for content in any other way. Please also take note that the first definition is from the Cambridge International Dictionary of English, a respected British source, which diminishes the argument that British and American English differ on the proper use of the term. Thanks for also posting the info about the words origins from Britannica, Adam. I own a History of Word Origins book, and looked up antisemitism when I got home last night, but its not listed. I would venture to say that none of the sites listed below or in my previous post can accurately be described as Israeli anti-Arab propaganda. I think seven dictionaries (plus the OED from William) should be sufficient evidence that the definition Jeroen posted is wrong /inaccurate. From: http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=anti*1+20 Definition (from Cambridge International Dictionary of English) Anti-Semitism is the strong dislike or cruel and unfair treatment of Jewish people. Anti-Semitism invariably reflects or foreshadows a diseased condition in European politics. From dictionary.com 3 entries found for antisemitism. an·ti-Sem·i·tism (nt-sm-tzm, nt-) n. 1. Hostility toward or prejudice against Jews or Judaism. 2. Discrimination against Jews. Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. Anti-Semitism \An`ti-Semi*tism\, n. Opposition to, or hatred of, Semites, esp. Jews. -- An`ti-Sem\ite, n. -- An`ti-Sem*it\ic, a. Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc. anti-Semitism n : the intense dislike for and prejudice against Jewish people [syn: anti-Semitism] Source: WordNet ® 1.6, © 1997 Princeton University From: http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?search=anti-Semitism anti-Semitism an·ti-Sem·i·tism noun behavior discriminating against Jewish people: policies, views, or actions that harm or discriminate against Jewish people ( disapproving ) an·ti-Sem·ite [noun] Encarta® World English Dictionary [North American Edition] © (P) 2002 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Developed for Microsoft by Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. From: Adam C. Lipscomb [EMAIL PROTECTED] snip From Britannica.com: anti-Semitism Hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious or racial group. The term anti-Semitism was coined in 1879 by the German agitator Wilhelm Marr to designate the anti-Jewish campaigns underway in central Europe at that time. So, as the word was originally coined, its definition is as per the common American usage. snip I think we can determine, then, that by using the term anti-Semite to describe someone, the intent is to portray the target as one who has hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious, ethnic, or racial group. _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Julia Thompson wrote: ... but I just don't like having more than about 10 things on the taskbar with the same icon. Do you have a solution to that? If so, I'm interested. Opera. It uses it's own icons, inside it's own window. So you only have one thing on your taskbar and that is Opera. All the icons inside Opera then have a description of the page you opened. Then again, you cannot read everything using Opera. Some things are really Opera resistent even if you can fool certain pages into believing you are using IE 5. But hey, that is a small inconvenience. Or you can sort all windows horizontal or vertical, when you want one you maximise it. Then when you are done you resize it again to fit into your puzzle. Just two mouse clicks to get everything resorted again and a description at the top of each window and a visual clue as to what is in each window. And then you can combine the two. Using Opera and opening the windows you want inside opera, then sort the windows to get an overview. Just a few of the things I do to keep it organised. Sonja ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Dan Minette wrote: ... you didn't get it right for 18 years ago... Huh, maybe its just me, but I think you should stop e-mailing now, before you make any more mistakes Sonja ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
At 23:30 02-10-2002 -0500, The Fool wrote: I've had upwards of 100 browser sessions open at the same time. Out of curiosity, what kind of activity could possibly require you to have 100+ browser sessions open simultaneously? Jeroen Cybersurfer van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Dan Minette wrote: ... you didn't get it right for 18 years ago... Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten wrote: Huh, maybe its just me, but I think you should stop e-mailing now, before you make any more mistakes No, that makes sense...try reading the sentence as: ... you didn't get it right for _1984_ -- Matt ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Jon Gabriel wrote: Further definitions of the word Antisemitism are listed below. I didnt have access to the OED dictionary online as you need to pay a usage license of US $795! (But William posted one for us anyway. (Thank you) :) ) Hey, that wasn't William who posted from the OED. William posted from Chambers 20th Century Dictionary. *I* posted from the OED. I'd really appreciate your properly acknowledging who did what if you're going to heap praise or scorn, especially if I am the initiator of the action resulting in said praise or scorn. (More fur flies due to misattribution than any other single cause some days, I've noticed) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Matt Grimaldi wrote: Dan Minette wrote: ... you didn't get it right for 18 years ago... Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten wrote: Huh, maybe its just me, but I think you should stop e-mailing now, before you make any more mistakes No, that makes sense...try reading the sentence as: ... you didn't get it right for _1984_ Ah like that. I get it. I'll retract my statement then and go to bed to get some much needed sleep. yawn, stretch Sonja ...so fuzzy that it is slowly becoming fluffy. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2002 13:29:39 -0500 Jon Gabriel wrote: Further definitions of the word Antisemitism are listed below. I didnt have access to the OED dictionary online as you need to pay a usage license of US $795! (But William posted one for us anyway. (Thank you) :) ) Hey, that wasn't William who posted from the OED. William posted from Chambers 20th Century Dictionary. *I* posted from the OED. I'd really appreciate your properly acknowledging who did what if you're going to heap praise or scorn, especially if I am the initiator of the action resulting in said praise or scorn. *hangs head in shame* I usually pride myself on accuracy, too! My sincerest, deepest, most heartfelt apologies. Thank you very much for posting from the OED. :) In my defense: I have some 400+ unread Brin-L e-mails, 4500+ unread Culture e-mails and 80+ personal e-mails in my mailbox and I'm sifting through them very, very slowly. Those I've read are beginning to blur into a morass of witty (and mindnumbing) text and pictures. I'm beginning to feel like a poster boy for that 'so far behind I'll never die' bumper sticker. (More fur flies due to misattribution than any other single cause some days, I've noticed) Are you playing cat volleyball again? :-) (Well, the only other question I could think to ask was if you were furry, and somehow it sounded inappropriate.) :-) Jon _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Jon Gabriel wrote: From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2002 13:29:39 -0500 (More fur flies due to misattribution than any other single cause some days, I've noticed) Are you playing cat volleyball again? :-) No, the only thing we did with a cat today was look at her, and let her come as close as she wanted. I think it was a high point for Sammy, he doesn't get to see cats very often. (The cat's name is Jane.) Now, dog hockey, on the other hand ;) (You know -- dog runs on the smooth floor, dog tries to make a turn, dog skids and either hits the wall or goes through a doorway, dog eventually learns not to run on that surface most of the time) (Well, the only other question I could think to ask was if you were furry, and somehow it sounded inappropriate.) :-) If I'm furry, that's not really any of your business. :) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
At 17:40 02-10-2002 -0400, Jon Gabriel wrote: Since both the Miriam Webster and American Heritage dictionaries are accepted as one of the authoritative sources for spelling and definitions of English, your definition of antisemitism as listed in your message (quoted above) is incorrect. In modern parlance, indeed in proper English usage antisemitism is defined as someone who is anti-Jew, not anti-Jew and anti-Arab. So, in reference to your statement: It is one of the major flaws in the logic of the fanatically-pro-Israel crowd. This is not a flaw in their logic. They are using the word properly and you are not. Sorry to disappoint you, but it is the other way around. If both Jews and Arabs are Semitic, than *by definition* the word anti-Semitic must mean anti-Jew *and* anti-Arab -- just like anti-American means hatred of anything American and not only hatred of anything Texan. What the pro-Israel crowd is doing, is ignoring part of the meaning of the word because it does not suit their needs. But then, they really have no choice -- if they were to admit that anti-Semite also means anti-Arab, they would end up having to admit that their logic is fatally flawed. Jeroen Likud Delenda Est van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2002 15:03:24 -0500 Jon Gabriel wrote: From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2002 13:29:39 -0500 (More fur flies due to misattribution than any other single cause some days, I've noticed) Are you playing cat volleyball again? :-) No, the only thing we did with a cat today was look at her, and let her come as close as she wanted. I think it was a high point for Sammy, he doesn't get to see cats very often. (The cat's name is Jane.) I was kidding, of course. :) I know Sammy's probably too young for this, but my 6-year old niece just *loves* a pet store we know in Boston that you can go to pet dogs and cats for sale. We keep a close eye on her to make sure she doesn't lose a finger. She's annoyed with us at the moment because we are running a cat and dog-free house. (First time in my life I've been totally without pets.) I get the feeling we weren't the primary reason she would get excited about visiting. :-) Now, dog hockey, on the other hand ;) (You know -- dog runs on the smooth floor, dog tries to make a turn, dog skids and either hits the wall or goes through a doorway, dog eventually learns not to run on that surface most of the time) My Akita *never* did that. (120+ lb dog hitting the walls would have been just awful I think.) But my cats would rev themselves up and go flying uncontrollably across the kitchen and living room floors stopping only when they hit something or someone. :) Very funny to watch, but you kinda wince when they collide suddenly with something that looks hard. (Well, the only other question I could think to ask was if you were furry, and somehow it sounded inappropriate.) :-) If I'm furry, that's not really any of your business. :) I wasn't askin'! Definitely would be TMI, thanks. :) *grin* Jon _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
- Original Message - From: J. van Baardwijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 3:16 PM Subject: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World Sorry to disappoint you, but it is the other way around. If both Jews and Arabs are Semitic, than *by definition* the word anti-Semitic must mean anti-Jew *and* anti-Arab -- just like anti-American means hatred of anything American and not only hatred of anything Texan. What the pro-Israel crowd is doing, is ignoring part of the meaning of the word because it does not suit their needs. Let me get this straight. English is a second language for you and you are claiming that the definitive source of English (OED) is wrong and you are right in defining an English word? So, do you also claim that the catwalk on an oil rig is misdefined because cats don't walk on it; software is misdefined because it actually isn't soft or a ware, a miser is not a tightwad because he isn't drunk? Or a photograph is not a snapshot because there is no gun involved? If you study the etomology of words, you can see how words evolve and are defined through usage. Dan M. But then, they really have no choice -- if they were to admit that anti-Semite also means anti-Arab, they would end up having to admit that their logic is fatally flawed. Jeroen Likud Delenda Est van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
- Original Message - From: J. van Baardwijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 5:24 PM Subject: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World The authority on this is called plain and simple logic. If X equals Y, then -X equals -Y. If X equals Y, then -X does not equal -0.5Y. So, anti-matter has negative mass? Out of curiosity, have you ever taken a course in logic? I don't think that word means what you think it does. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
At 16:36 03-10-2002 -0500, Dan Minette wrote: Let me get this straight. English is a second language for you and you are claiming that the definitive source of English (OED) is wrong and you are right in defining an English word? I am applying this horrible little thing called logic here. If X = Y, than -X = -Y. The fact that a lot of people accept that X = Y but at the same time believe that -X = -0.5Y does not make their interpretation valid. So, do you also claim that the catwalk on an oil rig is misdefined because cats don't walk on it; software is misdefined because it actually isn't soft or a ware, a miser is not a tightwad because he isn't drunk? Or a photograph is not a snapshot because there is no gun involved? Your analogy is flawed. While there is an opposing word for Semite (the word anti-Semite), there is no such thing as anti-catwalk, anti-software or anti-photograph. Jeroen Likud Delenda Est van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
At 17:30 03-10-2002 -0500, Dan Minette wrote: The authority on this is called plain and simple logic. If X equals Y, then -X equals -Y. If X equals Y, then -X does not equal -0.5Y. So, anti-matter has negative mass? Out of curiosity, have you ever taken a course in logic? I don't think that word means what you think it does. Then what do you call the reasoning if X = Y, then -X = -Y? Illogical? Jeroen Fuzzy Logic van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
- Original Message - From: J. van Baardwijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 5:39 PM Subject: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World At 17:30 03-10-2002 -0500, Dan Minette wrote: The authority on this is called plain and simple logic. If X equals Y, then -X equals -Y. If X equals Y, then -X does not equal -0.5Y. So, anti-matter has negative mass? Out of curiosity, have you ever taken a course in logic? I don't think that word means what you think it does. Then what do you call the reasoning if X = Y, then -X = -Y? Illogical? No, I'd say its a statement that may be true or false, depending on the formal system it is applied to. It depends on what you substitute for =, -, X, and Y. A language is an interesting thing, the meaning of words do not always follow the general rules. Assuming that they must is ignoring data in favor of one's own theorizing. Words mean what the speakers of a language agree they mean, not what you think they mean. The fact that the compound word anti-Semite means something different than one would expect by simply following the usual rules of the language to derive meaning is not surprising in English. English is full of exceptions to the rules; one must just know them. Your argument would be valid iff you could prove that English is not a valid language. (The iff is not a typo it is a logical term for if and only if) Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Jeroen wrote: At 17:24 03-10-2002 -0400, Jon Gabriel wrote: I have presented eight valid sources (most accepted **internationally** in their fields) that explain that proper usage of a particular word in English is not what you, in your opinion, consider the 'logical' definition of it to be. You want me to accept that your postulated argument is more valid than the one I've proven? Show me the authorities and source materials that agree with you. The authority on this is called plain and simple logic. If X equals Y, then -X equals -Y. If X equals Y, then -X does not equal -0.5Y. A lot of people choose (intentionally or unintentionally) to misinterpret the actual meaning of the word anti-Semite (they believe that X equals Y, but -X does not equal -Y). But the fact that there are a lot of them does not make their misinterpretation the new and correct meaning. It's not misinterpretation, Jeroen. It's using a word AS IT IS DEFINED BY THE RECOGNIZED AUTHORITY ON ETYMOLOGY AND USAGE - the Oxford English Dictionary. Common usage also applies - Dan's reply to you pointed out several other words in English that mean something other than a literal reading of their components would suggest. It may seem counterintuitive, but that's the way the English language works. Otherwise you're wrong, and I've proved my point. You have not proven me wrong. All you have essentially done is state that while Semite refers to both Jews and Arabs, the opposite of the word (anti-Semite) does not correspond with the opposite meaning of the word (hatred of Jews and Arabs). Again, the fact that a lot of people choose to misinterpet the meaning of a word does not make their interpretation valid. There is no misinterpretation - the commonly understood meaning of anti-Semite is one who harbors hostile feelings towards Jews either as a religious sect or an ethnic group. But you have proven something: my other point. In my previous post I wrote: If both Jews and Arabs are Semitic, than *by definition* the word anti-Semitic must mean anti-Jew *and* anti-Arab -- just like anti-American means hatred of anything American and not only hatred of anything Texan. What the pro-Israel crowd is doing, is ignoring part of the meaning of the word because it does not suit their needs. But then, they really have no choice -- if they were to admit that anti-Semite also means anti-Arab, they would end up having to admit that their logic is fatally flawed. You show precisely the behaviour I described for the pro-Israel crowd. Your Israel-related posts from earlier this year show that you are in fact part of that crowd. So, you have a very good reason for your (mis)interpretation of the word anti-Semite -- admitting that your interpretation of the word is wrong would seriously undermine the most favourite tactic of said population group. Um, no. You appear hell-bent upon reserving for yourself the right to define words the way you *want* to define them. I consider this reason enough to determine that you are not inclined to discuss this topic in good faith. Jeroen Likud Delenda Est van Baardwijk Adam C. Foolishness Delenda Est Lipscomb [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
--- Dan Minette wrote: snip Out of curiosity, have you ever taken a course in logic? I don't think that word means what you think it does. Perhaps I am udderly grasping at straws, but maybe you should go back to the beginning?! We aren't all intellectual giants. Cliffs of Insanity Maru __ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
- Original Message - From: J. van Baardwijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 3:16 PM Subject: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World At 17:40 02-10-2002 -0400, Jon Gabriel wrote: Since both the Miriam Webster and American Heritage dictionaries are accepted as one of the authoritative sources for spelling and definitions of English, your definition of antisemitism as listed in your message (quoted above) is incorrect. In modern parlance, indeed in proper English usage antisemitism is defined as someone who is anti-Jew, not anti-Jew and anti-Arab. So, in reference to your statement: It is one of the major flaws in the logic of the fanatically-pro-Israel crowd. This is not a flaw in their logic. They are using the word properly and you are not. Sorry to disappoint you, but it is the other way around. If both Jews and Arabs are Semitic, than *by definition* the word anti-Semitic must mean anti-Jew *and* anti-Arab -- just like anti-American means hatred of anything American and not only hatred of anything Texan. What the pro-Israel crowd is doing, is ignoring part of the meaning of the word because it does not suit their needs. But then, they really have no choice -- if they were to admit that anti-Semite also means anti-Arab, they would end up having to admit that their logic is fatally flawed. I think you need to look up the word sophistry. Its what you are doing in any case. xponent Spin Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
- Original Message - From: J. van Baardwijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 5:34 PM Subject: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World At 16:36 03-10-2002 -0500, Dan Minette wrote: Let me get this straight. English is a second language for you and you are claiming that the definitive source of English (OED) is wrong and you are right in defining an English word? I am applying this horrible little thing called logic here. If X = Y, than -X = -Y. The fact that a lot of people accept that X = Y but at the same time believe that -X = -0.5Y does not make their interpretation valid. So, do you also claim that the catwalk on an oil rig is misdefined because cats don't walk on it; software is misdefined because it actually isn't soft or a ware, a miser is not a tightwad because he isn't drunk? Or a photograph is not a snapshot because there is no gun involved? Your analogy is flawed. While there is an opposing word for Semite (the word anti-Semite), there is no such thing as anti-catwalk, anti-software or anti-photograph. Nope! Your logic is flawed. There is no language (spoken language) on earth that conforms to mathematical precision. Definitions are what they are, no matter how imprecise or nonsensical they seem to be. xponent Words Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
From: J. van Baardwijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sorry to disappoint you, but it is the other way around. If both Jews and Arabs are Semitic, than *by definition* the word anti-Semitic must mean anti-Jew *and* anti-Arab -- just like anti-American means hatred of anything American and not only hatred of anything Texan. What the pro-Israel crowd is doing, is ignoring part of the meaning of the word because it does not suit their needs. So now you are redfining the english language, even after someone has posted, the one and only definitive word meaning and usage from the unabridged Oxford English Dictionary. This is...Pathetic. Are you going to deny the holocaust next? ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Robert Seeberger wrote: I think you need to look up the word sophistry. Its what you are doing in any case. If you want the OED definition, ask. :) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
From: J. van Baardwijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2002 00:24:56 +0200 At 17:24 03-10-2002 -0400, Jon Gabriel wrote: Jeroen, I have presented eight valid sources (most accepted **internationally** in their fields) that explain that proper usage of a particular word in English is not what you, in your opinion, consider the 'logical' definition of it to be. You want me to accept that your postulated argument is more valid than the one I've proven? Show me the authorities and source materials that agree with you. The authority on this is called plain and simple logic. No. This is a non-sequitur. I have already posted 8 versions of proof from rather impressive (IMO) authorities that say that the word's modern English usage does not correspond to what _you think_ should be it's logical definition. The onus is now upon you to disprove what I have posted using **valid _sources_ from internationally recognized authorities on the English language.** I'd appreciate it if you would read the previous sentence again, carefully. Please don't make me repeat myself. You already know that you need to back up your opinion with documentation from a valid authority. You've shown previously onlist that your skills at dissembling are good enough that I shouldn't have to waste my time repeating myself. When you show me proof from an internationally recognized authority that your original argument is valid and can be applied to modern English language usage I'll assume you're serious about continuing this discussion. Show me the sources. Show me the documentation. Otherwise, your argument, and by extension you, are wrong. :-) What was it you had posted to the list incessantly a few months ago? I'm still waiting for Jeroen to post proof and documentation to these accusations? You'd think I'd remember it better from having seen it a few hundred times. :-) Oh, and by the way, if you feel inclined, I'd really love to see you provide further documentation that the authors and publishers of the eight dictionaries whose definitions were posted to the list are biased and members of the pro-Israel crowd. I did interpret that correctly, didn't I? You show precisely the behaviour I described for the pro-Israel crowd. Your Israel-related posts from earlier this year show that you are in fact part of that crowd. So, you have a very good reason for your (mis)interpretation of the word anti-Semite -- admitting that your interpretation of the word is wrong would seriously undermine the most favourite tactic of said population group. Jeroen, if you can't prove me wrong, then second-guessing my motives rather than disproving my accuracy is a rather pathetic alternative to admitting your own mistake, wouldn't you say? Jon _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Jeroen wrote: Thanks for trying, Matt, but I fear you are fighting a lost battle here. It is the default tactic of the fanatically-pro-Israel crowd to label any criticism of anything Israel-related anti-Semitic -- be it criticism of the country itself, its regime, its politics, its population, its religion or its canned-pineapple export business. It is their way of trying to silence those who disagree with them. They just do not know any better (and I doubt it will change for the better anytime soon). The Fool is wrong anyway with his accusation. It is well known that I am on the Arab side of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict; As Arabs are also Semites, I cannot possibly be anti-Semitic (because then I would have to be for and against the Arabs at the same time, which is by definition impossible). It is one of the major flaws in the logic of the fanatically-pro-Israel crowd. I haven't had time to read the rest of the posts on this topic. Forgive me if this has been posted already. (Although I doubt it has.) Jeroen, you've stated onlist before about how your English language skills reflect that you are not a native English speaker. Allow me to correct your misinterpretation of the word antisemitism by presenting some valid source material: From Miriam Webster's online dictionary: (www.m-w.com) One entry found for anti-Semitism. Main Entry: an·ti-Sem·i·tism Pronunciation: an-ti-'se-m-ti-zm, an-tI- Function: noun Date: 1882 : hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious, ethnic, or racial group - an·ti-Se·mit·ic /-s-'mi-tik/ adjective - an·ti-Sem·ite /-'se-mIt/ noun The American Heritage dictionary, which I have on my desk at work lists the following definitions for antisemitism: n. 1. Hostility toward or prejudice against Jews or Judaism. 2. Discrimination against Jews. The American Heritage dictionary may have an online site... I just don't have time to check right now. Since both the Miriam Webster and American Heritage dictionaries are accepted as one of the authoritative sources for spelling and definitions of English, your definition of antisemitism as listed in your message (quoted above) is incorrect. In modern parlance, indeed in proper English usage antisemitism is defined as someone who is anti-Jew, not anti-Jew and anti-Arab. So, in reference to your statement: It is one of the major flaws in the logic of the fanatically-pro-Israel crowd. This is not a flaw in their logic. They are using the word properly and you are not. I hope this clears things up. Jon _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
on 3/10/02 2:00 am, Robert Seeberger at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We obviously use different definitions in the Old World. Nope, you use more sophistry in the old world. Your definition of anti-semite is virtually the same as ours. Yet you *choose* to add definitions of other terms into the mix in order to justify your prejudices. It seems more likely you choose to remove them. (Those prejudices are not necessarily anti-semitism BTW) You will notice that no one has brought forth a definition that defines anti-semite as a hater of middle eastern people. Why not use a different term then? That is because the term anti-semite has a specific definition that is derived, not from dictionary use, but from language use over a very long period of time. You just dont see the term used in any other way. I already quoted a dictionary. -- William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
on 3/10/02 4:22 am, Adam C. Lipscomb at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: William Goodall wrote: on 3/10/02 2:00 am, Robert Seeberger at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Your definition of anti-semite is virtually the same as ours. Yet you *choose* to add definitions of other terms into the mix in order to justify your prejudices. It seems more likely you choose to remove them. From Britannica.com: anti-Semitism Hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious or racial group. The term anti-Semitism was coined in 1879 by the German agitator Wilhelm Marr to designate the anti-Jewish campaigns underway in central Europe at that time. So, as the word was originally coined, its definition is as per the common American usage. Despite the name, Britannica is a US encyclopaedia. So the fact that it gives the US usage of the word does not add any light at all to the argument. -- William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
on 3/10/02 4:29 am, Dan Minette at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You looked up Semite, not anti-Semitic. I looked up anti-Semitic. I quoted the definition Anti-Semite a hater of Semites, esp. Jews, or of their influence. - adj. Anti-Semitic. - n. So, I'd be interested to see definitions of anti-Semitism from the same dictionary you got your definition of Semite. ? -- William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
- Original Message - From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: BRIN-L [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 10:03 PM Subject: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World on 3/10/02 2:00 am, Robert Seeberger at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We obviously use different definitions in the Old World. Nope, you use more sophistry in the old world. Your definition of anti-semite is virtually the same as ours. Yet you *choose* to add definitions of other terms into the mix in order to justify your prejudices. It seems more likely you choose to remove them. (Those prejudices are not necessarily anti-semitism BTW) You will notice that no one has brought forth a definition that defines anti-semite as a hater of middle eastern people. Why not use a different term then? That is because the term anti-semite has a specific definition that is derived, not from dictionary use, but from language use over a very long period of time. You just dont see the term used in any other way. I already quoted a dictionary. One that specified Jews and no one else specificly. xponent I Can Read Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
- Original Message - From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 10:57 PM Subject: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World Dan Minette wrote: Look up anti-Semitic, not Semite. Or, are you arguing that English is a language that doesn't have exceptions to the rules. I think that is a badder thing to do than assuming that there are many rule exceptions in English that are still part of the language. Speaking of which, you missed one such exception. Shouldn't it be worse, not badder? :) By golly, I think you are right. I am embarasser than you can imagine. :-) Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
William T Goodall wrote: Despite the name, Britannica is a US encyclopaedia. So the fact that it gives the US usage of the word does not add any light at all to the argument. Is the Oxford English Dictionary a US dictionary? I believe it is a British dictionary. (Please correct me if I am wrong.) The OED definition specifically states that anti-Semitism is theory, action, or practice directed against the Jews. Nothing is said about widening the scope to groups beyond the Jews in the OED. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
William Goodall wrote: on 3/10/02 4:22 am, Adam C. Lipscomb at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From Britannica.com: anti-Semitism Hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious or racial group. The term anti-Semitism was coined in 1879 by the German agitator Wilhelm Marr to designate the anti-Jewish campaigns underway in central Europe at that time. So, as the word was originally coined, its definition is as per the common American usage. Despite the name, Britannica is a US encyclopaedia. So the fact that it gives the US usage of the word does not add any light at all to the argument. Please reread the quote I posted above. I don't think you were paying attention. I'll restate it: The term anti-Semitism was coined in 1879 by the German agitator Wilhelm Marr to designate the anti-Jewish campaigns underway in central Europe at that time. I think that sheds a tremendous amount of light upon the argument - it gives the origin of the term, and the meaning of the term *as it is most commonly used*. Adam C. Lipscomb [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Julia wrote: William T Goodall wrote: Despite the name, Britannica is a US encyclopaedia. So the fact that it gives the US usage of the word does not add any light at all to the argument. Is the Oxford English Dictionary a US dictionary? I believe it is a British dictionary. (Please correct me if I am wrong.) The OED definition specifically states that anti-Semitism is theory, action, or practice directed against the Jews. Nothing is said about widening the scope to groups beyond the Jews in the OED. The OED is British (although one of its most prolific early contributors was an expatriate American locked up in a British asylum). I'd call it THE definitive source on origins and definitions for word in the English language. Adam C. Lipscomb [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dan Minette wrote: From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dan Minette wrote: Look up anti-Semitic, not Semite. Or, are you arguing that English is a language that doesn't have exceptions to the rules. I think that is a badder thing to do than assuming that there are many rule exceptions in English that are still part of the language. Speaking of which, you missed one such exception. Shouldn't it be worse, not badder? :) By golly, I think you are right. I am embarasser than you can imagine. :-) Shouldn't that be embarrasseder? Embarrasser doesn't make sense, while embarrasseder would. (Of course, it's more embarrassed. And you dropped an r. And I'm *not* going to shut down my window for the OED online now. :P ) Why would you have to? I've had upwards of 100 browser sessions open at the same time. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Horses, was Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Reggie Bautista wrote: When I was a kid, we had a Tennessee Walker (along with a couple of other horses). One of my brothers who was 5'8 at the time (a little under 2 meters, Alberto :-) Actually, it's a *lot* under 2 meters. ;-) Two meters is almost 6 feet, 7 inches, which is pretty freakin' tall, even to me... (I'm 6'3 or a mere 190 or so cm) :-) __ Steve Sloan . Huntsville, Alabama = [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brin-L list pages ... http://www.sloan3d.com/brinl Chmeee's 3D Objects http://www.sloan3d.com/chmeee 3D and Drawing Galleries .. http://www.sloansteady.com Software Science Fiction, Science, and Computer Links Science fiction scans . http://www.sloan3d.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Horses, was Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Deborah Harrell wrote: There are Belgian teams that pull beer wagons in parades here (Miller, I think); at the last Colorado State Fair I went to, there was a draft horse pull: no whip or rein-slapping allowed, just verbal commands. The winning Belgians' performance was impressive: at the driver's quiet and Set... the horses rocked back onto their quarters; at ..HUP! they slammed into their collars as one, and didn't stop until the sledge crossed the line. (They also did plowing and lumber work the rest of the year.) Ooo, I love watching horse-pulling competitions (or hoss-pullin', as I heard it in Rockingham Co., NH). The horses that compete seem to really enjoy doing a good job, which is always enjoyable to see. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Tequila Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
At 19:06 26-09-2002 -0400, Kevin Tarr wrote: My cat's name is cat. His breath smells like cat food. Better his breath than yours... :-) Jeroen Silly Mode van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Horses, was Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Deborah Harrell wrote: --- Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten wrote: Deborah Harrell wrote: (The Friesian team had both elegance and biggerness; that's the breed of (usually black) horse popularized in America by the movie 'Ladyhawke.') nitpick If it ain't black it ain't as black as some people's soul it ain't a Friesian Horse (sp?). Unless you mean the extremely small white markings that are grudgingly allowed in the species. /nitpick No, haven't seen any with stars or blazes, but this particular team was _very dark_ chocolate brown - they told me purebred, but perhaps they were crossbreds. The latter are becoming more popular with the dressage and sporthorse set. Here are a couple of pix (the show looks a bit over the top; but if you at all like horses I highly recommend Cheval Theatre by the 'Cirque de Soleil' (sp?) folks): http://www.worldofdancinghorses.com/horses.html (I've seen it spelled Friesian, Freisian and Fresian.) I'm amazed. I wasn't thinking about anything as blazing as a star or blazes or something. Just a few white hairs on the fetlocks, stuff like that, so it isn't a pure black. From the Friesian Horse Studbook homepage http://www.fps-studbook.com/ Its black colour, long heavy mane and conspicuous fetlocks are typical of this trusty steed. Its friendly but lively character, as well as its intelligence and eagerness to learn make it possible to use the Friesian horse for many applications. Not only have they been used as coach horses, driving and show driving horses and riding horses, but they are also perfect for dressage, circuses and recreational riding. So you can understand that I'm very amazed they let that golden one in the book. I loved the pics btw. Sonja GCU I used to be a horse girl. Can you tell? ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Horses, was Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
--- Sonja wrote: Deborah wrote: snip this particular team was _very dark_ chocolate brown - they told me purebred, but perhaps they were crossbreds. The latter are becoming more popular with the dressage and sporthorse set. Here are a couple of pix (the show looks a bit over the top; but if you at all like horses I highly recommend Cheval Theatre by the 'Cirque de Soleil' (sp?) folks): http://www.worldofdancinghorses.com/horses.html (I've seen it spelled Friesian, Freisian and Fresian.) I'm amazed. I wasn't thinking about anything as blazing as a star or blazes or something. Just a few white hairs on the fetlocks, stuff like that, so it isn't a pure black. From the Friesian Horse Studbook homepage http://www.fps-studbook.com/ Its black colour, long heavy mane and conspicuous fetlocks are typical of this trusty steed. Its friendly but lively character, as well as its intelligence and eagerness to learn make it possible to use the Friesian horse for many applications. Not only have they been used as coach horses, driving and show driving horses and riding horses, but they are also perfect for dressage, circuses and recreational riding. One of the moments I loved best at a recent Horse Expo was when 2 Friesians were turned loose in the arena - ah, so beautiful! And it's one of the breeds that has 'presence' just standing around. Our farrier has worked with some and says they have wonderful temperaments. So you can understand that I'm very amazed they let that golden one in the book. Here, some of the 'color breeds' (Paint and Appaloosa) allow solid-colored 'breeding stock' status, but I think it's silly to call a horse with no spots an Appie. :P I loved the pics btw. Sonja GCU I used to be a horse girl. Can you tell? The more, the merrier! :D GSV Yee-haw! __ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Intellectual output from the Arab World
-Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: The Fool [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Verzonden: donderdag 26 september 2002 00:06 Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Onderwerp: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World It's stupid because, it gives up the ability to have direct access to the stored messages, they have to be parsed sequentially every time they have to be accessed, which is a severe net loss in computer processing time, etc. That would have been a problem 20 years ago, but with the speed and computing power of current computer systems, you would need to have an extremely large file before you notice any dramatic net loss in computer processing time. Jeroen Time is relative, anyway van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Intellectual output from the Arab World
-Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: The Fool [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Verzonden: donderdag 26 september 2002 01:09 Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Onderwerp: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World All the tequila I've ever tried tasted like spiced dog piss. Do I even want to know how you got to learn the flavour of dog piss? Nah, probably not... GRIN Jeroen Good Question van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, Adam C. Lipscomb wrote: Marvin wrote: Satan flows through me all the time, but only after I've consumed a coupla dozen stuffed jalapenos and half a case of Lone Star. That's not Satan - that's cheap-ass beer. Strangely enough, Lone Star is some of the best cheap-ass (read: American yellow lager-style) beer I've ever had. It can't compete with a good microbrew or craft-brew, but it beats the heck outta Bud/Coors/Miller/etc. And it is definitely cheap. Not that I'm going to give up my Guinness or Arrogant Bastard Ale, mind you. But a Lone Star is damn good with a plate of BBQ (and some jalapenos). Marvin Long Austin, Texas Two bits, four bits, six bits, a peso. If you're for Zorro, stand up and say so! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Tequila Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Baardwijk, J. van DTO/SLWPD/RZO/BOZO wrote: -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: The Fool [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Verzonden: donderdag 26 september 2002 01:09 Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Onderwerp: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World All the tequila I've ever tried tasted like spiced dog piss. Do I even want to know how you got to learn the flavour of dog piss? Nah, probably not... GRIN Jeroen Good Question van Baardwijk See, I'm wondering if our Fool is familiar with the *smell* of dog piss and extrapolated the taste from that. I heard of someone complaining about a meal they had once, that they claimed tastes like a wet dog smells. Although there are worse smells associated with dogs Julia who doesn't drink tequila unless it's mixed with a bunch of other margarita ingredients into, well, a margarita (rocks, salt preferred, although the purple margarita at Baby Acapulco was good in a very different sort of way, and maybe that doesn't use tequila anyway) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Tequila Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Dan wrote: Well, I was thinking about worse than that. Wet dog that rolled in stuff after getting wet. :-) Like, say, the way Houston smells? *grin* Adam C. Lipscomb [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your reality, sir, is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever. -- Baron Karl Friedrich Hieronymous von Munchausen ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
- Original Message - From: The Fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 1:25 PM Subject: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World From: Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: The Arch Villain I will ridicule whomever I please whenever I please. The attitude behind this statement is part of the reason the world is in the shape its in. It also shows a lack of self discipline, little regard for others, and an astounding amount of social ineptness. Place that line into a work of fiction and it is inevitably the words of a villian. A good person would never seriously utter such words. I, _Like_ villians. What is a story without a good villain? I even root for some villians. Some people are deserving of being ridiculed. In that Sir, you are wrong. There are some people who deserve to be ignored, but there is no justification for ridicule. A good natured ribbing between friends is quite alright, but ridicule that stems from acrimony is simply abuse. It is apparent to me Sir, that you have issues. And issues are the cooties of the 21st century. xponent Robs Famous Cootie Quote Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
The Fool wrote: Some people are deserving of being ridiculed. Rob wrote: In that Sir, you are wrong. There are some people who deserve to be ignored, but there is no justification for ridicule. A good natured ribbing between friends is quite alright, but ridicule that stems from acrimony is simply abuse. It is apparent to me Sir, that you have issues. And issues are the cooties of the 21st century. Ahhh, let 'im go. Remember - if he wants to dish it out, he'll have to take it. Besides, he might be your only hope when the Amish Black Helicopter Anti-Privacy Windows Junta takes over and strips us all of our privacy before selling our DNA to alien sex ranchers. Adam C. Lipscomb [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your reality, sir, is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever. -- Baron Karl Friedrich Hieronymous von Munchausen ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
From: Baardwijk, J. van DTO/SLWPD/RZO/BOZO [EMAIL PROTECTED] Van: The Fool [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] It's stupid because, it gives up the ability to have direct access to the stored messages, they have to be parsed sequentially every time they have to be accessed, which is a severe net loss in computer processing time, etc. That would have been a problem 20 years ago, but with the speed and computing power of current computer systems, you would need to have an extremely large file before you notice any dramatic net loss in computer processing time. I have 3 messages in my mailbox since I last reset it. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Tequila Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
- Original Message - From: Adam C. Lipscomb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 6:28 PM Subject: Re: Tequila Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World Dan wrote: Well, I was thinking about worse than that. Wet dog that rolled in stuff after getting wet. :-) Like, say, the way Houston smells? *grin* According to the EPA, there are 6 measures of air pollution. Houston's violation was on only one measure; ground-level ozone. In 1999 and 2000 it was higher than other cities on this one measure, and for the first time higher than Los Angeles. However, there are 5 other measures of air pollution, and several cities (including Los Angeles) violate at least 2 of these. http://www.houston.org/thefacts.htm Houston's air violates only one of the EPA's six criteria pollutant standards -- ozone. Nine other cities violate two or three of the EPA's pollutant standards. Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency According to the EPA, there are five regions that had worse overall air quality in 1999 than Houston as measured by the EPA's Air Quality Index. Leading the pack is Riverside, California with 93 days in which the Air Quality Index exceeded 100. Bakersfield at 88 days and Fresno at 81 were next highest then Atlanta with 61 days, followed by Knoxville with 59 days. Houston was sixth with 50 days. Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m1282/13_52/63173670/p1/article.jhtml Anyone who claims that Houston's smog problems are equal to or worse than L.A.'s is misinformed, says Kay Jones, a former EPA official who now consults on air quality. http://www.dallasnews.com/texas_southwest/STORY.e9eb444f2b.b0.af.0.a4.cccba. html In some ways, calling Houston America's smoggiest city misrepresented the relative quality of air in the two cities. Los Angeles' air is worse than Houston's in other categories. But ozone is the primary pollutant of concern and therefore gets more attention, officials said. xponent Neener Neener Neener Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Tequila Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
--- Horn, John wrote: snippage I'm not sure anything smells worse than wet dog. Except maybe a very dirty wet dog. Try the cleaning the kennels of working sled dogs... _that_ will curl your nose hairs! (It's the very high protein diet. Anyone who's tried the Atkins or similar high-protein diet should have had a similar experience... :P) (Can you tell I'm a cat person?) Proof of good taste, dear sir! But Dogs Do Provide Comic Relief Maru __ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Extremely bad dog-related smells Re: Tequila Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
From: Adam C. Lipscomb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Like boxes of sh*t in your house? Get a cat. True. But it's in a little covered box down in the basement. Some how I'd rather deal with that a couple of times a week than everytime I walk my dog. To each their own... - jmh ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
--- Russell Sherman wrote: snip Do you answer all questions with Zen-koan-esque irrelevancy? -Russell, who doesn't think Zen-koan-esque is a word, but it should be I like it! It's certainly more elegant than _my_ word invention of the day: 'biggerness' - having the quality of being bigger than; I actually used that in a phone conversation today. Sure they're small [said of Welsh ponies], but biggerness isn't everything in driving competitions! (The Friesian team had both elegance and biggerness; that's the breed of (usually black) horse popularized in America by the movie 'Ladyhawke.') Debbi who is trying to get through the backlog of posts I wanted to comment on or read again __ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
From: Russell Sherman [EMAIL PROTECTED] So it not ok to say anything baa-ad about the moronic twit who became president, but it _is_ ok to malign me. Just another example of how religious right wing fanatics attack free speech. May you feel the power of Satan flowing through you. ROFLMAO oh my god... haven't laughed like that for weeks Okay, I'm going to be generous and assume you realize how dumb it sounds for you to attack his use of free speech against you, then claim that he's the one attacking it... oh dear... In what way do I attack his ability to have free speech against me? He can say whatever he wants. I will ridicule whomever I please whenever I please. I think the point you're trying to make it ironic, but... I just can't seem to fathom it, sorry... ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
The Fool Wrote: In what way do I attack his ability to have free speech against me? He can say whatever he wants. I will ridicule whomever I please whenever I please. *grins* you're right, of course. I should have said Criticize instead of attack. Thank you for pointing out my loose semantics to me. _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Ray Ludenia wrote: John D. Giorgis wrote: At 05:13 PM 9/24/2002 -0700 Matt Grimaldi wrote: The Fool wrote: He implied I was anti-arab. I don't take that from anyone. Maybe you're a public figure and therfore that comment is perfectly fine. :) Hold on, buddy! I did not write that, John D. Giorgis did. Please keep your attributions accurate. John, you should have deleted the line with my name on it, in your original post, as you didn't quote any of my words. This would have made it harder for Ray to put your words in my mouth. -- Matt ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
- Original Message - From: Adam C. Lipscomb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 5:41 PM Subject: Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World Marvin wrote: Satan flows through me all the time, but only after I've consumed a coupla dozen stuffed jalapenos and half a case of Lone Star. That's not Satan - that's cheap-ass beer. Now, when I was still drinkin' tequila straight an' partyin' all night, THAT was when I felt the power of Satan flowing through me. Now, when I was still drinkin' tequila straight an' partyin' all night, I *was* Satan. xponent Horns Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
From: Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Wed, Sep 25, 2002 at 05:06:07PM -0500, The Fool wrote: I expect that what I send is maintained in integrity. Suppose there was an encryption / compression algorithm that for some reason, for a particular message came up with a from: that was aligned on the left of \nFrom , actually the message. The message would be completely indecipherable. I'm not very familiar with MIME, but I think the encoding takes care of this possibility, doesn't it? UUENCODE? Binhex base64, Yenc? The system doesn't even unmunge the message when it is resent. Munging is not reversible. The system CANNOT unmung (sic) it. That is why I suggested quoting instead of munging. Add a header X-Munged-From. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
Baardwijk, J. van DTO/SLWPD/RZO/BOZO wrote: ARAB / ISLAMIC NOBEL WINNERS 19.6% of World's Population 1.2 billion Muslims snip JEWISH NOBEL WINNERS 0.2% OF WORLDS POPULATION 14.1 Million Jews I wonder what the use of this set of statistics is, anyway. It looks like it was compiled by someone who (wrongfully) wanted to prove that Jews are superior to Arabs/Muslims. It doesn't prove that Jews are superior to Arabs/Muslims, but it certainly suggests something about the current states (and values) of their cultures. __ Steve Sloan . Huntsville, Alabama = [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brin-L list pages ... http://www.sloan3d.com/brinl Chmeee's 3D Objects http://www.sloan3d.com/chmeee 3D and Drawing Galleries .. http://www.sloansteady.com Software Science Fiction, Science, and Computer Links Science fiction scans . http://www.sloan3d.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
From: Baardwijk, J. van DTO/SLWPD/RZO/BOZO [EMAIL PROTECTED] Van: The Fool [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] There are something like ~50,000 scientists in the entire muslim world (an agregate total comprising the total of all scientists from the majority of islamic states). How many are there in the U.S.? Or Europe? I have a source for this statistic somewhere. Lemme guess. Useless-statistics.com? Anti-arab-propaganda.il? No it was from a very rspected turkish scientist. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
From: Baardwijk, J. van DTO/SLWPD/RZO/BOZO [EMAIL PROTECTED] Van: The Fool [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] There are something like ~50,000 scientists in the entire muslim world (an agregate total comprising the total of all scientists from the majority of islamic states). How many are there in the U.S.? Or Europe? I have a source for this statistic somewhere. Lemme guess. Useless-statistics.com? Anti-arab-propaganda.il? From this guy: http://www2.truman.edu/~edis/ In a couple of his articles. Hardly 'anti-arab-propoganda', as you put it. Don't me killfile you. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
The Fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] From this guy: The real question is what kind of filtering software inserted before 'From', after my sending and before my recieving. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Experiment Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
The Fool wrote: The Fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] From this guy: The real question is what kind of filtering software inserted before 'From', after my sending and before my recieving. I've seen that a lot if there are too many lines of nothing between paragraphs. I don't know where it is in which software, but I see it regularly. Let's experiment. One empty line before this one. Two empty lines before this one. Three empty lines before this one. Four empty lines before this one. Now, let's see what happens, shall we? :) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
At 12:24 24-09-2002 -0500, The Fool wrote: There are something like ~50,000 scientists in the entire muslim world (an agregate total comprising the total of all scientists from the majority of islamic states). How many are there in the U.S.? Or Europe? I have a source for this statistic somewhere. Lemme guess. Useless-statistics.com? Anti-arab-propaganda.il? From this guy: http://www2.truman.edu/~edis/ In a couple of his articles. Hardly 'anti-arab-propoganda', as you put it. Don't me killfile you. I suddenly get this feeling we are not on the same wavelength here. I am not saying that the statement about there being ~50,000 scientists in the Muslim world is coming from either of those (non-existant) websites, nor am I saying that the statement smells of anti-Arab propaganda. I was referring to the posted list of Arab/Muslim vs. Jewish Nobel Prize Winners. Jeroen Confusion Rulez! van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
From: J. van Baardwijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] At 12:24 24-09-2002 -0500, The Fool wrote: There are something like ~50,000 scientists in the entire muslim world (an agregate total comprising the total of all scientists from the majority of islamic states). How many are there in the U.S.? Or Europe? I have a source for this statistic somewhere. Lemme guess. Useless-statistics.com? Anti-arab-propaganda.il? From this guy: http://www2.truman.edu/~edis/ In a couple of his articles. Hardly 'anti-arab-propoganda', as you put it. Don't me killfile you. I suddenly get this feeling we are not on the same wavelength here. I am not saying that the statement about there being ~50,000 scientists in the Muslim world is coming from either of those (non-existant) websites, nor am I saying that the statement smells of anti-Arab propaganda. I was referring to the posted list of Arab/Muslim vs. Jewish Nobel Prize Winners. Bullshit. Your reply was directed at me and not that other data which I deleted. You wonder why people consider you anti-semitic, when you keep providing examples. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
From: J. van Baardwijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] At 14:39 24-09-2002 -0500, The Fool wrote: I suddenly get this feeling we are not on the same wavelength here. I am not saying that the statement about there being ~50,000 scientists in the Muslim world is coming from either of those (non-existant) websites, nor am I saying that the statement smells of anti-Arab propaganda. I was referring to the posted list of Arab/Muslim vs. Jewish Nobel Prize Winners. Bullshit. Your reply was directed at me and not that other data which I deleted. You wonder why people consider you anti-semitic, when you keep providing examples. I think I am more qualified to know what I was replying to than you are (although I admit my initial post was not clear on that). But, since you deemed it necessary to use foul language and imply that I am anti-Semitic (which other people have implied in the past as well but never managed to prove), I will consider this discussion to be over. You lost. BTW, this is exactly why I said earlier that a name change for the list to get rid of its bad reputation would be useless: you can change the name, but not the behaviour of the posters. You responded to Me with more of your anti-isreal, antisemitic rhetoric, and implied that I has somehow anti-arab. (There was no mention of arab in my post). You had already lost when you posted your gibberish. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
The Fool wrote: Bullshit. Your reply was directed at me and not that other data which I deleted. You wonder why people consider you anti-semitic, when you keep providing examples. So you feel the need to attack him when he tries to correct and restate his position? Why should anyone take you seriously at this point? -- Matt ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
From: Matt Grimaldi [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Fool wrote: Bullshit. Your reply was directed at me and not that other data which I deleted. You wonder why people consider you anti-semitic, when you keep providing examples. So you feel the need to attack him when he tries to correct and restate his position? Why should anyone take you seriously at this point? He implied I was anti-arab. I don't take that from anyone. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
The Fool wrote: He implied I was anti-arab. I don't take that from anyone. Matt Grimaldi wrote: I can see how his post could easily be interpreted that way, especially how he only included the ~50,000 Arab Scientists ^^ The Fool: Muslim., which include many nationalities. Sorry about that. Arab was in the air, so to speak. It should be Muslim. Matt Grimaldi: quote in the original post, but you could have pointed out how you felt wronged while remaining civil. It would also have put Jeroen in the position of having to explain himself. -- Matt ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 08:51:38PM -0500, The Fool wrote: From: Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 07:59:12PM -0500, The Fool wrote: This is a perfect example of what my instructors describe happens when people make quick-fix, kludgey, code. It never dies. It comes back and bites you in the ass. It gets used for twenty years. I can come up with a better parser, in about a minute without using a YACC. How would your parser deal with the message I posted a while ago in response to Nick, where I quoted the entire message, including delimiter and header? Size. The quote you made would also be within the body of the message, not the message header itself. Huh? How would the parser tell that it wasn't the beginning of another, different email message, but rather part of the body of the email that I posted which quoted another message? -- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Intellectual output from the Arab World
on 25/9/02 3:09 am, The Fool at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: it's no wonder very few outside the high end corporate world use them. There are about 6 million desktop computers running some version of Unix What exactly is your point? -- William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
