Comments on: A ‘Jihad Janet’

By: Sparky

Sparky — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 15:19:23 +0000

Yeah that photo does have aggressive eyes.

I put my devil face on at work today.

I don’t believe judging by faces is sufficient, but it may help somewhat. Crappy faces are not good predictors of future behavior.

By: Sandy

Sandy — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 04:34:19 +0000

“Those who want to divert people’s attention on her colour are in a way supporting extremist Islamic activities because they have a misplaced notion that it is politically correct to do so.”

Not the first time I’ve heard you accuse others who see things differently than you do as “supporting” extremist Islam.

I suppose since YOU think her colour isn’t important that MUST mean people who do are using misplaced political correctness. There couldn’t be any other possible explanation (or explanations. Who knows? Maybe THREE different people have THREE different reasons why they think colour is relevant here- too bad it makes them all supporters of extreme Islam)

By: Chiara

Chiara — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 03:17:27 +0000

Daisy–who here is trying to divert attention from violent extremism to colour? I understand Jay conflating Islam and violent extremism, because that is just the kind of guy he is, and he is consistent about it, but are you doing the same?

By: Daisy

Daisy — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 02:27:25 +0000

Jay,
That’s what I argued. More than her colour it’s the fact that she converted and joined an exremist outfit that is important. Colour is secondary here. Those who want to divert people’s attention on her colour are in a way supporting extremist Islamic activities because they have a misplaced notion that it is politically correct to do so. You should be equally worried about such so-called politically correct people. Their support is fuelling Islamic extremism. I think you have overlooked this aspect so far.

By: Kactuz

Kactuz — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 02:10:26 +0000

Or just plain cantankerous.

But then again, being against everybody and everything has its own virtues.

By the way, Oliveoyl is now 91 years old. Most people don’t know it, but she has a brother named Castor Oyl. Actually, Olive Oyl’s life is very interesting, not to mention her relationship with HamGravy, Bluto, the one-eyed runt and Scooner, better known as Sweepea.

By: olivetheoil

olivetheoil — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 01:23:15 +0000

No, olivetheoil, I don’t have any problem with being on the receiving end of a stereotype.

Well, you are more broadminded than me.

By: Chiara

Chiara — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 23:42:25 +0000

John–Thanks, I certainly did appreciate the difference in formal contexts, but she seemed to be the only one using it in the settings she did, eg Sunday morning talk shows etc. It probably speaks to her precision as well as the correct diplomatic term. Indeed the 2 are very different, and one wouldn’t want to confuse the two!!! Your “wind it back” translation is excellent and memorable. Thanks again!

By: j. kactuz

j. kactuz — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 23:35:22 +0000

No, olivetheoil, I don’t have any problem with being on the receiving end of a stereotype. If it is true and the accusation (stereotype) is bad, then it is a problem and maybe I should do something about it. If it is untrue, well, like Scarlet, I don’t give a damn. You can label or stereotype me in any way you like (racist, old, bald, mean, bigot, hunk, sex-machine, terrorist, gay, idiot, etc…) and I won’t lose any sleep.

Who came up with this silly idea of not offending anybody? or only not offending certain people? I think people need to grow a thicker layer of skin, maybe 2 layers. Sometimes people need to be offended. Like Lars Vilks, I believe there is an important principle at stake, not to even mention the basic facts of the case.

By: John Burgess

John Burgess — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 22:54:05 +0000

No, in ‘diplomatese’, status quo ante is the preferred term–’that which went before’. Status quo by itself could too easily refer to ‘as it is now’, which is not always the desirable state. ‘Wind it back’ is another way of putting it, unless it’s impossible to ‘unring the bell’.

By: John Burgess

John Burgess — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 22:51:21 +0000

No, a ‘thousand yard stare’ had dead eyes. That photo has aggressive eyes, IMO.