Not AGAIN !!!
 

I just found this , http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...ypt-fatwa.html

A Fatwa has been declaired against the ancent Egyption monuments !!!

First the Budas now this !!!!!

WHAT the FUCK !!!!!!!

A. It's spelled Buddha.

B. The Egyptian government isn't quite going around planting C-4 on their monuments...

C. The leader dude didn't say "blow up monuments", he said "you shouldn't have statues in your home"

A. It's spelled Buddha.
Scuze me just a drunk redneck here

B. The Egyptian government isn't quite going around planting C-4 on their monuments...
But they are afraid that some body will do something STUPID !

C. The leader dude didn't say "blow up monuments", he said "you shouldn't have statues in your home"
I didn't see that in the posted link .


All I was saying was that it would be a TRAVISTY ( may be spelt wrong , DEAL WITH IT !!!) for any of these works of art to be destroyed for religious reasons .
Just my 2 cents .

Imagine what will happen to 3D modelers and programmers.

Actually there's a bunch of Flash programmers I think should be tortured.:-)

Why aren't photographers and painters in the same amount of deep water as sculptors? Aren't they looking at boobies too?

Meh. And people come down on Christians.

http://www.iespell.com/ In case you don't like using the spell check on the site.

ZippyT doesn't need the spell checker to make himself clearly understood.

Friends don't let friends use IE.:-)

I doubt it's a problem with boobies (consensual, marital sex is considered one of/the highest forms of worship). Rather, the whole issue is one of idols and idolatry.

The short version of Islam's version of the Abraham & kids story is that Abraham destroyed his father's idols, except for one (the largest), claimed that it destroyed all the others, and later Ishmael and Hagar (Abraham's son & wife's handmaiden, respectively) found the Ka'ba and settled in now-Mecca as the first Muslims.

The important part is that the idols are symbols of other gods and in turn of polytheism, and that a very fundamental tenet of Islam (& Christianity, & Judaism) is the the exclusionary monotheism.

Another critical tenet of Islam is not to create images/icons of god or, I believe, the prophet: something about keeping the focus on the message & on God. This is why you see very little ancient Islamic art that is not calligraphy or architecture.

I suspect that in the context of the Hadith (7th century SW Asia), there was very little sculpture as "art for art's sake"; that it was predominately religious, and that, given you are forbidden on the one hand from making sculptures of God, forbidden on the other from making sculptures of other gods, and probably going to be accused of falsely deifying someone if you try to sculpt, say, your buddy Joe or your favorite rich patron, there really is very little room for sculpture.

And so, if in their society there is no legitimate place for sculpture as an art form, if essentially any sort of sculpture is inherently heretical, it makes sense to a) forbid or discourage people from trying to find the very fine line of acceptable sculpture, b) say that "sculptors shall be tormented most."


That said, IANASIJ (I Am Not A Scholar of Islamic Jurisprudence), & I like sculpture.

that's fascinating. i always assumed it was a "decency" thing, portraying the human form or something.

This is all just a variation on The Second Commandment. Good thing Muslims and Christians are killing each other over their major differences.

Anybody see that PBS/ Natl geographic about the "Lost Treasures of Afghanistan"? It was fascinating. They profiled people who hid artworks from the Taliban, (paintings, film), and what was most interesting was the mourning of the destroyed Buddahs and search for a legendary remaining giant Buddah—a reclining one— that they suspect awaits excavation. They think they found the foot.

Ibram, since you are new here I'm guessing you didn't get the memo. Zippyt is exempt from correct spelling, as am I, even though my finger is better. I've just gotten lazy with the shift key.

carry on.

I'm sure a christian would whirl on me if I wrote Jeesis... And a muslim would probably not be pleased if I wrote Aleh... I'm allowed to prefer correct spelling of Buddha.

Well, I am a card carrying Buddhist (since 1991 anyway) and you can spell it any way you like, as far as I'm concerned. I spell it the same way as you. I was just letting you know that zippyt is exempt that's all.:)

Huh? I didn't realize I was missing.:eek:

They only found a third of you. Don't get too excited. :D

But when they get about half way up they'll find the inch. ;)

Owwwwwwwwwwww!

Bad spelling is the easiest of solecisms to avoid. I avoid it pretty much perpetually, as my wetware spellchecker is a very good one.

Solecisms are bad; they make the utterer look stupid.

Ask yourself how badly you really need to look stupid.

UG,
Don't call me STUPID FUCK STICK !!!
I have been schooled by better folks than YOU , and it didn't help much .

I am Verry dislexick and have ADHD , but i have an IQ of 149 ( last time I was tested ) , I have to learn things my own way , this is me , just little ole' me

Words like solecism are bad; they make the utterer look pretentious.

Ask yourself how badly you need to look pretentious.

And if you decide that you very badly want to look stupid go to UG and join all of the others who wish to learn at the feet of the master. They even carry signs.:wstupid:

UG, the sensei of stupidity.

I'd say something clever if I knew what sensei meant. But since I don't speak Japanese or Middle Chinese, I'll just shut up. :blush:

Now I know how badly several of you need to look stupid. Do you know who you are?

Solecism stands. Don't hate me for being better at English than you are. That would show that you are stupid. You are at liberty to use "solecism" on any who commit it.

Zippy, I'm going to assume you are smiling when you say that. Most of the folks around here, I can expect that I can give them enough of a fucksticking that they end up looking like unicorns -- having read the things they write.

If you think you're being sneered at, consider why you might get sneered at. Maybe somebody thinks you could really do better? Now, I don't have to sneer at anyone to feel good about myself -- that's actually easier if I'm not curling my lip -- so I'd really rather not. However, there is that slight difference between quality and abysm.

Write quality, spell well (no matter what it takes) and you'll be taken seriously even by the toughies and skeptics. Is this not so?

Zippy is a US Marine, we take him at his word and his word has weight. Your pose isn't helping your standing.

You are? Hmmm, I thought English, being a language, was a tool for communicating with other people.

Obfuscating with 50 cent words, then calling yourself superior (a favorite tactic of L Ron Hubbard), not only fails to make your intended point it alienates you from the people your trying to communicate with.

You may think your vocabulary proves superior intelligence but actually it shows (along with your attitude), lack of social skills.

So who's better at English, one that can impress the librarian or the one that can communicate with the most people?:confused:

Yep, it looks like a real 'slam dunk' to us.:wstupid:

Well UG as I said , I am VERRY dislexic and have ADHD , so you calling me STUPID is like calling somebody in a wheel chair a GIMP to their face ,
NOT COOL !!!!

So take your superior acting self and FUCK OFF AND DIE !!!!!!!

And Yes I am serious , not smileing , if I was standing next to you I would have Whopped you upside of your fat superior acting big word drivveling head !!!

But I Digress ,
I am I ,
I do as I please ,
as I am an Adult ,
in the REAL world .

UG, ask yourself not "Am I smarter than he?" but "Am I as fun a person as he?"

I know I wouldn't want to hang around someone who was no fun but could use uselessly big words on cue to make himself sound smart. Gimme someone with less grasp of the language but more grasp of fun any day.

That said... normally, I'm kinda a stickler for spelling and grammar and such, but a valid excuse is a valid excuse. I got on zippy a bit at the start of the thread, but that was me being a stickler over one word, not calling him a dumbass or saying 'LYK ZOMG U NED 2 SPL EVRYTNG RITE!!11one!!one1'. I can understand what he's trying to say well enough to be able to tell he's a cool dude

Nobody gives a shit how smart you are.

They only want to know what you can do for them.

If you are smart it only means you can use it against them.

When you actually do use it against them, it makes you a very unlikeable character. Since you've done that here many times, I'm guessing that you do not, in real life, have a great deal of power and/or influence.

Can't we have something like a fatwa? I want to declare **** on shit and just go ape on it.

I do that all the time.

But does it have a cool name like Zeemer?
"A Zeemer on those phone spys!!!!"

So this is a very raw sore point with zippyt. This I see, and I apologize for pushing his buttons. I know what it is to have a button pushed.

Now here's a button I have, stumblefuck. I don't descend to your level: I say it's within your power, whatever the obstacles, to rise to mine. Your DI's told you the same thing, all through Parris or Pendleton, and I'm telling it to you now. You don't have to like it right off, and you don't have to like being called a stumblefuck, but rise to my level of competence with the English tongue and you've got something worthwhile, and none may take it from you. The attempt by those here to take my mastery of English away, or belittle it however specious their miserable excuses for so doing, is a fool's errand. You notice I don't run fool's errands. Guess a reason, if you like. Don't hate me for being better acquainted with a dictionary than yourselves -- use the fifty-cent words. Particularly, use them rightly and well.

UG, you too should try to do your very best.

Instead of claiming superiority because you have a stronger vocabulary, which is actually of limited utility, how about trying to claim it next week by becoming the most respected, the most well-liked of our bunch here.

It's a big reach for ya, but we have confidence that if you really try hard you can ACHIEVE. I mean, so far, Zippy is WAY ahead of you on this subject, but work hard and dig real deep down.

I have to admit taking perverse pleasure not only in the irony of UG using words more valuable ($0.50) than the imbecilic point he is trying to make but also the irony of his blissfull ignorance of it.

No ignorance at all. There is nothing imbecilic to the idea that solecisms are still bad. They were bad when the Greeks picked on the mushmouthed and ungrammatical speech of the inhabitants of Soloi, and they aren't improving with age.

Just for fun, do you know how to spell "blissful?"

Just for fun, do you know that "No ignorance at all." is a grammatically incorrect sentence fragment?

Just for fun, do you know that mushmouthed is not a word? Let me help you out here. In those instances when you have a thought so sophisticated and so subtle that none of the over 100,000 words in the dictionary are adequate enough to express it, you can take two words from the dictionary and hyphenate them to create a new word. Hence, the solecism in your post can be transformed into a grammatically correct word more befitting the complex and sophisticated mind that gave birth to it by putting a dash between mush and mouthed to create (drum roll, please).... mush-mouthed. Out of curiosity, did you mean to use that word at all? I hesitate to ask since I'm certain you wouldn't use an adjective (however solecistic) meant to describe speech to describe the written word.

Just for fun, do you know that it is also grammatically incorrect to use the adjective 'imbecilic' to modify the phrase 'to the point?' I think you meant to say "...imbecilic about the point...." but don't want to give you the benefit of the doubt since you rarely extend that courtesy to others.

Just for fun, do you know that it is grammatically incorrect to use a pronoun without an antecedent in the same sentence? I didn't think so because anyone who knew that wouldn't begin a sentence with a pronoun like you did in your second sentence (recall that the first meaningless phrase followed by a period does not have the required syntactical elements to elevate it to sentence status).

Just for fun, do you know that you have a grammatically incorrect comma splice in your second sentence?

Just for fun, do you realize that making a plethora of grammar errors in a three-sentence post not only make your high horse look more like a jackass but also make you look like a moron? You might know how to spell irony but it's pretty clear that the concept embedded in the word is sailing right over your oversized head.

I'll take Zippy's spelling over the worthless ideas your pitiful grammar stumbles over itself to convey any day.

Are we having fun yet?

Grammar is great up to the point of conveying an idea. If you can do that with the words and structure you use, you're good to go, unless you're doing something official or otherwise formal.

However, if you're going to attempt to demand correct spelling and grammar... do it right yourself.

Fuckin' thank you. I was wondering how he was still standing on his soap box with all of those errors continuously slapping me in the face as I read his posts, but then I remembered the only thing he knows about the English language and how to type it is the correct spelling and the definition. It makes sense, that is the only thing you would learn from studying a dictionary. Bravo. You know all the words and when to use them. Just not how. So, UG sit the fuck down and shut up.

Edit: Just to set the record straight, I'm not claiming to be the grand master of the English language. I just think it's pretty damn petty to fault someone to the degree that UG has. Are we not all adults?

Well said, Beastie.

...Nope.

Well, well, well. Beestie, a sentence fragment is an elliptical construction -- look the idea up if you need to. It is so used here, and elliptical constructions, while clearly not properly called sentences, are not ungrammatical, any more than this one is. They merely don't need to mention what is already understood.

It is surprising, indeed, not to find an obvious and readily understood compound word like "mushmouthed" to have its own entry in a Webster's -- but no one except somebody frantic for some excuse, any excuse, any wispy excuse, to round on me will fault me for it. Your actions, sir, betray you. No editor on Earth would fault me for using it in a newspaper column. Whenever Webster's catches up is fine by me. Remember, too, that many compounds beginning as hyphenated pairs of words lose their hyphens in shortish order, and in no defined nor authorized order.

"Nothing imbecilic to" is used to point directly at that which has the property of not being imbecilic. "Nothing imbecilic in" might perhaps have been better style. Don't try so hard at making mountains of molehills. I limited my effort in that direction to one sentence! How many paragraphs did you use here to heap Pelion upon Ossa?

The comma splice is correct. In that sentence, a semicolon would be too much, and a colon right out. Stylistically rather than grammatically, the comma could go and the sentence would still work well, but the sentence isn't scrambled by its presence.

Ideological notions of which ideas are worthless are, well, notional. I draw your attention in particular to definition 3a under "notional" in the Webster's Third .

Yeah, I'm having fun yet, and probably more than you. :p At least use a spellchecker, wetware or software, but be wary of the software tool as it can't distinguish either homonyms or meanings.

Vixen: no.

Now tell me: wasn't this thread originally about a potential threat to ancient Egyptian art?

First the Library of Alexandria, and now this.

The word is Philippines. You didn't even misspell it consistently. You wouldn't be skimping on the spell-checker use, now would you?

E.B. White is turning over in his grave.

The newspaper column is the last place I'd turn to to legitimize my ideas.

Other than that, I'd say your riposte smacks of desperation.

And by the way, I've friends who are more well read, well bred, and better fed than I, but I still like to make fun of them because they have no idea how to attach a table top to an apron with out making the top split like a fly girl on "in living color".

I guess they didn't teach that in Harvard.

It's not so much the verbing that wierds words. It's the renounification.

Eye don rumembuhr wut et wuz a bout.butt thizzz isz alot of funn.I lyketo feal superyor too stoopide alliterate peepuhl, two, Ug. Stoopide peepuhl...huhuhhuihuhuhuhu... (i laff).

Could be about new art... just any representative art. They need to mind their own damn business. If they don't like it, don't buy it or have it, it ain't complicated.

I think that was the point, though. He didn't say 'go blow up statues', he said 'you know, you arent s'posta keep these things in your houses'.

i be laffin mi ass off. thanks beestie. thanks so effin much. UG. please stop.

That was freaking brilliant wasn't it.

Surely.

Stop? If not never -- well, hardly ever.

That is NEVER the endgame to these little parties. If that was the case they would have just stated it and not spouted off another Fatwah.

I love that!

After puzzling over this peculiar remark for a while, I finally figured he thought "Filipino" might be misspelled.

Well, Clodfobble, don't hate me for being better acquainted with the dictionary than you. What do I find in my Webster's 3rd but entries not only for "filipino," but "filipina" for good measure.

I'll forgo a <snap> but you get the idea. :)

As much as I hate to say UG is right... Filipino is a word for a person from the Philippines.