Conference thebay::joyoflex

    re .0 Example, of course, circa 1983, "Ayatollah Assahola" was displayed on
          many bumpers during the last half of the Carter administration.
    
    The Carter administration ended on Inauguration Day in January,
    1981.

    Re .0
    >(apologies to Persian readers, this quote is used for example only).
    
    This apology should be considered offensive to Persian readers.
    After all, if someone calls Bush a liar, should they apologize to
    American readers?  Should they assume that American readers didn't
    already know that Bush is a liar, and that American readers might
    be offended by hearing the truth, so they should apologize?
    Surely Persian readers (except for the brainwashed few) agree with
    the quoted bumper sticker and find the apology condescending and
    insulting.
    
    (Sorry to advise that I do not intend this as a joke, irony, or
    whatever.  It should be a minor point at the moment, but we should
    avoid being condescending in the future too.)
    
    Of course, if you wanted to express apologies to the Assaholas,
    it would be appropriate.  (Irony here.)
    
    -- Norman Diamond

    
    (apologies to Persian readers, this quote is NOT used for example only).
    

    re .2
    
    The place to discuss whether Bush is a liar is COMET::DEFENSE_ISSUES
    which is currently more comical than this conference. 
    
    In the words of Salmon Rushdie, "you can never be too condescending".
    After all, this IS an international conference file.
                                                        
    Also, does anybody remember (circa 1980!) the other bumper sticker,
    "Iran Sucks"? 

	How about something along the lines of:

		US out of Mideast now!
		Give peace a chance
		Hell no, we won't go

	They're kind of old and not too catchy, but I think you get my 
	drift.

		-- Cliff

    A variation I heard being chanted at a demonstration in Chicago:
    
    Hell, no, we won't go
    We won't fight for Texaco.
    
    
    --bonnie

   or just make an acronym out of Saddam Hussein, International Terrorist.
   
   q
   

    Since the base note .0 elicited no lexically derisive slander,
    this last reply shows the only bumper snicker slogan I will pander.
    
    Seen on a bumper just this morning:
    
    
                      Slam Saddam!
    
    

    > Since the base note .0 elicited no lexically derisive slander,
    
    In order to be slander, it must meet the following conditions:
    1.  derisive
    2.  false
    3.  verbal
    We could overlook 3 because a reader could read it aloud if she
    wishes, but we can't really overlook 2.  It's hard to come up with
    derisive statements about SoDamn Insane that would not be true.

re .9

>    3.  verbal
>    We could overlook 3 because a reader could read it aloud if she
>    wishes, ...

Wait a minute!  Then it would be the READER not the writer who is
slanderous.  Also, doesn't 'verbal' mean roughly "of or pertaining to 
words"?  Written words are verbal (as opposed to pictorial, I suppose).
Maybe your number 3 should be 'oral'.

Dave C.

    	Could I advise caution in this note. I doubt Saddam Hussein
    will make a complaint to Ken Olsen about technical accuracy, but
    regardless of the technical differences between libel and slander we
    probably have Iraquis in Digital (heck, there are several at school
    with my daughters) and there are Digital policies about respecting
    race, religion, ...
    
    	I feel rather uncomfortable about this note.
    
    	On *any* complaint this note will be suppressed, and it will also
    be suppressed if it strays beyond word play.

    The requirements for slander, libel, or defamation of public figures
    are much more stringent than for private citizens.  I don't see any
    legal problems with anti-SH jokes, anymore than for jokes whose butt is
    Mike Dukakis or George Bush.

    The whole context of this topic is "jokes".  It will be very clear to a
    reasonable man that the jokes are not to be taken literally, and for a
    public figure, that would make a successful suit impossible.

    Racial jokes, such as those which lump all Iraqis into a single
    stereotype, probably should be excluded.  We wouldn't allow that for
    Jews, or Indians, or Blacks, so we shouldn't allow it for Iraqis just
    because their country lost a war.  Public figures are a different
    story, and I hope the moderator will distinguish between the two cases.

    I agree with 12 and 13.  For comparison, Ronald Reagan was an idiot
    but I know a few whites who aren't.  I mean, a few men.  Or a few
    Americans.  (All three categories include myself, not exclusively.)
    It is unusual for anyone except a politician to think that the
    rulers are the same as their subjects.
    
    On the other hand, although engineers are not a legally protected
    category, we might keep in mind that Ken Olsen or other corporate
    rulers have sometimes suppressed humor that targets engineers.  (Sigh.)
    What do we do if one reader asserts that this entire conference offends
    one English speaker?

    	There is already a JOKES conference, with over 130 entries on this
    topic. I see no reason for duplication here unless it is *more*
    relevant to JOYOFLEX than JOKES.
    
    	Incidentally, in the bar nearest to my office you would be lucky to
    get out without serious injury if you tried to crack a Saddam Hussein
    joke in a language that the rest of the clientel could understand.

Re: .12

>   ...  It will be very clear to a
>   reasonable man ...

Re: .14

>   but I know a few whites who aren't.  I mean, a few men.  Or a few
>   Americans.

Did I miss something here?  Are women being exxcluded from this
conference?  Or is this an inside joke that I'm interpreting as a sexist slur?

-d

    I have heard this at least 10th hand ... so, it may not be true.
    
    Supposedly, "Saddam" pronounced with the accent on the last
    syllable means "religious teacher".  However, when the accent
    is on the first syllable -- SADdam -- it means shoe shiner.

    RE: .14
    
    >>For comparison, Ronald Reagan was an idiot
    
    Let's leave politics out of this and allow me to point out something:
    
    	He's done more with his life than you have with yours.
    
    And I can easily say that without even knowing you.  Sorry, but I get
    tired of Reagan bashing.
    
    Eric
    

    Re: .17
    
    I don't think it's true.  I asked the question about the meaning of
    'saddam' of two native Arabian speakers, one from Jordan and the other
    from the United Arab Emirates.  The word 'saddam,' according to them,
    has only one meaning however it is pronounced - and that is _smasher_
    or _destroyer_.  They said also that it is not merely uncommon to use
    the word 'saddam' as a proper name, but that it is practically unknown.
    Neither of them had ever heard the use before.
    
    When I was a kid, there was a wrestler known as 'Strangler' Lewis.  The
    name was meant to frighten his opponents.  Saddam is up to the same
    thing.
    
    Bernie
    

    Re: .16
>Re: .12
>>   ...  It will be very clear to a
>>   reasonable man ...
>Re: .14
>>   but I know a few whites who aren't.  I mean, a few men.  Or a few
>>   Americans.
>Did I miss something here?  Are women being exxcluded from this
>conference?  Or is this an inside joke that I'm interpreting as a sexist slur?
    
    I can't speak for .12, but .14 should be fairly obvious.  I pointed
    out that a slur(*) on Reagan is not a slur on men.  It would not be
    very meaningful to say that a slur on Reagan is not a slur on women.
    (* For the purpose of this explanation, the truth or falsity of a
    slur is irrelevant.)
    
    Re .18:
>    RE: .14
>    >>For comparison, Ronald Reagan was an idiot
>    Let's leave politics out of this and allow me to point out something:
>    	He's done more with his life than you have with yours.
>    And I can easily say that without even knowing you.  Sorry, but I get
>    tired of Reagan bashing.
    
    Or he had a lot more done for him.  He certainly did a lot more
    damage too.  I did not assist the economic conversion of the U.S.A.
    into a third-world country.  Get enough of your friends to vote for
    me and I will surely do a better job than he did.

    Re: .19
    
    Did I say they spoke Arabian?  I meant to say "Arabic."  
    
    Bernie

    Re: .18, .20, ...
    
    I agree with Eric.  Enough Reagan bashing or anyone else bashing.  Many
    of us have strong feelings about Mr Reagan, Mr Kennedy, the Rev
    Jackson, and others, but we needn't enlighten others about them in this
    conference.  The gratuitous comments made are clearly out of line here.
    
    If you do believe yourself to be the possessor of a unique truth and
    feel duty bound to spread your gospel to us heathens, then use some
    ingenuity, like Limerick Addition Football.  You know something like
    
    		There was a young man named Teddy K
    	  	Who drove a young girl to the quay....
    
    
    At least it would keep us on the topic.
    
    Bernie
    

    re .22
    
    "quay" does not rhyme with "K".  It is pronounced "key".....

    
    > "quay" does not rhyme with "K".  Is is pronounced "key".....
    
    I'll take your word for it, but I thought both pronounciations 
    were acceptable.  Perhaps we're too far inland here in Colorado
    to appreciate the difference.
    
    Bernie 

    I really was not trying to enlighten anyone on the subject
    of Reagan's mentality, but rather on the difference between
    slurring a public person and slurring an ethnic group or
    similar protected group.  (And one of my further replies
    was a defense against a misdirected personal attack --
    in fact, against offensive innuendo.)
    
    If it is determined that slurs against public figures should
    be prohibited, then they should all be deleted.  If it is
    determined that only false slurs (e.g. slander/libel) should
    be prohibited, then perhaps nothing needs deletion.
    
    -- Norman Diamond

    Now Diamond has caught the wrong note
    You really should read what he wrote
    	There's never a pun
    	He's really no fun
    We play here with beams :-) not a mote.
    
    There's SOAPBOX for making your point
    So don't get your nose out of joint.
    	The very next time
    	A reply doesn't rhyme
    I'll writelock this note        !
    
    The laws with which we must comply
    Happen to be French, bye the bye.

So you're a hardguy, Monahan,
But we'll comply the best we can
And write in rhyme about Saddam.
Oh, dear!  My mind's a blank, it am.

		It grieves me that I may not slur
		The enemy, without a rhyme.
		Your mind's a blank, O CALIPH,
		And so's my verse, naturellement.
	
	I can't begin to tell you how difficult it was NOT to make that
	rhyme...

	Delia
	

    Reagan and Kennedy
    both receive bashing here
    Saddam does not yet, though.
    How is that just?
    
    Us versus Monohan's 
    Irreconcilable
    differences do require
    moderation.
    
    JoyOfLex JoyOfLex
    All I was looking for's
    one-sided banter that
    makes us all laugh.
    
    Having accomplished that
    rythmic'ly piggledy
    we can all turn now to 
    each others' gaffes.

    Seems to me that either rhyme OR reason should be accepted
    to help counteract Maddas(s).