Late to the party I am, but still. From the AP, “Hate-crime arrests in Quran desecrations at Pace University”:
A 23-year-old man was arrested Friday on hate-crime charges after he threw a Quran in a toilet at Pace University on two separate occasions, police said.
Stanislav Shmulevich of Brooklyn was arrested on charges of criminal mischief and aggravated harassment, both hate crimes, police said. It was unclear if he was a student at the school. A message left at the Shmulevich home was not immediately returned.
The Islamic holy book was found in a toilet at Pace’s lower Manhattan campus by a teacher on Oct. 13. A student discovered another book in a toilet on Nov. 21, police said.
Muslim activists had called on Pace University to crack down on hate crimes after the incidents. As a result, the university said it would offer sensitivity training to its students.
The school was accused by Muslim students of not taking the incident seriously enough at first. Pace classified the first desecration of the holy book as an act of vandalism, but university officials later reversed themselves and referred the incident to the New York Police Department’s hate crimes unit.
Burning the flag? An act of dissent. Dunking a cross in urine? A work of art. Leaving a book in the crapper? A “hate crime.”
Which means I’d better get the latest Pynchon novel and my Pottery Barn catalog out of mine, stat, before I’m arrested for offending postmodern ironists and people who pay way too much for teak furniture and throw rugs.
What is so disheartening is that here we have a university, with the help of law enforcement, turning an issue of free speech (and, to be fair, maybe vandalism or misdemeanor theft) into a double felony.
Which makes sense in a culture where butt-slapping thirteen-year olds are rapists and sexual predators, or where “torture” and “racism” mean so much that they no longer mean anything at all.
Or where musing over the holy spunk lands you a job with a presidential candidate…
Perhaps had Shmulevich issued his protest in a “free speech zone,” he’d have had better luck with the university. At any rate, a few years in the clink — and maybe some time in a re-education camp (the Pakistan mountain region has some fine facilities, I’m told) — will do this hater some good. Because as we know, there’s simply no excuse for tolerating intolerance.
More, from LGF:
The Council on American Islamic Relations is so ecstatic to see shari’a being enforced by US police that they’ve put up two articles about it:
“CAIR: Hate-Crime Arrest in NY Quran Desecrations”
“NY: Student Nabbed in Koran Dunk.”
For the record, I think Charles overstates the case a bit here, re: shari’a. What is being enforced is the left-liberal / progressive idea of free speech born out of multiculturalism and made manifest in speech codes that have transformed the idea of free speech into an idea “approved speech” — with approval coming from those who “own” a particular identity narrative and are therefore the only ones authentic enought to define the parameters of what is acceptable criticism.
Intolerance of criticism, under this neo-Orwellian drift, is a virtue — even though its application is quite selective, particularly when it involves the clash of two protected groups.
But then, intellectual rigor has been replaced by emotionalism and manufactured consent, so “rigor” is just another bourgeois construct designed to maintain the “status quo” (under which such other “constructs” — equality before the law, inalienable rights, Enlightenment humanism, equality of opportunity — hold insidious sway).
Burn it like the witch it is, I say. Only then can we project our egos onto the world and remake it in our own fallen image.
Good times…
****
update: Over at Slate, Christopher Hitchens asks, “Why are we so afraid of offending Muslims?”
Malkin has a copy of the complaint here, and echoes my examples of flag burning and Jesus swirlies.
Allah examines the legalities here.
I’ve been sounding the warning for these types of criminal eventualities for over a decade now — in my case, having watched my political views slowly take shape as I began to reflect on the lessons I learned from my studies on interpretation. I remain convinced that the “death of the author” (which took shape with the New Critics, but was perfected beyond formalism by post structuralists) — which “freed” texts from the “constraints” placed upon them by those who authored them — is, once adopted as the critical orthodoxy (and make no mistake, just about every school of interpretive theory since relies on a central destabilization of the grounds for determining meaning), the key moment in the long-running campaign by leftist academics to alter our culture’s underlying epistemology.
The fact that 5 members of our Supreme Court take such things as “diversity” seriously — given that it is on its face antithetical to the notion of individualism upon which this country is founded — is a testament to just how deeply insinuated has become this kind of pernicious thinking.
Worse yet is when I see self-styled conservatives or classical liberals giving cover to such nonsense (as they did during the Bill Bennett kerfuffle). We simply must reaffirm the grounds for meaning making — or, at the very least, make sure that people understand what it is they are doing when they determine meaning — or all is lost.
And with the left’s stranglehold on both the academy and the media, I don’t know how it’s going to happen.
Clearly, my repetition of the argument can provide little in the way of relief. I simply don’t have the circulation or the readership to make a difference — and the subject matter (hermeneutics) is the kind of thing that frightens people off to begin with. The average person, I suspect, thinks it’s something you pick up from a hooker with a cold sore.
Some days, I think I’d be better off just forgetting about it and jumping on the right wing bandwagon — highlighting the OUTRAGE without offering anything of substance as a counter.
It’s easier, for one thing — and both the traffic and the money is decidedly better. People do so love their mobs.
And hell, it might even get me a Corner link every now and then.
(h/t Tim P; lots more over at LGF. Just keep scrolling)
This makes me want to go place my copies of the Qur’an in the various toilets throughout my home.
It is my hope that these ridiculous cases make it to trial with competent defense lawyers (perhaps someone from F.I.R.E.) who can forcefully advance the argument listed by Jeff. The only way to defeat the stupidity of these speech codes is to expose them for what they are.
Anytime I’ve given a copy of The Letters Of J.R.R. Tolkein to a Lord of the Rings fan, I’ve heard back about how they had completely misunderstood some stuff, but that they get it now.
So my question is, based on this apparent precedent, if I purchase Korans from the local bookstore and flush them down the toilet, is it a hate crime ? Is the gateway to the charge because this kid stole the Koran ?
Perhaps we Christofascist Godbothering Evangelical Loonies should start filing lawsuits against any art that desecrates Christ or the cross or the Virgin Mary under the broad brush of Hate Crimes.
I suspect that a class action suit or a groundswell of legal pressure on the DA would be very interesting. I also surmise that Professor Nellie Waffle would argue that the Pace remedy is completely correct as white/Christian society “oppresses” Muslims. If Christians are the dominate religion in America and have oppressed others in the past then it’s a flying unicorn QED that we continue to beat down the brown people.
Thus there can be no hate towards Christians when our religious icons are debased, as we are the oppressors. As proven by history.
Jesus wept.
tw: offense least muslims cause they’re scary…
If this guy ripped the book from the library, then he should be charged with the appropriate misdemeanor charge. But felony charges for “hate drowning” a book? Very stupid.
“Some days, I think I’d be better off just forgetting about it and jumping on the rightwing bandwagon  highlighting the OUTRAGE without offering anything of substance as a counter.”
Nah. Too easy.
I’d like to see your explication of “the notion of individualism upon which this country is founded” rather than hammering the same old nails. Prolly just me but your own views are more interesting than reactions to the idiocy of the day.
Unless the ‘dillo is going to dance. That would come first. Except for a rising tide and gulls on the wing, that is. Ciao.
“For the record, I think Charles overstates the case a bit here, re: shari’a. What is being enforced is the left-liberal / progressive idea of free speech born out of multiculturalism and made manifest in speech codes that have transformed the idea of free speech into an idea “approved speech† with approval coming from those who “own†a particular identity narrative and are therefore the only ones authentic enought to define the parameters of what is acceptable criticism.”
Charles would likely call poh-tay-toh, poh-tah-toh on this one. One group favors ‘reeducation’ of those insult the protected groups, the other favors a much more violent and permanent ‘reeducation’ of those who insult… their ONLY protected group. Granted, as a means of understanding the phenomenon, your phrasing is much more useful, but I wouldn’t argue that either is incorrect. Simply a question of ends with a given means.
Another perfect chance to sum up what has been the thesis of PW since it has begun. Pity we cannot reach a broader audience, as often when I explain even the basics of your writings to my fellow travellers, I get stares as that I had just asked them to imbibe a screwdriver. They just don’t wrap their minds around it. I confess that part of it may be due to my lacking your linguistic skill.
I know leftist hatred doesn’t pay the bills, but you can always take heart that the hatred you enjoy from the leftists is proof that you are a blow to their weak spots. Of course, people who have eschewed ‘fact’ and ‘proof’ and ‘truth’ as means of maintaining the status quo cannot be defeated with reason (Having long since abandoned it)… but somewhere they have to know that you are dead on the money.
BTW: Jeff
I know that the short post OUTRAGE concept as employed by other blogs frustrates you with regards to their superior visitors and coin. Throw in the fact that OUTRAGE posts are easier
And, frankly, if I wanted to read LGF, I’d read LGF… or Captain’s Quarters… or the dozens of relatively dull news-c/p blogs out there. There’s a reason why my blog triumverate is so fixed. Ace brings the college humor (Not the frat kind, the nerd kind.) and the periodic rants. HotAir delivers news in a good looking format with a good ratio of fluff news and preaching kept correlative to writing skill, and PW stretches the mind, focusing on the underlying philsophical struggles. Without PW, I’d quit the blogosophere entirely.
Mr. Boo and Mr. Protein Wisdom- Charles at LGF disagreed with me that the Korans, were indeed, ‘stolen’. I guess it depends on what the meaning of is, is. I think the felony charges are outrageous but he should have flushed his own copy of the Book.
There are a lot of blogs I don’t read cause I have a really despicable ageist streak. I’m working on it. And also I seriously doubt Michelle Malkin is as young as she looks, so I steer clear just to be safe.
Anyone care to hazard a guess as to whether this guy or the guy who slashed a bunch of tires at a recruitment center, saying that he’d kill everyone on our side?
TW: what harm – yes, exactly!
Crap, this thing needs post preview – I’m shaking in my boots at posting something with a little HTML in it.
I think the Korans were stolen. As Ace said, this is the FIRST NEW STORY EVER WITH A RIGHT WING TILT and thus did not originally include the fact that the Korans were not the student’s to flush.
As Ace said Malkin said, Hot Air notes that Captain’s Quarters said. Via LGF. (h/t Hewitt).
Which is cool. Leaves me plenty of time to not bother.
Heh. There are some major blogs I don’t even bother reading because if they actually post anything I’d be interested in, it’s better presented with more depth and humor at one of the blogs I read regularly.
Plus I don’t think it’s a blog unless it’s open to the great unwashed masses to comment. ‘Registration closed’ pisses me off.
Cap’n Ed still has you listed at the celluloid place in his blogroll. You want I can help you wrap his house.
For the record, I think Charles overstates the case a bit here, re: shari’a.
Well, it depends on your point of view. The university administration is certainly not down with instituting shari’a, per se; they are, as Jeff said, enforcing the “intolerance of intolerance” and various speech codes that are drawn up to protect the Oppressed.
CAIR, on the other hand, sees this as One Step Closer To Shari’a, that being their favored trajectory to begin with.
So as Mr. Boo says, po-TAY-to, po-TAH-to.
The issue of whether the book was stolen is irrelevant. Would they be freaking out if the book had been Gone With the Wind or an Agatha Christie novel? Or the Bible or Book of Mormon or the Upanishads, for that matter?
The question answers itself, methinks.
I agree. If the Christian right were to start citing CAIR precedents, it might get the left to see what’s going on. If not, it would at least settle the issue that we’re sliding into theocracy, and we could get on with having the war to determine whose theology will be in charge.
TW: Yes, we must find out who will control Illinois.
“Which is cool. Leaves me plenty of time to not bother.”
The reason I come here is to learn . The hook was the ‘dillo , and the red pills , the addiction is what and how it’s written .
tw:”Living Potatoes ……heh
Some days, I think I’d be better off just forgetting about it and jumping on the rightwing bandwagon  highlighting the OUTRAGE without offering anything of substance as a counter.
Screw that. Your perspective (and that of the commentors) is what IMO keeps people coming back here. I like Malkin well enough and respect her in a number of ways, but she doesn’t offer the kind of analysis that happens here. Plus, Peter Fonda and the creepy word generator.
TW: made lawful
See!?
This entire issue was predicted to happen during the whole Muslim call to prayer kerfuffle in Hammtrammck Michigan a few years ago. I said it then and I’ll say it now, but either the government withdraws all favors in terms of religious exclusions (church bells violating noise ordinances, priest confessions inadmissable in court) or we can start adding shariah to the constitution.
There is no wiggle room. Either the 1st amendment means what it means -“congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”- or it doesn’t.
And sorry, but church bells violating noise ordinances, and priest confessions inadmissable in court rooms are examples of said establishment.
I gotta go with dicentra here — the university administration believes it’s striking a blow for “tolerance”, but CAIR considers it step towards sharia. Same outcome, different paths.
How do you “steal” an object if it never leaves the owner’s property.
Pace owns the toilet right?
Jeff G. said,
“Clearly, my repetition of the argument can provide little in the way of relief. I simply don’t have the circulation or the readership to make a difference  and the subject matter (hermeneutics) is the kind of thing that frightens people off to begin with.”
Perhaps, but clearly from all your troubles the left doesn’t think you are ineffective or harmless.
I was originally drawn here for the somewhat bawdy humor but then stayed because of your writings on language. learned quite a bit in the process.
As I recall, the issue in the Hamtramck case wasn’t just the noise, but the content of the noise. Church bells are content-neutral theology-speaking, but the muezzin’s call to prayer is not in that it declares that there is only one god and that is Allah.
I didn’t learn to proof read well however. Learned should have been capitalized.
Maybe it’s retaliation in the culture war.
I just noticed that the time on the posts seems to be off by half an hour.
I don’t think anyone has the patience to allow me to rant about this being the fault of the Boomers (and I don’t mean all of them, just 55% of them)…
The real beauty of the Islamicists is that they’re learning it is more effective (and infinitely easier) to hijack our institutions and fly them into our culture than to hijack planes and fly them into our buildings. Hell, some among us even assist them toward that end.
The good news is that by the time it’s too late, we will have installed cameras on every street corner so as to make the fashion police’s job a bit easier.
Eventually, each will have to decide. And that is sad.
Wasn’t Ric just berating us for opposing wholesale Muslim immigration or something?
yup
You are correct Jeffersonian. But that doesn’t change my point. Church bells may be “content-neutral theology-speaking”, but they are still theological in origin, and thus have avoided a strictly constitutional interpretation of their right to ring out at whatever hour of the day it may be, whereas I can’t play Hendrix beyond a noise level at whatever hour of the day I may want to. This is the problem with making excuses like we do for any religion. You don’t get to choose which fundamentalist will eventually spoil it for the rest of us.
And sorry, but church bells violating noise ordinances, and priest confessions inadmissable in court rooms are examples of said establishment.
I don’t see where you’re getting the bit about Catholic confessions being inadmissible in court being an infringement on the first amendment. First of all, I don’t believe they are inadmissible under US law, I believe that the law establishes that a right of confidentiality exists such that a priest cannot be compelled to testify in court to what he hears in confession. I don’t see why this is any different than respecting the confidentiality of discussions with one’s psychiatrist or lawyer, and I doubt that any laws are written to deny that confidentiality to other religious groups. I would strongly suspect that the only reason it comes up with us Catholics are that we are the only ones with a religious obligation to confess.
Civilis – excellent clarity. the only reason it came up here is because Catholics are the last group left that can be bashed publicly. I think it speaks volumes that the individual trying to make this particular point (while mis-stating the actual fact of the matter) has made an entirely different and more interesting one. Even if the confessional were not protected by law, there would not be one priest who would dare break that seal. You see it is not the wrath of man that he would be concerned with… but rather being defrocked in abstentia and having to answer to… well, to hewhocannot benamed (you know, the Author of the Univers and all that), as it were.
And sorry, but church bells violating noise ordinances, and priest confessions inadmissable in court rooms are examples of said establishment.
I’m not sure what you’re saying here. That if a law says that church bells can violate noise ordinances, it’s a violation of the establishment clause?
Furthermore, if you’re going to cite, the first amendment, you really are obliged to cite all of the stuff about religion: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…
So when it comes to church bells or Muslim calls to prayer, you’ve got some conflict there. What the Founders meant is that the State cannot prescribe religious observation nor proscribe it. If the state were mandating that church bells must peal at a certain hour, there’d be a conflict.
But saying that they can’t ring because they’re too loud? Only if the noise rule applies to all noises equally, regardless of their origin or ideological content. The state should prescribe only those ideological views that are consistent with the constitution’s concept of rule of law, separation of powers, governing by the consent of the governed, etc. All else the state should be mum on.
“Perhaps we Christofascist Godbothering Evangelical Loonies should start filing lawsuits against any art that desecrates Christ or the cross or the Virgin Mary under the broad brush of Hate Crimes.”
Does that include their appearance on tortillas and grilled-cheese sandwiches?
I mean, strictly speaking I see Tman’s point about church bells. There is nothing obviously secular that is granted similar leeway in terms of noise ordinances that isn’t covered under a public safety exemption. But I don’t necessarily believe that granting such an exemption for religious institutions necessarily represents an establishment of state sanction for religion, and I believe that once granted, restrictions can be imposed on that exemption for reasons other than the particular religion involved, such as volume, duration, or frequency of the noise.
As for other groups that can still be bashed publicly: we can still bash fundamentalist Christians and Mormons for their religion. We can also bash southerners, people from rural areas, NASCAR fans, gun owners, people who watch FOX news, Republicans, conservatives and libertarians. We can bash nerds, geeks, and others of non-leftist weird hobbies.
also Wall streeters, lawyers, pharmaceutical execs, marketers, professional athletes, and anyone that has been on a reality show
but one cannot bash Loverboy. I will not stand for it. And none can bash Boomers… that is clear. And anyway, the Mormons kind of deserve it.
nor Styx, Kansas, Journey, or Quarterflash. One may, however, bash Clapton.
if you’re wearing way too-tight red leather pants, you kinda have no choice but to stand for it
and The Buggles. One may not bash the Buggles. Or Devo.
oh Jeff! You are just the right mix of smart and snark.
Of course not, cynn. Those go straight to eBay.
And what exactly would the protein wisdom OUTRAGE post look like? A 150 word screed, followed 42 minutes later by an UPDATE: that stretched another 6500 words (encompassing a full three sentences).
Sorry, Jeff, don’t even toy with what Malkin does. As brilliant as you are– and as much as you secretly know you could do the common denominator– you wouldn’t be good at it. The scorpion stings because it is his nature; the armadillo just looks like a fool trying to stretch its ass to its hump. You are what you are.
For what it’s worth, you’re one of only two blogs for whom I’ve ever hit the tip jar. (And I think I just guilted myself into another trip.)
with approval coming from those who “own†a particular identity narrative and are therefore the only ones authentic enought to define the parameters of what is acceptable criticism.
Unless you’re Christian. Or white. Or male.
BECAUSE OF THE OPPRESSION!
(others’ oppression does not signify, of course; they are the other and can only be judged within the context of their sacrosanct otherness)
Christopher Hitchens is the very definition of an enigma.
Sometimes I can’t believe what he is saying, but other times, he is one of the most amazing and penetrating writers I have ever read.
This article is so “right on” (Jeebus! Do I sound like an old hippie?) that it is like an arrow through my heart.
I think if Mr. Hitchens were to do a tad more mushrooms, he might come to understand why so many of us live in faith…
Oh ya? Those Islamist bastards aren’t going to tell ME what to do. There, I just dumped my copy of the Quran into the toilet! Heh! No I’m spittin on it..Ptteeww! How do ya like them apples? Think I’ll just take whizz on it too while I’m standin here.. Ahhhh.. and throw some ham slices on it..slap..slap..and.. and.. slap it with my shoe.. whap whap whap.. and last but not least I think I’ll leave this steaming turd rolled in burnt hair right on the cover. Hah! There you go Imams! That’ll teach you that you cant tell us red blooded Americans what we can and cannot do. You wanna piece of me, come and take it. I’ll tear ya…..
::knock::knock::knock
Huh? just a sec..
(Crash! thump-thump-thump! Boom! Arrrgghh! Get on the ground! Get on the ground!)
FBI Special Agent Hinman: Uhh.. Mr Ouroboros is no longer here and wont be for, ohh, 5 to 10.. Move along now.. Nothing to see here… Move along before we have to take you in for some sensitivity training too.
tW: orally altgeld… I dont know what ‘altgeld’ means but it’s probably pretty funny coupled with ‘orally’ .
But I don’t necessarily believe that granting such an exemption for religious institutions necessarily represents an establishment of state sanction for religion,
It does. Eventually. If I were a Polish Jew in Hamtramck I would feel like it already has.
Tman is making the Jeff-like point that marginal religious exemptions from law will eventually have explosive-laden trucks driven through them by the most willful seekers of those laws’ total erasure. In the case of the Establishment Clause, since their religion is also an ascendant total theory of the State, the beneficiaries of the freeing of that particular text are Muslims.
By the time that eventuality is recognized (Sunday afternoon, was it?), it’s already too late. The principled ground was ceded with the first exemption. That first church bell can’t be unrung, especially in a climate of rhetorical “tolerance.”
What, legally, could be done now to stop “sharia creep?” Nothing the First Amendment was written to allow. Islam-specific de-exemption laws? That’s “negative Establishment,” at least.
And what happens if nothing is done? Today happens. We get a de facto state religion, against which, and only which, blasphemy is a crime, because only one religion’s adherents have the will, and the politico-rhetorical cover, to sic the State on their infidels.
one religion’s adherents have the will, and the politico-rhetorical cover, to sic the State on their infidels.
And the filthy Saudi lucre to back it up. Don’t forget that part.
What, legally, could be done now to stop “sharia creep?†Nothing the First Amendment was written to allow. Islam-specific de-exemption laws? That’s “negative Establishment,†at least.
And what happens if nothing is done? Today happens. We get a de facto state religion, against which, and only which, blasphemy is a crime, because only one religion’s adherents have the will, and the politico-rhetorical cover, to sic the State on their infidels.
Then the necessary change that needs to be made is cultural, not legal. It’s a problem we can’t rely on the government institutions to fight. We need to stand up and push the fact that someone is facing felony charges over an act of free expression. The problem is we won’t succeed unless we get a lot of momentum behind pushing back culturally, and most of the normal momentum in cases like these is on the left, the ACLU and the like.
We’d almost have more success if we replicated the same tactics and forced the ACLU and the left to respond that way. Prosecuting someone for a hate crime for bible or flag burning would get the left to throw its weight behind changing the law really fast. As it is, the left isn’t really going to get involved until a couple people on their side get prosecuted, at which point they’ll blame Christians and the right for the whole problem, and indicate that this is merely the next step towards a Christian theocracy.
“One may, however, bash Clapton.”
GUITARIST!
And certainly, one may bash everyone borne in the US over a 20-year period. Because that shit was just wrong.
And Jews. That never goes out of style.
Fuck, that hurts. Jesus.
TW: himself militia. (Yeah, it might come to that.)
Ah, to be on the jury if that case ever goes to trial.
Judge: “The court recognizes the honorable jury foreman MarkD.”
MarkD: “Thank you, your honor. Given that our duty as a jury is to decide the guilt or innocence of *snicker* a man accused of *chortle* a hate crime by *snort* putting a muslim koran into a toilet ,pfft – snig* the members have called upon me to ask one important question.”
Judge: “Please do.”
MarkD: “Well, your honor, with all due respect for you and the judicial systemHAVE YOU ALL LOST YOUR FUCKING MINDS?
Judge: “Ummmmm … 30 minute recess.”
Or, it could go something like this:
Defense Attorney: Your honor, half of the jury is asleep… and the other half… well, they look mildly retarded.
Judge: “retarded”?
Attorney: yes… er… retarded
Judge: do mean “slow” or are you going to tread into that “bell curve” thing?
Attorney: no, your honor… I mean slow… retarded
Judge: And???
Attorney: oh, forget it.
Judge: alright, 30 minute break for Oprah.
Matt;
I believe you have mistaken the Pace University administration and local authorities for your jury.
Easy mistake, though.
However, I’m a Tweenie Boomer or a Boomer Tweenie or a Boom A Dee Boom Boom Tweenie Tyke so my opinion may be flawed by my generational complicity in ruining our country.
I’m sorry in advance…
tw: the aggravated *sigh* all the time…
How about another lawsuit against a university, a al Duke and the lacrosse players? It seems to have worked out for the three players, since no one seems to be concerned about the financial burden.
It’s time to punish stupidity at the university level. Beat it like a red headed stepchild. Or something. And how about another massive lawsuit against the NYPD for the actions of the arresting (Muslim) police officer who decided to make it a felony arrest?
If it works for the ACLU, it might just work for us. How about a ACRU (American Constitutional Rights Union) or ASRU (Anti Stupidity Rights Union), or something like that? Fight fire with lawsuits.
BJ – good Lord… I am not going to get into this again. Unless, of course, you ask very nicely.
Jeff,
One of the key things I have learned in various US Army instructor training and effective communication courses is to avoid jargon. Unfortunately, to lugs like me, who are otherwise interested in the subject of language and interpretation(especially in how the left controls language to their ends) is that the subject at your level is chock full of jargon that is unfamiliar to a Joe like me. I can follow along, but I often stumble on terms I have no knowledge of.
Just sayin…
Hmm my post vanished. Am I persona non grata?
SGT Ted —
As with many specialties, the study of hermeneutics [interpretation] uses some technical terms. I try to define my terms as carefully as possible, but I’m happy to answer any questions.
Racist! Meritocracy is just another way that whites justify racial inequality by supporting merit as an avenue for advancement or admission to school!
Hey, it must be true, professors with six-figure salaries teach that shit at prestigious universities. And now I’m going to wash my mouth out with soap.
TW: marginal different Called that one right.
Queeran? I thought it was koran. WTF?
Late to the party, as always. Folks, the koran wasn’t desecrated, the toilet was.
LOL ;-) Well said.
Surely there is a member of the plaintiff bar that is willing to fight for the Constitutional rights of toilets everywhere.
jbpxzot kblxhmed mhidjolzu hojmlg jobhpvmcq ekdqrunz enrosu
ujle nthgsjm jivnsd kxetpbq
njhd upzknt pytmvjo rusba
axilv uyakl
nskgucz
hsldou aetjmb ksipjbh yajw
jnshrq
jadt wgjxzr
aqmkwuo umfncl
tfqina ljcad
kqtav
cekfjvu ztxhq kbpot eboghd
bvpenjl uvgfb gqcokev ktui
undpyjc xalj crkfinm
twzar qvhrb ljhw wtkh
tjgizva naeypbc
zhwuijr tzqco clndpzt zvktyl
dkzs ebwpi kmrtd
hcaorml
gmlxwk ymlb
hcxdpv hfemg bgerfk
knxuei blitgm zjumd
acryup
izcylrt bdmagx moguasl vnjtu
xmybfo xtyvqil
hqsc
kvdsr hpdgf hsrt
blqhv
maknf icyntl tbaovkm wpynv
ficxb uhrnc wymntlk jdafce
krch aesgpw
uzxf qmctneb zqwjhx huaw
iqoyhg yizsekp mdav
jvzw
iyuvl
futmp pzolv
alnms qsti wzljby
ahcxg dlcu flyuh vjuszdl
dhjsbv zpjh wtzdcf
dxhqgw stygjih lqinxe bmtno
mault
bijdgm tldpy bdnpoc hwlyn
jptel tzhly tbfc
izejyw
krgxnv sokdhz emjpbw gkze
yhvxdoj haxqw nxlyb
weymog cmazs itwy
tegzpnr cbstpy jfmaz
tvcbg nhjqvy knxo rfuwhbo