« "you realize, of course, that this means war!" -- bugs bunny. | Main | the blasphemous book of the jau jau is at it again ... »

July 14, 2010


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Jewel Atkins

I once posted a very long article, I can't remember where I first saw it, maybe it was wizbang, but it was about the eventuality of having to slaughter Muslim kids, because it was quickly coming to this point, and we'd better get used to the fact. Once we jettison the stupid appeaseniks and shills we can focus on an actual workable cold and logical survival plan, but as long as we are governed by pacifists of any sort, as long as we allow them to control the debate, then we will always lose.

john jay


a lovely picture.

except, i am really astounded, that a person could even attempt to play the piano like that.

you are facing the wrong way to read the music!!!

john jay

p.s. agreed.

p.s.s. must be hard to run the scales that way. (:O }}}}

GM Roper

John, it shouldn't be hard to run the scales that way! It gives credence to the phrase "Foot LOOSE and Fancy Free! :)

We don't have to "kill the kids" by the way, just convert them to Buddism or Hindu or some other religion that revers life and not death!

john jay


lovely ankles, feet, don't you think? (:O}}}}

when do they cease being kids. when i was growing up, i had no friends capable of cutting off the head of a man, ... , not at 10 years of age. quite frankly, i am somewhat mystified just what that "boy" was? someone especially devout at prayers, for crying out loud?

this is a "child?" not in any sense that i comprehend. when does this thing, this islam, take hold of a child in order to make him capable of such an act? what, they cut off heads as a parlor trick, a stunt to impress the rubes?

john jay


Dear author of this blog,

Is your shift key broken?

john jay



did it have much to do whether you understood it or not, or whether you like the content or not?

if you can explain to me one earthly purpose for caps, i might be persuaded to try it.

what do they do, just exactly?

john jay


Dear Mr. Jay,

Mixed case letters greatly improve the readability of a block of text over all upper case or all lower case. Upper case letters are like road signs on the highway of lower case text, signaling the presentation of words that stand for concrete particulars (proper names) instead of abstractions and, in combination with sentence-ending punctuation, signal the units of thought in written language as pauses and pitch changes do in spoken language. Viewed as a whole, the sentence breaks in a page of mixed case text are much more obvious than those in a page of lower case text.

That upper case letters are often redundant (in that they are not required to convey the intended word) is a point not against, but in favor of their use, since information theory shows that a certain level of redundancy vastly improves the probability the the message will be understood as sent. And not infrequently, upper case letters are necessary or very helpful in distinguishing proper names from their ordinary homonyms (red buttons, united laboratories).

It is not enough to show that all-lower-case text is intelligible, one must show that it is equal in intelligibility to the same text in mixed case. Lacking the gestalt of the upper-case signposts which enable the brain to preprocess the information it is deciphering, the neurology of reading is burdened with a heavier information processing load and the system becomes sluggish and/or irritated. Thus, your readers are less likely to receive the message you wish to convey, and that is a shame, because you are a brilliant thinker.

For an introduction to the utility of redundancy in writing see "Readable Writing: The Role of Cohesion and Redundancy":


You may also be interested in another online discussion of this subject which includes a link to a scientific study of the issue:


john jay


santa barbara said she agrees with me, that capitals really don't convey much at all.

capitals don't convey tone or rhythm, and, in my view, actually serve to impede it.

begin a sentence?

well, the period indicates the previous one has ended. and, if the first sentence of a paragraph is not capitalized, how does that impede the mind's analysis that a new one has begun?

why can "caps" add a mysterious & pleasing "redundancy" to a passage in a way that lower case cannot.

personally, the only way taht "caps" make any sense is as decoration for medieval monks, to give them something to do when copying materials.

thank you, btw, for saying that i am a brilliant thinker. that is a very nice thing to say, but, i am at something of a loss how the addition of capital letters to my writing adds or detracts from that observation, in any meaningful sense.

i doubt much that spelling has much to do with conveying meaning, unless it is a positive source of confusion. i don't that caps do very much, one way or the other, in terms of perception and conveying meaning.

i think precision in syntax, clarity and cohesion in word order, adn rhythm are everything. for example, read carl sandburg's biography of lincoln: his prose is better than his poetry, in my view.

but, thank you very much for the read, for the letter, and for the very nice compliment.

we shall, i hope, simply agree to disagree on the caps.

john jay



You wrote:

"why can 'caps' add a mysterious & pleasing 'redundancy' to a passage in a way that lower case cannot."

The redundancy in initial caps is in the double, rather than single marking of the sentence break (i.e., using only the sentence-ending punctuation). Also, I did not mention that it reduces some kinds of ambiguity, such as the period marking an abbrev. not being mistaken as one ending the sentence. Initial capitals are not mysterious but they can be pleasing, just as the redundancy in English spelling can be pleasing and provably enhances readability. I notice you did not address my point about proper names.

In any case I would not have commented on the subject had you not said:

"if you can explain to me one earthly purpose for caps, i might be persuaded to try it."

I count at least three earthly purposes explained!

Nor would I have taken the trouble to comment if I did not value the content you offered. I accept that you may not be persuaded and may be too habituated to your personal style to change, but I will continue to read your work since it is certainly worth the slight additional neural labor to reach your thoughts.


P.S. Who is this 'santa barbara' who agrees with you? (I am not implying that she is less than perspicacious.)

john jay


just a person, as opposed to a place, who happens to live in boring, oregon and not boring oregon.

say, speaking of oregon, how 'bout them ducks?


p.s. it is well that some labor is associated with reading, do you not think so? anything to make the reader attend to what is at hand.


jj: it astounds me that after reading this most erudite demolition of islam, all folks seem to be interested in is "caps"!

john jay


it is kind of amazing, isn't it? i've never quite got my head around it yet, ... , but, maybe someday.

i just shrug my shoulders, and keep on chugging. laughing.

john jay


JJ -
I agree with Kevin, what happened to the central of the lack of innocence or innocents of Islam. I have always referred to the outer ring of the Islamic org structure as the support and cannon fodder for the two inner target rings. Recall one of my recent comments regarding how one could shoot women and children to which I responded, "Easy, aim a little lower and don't lead them a much." I never was allowed to fly (transport) any more correspondents after that. But I can honestly state that I never shot anyone (man, woman, child, water buffalo, chickens, ducks, or pigs) that didn't deserve it.

With such a target-rich environment (1.? billion), I am more in favor of taking out the radical enforcement middle and the center or the target, which I have noted in our earlier exchanges that destroying the head and fangs of the snake is easier. Aside from eleminating some really bad players, it gives the outter support ring an opportunity to change their minds and ways. But I could be wrong - we maybe just kill them all and let the Arabian Moon god sort out the innocents from the otherwise.


This to RalphB as in a non-alpha and not even close to a Lambda, if you can't follow the central topic of an article, stay the fuck off-line. No one is interested in your tight-assed opinion about the use of the English language. Get a life, numb-nuts.


JJ -
Please excuse my tirade. Pencil-necked dip-shits sometimes press my hot button. Will try to be more civil in my future posts.

Molan Labe,


JJ -
Received this from another bud. It was originally penned by a German. Thought you might find it almost in "Lock-Step" with your thinking. Goes to show you great minds work together.


Goddamned, CRS.


From: terry@allington3691.freeserve.co.uk To: Undisclosed-Recipient:; Sent: 06/10/2012 16:52:57 GMT Daylight Time Subj: A Germans View Islam and fanaticism

A German's View on Islam - well worth reading.
This is by far the best explanation of the Muslim terrorist situation I have ever read. His references to past history are accurate and clear. Not long, easy to understand, and well worth the read. The author of this email is Dr. Emanuel Tanya, a well-known and well-respected psychiatrist. A man, whose family was of the German aristocracy prior to World War II, owned a number of large industries and estates. When asked how many German people were true Nazis, the answer he gave can guide our attitude toward fanaticism.

'Very few people were true Nazis,' he said, 'but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories.'

We are told again and again by 'experts' and 'talking heads' that Islam is the religion of peace and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace. Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the spectre of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam.

The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history. It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honour-kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. It is the fanatics who teach their young to kill and to become suicide bombers.

The hard, quantifiable fact is that the peaceful majority, the 'silent majority,' is cowed and extraneous. Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. China 's huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.

The average Japanese individual prior to World War II was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet. And who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery. Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were 'peace loving'?

History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason, we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points: peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence. Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up, because like my friend from Germany, they will awaken one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun.

Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late.
As for us who watch it all unfold, we must pay attention to the only group that counts -- the fanatics who threaten our way of life.

Lastly, anyone who doubts that the issue is serious and just deletes this email without sending it on, is contributing to the passiveness that allows the problems to expand. So, extend yourself a bit and send this on and on and on! Let us hope that thousands, world-wide, read this and think about it, and send it on - before it's too late.

Now Islamic prayers have been introduced into Toronto and other public schools in Ontario, and, yes, in Ottawa too while the Lord's Prayer was removed (due to being so offensive?) The Islamic way may be peaceful for the time being in our country until the fanatics move in.
And we are silent.......

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)