Intermarkets' Privacy Policy
Support


Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!


Contact
Ace:
aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
CBD:
cbd at cutjibnewsletter.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
J.J. Sefton:
sefton at cutjibnewsletter.com


Recent Entries
Absent Friends
Jon Ekdahl 2026
Jay Guevara 2025
Jim Sunk New Dawn 2025
Jewells45 2025
Bandersnatch 2024
GnuBreed 2024
Captain Hate 2023
moon_over_vermont 2023
westminsterdogshow 2023
Ann Wilson(Empire1) 2022
Dave In Texas 2022
Jesse in D.C. 2022
OregonMuse 2022
redc1c4 2021
Tami 2021
Chavez the Hugo 2020
Ibguy 2020
Rickl 2019
Joffen 2014
AoSHQ Writers Group
A site for members of the Horde to post their stories seeking beta readers, editing help, brainstorming, and story ideas. Also to share links to potential publishing outlets, writing help sites, and videos posting tips to get published. Contact OrangeEnt for info:
maildrop62 at proton dot me
Cutting The Cord And Email Security
Moron Meet-Ups





















« Terrorist-In-Training At The Guardian Calls Islamic Extremism Just A Bit of Excessive "Sassiness!" | Main | Margaret Cho Names Dog For "Chic" Terrorist »
July 16, 2005

Question: What's The Simplest Way To Say "Engages In Apologism"?

I keep running into this problem. I want to say that, for example, Dilpazier Aslan "aplogizes for" Muslim terrorism, but that doesn't sound right; that sounds like he's actually apologizing for the terrorism, rather than engaging in apologetics.

And so usually I resort to the clumsy "engages in apologias" or the like.

Is there a simpler way to say this? Preferably in one word? I'm stumped.

Language mavens, enlighten me.

Eh... Merriam-Webster seems to imply there's no such verb, or else they'd have mentioned it.



posted by Ace at 02:01 PM
Comments



Uh... apologist.

Posted by: Matt on July 16, 2005 02:05 PM

DEFENDS

Posted by: Uncle Jefe on July 16, 2005 02:12 PM

Let me elucidate: apologist.

Posted by: Matt on July 16, 2005 02:14 PM

Yes, I know "apologist." But that's a noun. I'm looking for a verb.

"Defends" is a close synonym, but I'm specifically asking if there's a verb-form for apologism.

Posted by: ace on July 16, 2005 02:17 PM

"...is an apologist for..."

Posted by: Larry Jones on July 16, 2005 02:17 PM

Sorry, I'm having a few Warren moments today.

Posted by: Matt on July 16, 2005 02:22 PM

I don't think there is a verb form for "apologia." I think the closest you're likely to get is "rationalizes."

Posted by: Maxie Zeus on July 16, 2005 02:42 PM

Argues apologetically
Clearly, he's defending, rationalizing, and arguing apologetically.
Asshole.

By the way-

Ol' Valerie Plame's
Undercover persona-
O'Brien's Betsy

Posted by: Uncle Jefe on July 16, 2005 02:51 PM

I'd go with "defends" or "supports", depending on the context.

Posted by: dave f on July 16, 2005 02:52 PM

rationalize, whitewash, excuse, palliate

Posted by: Phinn on July 16, 2005 03:02 PM

Justify. "The terrorism is justified because of the Muslims legitimate grievances with the West." Equivocating bastards.

Posted by: Stormy70 on July 16, 2005 03:05 PM

If you feel like corrupting the etymological root of the word apology, you can use the fabulous ancient Greek word apologeomai:"to make a defense of."

You'd have to just goof around with it though to Englishize it. It may keep the connotation intact.

She apologeomaied the terrorist attack with her assertions that America deserved to be bombed as a result of its imperialism.

I like it anyway.

Posted by: Feisty on July 16, 2005 03:12 PM

I like "AQ's bitch", but that's just me.

As in "The NYT is AQ's bitch".

Posted by: digitalbrownshirt on July 16, 2005 03:19 PM

Dhimmi is another one that fits.

Posted by: digitalbrownshirt on July 16, 2005 03:23 PM

Appeases.

Posted by: Mark Wilson on July 16, 2005 04:01 PM

IN light of the post above this, I nominate "chomanticize" as a verb form of "engages in terrorism apologism".

Here is a sentence using the verb form of word in context:

"By naming her dog after a chic terrorist, the fat lesbian walrus comedienne has chomanticized an individual who deserves nothing but ostracism from society."

You could also accuse someone of "engaging in chomantics" should the need arise.

Damn..i really should trademark that....

Posted by: Jack M. on July 16, 2005 04:14 PM

Would this be a request for a cunning linguist?

Posted by: Gromulin on July 16, 2005 04:18 PM

I've given thought to this myself in an effort to 'brand' apologists for terror, Islamofascism, etc. I wrote about it on my blog in an article entitled "Declaring The Enemy, Part Two: Islamofans."

Posted by: Yr. Fthfl. Svnt. on July 16, 2005 04:33 PM

Then again, "Islamopimp" works as well as anything else in my book.

Posted by: Yr. Fthfl. Svnt. on July 16, 2005 04:37 PM

"justifies"

I agree -- we need to find a verb for dhimmi as well as that's really what it is.

I am casting about and not finding the word used in WWII for Jews who helped the Nazis. I know [think] there was a specific term but am having a flat-brain day.

Posted by: Claire on July 16, 2005 05:36 PM

mitigates, excuses, justifies, exonerates...

apology

Posted by: John Anderson on July 16, 2005 05:48 PM

Oh, this is one of those cool "poetic license" moments: Use a non-word everyone knows you're using deliberately, like:

Apologates.

Apologywashes.

Posted by: rdbrewer on July 16, 2005 06:01 PM

"I'm specifically asking if there's a verb-form for apologism."


Well then, I will specifically tell you the verb form for being an apologist -- apologize.

Duh.

Unfortunately, it is a seldom-used secondary meaning of the verb, so it doesn't help you much in communicating with the audience that you affectionately refer to as a bunch of morons.

While we're on the subject, apologism does not mean what you think. You probably meant to say apologetics. Don't feel bad, you'd have to be a theology buff to have heard of apologetics.

Posted by: Michael on July 16, 2005 06:02 PM

Mea-culpizes

Sorry-o-fies

Posted by: rdbrewer on July 16, 2005 06:15 PM

I like sorry-o-fies a lot. But, we need something pithier for when the Val-U-Rite vodka is fueling the post, like:

bends-over-to-offer-squeekhole-ogizes

Posted by: Michael on July 16, 2005 06:30 PM

I have several ideas:

"Sacrifices own reputation for intellectual honesty by apologizing for a manifest sleazeball"

"Breaks his back bending over to explain away the inexplicable"

"Defends the indefensible"

"Excuses the inexcusable"

"Rationalizes the irrational"

"Empathizes with evil"

"Has his head rammed so far up his own GI tract that he cannot distinguish right from wrong"

"Is so contemptuous of Muslims that he refuses to hold them to the same standard as, say, Jews"

OK, these may not be short enough.

Posted by: TigerHawk on July 16, 2005 06:35 PM

Rationalizes... justifies... excuses...

Posted by: Dave S on July 16, 2005 07:17 PM

Thank you, Michael -- I didn't know that all. v. interesting. and useful.

Starting over, howz about "excusing": To explain (a fault or an offense) in the hope of being forgiven or understood: To serve as justification for

'Course there's always the term, "the Bend-Over-and-Butter-Up Crowd"

Posted by: Claire on July 16, 2005 07:22 PM

Some other suggestions:

He

"adfiskulated"

"Galloweighed-in"

"Arafarted"

"Moore-tified"

or, simply, "lied".

Posted by: Noel on July 16, 2005 07:29 PM

how about "pimps himself out for..."

Posted by: cuddihy on July 16, 2005 07:29 PM

"Is so contemptuous of Muslims that he refuses to hold them to the same standard as, say, Jews"

Bingo!

Posted by: Claire on July 16, 2005 07:52 PM

In relation to engaging in apologetics for anything to do with the fight against Islamism, how about "dhimmicizing"?

Posted by: Squatch on July 16, 2005 07:55 PM

Apologyrates.

Mea culpagizes.

Posted by: rdbrewer on July 16, 2005 08:09 PM

rdbrewyer:

I appreciate your continuing to noodle on this, but I'm still voting for sorry-o-fies.

Posted by: Michael on July 16, 2005 09:10 PM

Of course, in order to accuse someone of sorry-o-fication you must observe the obligatory empathetic head-tilt, but the head-tilt can usually be inferred from the author's text.

Posted by: Michael on July 16, 2005 09:41 PM

Maybe "shills for"?

Posted by: David C on July 16, 2005 10:25 PM

or perhaps "flacks for"

Posted by: Stephen on July 16, 2005 10:51 PM

How about " Dilpazier Aslan "verbally participates in" Muslim terrorism"?

Or "orally justifies"
Or "excretes terrorist sh*t through his pie hole"

Posted by: dougrc on July 16, 2005 10:53 PM

"Chamberlains"

Posted by: Buckley F. Williams on July 16, 2005 11:08 PM

"Rationalizes", "justifies", or "excuses" are good.

Posted by: SWLiP on July 17, 2005 12:40 AM

Insincere-o-shitifies

Posted by: on July 17, 2005 02:23 AM

blows terrorists for lunch money

Posted by: krakatoa on July 17, 2005 02:43 AM

Kos.

"He was Kosing all over the place."

Posted by: Yr. Fthfl. Svnt. on July 17, 2005 04:06 AM

Democrats:

Dem. Demmed. Demming. Demmi. Dhimmi.

Popular dem Naom Chomsky

"Nancy Pelosi was demming for prisoners' rights in Gitmo today..."

"Kos demmed for the slaughter of US contractors in Iraq on his website..."

"Demmis Nancy Pelosi and Joseph Wilson both burst into tears on Oprah..."

Posted by: Yr. Fthfl. Svnt. on July 17, 2005 04:36 AM

exculpates?

Posted by: msl on July 17, 2005 10:34 AM

Quisling

Posted by: nobody4 on July 17, 2005 05:29 PM

I second 'justifies.'
Cuts to the heart rather nicely.

Nothing is really shorter than the clumsy 'engages in apologism,' if you want the exact same nuanced meaning, you may have to go with a longer phrase rather than shorter.

'Bends over backward trying to rationalize...'
'Trots out the old canard about Muslim grievances...'

Posted by: lauraw on July 17, 2005 08:12 PM

How about "makes sophistical arguments in support of terrorism," "propagandizes in support of terrorism," "attempts to justify terrorism," or "tells people to shut up and take their terrorism"?

Posted by: Helen Gaius Mohiam on July 17, 2005 08:20 PM

"creedle". the little fucker fairly creedles about terrorism.
ok, I just made that up. but its kinda onomatopoeic. its the sound I imagine the little craven cunt will make when his head is crushed under foot, like the cockroach he is.

Posted by: larrikin on July 17, 2005 10:21 PM

"[I]ts the sound I imagine the little craven c*nt will make...."

Actually, I think that sound would be a "queef." And I think we finally have the verbal form of "apologia": "Edward Said always used to queef for Islamic terrorism." "If you punch Robert Fisk, it just makes him queef louder." "The BBC and Reuters queef for terrorism almost as much as al-Jazeera." "Queef" will do quite well as the verbal form of "dhimmi," as well: "Andrew Sullivan used to be a voice for armed counterattack against Islamofascism, but now he just queefs." A particularly egregious editor is "editor-in-queef." (Kiefer Sutherland had better never, ever become an apologist for terrorism.) Thomas Friedman has been unexpectedly tough lately, so, like, "Where's the queef?" If someone comes up with a novel argument in favor of terrorism, he's "turned over a new queef."

Posted by: Helen Gaius Mohiam on July 18, 2005 03:50 AM

"champions".

Has the overtones of a defender and an advocate -- one who does (in this case, verbal) battle on behalf of another individual or a cause.

Thomas Friedman champions the caliphate. Milton Friedman champions school vouchers.

Posted by: Pouncer on July 18, 2005 12:30 PM

Touts Terrorism?

Mediates Murder?

Gilds Goatgropers?

Softsoaps Splodeydopes?

Posted by: Speller on July 18, 2005 12:45 PM

obsequiate?

Posted by: on July 18, 2005 09:38 PM

Toady? (neologism - Sycophize?)

from American Heritage/bartleby.com: Toadeater and the verb derived from it, toadeat, influenced the sense of the noun and verb toad and the noun toady, so that both nouns could mean “sycophant” and the verb "toady" could mean “to act like a toady to someone."

Posted by: on July 18, 2005 10:16 PM

Ooooo

'softsoaps.'
Good one, Speller.

Posted by: lauraw on July 18, 2005 10:35 PM

Ace,

Given the limitations of "English" you may need to select a verb that conveys the speaker's intent to deceive the [Western] audience while simultaneously currying favor with the [Al Queda] subject of discussion. Having established the disengenuousness of the apologist, the specific intent of apologizing for terrorism could then be relegated to context.

Then again, one of the geniuses commenting on this site may find the perfect verb, but it won't be me.

Izzy

p.s. sorry for fraying any comment threads, and who is the yellow lady?

Posted by: on July 19, 2005 12:49 AM

Gray Lady.


Yellow Journalism.


Yellow Lady.

Posted by: rdbrewer on July 19, 2005 12:59 AM

Softpeddles Suicidebombers?

Panders Porkhaters?

Hawks Headchoppers?

Markets Misogyny?

Fellates Fanatics?

Posted by: Speller on July 19, 2005 12:10 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?








Now Available!
The Deplorable Gourmet
A Horde-sourced Cookbook
[All profits go to charity]
Top Headlines
What? Skeleton of the most famous Musketeer, D'Artagnan, possibly discovered in Dutch church closet.
Dumas picked four names of real musketeers out of a history book, D'Artagnan, Athos, Aramis, and Porthos. So there was an actual D'Artagnan, though he made most of the story up. (Or, you know, all of it.)*
Charles de Batz de Castelmore, known as d'Artagnan, the famous musketeer of Kings Louis XIII and Louis XIV, spent his life in the service of the French crown.
The Gascon nobleman inspired Alexandre Dumas's hero in "The Three Musketeers" in the 19th century, a character now known worldwide thanks to the novel and numerous film adaptations.
D'Artagnan was killed during the siege of Maastricht in 1673, and there is a statue honoring the musketeer in the city. His final resting place has remained a mystery ever since.

A lot of Dumas's stories are based on bits of real history. The plot of the >Three Musketeers, about trying to recover lost diamonds from the queen's necklace, was cribbed from the then-almost-contemporaneous Affair of the Queen's Necklace. And the Man in the Iron Mask is based on real accounts of a prisoner forced to wear a mask (though I think it was a velvet mask).
* Oh, I should mention, Dumas says all this, about finding the names in an old book, in the prologue to his novel. But authors lie a lot. They frequently present fictions as based on historic fact. The twist is, he was actually telling the truth here. At least about these four musketeers having actually existed and served under Louis XIV.
Fun fact: You know the beginning of A Fistful of Dollars where the local gunslingers make fun of Clint Eastwood's donkey and Eastwood demands they apologize to the donkey? That's lifted from The Three Musketeers. Rochefort mocks D'Artagnan's old, brokedown farm horse and D'Artagnan is incensed.
A commenter asked which should be read first, The Hobbit of LOTR?
Easy, no question -- read The Hobbit first. It's actually the start of the story and comes first chronologically. It sets up some major characters and major pieces in play in LOTR.
Also, the Hobbit is Beginner-Friendly, which LOTR isn't. The Hobbit really is a delightful book, and a fast read. It's chatty, it's casual, it's exciting, and it's funny. In that dry cheeky British humor way. I love that the narrator is constantly making little asides and commentary, like he's just sitting next to you telling you this story as it occurs to him.
LOTR is a very long story. Fifteen hundred pages or so. The Hobbit is relatively short and very punchy and easy to read. If you don't like The Hobbit, you can skip out on LOTR. If you do like it, you'll be primed to read LOTR.
Oh, I should say: The Hobbit is written as if it's for children, but one of those smart children's stories that are also for adults. Don't worry, there's also real fighting and violence and horror in it, too.
LOTR is written for adults. (It's said that Tolkien wrote both for his children, but LOTR was written 17 years later, when his children were adults.) Some might not like The Hobbit due to its sometimes frivolous tone. Me, I love it. I find it constantly amusing. Both are really good but there is a starkly different tone to both. LOTR is epic, grand, and serious, about a world war, The Hobbit is light and breezy, and about a heist. Though a heist that culminates in a war for the spoils.
The Hobbit Challenge: Read two more chapters. I didn't have much time. Bilbo got the ring.
I noticed a continuity problem. Maybe. Now, as of the time of The Hobbit, it was unknown that this magic ring was in fact a Ring of Power, and it was doubly unknown that it was the Ring of Power, the Master Ring that controlled the others.
But the narrator -- who we will learn in LOTR was none of than Bilbo himself, who wrote the book as "There and Back Again" -- says this about Gollum's ring:
"But who knows how Gollum had come by that present [the Ring], ages ago in the old days when such rings were still at large in the world? Perhaps even the Master who ruled them could not have said."
In another passage, the ring is identified as a "ring of power."
I don't know, I always thought there was a distinction between mere magic rings and the Rings of Power created by Sauron. But this suggests that Bilbo knew this was a ring of power created by Sauron.
Now I don't remember when Bilbo wrote the Hobbit. In the movie, he shows Frodo the book in Rivendell, and I guess he wrote it after he left the Shire. I guess he might have added in the part about the ring being a ring of power created by "the Master" after Gandalf appraised him of his research into the ring.
I never noticed this before. I know Tolkien re-wrote this chapter while he was writing LOTR to make the ring important from the start. And also to make Gollum more sinister and evil, and also to remove the part where Gollum actually offers Bilbo the ring as a "present" -- Bilbo had already found it on his own, but Gollum was wiling to give it away, which obviously is not something the rewritten Gollum would ever do.
But I had no memory of the ring being suggested to be The Ring so early in the tale.
Finish the job, Mr. President!
Melanie Phillips lays out the case for the total destruction of the Iranian government and armed forces. [CBD]
CJN podcast 1400 copy.jpg
Podcast: Sefton and CBD talk about how would a peace treaty with Iran work, Democrats defending murderers and rapists, The GOP vs. Dem bench for 2028, composting bodies? And more!
Oh, I forgot to mention this quote from Pete Hegseth, reported by Roger Kimball: "We are sharing the ocean with the Iranian Navy. We're giving them the bottom half."
Forgotten 80s Mystery Click: Red Leather Suit and Sweatband Edition
And I was here to please
I'm even on knees
Makin' love to whoever I please
I gotta do it my way
Or no way at all
Tomorrow is March 25th, "Tolkien Reading Day," because March 25th is the day when the Ring is destroyed in the book. I think I'm going to start the Hobbit tomorrow and read all four books this time.
The only bad part of the trilogy are the Frodo/Sam chapters in The Two Towers. They're repetitive, slow, and mostly about the weather and terrain. But most everything else is good. Weirdly, the Frodo-Sam chapters in Return of the King are exciting and action-packed and among the best in the trilogy. (Though the chapters with everyone else in Return of the King get pretty slow again. Mostly people talking about marching towards war, and then marching towards war.)
Forgotten 80s Mystery Click
One day I'm gonna write a poem in a letter
One day I'm gonna get that faculty together
Remember that everybody has to wait in line
Oh, [Song Title], look out world, oh, you know I've got mine
US decimation of Iran's ICBM forces is due to Space Force's instant detection of launches -- and the launchers' hiding places -- and rapid counter-attack via missiles
AI is doing a lot of the work in analyzing images to find the exact hiding place of the launchers. Counter-strikes are now coming in four hours after a launch, whereas previously it might have taken days for humans to go over the imagery and data.
Robert Mueller, Former Special Counsel Who Probed Trump, Dies
“robert mueller just died,” trump wrote in a truth social post on march 21. “good, i’m glad he’s dead. he can no longer hurt innocent people! president donald j. trump.”
Canadian School Designates Cafeteria And Lunchroom As "No Food Zones" For Ramadan
Canada and the UK are neck and neck in the race to become the first western country to fall to Islam [CBD]
Recent Comments
Anna Puma: "Nazi Germany and T4, when they were murdering the ..."

no one of any consequence: "She could fly with ears that big. ..."

Sam Adams: "113 How do you make your nipples point in differen ..."

Masturbatin' Pete: "377 I expect some coalition will be put in charge ..."

Sponge - F*ck Cancer: "[i]Ellen Degeneres has HUGE ears Posted by: Don B ..."

Cow Demon: "My preferences, in order: 1. No war. 2. War that w ..."

As my father in law would say : "She can fly away those ears. ..."

Victor Tango Kilo: "How about Illinois, because, after all Pritzker ow ..."

[/i][/i][/i][/s][/s][/s][/b][/b][/b]Christopher R Taylor: "[i]How do you make your nipples point in different ..."

[b]bob[/b] ([i]moron incognitus[/i]): "Seriously. In Canada, the death certificate does n ..."

melodicmetal: "Its funny that the people who have fucked up forei ..."

People's Hippo Voice: "I think Trump should file a sealed-appeal of the c ..."

Bloggers in Arms
Some Humorous Asides
Archives