Slashdot Mirror
UK Academics Arrested For Researching al-Qaida
D Afifi writes "Two political researchers at the University of Nottingham, in the UK, have been arrested under the Terrorism Act for downloading Al-Qaida material from a US government website. The material was to be used for research in terrorist tactics. There has been a huge public outcry, with university staff planning a march to demonstrate against the attack on academic freedom. Yet, one of the students, an Algerian, is still held in custody under immigration charges and is being fast-tracked for deportation."
The UK is the country furthest along the road to 1984.
Sweet, now there are even more kinds of "illegal data" out there.
Under-age porn, "terrorist" material, DRM removing software, MAFIAA products, etc...
If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
in order to control the masses.
Fear is a common tactic used since the begging of civilization to manipulate people.
- Zeus will destroy you all!
- The devil will come for you and burn you for all eternity!
- Terrorists! omg! seek shelter at once!
- Human knowledge belongs to the world
Anyone have a link to the material in question? (Is it in English?)
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
All this means is ...... WTF????
Information hosted on a US government website? That is forbidden material? Entrapment anyone? How about err... uhhh... holy fuck!
So the UK government noticed this material being downloaded and never looked at where it came from? WTF? Is the US Government now hosting terrorism inciting materials for the internets?
This, I truly hope, leaves buckets full of egg and chicken shit on the faces of some government employee types.
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
They were reading material from a US government website. These are the same idiot agencies who attacked Iraq to "get rid of Weapons of Mass Destruction". Clearly if anyone is less able to produce proper intelligence and material - it's these gaffs.
It's like reading an article on how to improve your country's economy written by George Bush.
No offense to any American's reading btw - it's the agencies I have no respect for.
Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
I mean.. Information doesn't kill people; people kill people!!! It's what you do with the information that counts!
I got curious once and looked up how to make a hydrogen bomb. Does that make me a terrorist? NO. Because I only use my hydrogen bomb for personal self-defense!
--- We need more Ron Paul!
There are 2 issues here that I can tell.
;) ) therefore should not be treated as a terrorist.
:p
#1 Arrest under Terrorism act for having al-Qaida-related material.
#2 Immigration charges and subsequent deportation.
The two are related insofar as discovering 1 resulted in 2.
#2, the illegal immigration, *should* result in deportation - he is perfectly able to make a claim on humanitarian grounds or claim asylum. The fact remains that illegal immigrants should be deported.
#1 should be approached as:
a) person found with dodgy material
b) person was investigated
c) things happen
Now, the main objection is vs c). he was engaging in legitimate academic research (you COULD argue he is a terrorist and this is a clever coverup, but I wont go there
The fact that "An illegal immigrate faces deportation" is no surprise and should not impact your judgement here.
This probably comes acros as a bit confused - its been a long day.
à_à
At a recent InfraGard meeting http://www.infragard.net/ the FBI special agent liason asked how many people had read the Al Qaida training manual. Very few had. He provided the link and suggested everyone read it to learn how the enemy thinks. Hmmm, maybe it was entrapment and we're all now on an "enemies of the state" list! :-)
Some things never change.
--
make install -not war
>>The material was to be used for research in terrorist tactics.
Sure it was. Just like Pete Townsend was conducting "research."
I wonder how many of the 7/7 students (and 9/11 airflight "students") researched terrorist tactics before they went off to kill others.
Further, I'm be curious to know his field of study, wherein "terrorist tactics" is a relevant component of his schooling.
Remember the biggest backer/supporter of the U.S.'s invasion of Iraq? That's right, the United Kingdom.
You shall lose both, and deserve neither.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
Fear drives so much in the form of bad governmental behavior. I feel for my British friends, as they must feel for Americans. Blair and Bush (now Brown), leading their countries down the path to an oil war-- not terrorism-- oil. Not religious self-righteousness-- war for oil and to destabilize governments not marching in-step with them.
The quotations of American and British patriots that warn that liberty at the cost of security is folly are now sadly worn out. My British friends have less hope because they believe that Tory and Labor, just like Democrats and Republicans, are largely the same. This is a dangerous time in the world for people not to believe in the integrity and veracity of their governments; more is at stake in interdependency than ever before. I hope, no pray, they listen to their constituents.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
As I RTFA I realized that this looks like standard jobsworth cops at large and could happen any day here in the U.S. Too much responsibility too little brains.
The cost of that cleanup, of course, will be borne by taxpayers, not industry.
What logic the police have. Let me write a short play on what police conversation must be like in the office: Officer John Smith: "If someone researches terrorism, that means that they MUST be a terrorist!" Officer Jack White: "Brilliant thinking John, that must mean...that if someone researches professional baseball...that they MUST be a PRO-BASEBALL PLAYER!!" Officer John Smith: "And...if someone researchers about geese...then....they must be a GOOSE!" - - - Seriously, this logic reminds me of the scene from Monty Python's Holy Grail where they determine that a woman is a witch because she's 'made of wood'. Go police! 1984!
1984 assumes the government is competent and really out to get everyone. In reality its more like the movie Brazil. Everyone mindlessly doing their job without any critical thought. Watching Brazil and comparing it to current events is truly horrifying.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
be to raid the US embassy for related material and deport them all?
"The fight for freedom has only just begun." - Geert Wilders
No one else seems to have covered this angle, so I'll bring it up. WTF is wrong with the University of Nottingham? I cannot believe a supposed institution of higher learning would sell its scholars down the river like that. This whole thing flies in the face of what a University is suppose to stand for. Perhaps I'm just naive.
BUt now maybe people who think there is nothing to worry about with this fascism creep that has been going on in thUK and the US wull start to wake up.
You can view video clips of Tony Blair and CIA officials basically stating that Al Qaeda doesn't exist on You Tube (IIRC from the BBC originally).
http://polidics.com/cia/top-ranking-cia-operatives-admit-al-qaeda-is-a-complete-fabrication.html
Maybe they are trying to stop people from researching this stuff.
Two details should be considered before judging the situation and blaming random people:
This is a gross mistake anyway, but it's a quite a bit less 1984-ish than one might think from the summary.
The state you are in while your HEAD is detached... - wait, what?
If it's all countries I expect there are in fact quite a few in front of the UK in the "1984" stakes.
Not that that is anything to be proud of.
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
This sounds very similar to a recent episode of numb3rs (not the greatest show in the world, but better than average). Charlie's colleague was arrested for working on genetically modified foods and sending the results to Pakistan where it could save people from famine. The government considered it bio-terrorism research material.
I have little doubt that this episode was inspired by the whole national security climate which silences research all the time.
A few days ago (Friday, May 23rd) 18 year-old Ben Smith was stopped, in a routine check by a police officer, while driving his Vauxhall Corsa to his home in Melksham, Wiltshire. The officer found nothing amiss, but noticed an England flag on the parcel shelf (which Mr. Smith used to cover his music system from potential thieves) and ordered him to remove it. According to Smith:
He saw the flag and said it was racist towards immigrants and if I refused to take it down I would get a £30 fine. I laughed because I thought he was joking, but then I realized he was serious so I had to take it down straight away. I thought it was silly - it's my country and I want to show my support for my country.
This is merely the latest in a long line of such "politically correct" discrimination on the part of England's authorities or its employees. In January 2007, a 27 year old man was ordered by Bedford Council to take down an England flag, that he had hung on the side of his house. In 2006 a fire station was ordered to remove an England flag, because, they were told, it might offend ethnic minorities (despite the local mosque protesting that it did not), and earlier this year a government report revealed that children were routinely punished for wearing clothing bearing the English flag.
But, then, 'England' is a subversive idea to a government that wants to hold the United Kingdom (UK) together, to sink it into the homogenizing machine of the European Union (EU). And 'England' and English nationalism are anathema to political correctness. We have seen this before, of course. A few decades ago a rising Scottish nationalism was considered a threat to the UK.
To combat this rise, the chief secretary of the Treasury in James Callaghan's Labour government, Joel Barnett, was asked to devise a system of distributing funds between England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland. While this was supposed to be a fair, as well as temporary system, the Barnett formula remains, and, today, means that 8 billion pounds (approximately 16 billion U.S. dollars) are diverted to Scotland every year, giving the Scottish government approximately 1,500 pounds more per person. Wales enjoys a similar financial advantage. Moreover, in 1998 the British government granted devolution to Scotland and Wales, creating a Scottish Parliament and a Welsh Assembly. It did not, however, devolve any powers to England, which remains the only country in Europe without national representation. Consequently, Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs are able to vote the House of Commons, on matters that are limited to England, though English MPs have no reciprocal right.
All of this, in practical terms, has meant that residents of Scotland enjoy free college tuition, free parking, free healthcare, free dental check-ups, etc., while residents of England do not. Some medications are also free in Scotland that must be paid for in England. Similar benefits are afforded residents of Wales and Ireland. The Times recently commented, "As they contemplate higher food and fuel costs, rising council tax and poor services, they increasingly ask: why should the English get so much less than the Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish?" This question is being asked, though mostly by those who live close to Scotland or Wales. The town of Berwick-upon-Tweed has even voted to become a part of Scotland, and the village of Audlem, Cheshire, to become a part of Wales, although such protests probably have little effect beyond highlighting the disparity.
Nevertheless, a turn toward localism is already making strides across Europe, and there is a growing sentiment toward devolution and even the eventual independence of England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. The S.N.P. is fighting to make Scotland (population of just over 5 million) an independent country, Plaid Cymru is seeking the same for Wales (3 million), as Sin Fein is for Northern Ireland (slightly less tan 1.75). Sin Fein also wants an eventual reunification with Southern Irelan
By my estimates there are many government and other activities which could be considered 'terrorist' by some definitions of the word. Back in South Africa Nelson Mandela was considered a 'terrorist'. So how do we define 'terrorism' without implicating the so-called 'good guys'?
http://projectleader.wordpress.com
Sun Tsu said "Know thy Enemy". Don't the morons in the British Government understand that? God help Britain. Voting is a choice between Right Wing Retards and Right Wing Retards Lite.
Anyway, proves that what you look at on the net is recorded.
Just wanted to clarify why he's being deported. The brits' reaction to the downloading of the document was a bit extreme, but if ya want to live in a country then ya gotta play by their(sometimes idiotic) rules
But there is something fundamentally wrong with the government if you're an academic and visiting a web site brings you to the attention of the immigration departmnet in the first place.
I think it is pretty obvious that the government decision and policy makers are useless without the people to execute their orders.
Why aren't we actively protesting to those people? These people are responsible for their actions and are responsible for acting on their own conscience. It's easy to show that various campaigns to influence government policy and direction even in small degrees.
How possible might it be to influence the arms and legs of bad government to refuse to act against its conscience?
Tagged: 1984 (of course)
Modding Trolls +1 inciteful since 1999
was studying passenger jets, not Al Qaida literature. The real terrorists plotting a crime have already been recruited, and don't need to read any more Al Qaida stuff. Arresting someone for reading Al Qaida stuff is at best a "pre-crime": they might be converted and decide to commit crimes in the future so we have to stop them now. More likely, this is another case of panicked stupidity causing the innocent to suffer.
Does the UK listen to ALL of its citizen's conversations AND their internet connection?
Is the UK able to tap ALL of the traffic cameras?
Does the UK track its citizens via toll roads that have fast RFID that requires total access by the feds?
Does the UK require all of your banks and CC to give a tap to the feds?
Does the UK have access to all libraries check-in/check-out of books, including grade schools and private libraries?
Does the UK require you to have an approved ID to fly or travel by train?
No, the UK simply needs to hire neo-cons to learn how to do this correctly.
Just wanted to clarify that the UK still has due process. Being *charged* with an immigration crime is not the same as being guilty of said crime. Your reaction to the arrest was a bit extreme, but if ya want to have free speech then ya gotta put up with reactionary (sometimes total bullshit) posts on message boards.
Thank you Dave Raggett
The exits are north and south, pick one.
To quote David Letterman, when interviewing Bill O'Reilly ... "I'm not smart enough to debate you, but I have a feeling that 90% of everything you say is crap"
http://projectleader.wordpress.com
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/terrorism/alqaida_manual/
In a newer apartment, avoid talking loud because prefabricated ceilings and walls [used in the apartments] do not have the same thickness as those in old ones.
Most of the manual (the first one) is bullshit. BTW I'm surprised that they have given Israeli and Russian examples(what they did to achieve their goals) wherever possible.
"See: Africa and starvation."
I had no idea that Mugabe was an environmentalist?
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Everywhere the Muslims go, they cause trouble.
Send them home.
668: Neighbour of the Beast
"The student had obtained a copy of the al-Qaida training manual from a US government website for his research into terrorist tactics."
This is freely available from a US govt website? But you get arrested for downloading it.... ??? anyone else see the problem with this?
Okay, okay, we all know that the US/UK are deliberately baiting and encouraging terrorism as it is serving their interests in controlling the population, but this is ridiculous!
It's out of copyright in Australia and hosted on Gutenberg Australia's site. Fortunately it made it though before the F***edUp Trade Agreement extended copyright and the legislation isn't retrospective.
So, let me get this straight. In order to uphold peace, freedom, civilization and whatnot, we clamp down hard on the academics. So far, so familiar. Now, just for the masterstroke, We focus out little witch hunt on pro-UK moderates, from middle eastern cultural and ethnic backgrounds, with an academic interest in terrorism. Y'know, because it isn't like those sorts of people might prove useful or anything? WTF. Cracking down on academic researchers under some sort of all-encompassing "state's power to do whatever, to whomever" act is bad enough; but not even doing it pragmatically? If 10 Downing Street were to enter the twilight zone, would anybody notice?
... I don't think that it was a "war for oil" because had it been a "war for oil" we would have more oil. We had a War On Drugs, and now there are more and cheaper narcotics than ever before.We had a War On Poverty, which widened the gap between rich and poor.
We're in a War On Terror, and there is more war and fear and uncertainty about the future of the world than at any other time since World War II.
What makes you think a War For Oil would mean more oil?
Just like all of these other wars on concepts, the War For Oil means two things. Firstly, the oil is not for you, and the control of said oil is not for your benefit. Secondly, thanks to Hubbert's Peak, the war was probably already lost before it started.
(AC: posting from work)
there's the stickler, though, as to what the war was planned for ... essentially to have "control" over the oil, not necessarily cheap oil. The oil companies are grinning ear-to-ear about the price of oil - they LOVE that this war is a balls-up from A to Z. Everyone here says to "follow the money", and who benefits MOST from the war ? They've been drolling over Iraq's pool of black gold for decades, plotting left and right and trying their damnedest to make sure that the oil is REALLY HARD to get out, thus inflating prices because of supply-side shortage, and fleecing us all.
...
then again, a few less hydrocarbons released into our skies turns out to be a lucky turn, I guess
hough it's implied in the "held for nearly a week" is that the guy was released.
It doesn't mention why the University flagged it as an issue
"Jonathan Ray, spokesman for the university, said: "What brought this matter to our attention was this material being sent to someone else who is now being held on unrelated immigration matters"
It's an interesting point, but one not explored in the Guardian or in here
It also doesn't state if they even asked the cops why they did this. This statement from the cops is from a Nottingham newspaper
"A Notts Police spokeswoman said the decision to extend the time allowed for questioning was made by a judge.
She said: "The investigation, in its broadest sense, is continuing. The bottom line is that it was the judge, who is experienced in these issues, who granted us more time.
"Police do not just look for evidence that will convict somebody, they are also looking for evidence that may clear an individual.
"This case was handled in an extremely professional way. We deliberately kept it low-key and have never sought to raise the profile of these two individuals or of this case."
In some jurisdictions you'd be put on a list just for reading this post on slashdot.
Come to think of it, imagine what they'd do to you if you actually bothered to type a response and pressed sub...
So, the police came in, grabbed the wrong guy and tortured him to death. Because of a typo. Well, it's a mistake, but not a horrible mistake. Happens all the time really. Go about your business, nothing to see here, eh?
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
It's very simple : The further away you are, the higher quality immigrants you get. Also religiousness makes you lessable to integrate. So together this insures that Islamic immigration to Europe is about the worst type of immigration imaginable.
On the first point :
- Mexican immigration to Europe is very high quality, but your aware of the problems in the U.S.
- African immigrants to the U.S. are *the* highest performing minority, above even any asian group, and even with the negative impact of African-American culture. Indeed, look who's running for president. At the same time, African immigrants to Europe are pretty much the scum of the earth, entering & working illegally, not integrating, etc.
Arabic people immigrating to Europe are not much better than these low class African immigrants. On top of this, Arabic people often expect others to conform to their barbaric interpretation of Islam.
As a side note, my impression is that Britain is handling it's Pakistani immigrant population successfully. Of course they must weaken the power of the loony bin Islamic leaders, but these are less problematic in that community than those in Arab communities, again largely because these were higher quality immigrants in the first place.
Basically all countries need essentially flat immigration quotas which accounts for assimilation, i.e. the quota is logarithmic in the countries population and the quota would be reduced if there was any tendency to form ghettos or home cultural institutions (like churches). Next you restrict to only the highest quality ones via a canadian style point system. Moreover quotas & should be applied across all immigrant, worker, and refugee categories.
Also, all countries should eliminate & revoke all religious worker visas. Indeed, even having religious training should count against you for other visa classes.
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
First of all, that's a bit convenient a definition.
But the fact is, the western world too has a long and funny history of targetting civilians explicitly. The terror bombings of WW2 (started, duly noted by Germany, but continued by the Allies just as well) were probably the best example, though more recent examples do exist. The theory was explictly to kill enough civilians, as to (A) cause a huge morale drop and make them beg their government for peace, and (B) cripple the economy by killing enough of the workforrce.
The industrial cities of Germany for example have not been colateral damage in trying to bomb the factories, they have been the targets themselves. That was the actual target: bombing the city and terrorizing the population. (But again, so did Germany with UK cities, so I'm not trying to make it sound like only one side was doing it.)
The whole doctrine and technique of firebombing them didn't even work against factories. How it worked was dropping a big bomb with an otherwise thin shell, so the blast would blow the shingles off house roofs, followed by lots of little fire bombs that would then fall in the house and set it ablaze. The houses of civilians were _the_ target.
Against factories that particular mix had little to no effect. Against troops or military targets that mix would have been outright stupid, and noone used it for that.
Again, the whole doctrine was to kill as many civilians as your can, and scare the seven shades of shit out of the survivors. That's a terror tactic by any other name.
Want another example: the USA has actively researched biological warfare and had stockpiles of nasty germs until the 70's. I do believe that the doctrine wasn't to drop them just on enemy troops.
The west only gave up on that shit, when we finally figured out that nukes are enough of a deterrent anyway, and killing 3% of a city's population with modified Brucellosis is peanuts compared to nuking it. And again, the doctrine of mutually assured destruction isn't about nuking enemy troops. If you look at any country with nukes, right as we write this, the nukes are aimed at the (potential) enemies' civilian cities. The threat is, very much, "if you dare attack us, we'll wipe out your population and turn your country into a radioactive wasteland."
The neutron bomb was developed for the explicit reason of killing or injuring as many humans as possible, while causing as little damage as possible to everything else. It's not a bomb you'd use to disable a military factory, it's a bomb which would kill its workers (and the whole city nearby) and at most blow the windows off that factory.
Etc.
So, you know, freakin' _please_. I'm even willing to swallow _some_ "us vs them" dehumanizing arguments, but "we wouldn't ever target civilians" is so much bullshit it could fertilize a few acres.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
You get 0 points for reading comprehension.
No, I haven't even bothered rtfa
So the new tactic is to make available, then arrest anyone who downloads it?
Brilliant! I feel much safer now. Thank God they're thinking of the children.
The UK government has presumably decided that the US government is a terrorist organization, and that downloading material from its Web sites is therefore a crime.
The world waits with bated breath to see if Uncle Sam retaliates in kind.
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
Call me paranoid, but isn't it as though they UK government wanted monopoly on information on the subject? That's at least the conclusion I would draw if I was persecuting for researching something.
Wouldn't want any non-state sanctioned truths getting out about what a bunch of hot air this so called terrorist 'threat' really is.
GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
British American Tobacco to be precise. Need I say more?
"Two political researchers at the University of Nottingham, in the UK, have been arrested under the Terrorism Act for downloading Al-Qaida material from a US government website."
So if you download information from a _US government website_ you get arrested and served with a deportation order?
What exactly is the relationship between the US government and Al-Qaida?
Let's analyze this shall we?
Ok so the first part
So, a revolt against unfair imposition of outrageous taxes by people who do not represent you or even have your interests in mind is not, by your definition "a struggle for liberty".
So, a monarchy that does not represent you or your interests, and requires you to engage in unfair and outrageous acts at their behest is not a "dictatorial monarchy". Hmm.
It seems you have no idea what the fuck your babbling about.
Yo renounce your citizenship you clown, it happens all the time.
Oh please shut the fuck up. You don't want "personal freedom" as it really exists, because if you did you could just move to one of the many near lawless locations ALL OVER THE FUCKING WORLD where you could have all the freedom you like.
But that's REAL freedom, i.e., the unsafe, unclean, unruly, uncivilized kind. The kind of freedom people talk about wanting until they have it.
You want the safe, clean, happy freedom that so many people idealize, without appreciating that it's artificial and never lasts.
Long story short, move to Africa. You can get "freedom" out the ass, just don't be a crybaby when you realize the true cost.
The problem is your definition of "freedom" is unworkable. If you feel you only have freedom when you can do whatever you want, well then you can never be free. The reason is that if we let you do whatever you want, we are going to be infringing on someone else's freedom. You see situations like that in dictatorships, like say North Korea. Kim Jong-il has essentially total personal freedom. He can do whatever he wants. However, the price his country pays is that they are all extremely oppressed for that. While the one man may be free, the rest of them aren't.
So, in actual free nations, we have to work towards a balance of freedoms. You have to make sure that one person's freedoms don't infringe on another person's freedoms. That way everyone can be free to do pretty much what they want, and not have to worry about others forcing their will on them.
If you can't accept that kind of freedom, well, then you are a very selfish individual.
Why isn't there a bureaucratic process to get clearance to research content that normally triggers suspicion from authorities?
If you are in Uni and you see someone printing off an Al-Qaida terrorism manual and you reported it, would you or would you not expect the police to investigate??? Of course you would. Even if his lecturers are saying "Yes we knew about it". You would expect the authorities to keep digging in case there were alterer motives. I live in Nottingham and am for one happy that the police did there job. Getting caught up in an explosion would I don't know.... Kind of ruin my day.
-1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flamebait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
Exactly, it's a well observed phenomenon that the 2nd generation is more adventurous in exploring their new home, since they have little memories of the old one.
The 'Little Italies' and other cultural neighborhoods are kind of like transition points. Many of the kids there move out and live typical American lives.
"I only speak the truth"
Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
I'm glad there are some people who realize that there is such a thing as time. The children and grandchildren of immigrants will speak english and possibly be elected president. And when you make conditions better for the worse off people on this planet, you reduce the impact of the inevitable fall you or one you love will experience at some point.
It's called hedging your bets.
At least since the Communist Lee Harvey Oswald shot the brains out of the Democrat Party, turning them into the Dummycrat Party.
Our enemies have learned that the way to defeat America is to buy the Dummycrats. Look how much was bought with a Trip for Three to Saddam's Baghdad! The press still won't report America's successes, years after Saddam, because of the enormous goodwill the Democrats felt towards Saddam because he bought Bonior, McDermott, and Johnson.
Treason is the highest form of patriotism!
Cesar Noragueda
.. of the numbers for the same crimes.
Oh My God! if those numbers are put together, we will have one mighty embarrassment for all of us non-muslims.
Hackers have long memories. It works both ways.
that is was a comprehensively planned war for oil price manipulation!!
1. loot oil
2. scare everyone
3. create shortages globally
4. profit
Hackers have long memories. It works both ways.
Excellent, they should be deporting a lot more professors from the UK. Anti-English and anti-American cowards.
No. Nor is there anything in my post that would lead an intelligent reader to determine otherwise.
Reread that until you realize why your reply was moronic.
As to my rudeness, there is some question about your fitness to bring that particular point up, as YOU are the asshole bitching about arbitrary and inapplicable moral codes, yet are also trying to hold me to an arbitrary and inapplicable moral code that YOU suddenly feel is applicable.
You fail again.
Different Arabic users will have different pronunciations anyhow and different English users will attach different sounds to the letters.
Incidentally the bastion of balanced research (wikipedia) gives both alternatives.
Starvation in Zimbabwe (where I have actually been to - have you?) is occurring for very different reasons than starvation elsewhere in Africa. Some people with improved crops have been trying to help Africa use them for years to get better yields in the places that haven't confiscated farms as presents, but environmentalists fear genetically modified crops and so have blocked such action - probably killing more people than Mugabe could ever hope to in the process.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Mugabe was the one who turned away the ship full of GM corn (the same variety the US eats in it's cearal), not the environmentalists. Other dictators have turned away western vaccinations and anti-aids medicine using equally bizzare excuses.
The fact is that this has nothing to do with environmentalists, it is politics. Dictator X doesn't want the population getting aid from someone else because dictator X will lose some of his control over said population. The same bullshit can be seen in Burma at the moment.
This is not to say that the extremist environmentalist don't want to ban GM crops but the 'fringe elements' do not have that sort of power in the west, in Africa, or anywhere else I have heard of.
Now since you have been to Africa and I haven't I could be wrong about the fucked up politics of the region. If that is the case you should easily be able to link to news reports showing which environmentalists are turning back aid ships and/or stopping them from being loaded.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Everybody seems to forget we ARE at war with Islamofascists....
Sort of hypocritical to charge someone for terrorist activities for downloading al Qeada material made public by the U.S. government, when anyone who is seriously interested in destroying a nation can download all manner of U.S. government papers on the Bush economic policy without any repercussions whatsoever....
Orwell: "In a Time of Universal Deceit, telling the Truth is a Revolutionary Act"
Odds that you'll be directly affected by a terrorist attack: 0.0001%
Odds that you'll have your daily life affected by 'anti terrorism' measures on any given day: 99%
Yes, I'm sucking these figures out of my thumb, but they're close enough for government work and will serve the purpose of highlighting just how disproportionate the response to terrorism actually is.
Granted, I may not keep close track of US domestic news, but offhand I cannot think of a single terrorism attack specifically against a US target (outside of the onflict zones of Afghanistan and the Middle East) since 9/11.