Slashdot Mirror


Turkey Has Reportedly Banned Google

oxide7 and a number of other readers sent word (from mostly non-authoritative sources as yet) that Turkey had imposed an indefinite ban on some Google properties. "Turkey's Telecommunications Presidency said it has banned access to many of Google IP addresses without assigning clear reasons. The statement did not confirm if the ban is temporary or permanent. Google's translation and document sharing sites have also been banned indefinitely along with YouTube and Facebook in the country. Other services such as AppEngine, FeedBurner, Analytics, etc., have also been reportedly banned." Some real-time commentary (much of it in Turkish) can be found at Twitter hashtag #TurkeyCensoringGoogle. We have noted in past years the censorious ways of Turkish courts.

531 comments

  1. Flood gates open by shemp42 · · Score: 1

    Well it looks like the Green damn has begun to flood the world.

  2. Flow of Information by headkase · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think this quote applies here:

    As the Americans learned so painfully in Earth's final century, free flow of information is the only safeguard against tyranny. The once-chained people whose leaders at last lose their grip on information flow will soon burst with freedom and vitality, but the free nation gradually constricting its grip on public discourse has begun its rapid slide into despotism. Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.

    Commissioner Pravin Lal
    "U.N. Declaration of Rights"

    source

    --
    Shh.
    1. Re:Flow of Information by JWSmythe · · Score: 4, Funny

          That would have been a lot more impressive if it was a real quote, and not just a quote from a video game.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    2. Re:Flow of Information by Jawnn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Au contraire. The quote, or rather it's use, is all the more impressive (though not in a good way) for what it represents, the death of conventional literacy.

    3. Re:Flow of Information by Mad+Merlin · · Score: 1

      That would have been a lot more impressive if it was a real quote, and not just a quote from a video game.

      Ultimately, they're both sets of words composed by a person. What's the difference? Is it just that you expect someone famous to be attached to a quote? What if someone famous composed the words quoted in the video game? Would that still not be a real quote?

    4. Re:Flow of Information by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      War.

      War never changes.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    5. Re:Flow of Information by CAIMLAS · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yet, Turkey is/was a charter nation in the creation of the United Nations; they've also been a member in NATO since the Cold War.

      Somehow, something has changed. It's interesting that this so closely coincides with the "blockade" incident with Israel, on account of many of the participants having been Turkish citizens.

      I wonder if either of these events have anything to do with the recent (2002) elections in Turkey, where the AKP party (a 'religiously conservative' party with strong Islamic 'influence') won the seats of government in overwhelming numbers. It would certainly explain socio-political events since that time, if indeed they're moving closer towards the Islamic "center" (as Iran claims having done themselves).

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    6. Re:Flow of Information by headkase · · Score: 1

      You have some secret information that would qualify Google? Spill the beans! So it can be considered freely! ;)

      --
      Shh.
    7. Re:Flow of Information by headkase · · Score: 1

      Sorry wrong branch.

      --
      Shh.
    8. Re:Flow of Information by Cassius+Corodes · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It is indeed to do with the AKP party - but that is nothing new for turkey - what is new that this time the army has not responded with a coup as it normally does when religious folk get out of control in turkey. I think it has happened at least 3 or 4 times so far. Since their election turkey has moved closer to Iran, and with the blockade stunt now has taken leadership of the 'resistance bloc' (as well as caused their religious followers to go totally bat shit crazy on the streets (see some of the photos)). Basically barring the army doing anything turkey has left both the western and secular realm.

      This situation is quite interesting as the majority has repeatedly elected, what is basically, an Islamist party into power. The west has made it clear they dont want the army to intervene this time, but that is the only thing that can save Turkey from the Islamists. What the hell are you supposed to do if you believe in democracy but democracy spawns people who bring it down?

      --
      Control is an illusion, order our comforting lie. From chaos, through chaos, into chaos we fly
    9. Re:Flow of Information by headkase · · Score: 1

      There is a tendency to over-differentiate in human thinking. More and more branches open up and the consequences between them become ever more complex with the resulting signal of your thoughts plummeting. Do you think you are trying to relate things that may have no relation? All these things may have been factors but I believe the true motivator from your post, the one to concentrate on, is the nature of biblical thinking. From that perspective it is acceptable to deny things rather than face the truth that they are part of our natural experience. Banning Google I believe in this context stems from biblical rationale. Stating why you want to ban them and publicly exposing that rationale is more compatible with information flow. Information flow trusts individuals to do the right thing, censorship implies that you as an individual cannot be trusted to not fall off the biblical path. Do you think that this mind-set is relevant?

      --
      Shh.
    10. Re:Flow of Information by oldhack · · Score: 1, Informative

      Shut up, douchebag. It's the same gov't that kept military "deep state" in check, implemented many "Western" policies that EU asked for, and managed to bring the crazy inflation under control.

      The recent anti-Jew theatre is getting out of hand, though. Turkey and Israel have been close trading and military allies for many years.

      --
      Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
    11. Re:Flow of Information by JWSmythe · · Score: 4, Interesting

          Well, the attribution for the quote was to Commissioner Pravin Lal of the UN. That position indicates someone who has earned respect of world leaders, and in that is himself a world leader.

          Myself, I don't know all the members of the UN, nor all the titles within the UN. I strongly suspect most of us wouldn't. It would be easy to confuse a well written game quote, for a well written quote of a world leader. Likewise, there should be no expectation that we would all recognize every character from every video game.

          Or as NATO Intelligence Chief Henry Schmit once said, "There's only a fine line between information and disinformation. We must remain diligent to the factuality of any information presented."

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    12. Re:Flow of Information by Bartab · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yet, Turkey is/was a charter nation in the creation of the United Nations; they've also been a member in NATO since the Cold War.

      The UN is populated more by dictatorships than anything approaching "free countries", and NATO broke down into a "sign this paper against communism and the US will give you money" almost instantly.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo.
    13. Re:Flow of Information by headkase · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That is a valid point. At the same time we must look forward and to do so we need guides. Extrapolation is one of those guides. The quotes on that page represent a coherent package that are relevant to current human issues and are therefore useful for extrapolation given our current world.

      --
      Shh.
    14. Re:Flow of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

          Well, the attribution for the quote was to Commissioner Pravin Lal of the UN. That position indicates someone who has earned respect of world leaders, and in that is himself a world leader.

          Myself, I don't know all the members of the UN, nor all the titles within the UN. I strongly suspect most of us wouldn't. It would be easy to confuse a well written game quote, for a well written quote of a world leader. Likewise, there should be no expectation that we would all recognize every character from every video game.

      <snip>

      Perhaps it was in the interests of full disclosure that the OP also posted the source. Would this not invalidate your argument regarding the attribution?

    15. Re:Flow of Information by Bartab · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It is indeed to do with the AKP party - but that is nothing new for turkey - what is new that this time the army has not responded with a coup as it normally does when religious folk get out of control in turkey. I think it has happened at least 3 or 4 times so far.

      This is true, and entirely the fault of the EU. The -people- of Turkey want a religious, sharia law based, dictatorship. It's a foreign thought to western minds, but as you point out they've pressured for such a gov't several times. At which point the, highly secular, military comes out in a minor coup and re-establishes what was the second freest nation in the area.

      The EU didn't like that, so as such a gov't is being implemented now the military is holding back and not correcting the situation, and we get headlines like this one.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo.
    16. Re:Flow of Information by Darkman,+Walkin+Dude · · Score: 1

      The once-chained people whose leaders at last lose their grip on information flow will soon burst with freedom and vitality

      Yeah so how come most of your creativity comes from your immigrants from Europe? Back to your government sanctioned free speech zone you. In other news, turkey by name, turkey by nature.

    17. Re:Flow of Information by headkase · · Score: 1

      That is all leading up to the conclusion: Beware those who would deny you access to information for in their heart they dream themselves your master.

      Do you not think with human nature in mind this has a degree of truth to it?

      --
      Shh.
    18. Re:Flow of Information by RMingin · · Score: 1

      The definition of fiction is 'Not all documented truth', not 'contains no documented truth'. A subtle but important distinction.

      To clarify further: Because a quote is from a game or movie it can have no truth in it?

      --
      The preceding comment is my own, and in no way construes an opinon of the Emperor of Mankind.
    19. Re:Flow of Information by JWSmythe · · Score: 2, Insightful

          As it is frequently commented on here, people fail to read the whole summary, and more often the article itself. It would be irrational to assume anyone would follow a link in a comment. Even if they did, they may not have recognized the name at the top of the page as a game page, and it would simply look like a list of famous quotes. I know I didn't game a lot through that period (busy working and having a life), and therefore didn't recognize the game name, but I did recognize Sid Meier's name.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    20. Re:Flow of Information by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

      I think William Shatner said it best.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    21. Re:Flow of Information by headkase · · Score: 1

      Please specify what William Shatner telling Star Trek fans to "get a life" has to do with fiction containing truth as well as fiction?

      --
      Shh.
    22. Re:Flow of Information by JackieBrown · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The west has made it clear they dont want the army to intervene this time, but that is the only thing that can save Turkey from the Islamists.

      That is because the West has become weak and thinks that the more meek it gets, the more everyone will suddenly love it.

      In truth, our enemies still hates us and we are losing what allies we once had.

    23. Re:Flow of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The turks have allowed the jihadists to control the propaganda. This is, in no small part, a result of the EU pressure towards a free press. Unfortunately, that meant that the better funded press won; there is no free press there.

    24. Re:Flow of Information by gordoste · · Score: 1, Troll

      Why aren't they allowed to have a democratic country implementing Sharia law? If it's a liberal reading of Sharia law it might even be better than the "pay lip service to people's rights while trampling on them and making yourself billions of dollars" that the US has spawned and is exporting.

    25. Re:Flow of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A video game quote is 4:Insightful?! It's not even a real person, and the citation doesn't acknowledge this.

      I dare not ask what passes for literacy here.

    26. Re:Flow of Information by headkase · · Score: 1

      Obviously I post mostly elsewhere where people think about what they are reading. I remember when Slashdot wasn't an idiot-fest.

      --
      Shh.
    27. Re:Flow of Information by Man+On+Pink+Corner · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Democracy doesn't mean the tyranny of the majority should run unchecked. Almost 80% of people in general believe in an invisible sky wizard, so without safeguards to keep the religious majority from running roughshod over reality, "democracy" is eight wolves making the rules for two sheep.

    28. Re:Flow of Information by Zerth · · Score: 1

      And the corollary, from the same game:

      Take control of the input and you shall become master of the output.

      Chairman Sheng-ji Yang

    29. Re:Flow of Information by johncadengo · · Score: 1

      Or as NATO Intelligence Chief Henry Schmit once said, "There's only a fine line between information and disinformation. We must remain diligent to the factuality of any information presented."

      Haha. I see what you did there. Googled the quote and the man. Neither exist.

      --
      My page.
    30. Re:Flow of Information by headkase · · Score: 1

      That is true and exposes another aspect: values. I value my freedom to set my own course and not have it dictated to me. However, a further subtlety is if your input supported the conclusion would you believe you had your "freedom" when you did not and are therefore contained within the desired output of another?

      --
      Shh.
    31. Re:Flow of Information by gordoste · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Apparently "democracy" in America means the tyranny of the rich minority runs unchecked. In the absence of something to provide a moral compass, money has filled the vacuum and now anything is OK as long as it makes money.

    32. Re:Flow of Information by elloGov · · Score: 0, Interesting

      Thanks for laying out our future for us. To folk like you, we are just the alien of the times. As a Turkish Kurd by birth, I've suffered tremendously, because of those who thought they knew what was best for people of Turkey. The army and the minor "secular" elitist persecuted the majority with the 1960, 1971, 1980 and 1997(Albeit a soft one) coups and caged us in an centurylong economical slump and social tyranny. Folk like you aren't exclusive to one race, region, sex, age group or an opinion. You tell stories to inspire reality. As a mercenary, I applaud you; but like a fool I pity you. Equally fertile, your message has an inhumane manifest. I wish you individual happiness, but not at the expense of others' basic human natural rights. Being caged institutionalizes animals, including human beings. Seeing your father smacked around consistently is psychologically permanently destructive to a child. It is these people who are fighting for freedom; not the "jihadists", not the governments. As an American via adolescence and naturalization, i can attest wholeheartedly to that people of the Middle East including Middle Eastern Jews (not Ashkenazi) do not hate you for your freedom.

    33. Re:Flow of Information by masterwit · · Score: 1

      Please do not start to doublethink this!

      --
      We should start a new Slashdot and return control to the geeks. It actually wouldn't be that hard to get some users to
    34. Re:Flow of Information by noidentity · · Score: 0, Redundant

      The quote, or rather it's use, is all the more impressive (though not in a good way) for what it represents, the death of conventional literacy.

      irony

    35. Re:Flow of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I was on the impression that the recent years of consistent censorship activities were from the extreme-right wing nationalists who have some issues with the Kurds, the Armenians, the people who write something about Atatürk the extremist don't like and the people who somehow insult against "Turkishness" of the Turkey.

    36. Re:Flow of Information by tsm_sf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The quote, or rather it's use, is all the more impressive (though not in a good way) for what it represents, the death of conventional literacy.

      Where do you get off talking about "conventional" literacy? The form has been living and evolving for more than five thousand years, and certainly wasn't destined to peak "when you were younger". The quote you're bitching about contains a specific point of view that was communicated effectively enough that at least one reader(whatever) was able to apply it in a manner that conveyed his thinking on a similar but unrelated topic.

      How many authors have failed to hit that mark?

      --
      Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
    37. Re:Flow of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      coincidence? ... Or - damage control for israel to detract american favor from turkey. What other country bans google? What is the popular perception of that other country? Questions.

    38. Re:Flow of Information by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          I was wondering how long it would take someone to catch that. :)

          Is my fiction any different that of a game? Well, only in that I didn't fit it into the game's storyline.

          "He" could have said something like "Control of information is essential to ensure the continuity of peace for the civilians who we are sworn to protect." But, I play for the side of free speech and unlimited access to information. When information is free to everyone and there are no more secrets, we can formulate truly educated opinions.

          All that we really know about the incident in question is that it is rumored that the Turkish government may have blocked access to Google IP blocks. Until we have all the information, we won't know if it is truly a malicious attempt by their government to limit access to information, or simply a routing error. Where the article did say some Google properties are accessible but very slow, it could just be a major mistake, and not actually government censorship. It's not like we've never seen that happen before.

          We likely will never know the whole truth though.

          If they deny it, it could be a routing error, or they could be lying and it is censorship.

          If they admit it, it could be censorship, or they may see it was a good idea (just speculation, not really a good idea) and enforce it as a new rule.

          I would think if they blocked Google properties to limit civilian access to outside resources, it would have been a rapid and wide spread block, which removed access from any potentially threatening intellectual property.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    39. Re:Flow of Information by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      Hey, you can always count on alliance with the one country more despised by Islamists than the rest of the West put together!

    40. Re:Flow of Information by Anci3nt+of+Days · · Score: 0, Troll

      The quote, or rather it's use, is all the more impressive (though not in a good way) for what it represents, the death of conventional literacy.

      Irony.

      All Hail Grandma Natzi.

    41. Re:Flow of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      It's not anti-Jew, the people of Israel happen to be Jewish. This is anti-Israel slowly stealing the land of Palestinians. Check out this map: http://palestinethinktank.com/2006/05/10/the-shrinking-map-of-palestine/

    42. Re:Flow of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually the bans do not come from the goverment but PAs and courts who are almost all Ataturkist/Kemalist and anti-Islamist. It takes a young Greek or Armenian kid to put together a webpage or video swearing at Ataturk for the courts to shutdown the web. However looking at all the other posts it is obvious to see Islamophobia at play: even when the courts that are typically at odds with the current goverment are at fault, the "Islamists" are faulted. The current goverment has been able to pass more laws for freedoms & democracy than most previous ones combined. This has ironically made it more favored in EU than previous goverments and the other political parties in Turkey.

    43. Re:Flow of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hi, I am from Turkey...

      I just could not stop myself, but say that I found this comment as trolling. In almost any news I see that relates to Turkey, I see these kind of political comments that never really touch the problem mentioned in the original news. I wonder how they become 5 score comments in the end. Is Slashdot really that biased against Turkey? Or is Slashdot full of people who can't distinguish what is trolling or not?

      Thanks to those posters who wrote how the legal system works in Turkey, which is the real explanation for this ban. Not the conspiracy trolling theory voted 5-score above...

    44. Re:Flow of Information by macshit · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The -people- of Turkey want a religious, sharia law based, dictatorship. It's a foreign thought to western minds, but as you point out they've pressured for such a gov't several times. At which point the, highly secular, military comes out in a minor coup and re-establishes what was the second freest nation in the area.

      No, some people in Turkey want a religious government, some would like sharia law, and a few would like a dictatorship. The number of people that actually want all those things together is probably rather small.

      --
      We live, as we dream -- alone....
    45. Re:Flow of Information by KahabutDieDrake · · Score: 1

      ... the end of the world occurred pretty much as we'd predicted. Too many humans, not even space or resources to go around....

    46. Re:Flow of Information by sammyF70 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Or, as Duke N. Ukem, Philosophe Extraordinaire, once said : "Nuke 'em 'till they glow, then shoot 'em in the dark!"

      --
      "DRM is like the Ford Pinto: it's a smooth ride, right up the point at which it explodes and ruins your day."-C.Doctorow
    47. Re:Flow of Information by Cassius+Corodes · · Score: 1

      You know, for all the faults of the US etc., it really doesn't belong in a conversation about islamists.

      --
      Control is an illusion, order our comforting lie. From chaos, through chaos, into chaos we fly
    48. Re:Flow of Information by Cassius+Corodes · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because a country under Sharia law is never in practice a democracy. Also there is no such thing as a liberal reading of Sharia law, the people who are liberals dont want sharia law, and the people who do want it, certainly are not going to water it down. So the only possible liberal reading of sharia law is one where its not read at all.

      As an aside, to all the people who bring the US into unrelated conversations - take a look at its history - the US is by a wide margin the historically the best (in terms of how they treat others) superpower of all time. They make mistakes a-plenty (some on purpose too) - but bringing them into comparisons of islamists or the like as if you would not care if a country like Iran replaced the US as the main superpower in the world is just plain and simple stupid. Please take a step back and consider what you are saying.

      --
      Control is an illusion, order our comforting lie. From chaos, through chaos, into chaos we fly
    49. Re:Flow of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NATO, smato... Turkey is suspect. Well, ok, the advances in suffrage in the last 20 years or so are impressive, yet still, last year you didn't want to be at a Turkish wedding. In my humble, and admittedly racist, opinion, the old world attitudes are still woven into the culture... another murkier ancient hatred. Besides, you just can't trust people that are that good looking. Same with the Bengali.

    50. Re:Flow of Information by Cassius+Corodes · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Perhaps you could rewrite this without the rambling... its often best just to get to the point otherwise your message is easily lost.

      Kurds in turkey suffer no matter what the government. The islamists are not fans, neither were the supporters of ataturk. Since gaining power they have continued their attacks on the kurdish part of Iraq, as well as the kurds within turkey. If you think your lot is going to improve with them, you are sorely mistaken. The best hope of the Kurds is a separate country (kurdistan), or the realisation of the dream of a secular and western turkey. Neither is going to be achieved without outside help.

      --
      Control is an illusion, order our comforting lie. From chaos, through chaos, into chaos we fly
    51. Re:Flow of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It means get a life.

    52. Re:Flow of Information by Cassius+Corodes · · Score: 1

      If you look above, you will note I was replying to a previous comment on a slightly different track. And yes slashdot is really biased against whatever you happen to believe in, and otherwise never goes off track to discuss things they find interesting.

      --
      Control is an illusion, order our comforting lie. From chaos, through chaos, into chaos we fly
    53. Re:Flow of Information by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      “Those who value a statement more, because it comes from a big name, can’t be helped by its insight anyway.”
      — Me

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    54. Re:Flow of Information by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      Huh? The last 10 years of US history is largely about its relation to Islam and Islamists. To say otherwise is to deny history. So yeah, the US most definitely belongs in a conversation about Islamists, at least in the year 2010.

    55. Re:Flow of Information by Captain+Segfault · · Score: 1

      "Commissioner Pravin Lal" could, for someone not familiar with SMAC or the UN, plausibly be the name of a real world leader.

      "As the Americans learned so painfully in Earth's final century...", not so much.

    56. Re:Flow of Information by Tei · · Score: 1

      I salute you man.

      Heres that, in a Sid Meier Alpha Centauri video.
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iY57ErBkFFE

      --

      -Woof woof woof!

    57. Re:Flow of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the hell are you supposed to do if you believe in democracy but democracy spawns people who bring it down?

      I'm a little sketchy on the details, but I'm pretty sure we're supposed to give them Czechoslovakia first.

    58. Re:Flow of Information by williamhb · · Score: 1

      No, some people in Turkey want a religious government, some would like sharia law, and a few would like a dictatorship.

      If I recall correctly, however, sharia and democracy are to an extent mutually exclusive. The rationale being that sharia claims itself to be "the law of god" and under sharia the views of man (ie, democracy) cannot trump "the law of god". So, once you are under sharia law, it's hard to vote to get rid of it, and many of your other democratic rights also get eroded. Or at least I understand that was the view of the 1998 Constitutional Court of Turkey when they banned the Refah Party.

    59. Re:Flow of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny thing is, this whole Google censorship mess was because of the opposition and so called organisations built for protecting Ataturk's image. They are the ones also behind head scarf ban and other restrictions. Many of the current governments democratic rights attemps were also blocked by the opposition. Get your facts right.

    60. Re:Flow of Information by chrb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The -people- of Turkey want a religious, sharia law based, dictatorship.

      I take it you have never met any of the Turkish people, or ever travelling to Turkey? I have, and found that most people do not want anything to do with the kind of ultra-conservative views you attribute to them.

      Basically, your position is the same as saying "The -people- of the United States want a religious, Ten Commandments law based, dictatorship", based on the government of George Bush being overtly Fundamentalist Christian, and being elected by the people of the U.S.

      In fact, what the people of Turkey mostly want is good government and an end to corruption, security and prosperity, and for much of the youth, to be E.U. citizens so that they can freely study and travel in the rest of Europe. The election of AKP was more to do with rejecting the policies of the previous administration than endorsing Islamism.

    61. Re:Flow of Information by chrb · · Score: 1

      The UN is populated more by dictatorships than anything approaching "free countries",

      You are wrong. According to the Freedom in the World measure of democracy and political freedom, 46% of nations are "free" and 30% are "mostly free". Only 24% are "not free". Clearly, 76%>24%, so the majority of nations are in fact not dictatorships.

    62. Re:Flow of Information by Hognoxious · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I didn't need any attribution to recognize that as one of your originals. The commas are, as usual, fucking wrong.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    63. Re:Flow of Information by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Turks are arabs, no matter how much they pretend otherwise. The paint was going to wear off sooner or later.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    64. Re:Flow of Information by Cassius+Corodes · · Score: 1

      See the comment I was responding to

      --
      Control is an illusion, order our comforting lie. From chaos, through chaos, into chaos we fly
    65. Re:Flow of Information by Aceticon · · Score: 1

      Clearly the majority of voters in Turkey want a religious party at the helm - otherwise they would've voted for someone else. Turkey is a Democratic country (now that the Generals are under control).
      [You're either pro-Democracy or against it - if you support a coup when you don't like the results then you're against Democracy]

      Whether the turkish want sharia law or not is a totally different thing: while Turkey has some cases of some the most backwards practices in muslim countries (like honor killings), there's no religious police going around beating up girls for having been seen with boys (like in Iran) and burkas are hardly popular.

      The impression I get from Turkey is pretty much like my own country (Portugal) from 20 or 30 years ago: while a minority of
      mostly city living, more educated people don't want religion mixed with politics, the majority which are mostly poorly-educated and living outside cities does want a religion-influenced government. If it's like in my own country, urbanization and near-universal education will sort this out soon enough.

    66. Re:Flow of Information by Hognoxious · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I take it you have never met any of the Turkish people, or ever travelling to Turkey? I have, and found that most people do not want anything to do with the kind of ultra-conservative views you attribute to them.

      A sizable number clearly do support the conservative/islamicists, or they wouldn't have been elected.

      I suggest your sample is somewhat skewed, the reasons for which ought to be obvious even to you.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    67. Re:Flow of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since their election turkey has moved closer to Iran,

      OMG what is an election turkey and why has it moved closer to Iran?

    68. Re:Flow of Information by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

      If you want to pick a video game in order to criticize the popularity of video games as "a death of conventional literacy", then Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri is a poor choice.

      Yes, and video killed the radio star.

    69. Re:Flow of Information by Mushur · · Score: 1

      Could you elaborate on that? How can the EU impede the Turkish military in any way??? I don't understand? And why would the EU press for a sharia government? I'm thankful if you could outline this situation.

    70. Re:Flow of Information by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      That is because the West has become weak and thinks that the more meek it gets, the more everyone will suddenly love it.

      Invading Iraq and Afghanistan is "more meek"? More meek than Joe Stalin and Adolf, perhaps. People hate the US for its aggression, not its meekness. (And note, I do not include myself in the "haters" group, more "disappointed".)

    71. Re:Flow of Information by igb · · Score: 1

      Were the endless expansionism of a small part of the EU technocracy to actually be made flesh, the EU would disintegrate. Turkey may want to join the EU: for practical purposes, no-one outside the political elite of the EU wants them to join. Here in the UK, even politicians who _are_ part of the EU elite talk of long-term limits on admission of Turks into the labour market, while everyone else (including the government for the next five years) ignores it in the hope it will go away.

      Turkey has a population that would make it one of the largest EU countries, an economy which would make it one of the poorest EU countries, politics that would make it one of the most unstable EU countries, education that would make it one of the least skilled EU countries and religion that would make it one of the most dangerous EU countries. It would also give the EU a porous land border with Iran, which would make Turkish entry into the Schengen group simply impossible.

      Most of the EU countries imposed strict limits on the `accession countries' of Eastern Europe. The British government didn't, and it's hardly controversial to say that probably (amongst other things) cost Labour the 2010 election. Eastern European immigration driving down wages and conditions is a toxic political issue, to make Mexican immigration into the US look like a minor local issue. Turkish accession would have all the same problems, plus Islam, plus more poverty, plus a trigger-happy military.

      It's unimaginable that it will happen, but certainly Britain, probably France, certainly Italy, probably the Benelux countries and as sure as eggs is eggs Germany would impose barriers that would make Turkey's membership almost pointless: they would be denied access to labour markets, capital markets, the Euro and Schengen. It would also result in Britain and potentially France making serious moves to leave the EU, and would bring down most governments west of Berlin. It would bring the Constitutional Referendum debacle back into the agenda, cause several countries to renege on the Lisbon Treaty and generally smash the EU governance to pieces.

    72. Re:Flow of Information by macshit · · Score: 1

      Clearly the majority of voters in Turkey want a religious party at the helm - otherwise they would've voted for someone else.

      That doesn't follow. Somewhat less than 50% of the electorate voted for a particular party (the AKP), not "a religious party" as an abstract concept. Some of those voters may indeed feel that having a religious party in control is always desirable, but undoubtedly others simply liked the policies of that particular party, in that particular election, better (or hated them less than the opposition...).

      Given that the AKP seems to have some very significant policies that aren't connected with religion, this seems even more likely. [In particular, they seem to be considered very progressive with respect to EU integration, which is clearly a significant issue for Turkey.]

      --
      We live, as we dream -- alone....
    73. Re:Flow of Information by chrb · · Score: 1, Insightful

      A sizable number clearly do support the conservative/islamicists, or they wouldn't have been elected.

      "A sizable number (of Americans) clearly do support the conservative/Christian fundamentalists, or they wouldn't have been elected." - Would that be a fair assessment of Bush-era American politics? Maybe. Or maybe the real world is more complex than that.

      You should try to read and understand why AKP was elected, and what they represent. Note that 57.4% of the Turkish electorate did not vote for AKP.

      • AKP advocate a liberal, capitalist economics. Does this sound like Islamism to you? Surely a true Islamist party would reject capitalism?
      • AKP has more female representatives in power than any other Turkish political party. Does this sound like Islamism to you? Surely a true Islamist party would not allow women to take positions of power?
      • AKP advocates further economic and cultural integration with the traditionally Christian nations of Europe. Does this sound like Islamism? Surely a true Islamist party would reject Europe as "nations of heretics"?
      • The leadership of AKP supported the USA in attempts to launch attacks on Iraq, against the wishes of the rest of parliament, and their backbenchers. Surely a true Islamist party would never support U.S. attacks on another Muslim nation, in any way whatsoever?
      • In some Kurdish areas AKP candidates have been voted in rather than those of Kurdish political parties. Surely a true Islamist party would never have representatives from non-Muslim backgrounds, and would stand no chance of being elected in non-Muslim areas? What is AKP doing?

      As usual, the true situation is more complicated in real life than the simplistic parodies that people like to believe. AKP represents Islamism in the same way that the Christian Democratic Union represents Christian governance. Would you also denounce the CDU for advocating a conservative, Christian form of government?

    74. Re:Flow of Information by VJ42 · · Score: 1

      It's unimaginable that it will happen, but certainly Britain, ... would impose barriers that would make Turkey's membership almost pointless:

      Our British politicians are among those most enthusiastic about Turkish accession. As for the media, even the Telegraph endorses it: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/5115953/Turkeys-time-has-come.html


      It's the Germans with their large native Turkish population that really oppose it.

      --
      If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
    75. Re:Flow of Information by chrb · · Score: 1

      The tone of your post is quite alarmist. People said similar things about the E.U. disintegrating when the former USSR nations joined (Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Czech Republic..). All had big problems with governance, corruption, criminality, etc. Those countries were (and still are) conduit routes to criminal enterprises in the East. The people in those nations were far poorer and less well educated than those in Western Europe. And yet, somehow, those nations joined the E.U., and the world didn't fall apart. Yes, there were growing pains, and problems with the local shouts of "they're taking our jobs", but the E.U. is still here, and there is no realistic chance of the UK leaving it anytime soon.

      The Eastern European immigration issue is overblown by the right-wing press. You might like to watch The day the immigrants left for some insight into exactly why corporations are employing immigrants rather than the local unemployed. For a more economics oriented read, see this post by the economics editor of the Sunday Times, some choice quotes "migrants paid £2.5 billion more in taxes than they took out in benefits and the use of public services. This net gain to the exchequer is likely to have grown, the government suggests." Nobody is forcing businesses to employ immigrants - they do so because they are the best option. Forcing businesses to employ locals is not the answer - that will either stunt the growth of British business, or make that business uncompetitive in the global marketplace.

    76. Re:Flow of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Basically, your position is the same as saying "The -people- of the United States want a religious, Ten Commandments law based, dictatorship", based on the government of George Bush being overtly Fundamentalist Christian, and being elected by the people of the U.S."

      Both are true actually. The united states is full of retarded evangelical christians and turkey is full of ignorant muslims.
      The United States is the MOST RELIGIOUS COUNTRY OF THE WEST. The United States != California, just because a part of California feels like the West isn't going to wash away the stench of Texas and Arizona.

    77. Re:Flow of Information by imakemusic · · Score: 1

      "Pravin Lal" sounds like the name of someone who might not have English as a first language.

      "Final" is synonymous with "last".

      "Last" can also mean "previous".

      "As the Americans learned so painfully in the last century..." makes sense.

      It's not that big a leap.

      --
      Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!
    78. Re:Flow of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its your mother, and she is so fat, she has moved closer to everyone.

    79. Re:Flow of Information by moz25 · · Score: 1

      "As usual, the true situation is more complicated in real life than the simplistic parodies that people like to believe."

      These are the wisest words I've read all day. Maybe even all week.

      Thank you.

    80. Re:Flow of Information by beerbear · · Score: 1

      Very well put, thank you.

      --
      Hold my beer and watch this!
    81. Re:Flow of Information by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 1

      The impression I get from Turkey is pretty much like my own country (Portugal) from 20 or 30 years ago: while a minority of
      mostly city living, more educated people don't want religion mixed with politics, the majority which are mostly poorly-educated and living outside cities does want a religion-influenced government. If it's like in my own country, urbanization and near-universal education will sort this out soon enough.

      Well, yes, but there is one problem. If you put the religious nutcases in power, they will do everything possible to prevent the unwashed masses that put them there from getting educated in anything they dislike. Like...say...blocking access to information or trying to get $local_flavor_of_insanity to be taught in schools.

      --

      People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
    82. Re:Flow of Information by professionalfurryele · · Score: 1

      Yeah I mean the only real literature is on stone tablets! Shakespeare was a hack for using anything other than a chisel! Citizen Kane is a piece of crap! Welles should have known better than to make his work a moving picture rather than putting it down on good old fashioned marble.

      The quote in question is actually very appropriate. It accompanies the secret project "The Planetary Datalinks", a Planet wide communication network which basically helps to spread ideas.

      Would you have had the same reaction were I to quote Moby Dick is a thread where the central theme is revenge? Elitism is not a substitute for genuine intellectual prowess.

    83. Re:Flow of Information by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      That would have been a lot more impressive if it was a real quote

      I think Sid Meier (or Brian Reynolds) might argue that it is. :-)

    84. Re:Flow of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The think you need to understand about Turkey is that it's traditionally nationalist first, nationalist second, nationalist third, and muslim fourth. AKP maybe goes up to nationalist first, islamic second. They're about as scary as the the german CDU as far as their religiosity is concerned - but Turkish nationalism is scary, so in practice they are slightly scarier. They're not particularly scary as Turkish parties go.

    85. Re:Flow of Information by jez9999 · · Score: 0, Troll

      Turkey is a bizarre case which I've never understood, and perhaps someone could explain it to me. You have a country which has traditionally been fiercely secular (even most average voters, not just the military) thanks to Ataturk's reforms... yet 99% of them claim to be Muslims. Now, how can those 'Muslims' possible support a non-Islamic, secular state? Either they're lying about wanting a secular state or they're confused about what being a Muslim entails. Which is it?

      It's kind of depressing that so many of them seem unable to escape the cycle of dumb Islamic indoctrination, despite not living in a religious state (yet).

    86. Re:Flow of Information by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      In fact, what the people of Turkey mostly want is good government and an end to corruption, security and prosperity, and for much of the youth, to be E.U. citizens so that they can freely study and travel in the rest of Europe

      And yet 99% of them claim to be Muslims. They seem to be confused.

    87. Re:Flow of Information by GCsoftware · · Score: 1

      Basically, Turkey (including some of the military) wants accession to the European Union. The EU can thus set terms for accession treaties, including restrictions on the military's role in political life. Because of these restrictions, the military is impeded from blocking the current religious AKP party from ruling - an unfortunate side effect, not the desired end result of a fundamental EU policy that member states' governments must be of a certain liberal democratic standard. Whether the AKP actually wants Shariah or not is highly debatable, they are a pretty moderate party as far as I can tell, when I was last in Istanbul (January) it certainly did not feel like a state under an Islamic regime, not even to the extent that something like Dubai does.

    88. Re:Flow of Information by zach_the_lizard · · Score: 1

      Whether or not one can have a democratic sharia law is less important than the end result of sharia law, religious tyranny. It matters little whether this tyranny was put in place by the ballot box or not. This is one of the reasons we place limits on the power of governments, even if 50% + 1 put it in power.

      --
      SSC
    89. Re:Flow of Information by JuniorJack · · Score: 1

      The people in those nations were .... and less well educated than those in Western Europe

      That was a joke, right ?

    90. Re:Flow of Information by dave420 · · Score: 1

      "Final" can mean "last" as in "end", but never "previous".

    91. Re:Flow of Information by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      And as Saddam demonstrated, the most effective way to get rid of Sharia is with a dictatorship. "Democratic" Iraq is rapidly reverting to type.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    92. Re:Flow of Information by FreakyGreenLeaky · · Score: 1

      Well, allow me to be the first to say, "fuck 'em."

    93. Re:Flow of Information by dave420 · · Score: 1

      "Best" superpower? The country was founded on the boundless killing of the native inhabitants, even extending to annexing Hawaii and killing a shit-ton of Mexicans. Then the US got engaged in wars (real and proxy) against democratically-elected presidents, toppling democracies and installing their own dictators. Don't try to pretend the US is somehow better than other superpowers, as moral relativism is for the weak. The US is either good or not, and it certainly has done some seriously fucked-up shit in its short history. It's attitudes like yours, where you seem to be incapable of conceding the heinous actions of the US, that furthers those same heinous actions. History will repeat itself while people like you are blind to it. It's funny you talk about Iran, as Iran was a wonderfully westernised place, full of freedom, until the US decided that wasn't in the US's best interest, and installed a brutal dictator. Lovely stuff.

    94. Re:Flow of Information by justleavealonemmmkay · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Ever watched Turkish TV ? It's Mediterranean bimbos 24/7.

    95. Re:Flow of Information by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Or, the third option - you don't know what it means to be a Muslim. Problem solved! We have a winner!

    96. Re:Flow of Information by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Don't confuse Islam with Wahhabism. It's like confusing Christianity with the Klan.

    97. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      I'm not that post's author, but it seems the point was something similar to:

      Just because it is good entertainment, this doesn't mean that therein exists and great truth, or way of life, or really anything more than good entertainment.

      I'm not personally asserting that you feel any particular way, but this is how I understood the point.

    98. Re:Flow of Information by Rogerborg · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You should try to read and understand why AKP was elected, and what they represent.

      OK, let's play!

      Note that 57.4% of the Turkish electorate did not vote for AKP.

      57.4 + 46.6 = 104%. Well, what's 4% here or there? Only Allah is perfect.

      AKP advocate a liberal, capitalist economics.

      Their platform is that everyone will get rich. That's not politics, that's marketing.

      AKP has more female representatives in power than any other Turkish political party.

      Wait - the largest party has the most female representatives? It's a miracle! Say... can you name any of these female representatives? What "power" do they actually wield?

      AKP advocates further economic and cultural integration with the traditionally Christian nations of Europe.

      Economic, yes: it's part of the "everybody gets rich" scheme. Cultural? I have no idea where you're getting that from. They tried to lift the ban on the hijab, remember? Is that the act of a party who wants the populace (not the legal system, the culture) to become less or more Islamic?

      The leadership of AKP supported the USA in attempts to launch attacks on Iraq, against the wishes of the rest of parliament, and their backbenchers. Surely a true Islamist party would never support U.S. attacks on another Muslim nation, in any way whatsoever?

      Uh... they supported the US action to depose the famously secular Saddam. Just because Bush was crazy enough to believe that a secular democracy would fill the vacuum doesn't mean anyone else was that deluded.

      In some Kurdish areas AKP candidates have been voted in rather than those of Kurdish political parties. Surely a true Islamist party would never have representatives from non-Muslim backgrounds, and would stand no chance of being elected in non-Muslim areas? What is AKP doing?

      Uh... it's proselytising. Thanks for asking!

      You get that the AKP has to deny being a religious party so that it doesn't get banned, right? That the Constitutional Court voted 6 to 5 (1 short of the 7 needed) to disband them on that basis?

      And lastly, are you familiar with the concept of taqiyya? If not, I'd read up on it. And pay less attention to what the supporters of AKP tell you (especially in pubs) and more on what the AKP actually do.

      Like, for example, what they've just done.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    99. Re:Flow of Information by Jesus_666 · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Beware of he who uses too many commas, for half of his brain thinks, that he's speaking German."
      — A very intelligent and, may I say, handsome fellow. Humble too.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    100. Re:Flow of Information by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Your enemies hate what you do, not who you are. Stop doing that, and they'll cease to be your enemies. It's rather simple, but it means admitting bad things a country has done. The UK realised this, and not only did Republican and Unionist terrorism all but cease, but the rights of a nation were realised.

    101. Re:Flow of Information by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      Which is obvious to a native speaker. The GP commented that the name potentially indicated someone with sub-native English skills who might know about "final = last" and "last = previous" but not about "final != previous".

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    102. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      You might want to read what you're linking to:

      On the other hand, arguments from authority are an important part of informal logic. Since we cannot have expert knowledge of many subjects, we often rely on the judgments of those who do. There is no fallacy involved in simply arguing that the assertion made by an authority is true. The fallacy only arises when it is claimed or implied that the authority is infallible in principle and can hence be exempted from criticism.

      I blame the wiki generation, especially the tropes people. It seems that if something can be grouped under an umbrella, and a handle neatly installed, then we automatically diminish its value. This is ludicrous. Again, "since we cannot have expert knowledge of many subjects, we often rely on the judgments of those who do". You claim that taking your doctors statement as toward your medical condition over that of, say, your housekeeper makes it that this medical advice can't help you. And I can rightly surmise this because you lack any exclusions to your generalization, and there are many, many obvious ones.

      But no, there exists a wiki article somewhere with the word 'fallacy' in it, and you have decided to forbid eons of patterned thought because somehow you know better.

    103. Re:Flow of Information by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      I had to look up Chief Henry Schmit to determine if that was also from a video game or not.

    104. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      Somehow, something has changed. It's interesting that this so closely coincides with the "blockade" incident with Israel, on account of many of the participants having been Turkish citizens.

      I think a less-complex assessment is likely the case here: Turkey has been negotiating with Iran.

      See, I'd guess that the very last thing Turkey wants is to be the staging point for yet another war on an Islamic nation. They see all the war-mongering/saber-rattling from the US and are troubled by it. They single-handedly undermined the US efforts to impose nuclear sanctions by brokering a fuel exchange deal directly with Iran, and I believe Brazil. They're almost certainly trying to avoid war.

      It seems that part of this deal would have included some pro-Islamic considerations including this internet position (which seems common in non-Western societies) and the flotilla.

    105. Re:Flow of Information by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      It seems like if you want one of those things, you wind-up with them all.

    106. Re:Flow of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The military isn't holding back. It is losing.

    107. Re:Flow of Information by Clandestine_Blaze · · Score: 1

      If the majority of a country want Sharia law, then who are we to deny them that? Why should we support a military coup to stifle what the majority want? History is, in this case, simply repeating itself. We support a secular minority who stifles a religious majority until it breaks out into full violence, and then we're left wondering why "they hate us for our freedoms" -- they don't. They hate us because we keep meddling in their sovereign affairs.

      After all that has happened in the last fifty years, I cannot honestly believe that we're even having this conversation. You can't support democracy while it suits your fancy, and then suddenly backpedal and say "well, that's not democracy even though the majority wanted it..." when you stop agreeing with it.

      If you simply hate Islam, which is what I gather from your post, then that's fine, don't practice it. But we're hardly in any position to dictate to a foreign country what they should be practicing just because we hate it.

    108. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      Now, how can those 'Muslims' possible support a non-Islamic, secular state? Either they're lying about wanting a secular state or they're confused about what being a Muslim entails. Which is it?

      I think perhaps they simply have a different view of what it means to be a Muslim.

      And frankly, I'd take their word of it over yours because they have the natural right to define their own religious practices.

      Christianity has examples of this as well. Mormons are Christian, for example, but many of the mainline religions wouldn't claim them and they were in fact persecuted for their 'fringe' beliefs.

      Point being, a culture's understandings of religions evolve. Deal with it.

    109. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      In fact, what the people of Turkey mostly want is good government and an end to corruption, security and prosperity, and for much of the youth, to be E.U. citizens so that they can freely study and travel in the rest of Europe

      And yet 99% of them claim to be Muslims. They seem to be confused.

      You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

    110. Re:Flow of Information by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      Adding to this, describing the US with the term 'meek' is really pushing it. The US has lost wars politically and socially, but never because of shortcomings in combat. Even Vietnam wasn't a military loss; North Vietnam lost 5 times the number of soldiers.

    111. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      That is because the West has become weak and thinks that the more meek it gets, the more everyone will suddenly love it.

      In truth, our enemies still hates us and we are losing what allies we once had.

      If the West has become weak it is likely due to lacking any coherent direction, because we declared war on a concept, rather than on any specific people. We may as well have declared war on mosquitos. We're flailing blindly in every direction, yelling at the top of our lungs, as if it makes any difference at all. Of course we're going to get weary of it.

    112. Re:Flow of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your reply would be a lot more impressive if it wasn't posted every time this quote was used

      Not only that, the situation may have been fictional, but the underlying logical structure and deep relevance to today's society is not.

      Or are you trying to say that fictional works cannot have any serious character, or have any good ideas?

    113. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      It's not anti-Jew, the people of Israel happen to be Jewish. This is anti-Israel slowly stealing the land of Palestinians.

      Yes, this.

      The holocaust was a terrible thing, and no one can deny that the Nazis were in the wrong and that the Jewish people, as a whole, were owed a debt - if ever any race/group was.

      But this had zero to do with the Zionist issue of Israel and the English wanting to wash their hands of it in whichever way worked out the best for them. Look into the history, the violence over that silly patch of sand was a huge issue prior to the war, and continues to be so today.

      In short, all the evil of the holocaust cannot justify the existence of Israel. It has to do that on its own. Nor can all of that evil excuse the evils conducted by their own government, or any government for that matter. Just because they feel racially superior to the rest of us, it doesn't mean that we have to capitulate to that notion. Were it any other people this would be abhorrent. Yet, because of the Nazis, we're all expected to be cool with it.

    114. Re:Flow of Information by AkiraRoberts · · Score: 1

      I don't think that being Muslim means that one necessarily must demand that one's government is Islamic as well. Just as there are Christians in the US who don't necessarily want a Christian theocracy, why is it so shocking that Muslims in Turkey (which, as you pointed out, has a long history of being fiercely secular) would feel similarly. You might be a little confused as to what being Muslim entails.

      --
      words, words, words, lemur, words, words words
    115. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      Turks are arabs, no matter how much they pretend otherwise. The paint was going to wear off sooner or later.

      Don't be a racist.

    116. Re:Flow of Information by Jawnn · · Score: 1

      Perhaps I should clarify my use of the term "conventional literacy". It is, or was rather, a "convention" that one cited only the work (fiction or non-fiction) of real persons, living or dead, and when citing a passage of fiction, one identified it as such and placed the quote in that context. But hey, if you want to argue that what some character said in a game is on par with the works of Voltaire or Shakespeare, knock yourself out.

    117. Re:Flow of Information by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Is Shakespeare - or rather quotations spoken by characters in his plays - any less fictional than a videogame?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    118. Re:Flow of Information by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      Democracy doesn't mean the tyranny of the majority should run unchecked.

      If you use a strict definition of democracy, then yes, it actually does mean that. That's why all of the nations that we call democracies aren't "true" democracies, but constitutional governments (usually representative democracies).

    119. Re:Flow of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think that in the GP post, "conventional" literacy is supposed to refer to the ability to analyze all aspects of a text. The original quote is well written, but phrases like "the free nation gradually constricting its grip on public discourse has begun its rapid slide into despotism" lose much of their power (not to mention relevance!) when one realizes that the "free nation" in question is completely fictional. A carefully chosen fictional example supports the author's point of view perfectly? Gee, whodathunkit? But of course, "modern" literates just care that the words are well arranged, that it "sounds good", and of course that it supports their pre-existing beliefs.

      I think that this is what the GP was getting at.

    120. Re:Flow of Information by jez9999 · · Score: 0, Troll

      And frankly, I'd take their word of it over yours because they have the natural right to define their own religious practices.

      What they don't have the right to do is define what it means to be a Muslim when they say that the Quran is their most holy, infallible book. Only the book has the right to define what it means, that's the whole point of religion. And I know enough to know that they sure as hell don't practice everything in that book. I'm simply taking them to task for not practicing what they claim to believe is the most important thing in life. How is that unfair?

    121. Re:Flow of Information by Ill_Omen · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, but you're missing the point. If you're quoting Shakespeare, you would do the following

      "To be or not to be..." --Hamlet, Hamlet by William Shakespeare

      and not

      "To be or not to be..." --Hamlet, Prince of Denmark

      The first identifies it as a line said by a fictional character, and includes the actual author. The second places the fictional character of Hamlet in a non-fictional context.

    122. Re:Flow of Information by AkiraRoberts · · Score: 1

      Turks are arabs, no matter how much they pretend otherwise.

      Well no, actually. They are Muslim. But Muslim != Arab. Turks are an ethnic group originating in Central Asia.

      --
      words, words, words, lemur, words, words words
    123. Re:Flow of Information by apeeira · · Score: 1
      You know it makes kinda of sense if we take Col. Santiago's admonition to heart:

      "Information, the first principle of warfare, must form the foundation of all your efforts. Know, of course, thine enemy. But in knowing him do not forget above all to know thyself. The commander who embraces this totality of battle shall win even with inferior force. "
      Col. Corazon Santiago
      Spartan Battle Manual

      Only thing is that under this precept, denying information to your own citizens could be ...you know...waging war upon them

    124. Re:Flow of Information by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I'm not convinced Shatner ever said anything best. Apart from "Hello, my name is William Shatner" - and even that's debatable.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    125. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      I'm simply taking them to task for not practicing what they claim to believe is the most important thing in life. How is that unfair?

      Your entire question is rhetorical.

      You are somehow comfortable with the notion that the only 'true' interpretation is a fundamentalist one. This doesn't pass a basic logic test, let alone a cultural test.

      And I know enough to know that they sure as hell don't practice everything in that book.

      So you admit, then, that people adapt what the (any) book says to what is relevant to them at the time they need it.

      Only the book has the right to define what it means, that's the whole point of religion.

      But yet, there exists this statement, and even in the same post. I'll clue you in:

      People.

      People are the 'whole point' of religion. Specifically how these people live their lives, what their moral code winds up being, etc. You're somehow expecting your reader to believe that an inanimate object sprung into being all on its own and decided by itself what would be contained in the pages.

      To the best of my knowledge, no one reads a religious tome in this manner. Or at least no one who would be even remotely interested in what you expect of them.

    126. Re:Flow of Information by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Man, I hate that, I've seen it so many times in comments.

      * Check, that the file is writable.

      I assume[,] that it's correct German to put it after a verb that indicates sensing or knowing. Still fucking irritates the living shit out of me. It must still be a valid sentence if you remove the bit between the commas, how hard is that?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    127. Re:Flow of Information by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      "Final" is synonymous with "last".

      Bollocks.

      The last game between Nadal and Soderling was the 2010 French Open final.

      Swap them around and it makes no sense at all, unless one of them died and they were competing for a shoemaker's equipment.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    128. Re:Flow of Information by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      That would have been a lot more impressive if it was a real quote, and not just a quote from a video game.

      "It's a true quote, and I should know - after all, I made it up myself"
          -- Oscar Wilde

      "Hey, you stole that off of me, you great big ponce!"
          -- Yogi Berra

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    129. Re:Flow of Information by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Interesting. I'm not in the habit of quoting nonexistent people, so would it be:

      "The Earth is six thousand years old." -- God, The Bible by God.

      or

      "The Earth is six thousand years old." -- God, Deity.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    130. Re:Flow of Information by jez9999 · · Score: 0, Troll

      LOL.

      You are somehow comfortable with the notion that the only 'true' interpretation is a fundamentalist one.

      Yes. Religion is, by nature, fundamentalist. I consider those who cherrypick from religious texts to be utterly hypocritical, and not properly religious - choosing, as they do, what morals to follow based on the contemporary moral zeitgeist (basically humanism).

      So you admit, then, that people adapt what the (any) book says to what is relevant to them at the time they need it.

      Only if they're utterly hypocritical, especially Muslims, who claim to revere every last word of the Quran.

      People are the 'whole point' of religion. Specifically how these people live their lives, what their moral code winds up being, etc. You're somehow expecting your reader to believe that an inanimate object sprung into being all on its own and decided by itself what would be contained in the pages.

      To the best of my knowledge, no one reads a religious tome in this manner. Or at least no one who would be even remotely interested in what you expect of them.

      We are in agreement. That's why I find it sad that people lower themselves to giving a shit what the Quran says and calling themselves Muslims.

    131. Re:Flow of Information by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      The problem with Turkey isn't the government, it's the people. Turkey, like many other middle eastern countries, has been taking an increasingly radical Islamic turn in recent decades. The traditionally secular Turkish government is being turned further to the religious right not by despots, but by the Koran-thumping populace. The popular perception of democracy is that it always leads to a more free and open society. But if the general populace is radical, it can just as easily lead the the election of an even more repressive regime. Just look at Gaza and Iran as great examples of that.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    132. Re:Flow of Information by nusuth · · Score: 1
      According to polls ratio of Turks who say they *are* religious is between 60-65% (a number quite close to USA and quite far from rest of the civilized world.) Not all of those are sunni muslims (almost 90% are), not all religious sunni muslims think that their religious views should be reflected in government (around 70% do), not all of those who do prefer a religious system go as far as claiming a shaira based law system is better (only around 10% do.) In consequence Turks who want to be ruled by shaira hit an all time high at around 10% in the early 90s, declined back to 5% - its historic level. The religious conservatives never took half of the votes and passed 40% mark only thrice, under somewhat exceptional circumstances.

      In short, you don't know what you are talking about.

      --

      Gentlemen, you can't fight in here, this is the War Room!

    133. Re:Flow of Information by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      killing a shit-ton of Mexicans

      16,000 is a "shit ton"? You realize that there were single battles in the American Civil War, World War I and World War II with higher casualty counts than that? Of course Mexico started that war too, but don't let the facts get in the way of your rant.....

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    134. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, but you come across as an anti-theist and a racist to me. You're not listening, so I'm not going to entertain you any further. Have a nice day!

    135. Re:Flow of Information by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Well no, actually. They are Muslim.

      Really? I totally didn't know that!

      But Muslim != Arab.

      Is there no end to his wisdom?

      Turks are an ethnic group originating in Central Asia.

      There is not, and there is no beginning to it either.

      Most modern Turks are not of Asian ancestry. They are descendants of people previously living there since before the Byzantine empire.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    136. Re:Flow of Information by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      In short, all the evil of the holocaust cannot justify the existence of Israel.

      How about the evil that occurred after the Holocaust?

      "Well, I don't know about "everywhere else," but after World War II, many Jews did attempt to "go home" to Poland. This resulted in the murder of about 1,500 of them -- killed not by Nazis but by Poles, either out of sheer ethnic hatred or fear they would lose their (stolen) homes.

      The mini-Holocaust that followed the Holocaust itself is not well-known anymore, but it played an outsized role in the establishment of the state of Israel. It was the plight of Jews consigned to Displaced Persons camps in Europe that both moved and outraged President Truman, who supported Jewish immigration to Palestine and, when the time came, the new state itself. Something had to be done for the Jews of Europe. They were still being murdered.

      In the Polish city of Kielce, on July 4, 1946 -- more than a year after the end of the war -- rumors of a Jewish ritual murder triggered a pogrom in which 42 Jews were killed. All were Holocaust survivors. The Kielce murders were not, by any means, the sole example of why Jews could not "go home." When I visited the Polish city where my mother had been born, Ostroleka, I was told of a Jew who survived Auschwitz only to be murdered when he tried to reclaim his business. In much of Eastern Europe, Jews feared for their lives."

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    137. Re:Flow of Information by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      Don't feed the trolls.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    138. Re:Flow of Information by imakemusic · · Score: 1

      Balderdash.

      True the words aren't always interchangeable (so, ok, maybe "synonymous" wasn't the right word to use). However there are meanings for which both words are appropriate. For example "the last ever $event" would mean the same as "the final $event".

      I don't think it's unreasonable to think that someone to whom English is a second language could confuse the two words.

      Obviously the use of the word "Earth" makes you look twice but still...

      Anyway, your example isn't the best as in this context "Final" means "last game". If you swap "final" and "last game" then it still makes sense.

      --
      Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!
    139. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      In short, all the evil of the holocaust cannot justify the existence of Israel.

      How about the evil that occurred after the Holocaust?

      Don't you see how it still wouldn't matter?

      The just thing to do is to right the wrongs by taking action against those committing them. If Poles were keeping stolen Jewish homes, that is an issue to take up with Poles, not Arabs.

      Why would Arabs be expected to suffer for Polish or German crimes?

      Logically, they wouldn't.

    140. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      Perhaps, but someone has to say it. We can't all sit around thinking everyone will walk away from this unchanged. The more racially-charged epithets we tolerate the longer it will be until we find peace.

    141. Re:Flow of Information by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Almost 80% of people in general believe in an invisible sky wizard, so without safeguards to keep the religious majority from running roughshod over reality

      You think safeguards do anything? It's the fact that the 80% can't agree on what colour his beard is that keeps them in check.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    142. Re:Flow of Information by AkiraRoberts · · Score: 1

      While modern Turks are certainly descendents of people who have been living there a good long time, they did, in fact, originate in Central Asia. "Turk" was sort of generic designation, adopted by Arabs, applied to most of the Turkic speaking tribes they encountered in Central Asia. Eventually, some of those tribes ended up in Turkey.

      My point, which you so very cleverly missed, is that Turks are not Arabs. If, as you claim, you knew that in the first place, than your original statement - "Turks are arabs, no matter how much they pretend otherwise." - is a touch disingenuous.

      --
      words, words, words, lemur, words, words words
    143. Re:Flow of Information by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Democracy just means rule by [some of] the people. Mob rule would be "vulgocracy" - if you can stomach Greek/Latin hybrids.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    144. Re:Flow of Information by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      In the space between WW2 and the Gawdless Commarnists(tm) getting hold of the baaahmb(tm) the US could have pretty much taken over the world. They didn't. There were many worse empires before, and I doubt the Soviets or the Chinese would have been any more enlightened if they'd had the same power the US did.

      I think they deserve at least a B-.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    145. Re:Flow of Information by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      It does matter. The Jews couldn't return to Europe without being murdered. What should they have done? Moved back to Poland in spite of the dangers and tried to fight it out in the courts? Would that have been your choice if you were a displaced person? You'd take your family back into that environment? I think not.

      Furthermore, the Arabs weren't "suffering" until they rejected the partition plan and decided to settle the issue with violence. Jews were already living in Palestine and had been doing so for thousands of years. Palestine hadn't been self-governing for a long time prior to the partition plan. One way or another you had to reconcile the fact that you had two populations living in a soon to be decolonized area with different political objectives. The partition plan was an honest attempt by the global community to do this. One side accepted it. The other side picked up guns. The rest is recent history.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    146. Re:Flow of Information by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    147. Re:Flow of Information by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I think perhaps they simply have a different view of what it means to be a Muslim.

      And frankly, I'd take their word of it over yours because they have the natural right to define their own religious practices.

      Tell that to the Ahmadi

      Oh sorry, you can't - they're dead! They had a "different view of what it means to be a Muslim" alright, but they've been well and truly corrected.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    148. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      The European Jews should have lobbied for remedy from the Allied governments. The Israel stuff is a cop out, and there's just no other way to describe it. What right did any Europeans have to emigrate there? Imagine they were Russian Catholics, also victims of the holocaust, who wanted to live there and wanted to be legitimized as the de facto rulers of that region. Doesn't make sense, does it?

      Both sides picked up guns, and only one side became a sovereign entity. To this very day there is one government that is recognized as legitimate and one group of very pissed-off, unrepresented people.

    149. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      They have the right to say whatever they wish, AND the moral responsibility to be decent human beings.

      These are not incompatible.

    150. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      It seems they're already aware. It would also seem that 'corrected' is not in any way the appropriate word.

    151. Re:Flow of Information by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      The European Jews should have lobbied for remedy from the Allied governments.

      Yes, because Joe Stalin was such a caring man and would surely have intervened. Or did you forget that Poland was under Communist occupation at the time?

      Seriously, put yourself in their shoes. Why are you able to do that for the Palestinians in 2010 but not the Jews in 1946? More than half of your family disappeared in the camps, while the survivors are still being attacked and killed. What would you do?

      Both sides picked up guns

      The Israelis picked up guns after they were invaded. They accepted the partition plan while the Arabs rejected it and invaded the lands designated for Israel. No amount of revisionist history can change this underlying fact.

      and only one side became a sovereign entity

      Whose fault is that? At varying times Israel has made generous peace offers to the Palestinians. Negotiations usually break down over the "Right of Return". The "Right of Return" would be demographic suicide for Israel and is never going to happen. Until the Palestinians accept this there won't be a lasting peace in the region.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    152. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      Why are you able to do that for the Palestinians in 2010 but not the Jews in 1946?

      Why are you able to do that for the Jews in 1946 but not the Russian Catholics in 1946?

      And by the way, I am able. There were Allied nations besides the Soviet Union to appeal to. Is there not a sizable population of Jewish people in the United States? Whom did they have to kill to be able to live freely here?

      Zionism was not the only answer, but it was the only choice that furthered a problem that was both unrelated and already an issue, and therefore I have a problem with it.

      In short, each and every of the Allies had resources that could have been shared to remedy the situation without embroiling us in another century of war. Some took those paths, and I applaud them. If any are, these would be the examples of God's true chosen people. They did what Christ would have done. Those that chose eternal war did so out of anything except desire for justice, peace, or humanism of any kind.

      So when you say 'the Jews in 1946', that's a pretty big group of people. Not all of which were Zionist.

    153. Re:Flow of Information by mcvos · · Score: 1

      I think it'd be:

      "The Earth is six thousand years old." -- Some medieval monk

      If you go quoting, quote accurately. Don't make stuff up.

    154. Re:Flow of Information by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Hey, you can always count on alliance with the one country more despised by Islamists than the rest of the West put together!

      Belgium? How many divisions have the Belgians got?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    155. Re:Flow of Information by WrongMonkey · · Score: 1

      I don't think its too cynical to say that about 40% of the people of in the United State do want a religious, Ten Commandments law based dictatorship. They might not use those exact terms, but when you talk with them, that's what they describe.

    156. Re:Flow of Information by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      Why are you able to do that for the Jews in 1946 but not the Russian Catholics in 1946?

      Why don't you answer the question instead of changing the topic?

      There were Allied nations besides the Soviet Union to appeal to.

      Ask the Polish Government in Exile and the Hungarian Revolutionaries how well that worked out.

      Is there not a sizable population of Jewish people in the United States? Whom did they have to kill to be able to live freely here?

      You didn't even read the article I previously linked to, did you? The United States had immigration quotas at the time and would not have accepted all of the displaced persons from Eastern Europe.

      Zionism was not the only answer, but it was the only choice that furthered a problem that was both unrelated and already an issue, and therefore I have a problem with it.

      You can have a problem with it all you want, but there are six million Jews living in Israel now and they aren't going anywhere. So how do we best resolve the issue and find a peaceful solution? Asking Israel to give up the right of a sovereign nation to defend itself is not a starting point for a just peace. What do you think we would do if a group of Native Americans started dropping rockets on American towns? Do you think we would allow them unfettered trade with the rest of the world so as to continue arming themselves?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    157. Re:Flow of Information by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      1u3hr apparently saw "West" and read "US".

      I'd suggest the accusation of meekness that caused him to wave his dick around so much was aimed more at the kum-ba-ya singing appeaseniks to be found in Europe.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    158. Re:Flow of Information by mcvos · · Score: 1

      Turkey is a bizarre case which I've never understood, and perhaps someone could explain it to me. You have a country which has traditionally been fiercely secular (even most average voters, not just the military) thanks to Ataturk's reforms... yet 99% of them claim to be Muslims. Now, how can those 'Muslims' possible support a non-Islamic, secular state?

      How can so many Christians support a secular state? Possibly they're not complete idiots. It's apparently also possible for muslims to not be idiots.

    159. Re:Flow of Information by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      This is anti-Israel slowly stealing the land of Palestinians.

      You mean the land that the UN gave to the Israelis after the British stole it from the Turks who stole it from the Byzantines who inherited it from the Romans who stole it from the Jews?

      Can we have Aquitaine back?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    160. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      Why are you able to do that for the Jews in 1946 but not the Russian Catholics in 1946?

      Why don't you answer the question instead of changing the topic?

      Well, it is my topic, isn't it? I began this line of discussion with a reply to an AC who was not you. You responded to my comment, and not the other way around.

      The premise is simply that outside of the religious angle, there isn't a lot of logical support for making the Zionist issue worse.

      You're patently ignoring the fact that no one legitimized an occupation by Russian Catholics of any Arab lands. There's no parity here, and if it made logical sense there would be.

      Please don't accuse me of changing the topic. You're the one doing that. We've been discussing fine details of a tangent, and that's all.

      You can have a problem with it all you want, but there are six million Jews living in Israel now and they aren't going anywhere. So how do we best resolve the issue and find a peaceful solution? Asking Israel to give up the right of a sovereign nation to defend itself is not a starting point for a just peace. What do you think we would do if a group of Native Americans started dropping rockets on American towns? Do you think we would allow them unfettered trade with the rest of the world so as to continue arming themselves?

      The Native American parallel is an apt one. I think the Reservation solution is one of the more shameful things we have ever done to a people. This, actually, is part of the emotional underpinning to as why I don't care to see history repeat itself in this way.

      I imagine a plan stepping towards peace would need to include:

      1) Palestine gains 100% of the sovereignty that Israel enjoys.

      2) The right of Palestinians and Israelis to hate and want to kill each other is acknowledged, as it is a natural human right.

      3) Israel and Palestine are both restricted from committing war crimes, and are punished equally by the international community.

      In short, parity will be required, because once you remove the 'pre-ordained by God' argument, the rest of it is extraordinarily weak. And, as an American, I fully respect the right for the Jews and Muslims to believe what they wish, and refuse to draft legal structures around these contradictory beliefs. It seems perfectly logical and natural to me, and thusly I advocate it.

    161. Re:Flow of Information by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      There's so much BS going around about democracy and the "tyranny of the majority".

      Constitutions don't need to be written down. A constitution, in the classical sense, is merely the fundamental rules and institutions of a society. Arguably, written constitutions aren't even real constitutions, but attempts to describe them and capture them. All organized societies are "constitutional".

      Representative democracy really does nothing to solve the problem of the "tyranny of the majority", if it is a problem at all. Some written constitutions purport to protect certain minorities, but there simply is no procedure to decide when a minority should be allowed to overrule a majority, and when it shouldn't. Enshrined minorities with power is just as often a problem as opressed minorites - and more often than majorities of any sort, I argue.

      Minorities are protected when, and only when majorities choose to restrain themselves. The magic bits of paper called constitutions only work as long as people believe they work - a bit like placebo medicine.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    162. Re:Flow of Information by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      You're patently ignoring the fact that no one legitimized an occupation by Russian Catholics of any Arab lands.

      I'm ignoring it because it's a thinly veiled attempt at changing the subject. Even if I were to acknowledge it as a legitimate argument, it fails as an analogy because Israel was created by the international community through the United Nations out of an area that was not a sovereign country. There was no "occupation" until Israel was attacked by foreign nations bent on destroying her. After that happened she had every right to defend herself and her people, as acknowledged by the UN charter and international law.

      Palestine gains 100% of the sovereignty that Israel enjoys.

      That would happen tomorrow if the rocket attacks ceased and the Palestinians came to terms with the fact that there will be no right of return.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    163. Re:Flow of Information by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          But the article you linked argues for both sides. Should I take an argument of the state of the world from a random computer geek, or from a well educated and respected world leader? While both may say the same thing, the expert in his field would tend to know more in that field. I also prefer legal advice from a lawyer, and not a Slashdot poster who prefaces his statement with IANAL.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    164. Re:Flow of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or perhaps the voting in of an extreme right wing racist war mongering government in Israel ?

    165. Re:Flow of Information by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

      But ... he is ... Captain ... James T ... Kirk ... :)

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    166. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      Either you are lying or your reading comprehension is suffering.

      Just because they feel racially superior to the rest of us, it doesn't mean that we have to capitulate to that notion. Were it any other people this would be abhorrent. Yet, because of the Nazis, we're all expected to be cool with it.

      This is the topic.

      And it isn't an analogy any more than suffrage for women was an analogy. Either people are equal, because they are people, or the Jews are somehow better than the Russians and Arabs. You can't mince words here, this is as clear as night and day.

      After that happened she had every right to defend herself and her people, as acknowledged by the UN charter and international law.

      Indeed 'she' did. But no amount of nationalistic zeal can excuse 'her' crimes that went well beyond defense. These are well documented, and do not need to be recounted here. That's not the issue. The issue, as I defined it with my post eleven posts ago, is the disparity. Were the US to ban coriander to the Sioux in Montana, they would likewise get no sympathy from me. But there are those that justify things like the blockade, the home-crushing, human-killing Caterpillar machines, and other patently evil tools as 'defense'.

      My position is that they do so out of some other mechanism than logic. Compassion might have described it, several years ago, but it falls short today.

    167. Re:Flow of Information by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

      If it is quoted frequently, and others have said exactly what I said, maybe there is some truth behind it. I've never replied to anyone using that quote before.

          Fictional characters don't say anything worthy of quoting. The author of the work being performed is worthy of being quoted for having a character saying it though. Using the rank and/or honorable position of the fictional character to show authority and knowledge in their field is inappropriate as the character nor the author. You may as well quote Doctor Nick as practical medical advice.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    168. Re:Flow of Information by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      Either people are equal, because they are people, or the Jews are somehow better than the Russians and Arabs.

      I see what you are doing there, trying to make it into a racial issue rather than a political one.

      The issue, as I defined it with my post eleven posts ago, is the disparity

      Cry me a river. When Hamas stops launching rockets into Israel the Israelis will stop attacking them. It's really that simple. As far as "disparity", give me a break -- if someone pulls a knife on me are you doing to condemn me when I respond by pulling my pistol?

      But there are those that justify things like the blockade

      The blockade is justified as long as Hamas continues to try and import weaponry that is later used to murder Israeli civilians.

      the home-crushing, human-killing Caterpillar machines

      Maybe the Israelis should use rockets instead and they'd have your sympathy?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    169. Re:Flow of Information by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      Well, "I assume" is a valid sentence. It doesn't carry the same amount of information but neither does any other (usual) sentence where you remove any clauses.

      German usually requires commas as a clause separator except where words like "and" or "or" are used. While German looks to a native English speaker as if it was written by William Shatner, English looks to a native German speaker like an unstructured mess because of what appear to be incredibly long unbroken clauses. (To a German that last sentence looks like two atomic clauses while it would've been five in German.)

      In essence we just use fewer rules to determine when a comma is used as a clause boundary designator with the overall result being stricter.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    170. Re:Flow of Information by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          And as you found out, he wasn't a video game character. He was simply a figment of my imagination. :)

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    171. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      Hamas has the right to use weapons to attack its enemies, just as the United States has the right to do so. It is called 'sovereignty'. If you'd like them to stop, either win the war or negotiate a truce.

      "Cry me a river", indeed.

      Either people are equal, because they are people, or the Jews are somehow better than the Russians and Arabs.

      I see what you are doing there, trying to make it into a racial issue rather than a political one.

      This isn't some fabrication of mine. This is the truth of it. If you remove the labels placed on these peoples and look at their behavior from a 'blind as in justice' point of view, there are few explanations left.

      Where I'm from we have this whole 'civil rights' thing that was followed closely by this notion of 'equality'. It means we put blinders on and look at all people as human beings, created equal under God, and apply the law evenly, with an aim towards justice. We look at what they are doing, outside of who they are. This clearly should not offend you nor anyone else.

      Maybe the Israelis should use rockets instead and they'd have your sympathy?

      Maybe, if they used them on military targets. But as genuine terrorists that target civilians go, I don't have a whole lot of sympathy to spare. Here at least, we have some parity.

      To take you back to the very beginning, if the surviving Russian Catholics started taking out blood vendettas against the German people of today, would this be 'justice'?

      I've made all these points already, and I get the impression that you comprehend their content completely.

    172. Re:Flow of Information by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      Hamas has the right to use weapons to attack its enemies, just as the United States has the right to do so. It is called 'sovereignty'. If you'd like them to stop, either win the war or negotiate a truce.

      If you admit it's a war then you can't condemn Israel for blockading them.

      if the surviving Russian Catholics started taking out blood vendettas against the German people of today, would this be 'justice'?

      That's interesting, because the Palestinians engaging in the modern day vendettas against the Israelis are two or three generations removed from the Palestinians that were displaced during the various wars waged against Israel. Why aren't you condemning them with the same vigor as you condemn Israel?

      The fact remains that they could have peace tomorrow if they gave up on the Right of Return. The Israelis are willing to work with them on every other issue besides that one. The Palestinians refuse to accept any peace that doesn't give them the right to settle anywhere they want within the pre-1967 borders of Israel. There will be no peace until they give up on this fantasy or defeat the Israelis on the battlefield. Since they've shown no willingness to do the former and the latter is impossible I don't hold out much hope for seeing a just peace during this generation.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    173. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      Why aren't you condemning them with the same vigor as you condemn Israel?

      Because the Palestinians just don't come across to me as the aggressors here. They, from my view, have become the oppressed people.

      The fact remains that they could have peace tomorrow if they gave up on the Right of Return.

      No clue, but if so, why the blockade? Will this somehow aid in the negotiations? Why bulldoze homes with the people still inside? Does this somehow help?

      You could, possibly, be right, but the behavior I can witness doesn't support your position. I'm not seeing any negotiations, gestures of goodwill, etc. I'm not even seeing a defensive posture, but an aggressive one.

    174. Re:Flow of Information by makomk · · Score: 1

      If I recall correctly, however, sharia and democracy are to an extent mutually exclusive. The rationale being that sharia claims itself to be "the law of god" and under sharia the views of man (ie, democracy) cannot trump "the law of god".

      The same is true of a lot of the more interesting Christian fundamentalist groups in the US. Unfortunately, they have a fairly large amount political influence and lots of cash, and stopping them would be unconstitutional...

    175. Re:Flow of Information by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      No clue, but if so, why the blockade?

      You answered your own question a post or two ago (emphasis mine):

      Hamas has the right to use weapons to attack its enemies, just as the United States has the right to do so. It is called 'sovereignty'. If you'd like them to stop, either win the war

      It's perfectly acceptable to blockade an enemy to prevent him from receiving weaponry that can be used to kill your citizens or soldiers. The United States did the same thing forty years ago. The Allies did it during both World Wars. What's the problem?

      I'm not seeing any negotiations, gestures of goodwill, etc.

      Then you haven't been paying attention to the last twenty years of peace talks and gestures of goodwill.

      I'm not even seeing a defensive posture, but an aggressive one.

      The posture is in the eye of the beholder, but it should be noted that international law does not require you to wait until being attacked to take defensive action.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    176. Re:Flow of Information by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      If the majority of a country want Sharia law, then who are we to deny them that?

      There once was a certain country, in which the majority decided to gave power to a party which had a program of explicit racial discrimination - in an entirely democratic way, I must add. We all know (I hope!) how this ended.

    177. Re:Flow of Information by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Interesting. I'm not in the habit of quoting nonexistent people, so would it be:

      "The Earth is six thousand years old." -- God, The Bible by God.

      or

      "The Earth is six thousand years old." -- God, Deity.

      Let's ignore the fact that nowhere in the bible you'll find the sentence "The Earth is six thousand years old." Assuming that sentence would be found there, and further assuming that the bible claimed that God said that, the correct quote would be:

      "The earth is six thousand years old" -- God, The Bible, unknown author.

      And given that the bible wasn't originally written in English, you also should write which translation of the bible you're quoting.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    178. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      It's perfectly acceptable to blockade an enemy to prevent him from receiving weaponry that can be used to kill your citizens or soldiers. The United States did the same thing forty years ago. The Allies did it during both World Wars. What's the problem?

      The problem is the disparity between 'Israel really wants peace' and their actual behavior.

      I'm not making an international law argument here, but a moral one. If Israel believed that Hamas had a right to exist, and viewed them as a political adversary, the blockade would stop. If they viewed them as a geopolitical enemy, then attacks would begin. Instead they appear to view these people as chattel. They're not to be warred upon nor negotiated with, just boxed away until they all die off. Open war would be less cowardly, and likely would end the conflict sooner, so yes I do see this as a viable option for a sovereign nation. That isn't even close to what is happening, though.

      When the last Israeli invasion happened, what did they take out? Infrastructure, right? Schools, power, water? Aren't they still banning the import of many, many, many non-missile items, including educational materials?

      I'm not saying that it is impossible for Israel to do the right thing. I absolutely believe that it is. However the mere possibility doesn't obviate the fact that what they are actually doing is relatively evil.

    179. Re:Flow of Information by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      The problem is the disparity between 'Israel really wants peace' and their actual behavior.

      As opposed to the behavior of the Palestinians?

      If Israel believed that Hamas had a right to exist, and viewed them as a political adversary, the blockade would stop.

      Political adversaries wage war at the ballot box. Hamas launches rockets into Israel. That's not the action of a political adversary.

      However the mere possibility doesn't obviate the fact that what they are actually doing is relatively evil.

      I don't see it that way. I see them as doing what they have to do to defend their people.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    180. Re:Flow of Information by WWWWolf · · Score: 1

      That would have been a lot more impressive if it was a real quote, and not just a quote from a video game.

      Yeah, I bet you say the same thing when people quote Nineteen Eighty-Four. I mean, it's just a novel. Fiction can't produce words to live by, right? Right?

    181. Re:Flow of Information by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      It's indeed correct in German to put a comma there, but not because of what the verb indicates, but because in German there's always a comma between main clause and subordinate clause (the main clause in this case only consists of the word "check").

      It must still be a valid sentence if you remove the bit between the commas, how hard is that?

      It's rather hard to remove anything between the commas when there's only one. :-)

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    182. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      The problem is the disparity between 'Israel really wants peace' and their actual behavior.

      As opposed to the behavior of the Palestinians?

      Again, the Palestinians are the one that are displaced, without a military, and without any representation to the outside world. They're not using their military to oppress a body of people. Their chosen methods are frequently despicable, to be certain, but if we hope to end the conflict with anything short of genocide, we're going to have to allow some degree of violent dissent to the oppression.

      I don't see it that way. I see them as doing what they have to do to defend their people.

      There needs to be a limit. If anyone, anywhere can do 'what they have to do' as a practical matter, then there is no longer any such thing as 'good and evil'. I'm not going to elect to live in that world.

    183. Re:Flow of Information by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      Again, the Palestinians are the one that are displaced, without a military, and without any representation to the outside world. They're not using their military to oppress a body of people. Their chosen methods are frequently despicable, to be certain, but if we hope to end the conflict with anything short of genocide, we're going to have to allow some degree of violent dissent to the oppression.

      Sorry, but you and I aren't going to see eye to eye on this. I do not see the Palestinians as an "oppressed" people, nor do I buy the line that they have no representation to the outside world.

      There needs to be a limit. If anyone, anywhere can do 'what they have to do' as a practical matter, then there is no longer any such thing as 'good and evil'. I'm not going to elect to live in that world.

      Your "election" is irrelevant, as nation-states will take whatever steps they deem necessary to defend themselves. As long as rockets continue to land on Israeli soil, the Israelis aren't likely to end the economic blockade of Gaza.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    184. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      Your "election" is irrelevant, as nation-states will take whatever steps they deem necessary to defend themselves. As long as rockets continue to land on Israeli soil, the Israelis aren't likely to end the economic blockade of Gaza.

      This is nearly true. Except that by participating in my democracy I can have an impact on how much blood is on my own hands. To date the United States has been all but complicit in Israel's behavior, good and bad. But the time for this has passed. Let them stand on their own and behave as they will without any assistance from us, at least until they return to an honorable path that we can support.

    185. Re:Flow of Information by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "The Earth is six thousand years old." - People who haven't bothered to learn the history of the Bible.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    186. Re:Flow of Information by geekoid · · Score: 1

      I've talked to some Christians and they claim the Bible was handed to Adam by God himself.

      Yes, I know they're wrong, but they really believe that nonsense.

      It's a bit like saying Gene Roddenberry got the scripts for Star Trek from Kirk himself.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    187. Re:Flow of Information by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Accept history doesn't really bear that out.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    188. Re:Flow of Information by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      But the time for this has passed.

      Congress and the American people disagree with you, but regardless, isolating Israel is not a sound foreign policy move even if you disagree with their actions. The last time they were isolated they ran to other pariah nations (South Africa) and traded weapons and technology with them. They are even rumored to have engaged in a nuclear test with them.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    189. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      They have disagreed in the past, but be observant and see if you don't notice a change.

      A lot of us are tired of the crap.

      And honestly I don't think that the threat of Israel going to 'other pariah nations' is any justification for their 'goodness' as an ally.

      Further, I'm not specifically advocating isolating them, per se, but their actions. If we, as a nation, are of the opinion that Israel's blockade isn't legal, for example, we can and should treat them like any other pirates on the high seas. Let us see if they will turn on this old ally as quickly as they turned on Turkey.

    190. Re:Flow of Information by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      Except that the blockade is perfectly legal and we as a nation are supportive of Israel. It's one of the few bipartisan issues remaining that a sizable number of Democrats and Republicans agree on.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    191. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      Well, understand also that incumbents aren't doing so very well these days.

    192. Re:Flow of Information by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      Which has exactly zero to do with Israel, but nice try.....

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    193. Re:Flow of Information by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      Dude. Seriously.

      It's one of the few bipartisan issues remaining that a sizable number of Democrats and Republicans agree on.

      The issues that used to be agreed upon in a bipartisan way aren't going to continue to be universal. We're looking at more than just one party with two colors in the very near future.

      But you're right, it has nothing to do with anything other that as a response to the words you wrote.

    194. Re:Flow of Information by WNight · · Score: 1

      No, it still seems to fit. Under Sharia law the sky-wizard crowd make the laws, under US "democracy" the rich disproportionally make the laws.

      Neither is a good system for the victims of the politically active, either domestically or foreign.

    195. Re:Flow of Information by WNight · · Score: 1

      Because a country under Sharia law is never in practice a democracy.

      Right.

      Whereas if you had a democracy to start with you could voluntarily subject yourself to space-ghost law as well. Of course nobody would - but they'd be free to do so. What we need to do is realize that for a reasonable god-botherer, this would be enough.

      Sharia law is slavery and one of our allies is seeking to enslave its population - that this (might) have majority support doesn't matter at all to the minority, nor should it to us. Countries with religious government (leaders?) aren't legitimate as they reject a mandate from the people in exchange for one from their myth.

      As an aside, to all the people who bring the US into unrelated conversations [...]

      No. Most of the people who bring up the USA are either in it, near it, subject to its rule, etc. All valid reasons to discuss it. And like having the default currency, another cost of being the biggest is that everything is measured against you.

      Given how the USA is currently enforcing their ideals for correct behavior, its own standards are appropriately more under scrutiny now than ever.

      Especially given how it's little things like Bush not being properly elected that the USA used against Saddam. Sure he was a more egregious example, but that just suggests we'd have been fine if he'd kept his landslide victories to 65% instead of 99% - as we didn't care if he gassed the Kurdish, etc. It shows the USA's got pretty low standards at home and for allies.

    196. Re:Flow of Information by WNight · · Score: 1

      You're either pro-Democracy or against it - if you support a coup when you don't like the results then you're against Democracy

      Not at all. I support a democracy of people speaking for themselves, but I don't accept the tyranny of the majority.

      As soon as the action of that democracy is to take choice away from others the government loses its legitimacy. Tyranny is just as horrible when it's one man or a million in charge.

      If these people voted to secede and form their own government that'd be legitimate - if they vote to replace their government with one non-responsive to the needs of the non-religious then they're traitors and we should aid the other side in the upcoming civil war.

      I agree about the eventual answer though - education. But a large part of that is addressing religion like the myth it is.

    197. Re:Flow of Information by Mister_Stoopid · · Score: 1

      >What do you think we would do if a group of Native Americans started dropping rockets on American towns? Do you think we would allow them unfettered trade with the rest of the world so as to continue arming themselves?

      I think the US should make reparations to Native Americans by establishing a homeland for them. We'll give them the western half of France. If the French people don't support this "partition plan" and choose to resist we'll call them terrorists. After the US has used it's military strength to enforce the Native American nation in Europe for 50 years we'll say "You can have a problem with it all you want, but there are six million Native Americans living in West France now and they aren't going anywhere.".

    198. Re:Flow of Information by Lunzo · · Score: 1

      The Bible has its own citation system. It's called chapter and verse numbers. It works quite well.

    199. Re:Flow of Information by Cassius+Corodes · · Score: 1

      That's all well and good except under one the politically active get hauled away in the middle of the night and are never heard from again and the others stand for office or alternatively vent on their blogs. I'll let you guess which is which.

      While I am glad you are striving to hold the world to a higher standard, I am simply asking people to take a step back and see how far we have come, and to appreciate what we have. I feel that having a dismissive attitude about how far we have come is a real danger as people don't realise how foreign many things we take for granted are around the world - even in places we might consider otherwise western.

      The way you seem to have equated a religious dictatorship, one that persecuted minorities of the racial and religious variety, with a multi-cultural, multi-religious, rule-of-law bound, personal freedom focused democracy albeit one with a disproportionate influence in governance from the rich is an example of this, in my mind, dismissive attitude.

      --
      Control is an illusion, order our comforting lie. From chaos, through chaos, into chaos we fly
    200. Re:Flow of Information by Cassius+Corodes · · Score: 1

      Then the US got engaged in wars (real and proxy) against democratically-elected presidents, toppling democracies and installing their own dictators.

      The key is that we have also done the opposite, we have helped people in poverty, fought dictators for democracy and have helped countless people live a better life. This very fact is what differentiates us from all other superpowers throughout history. The fact that the world considers free democracy the standard barer for national governance is a direct consequence of our actions.

      History will repeat itself while people like you are blind to it.

      What I am worried about is that history may not repeat itself, and we will have lost the brightest beacon of hope in this world.

      --
      Control is an illusion, order our comforting lie. From chaos, through chaos, into chaos we fly
    201. Re:Flow of Information by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      Hognoxious apparently saw a criticism of the US and decided to prove that the Ugly American is alive and well.

      And if you don't include the US when you say "the West", then what the fuck does the term mean? Also, as for "kum-ba-ya singing appeaseniks to be found in Europe": 1) I'm not a European, and 2) You may not have noticed that NATO was dragged into your little wars; along with countries like Australia who have all lost lives in the Middle East and Afghanistan and become targets of terrorist retaliation at home as a result.

    202. Re:Flow of Information by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      The US didn't do it, the international community did via the United Nations. Take it up with them.

      Your analogy also falls flat because there was already a large Jewish population in the area before the partition plan went into effect. AFAIK there is no sizable Native American community in France.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    203. Re:Flow of Information by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

      Well, the quote could be good if attributed to George Orwell's 1984. If it's attributed to a person and rank (i.e., John Nobody, POTUS) rather than character and publication (John Nobody, POTUS, in Joe Author's book Last Dynasty of America), then that's a misrepresentation of the person and their authority.

          Someone else posted this excellent example.

      No, but you're missing the point. If you're quoting Shakespeare, you would do the following

      "To be or not to be..." --Hamlet, Hamlet by William Shakespeare

      and not

      "To be or not to be..." --Hamlet, Prince of Denmark

      The first identifies it as a line said by a fictional character, and includes the actual author. The second places the fictional character of Hamlet in a non-fictional context.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    204. Re:Flow of Information by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          Not to go all religious on you or anything, but God didn't write the book. As the story goes, it is a collection of writings, which were handed down over generations, transcribed countless times, until they were collected into written books. Those books were then modified quite a few more times, translated, and rewritten. Select books were then compiled into the "bible".

          So, if you wanted to cite a line by "God" from a Christian bible, it would be something along the lines of

          "And then I destroyed all I had created." God, [this version] Bible

          It has become customary to include the book, chapter, and verse, such as Revelation 21:8. Speaking of which, that specific verse kinda damns anyone who has a cross, or other religious statues or paintings. God takes that whole idolatry thing pretty seriously. Well, if you believe in such mythology. That makes me safe on two counts. :)

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    205. Re:Flow of Information by Cassius+Corodes · · Score: 1

      FYI most Kurds are Muslims - they are mainly persecuted because they are ethnic minorities rather than religious minorities.

      --
      Control is an illusion, order our comforting lie. From chaos, through chaos, into chaos we fly
    206. Re:Flow of Information by Cassius+Corodes · · Score: 1

      Not in all cases, as an extreme example, the nazis would not have stopped with their hatred of jews despite any actions by the jews. Now if you read the press in the middle east you will note that it only loosely conforms to reality, and the US and Israel are blamed for pretty much everything, their fault or not. There a just so many conspiracy theories, such distortion of facts that even if we went there to plant flowers it would be constructed as some kind of diabolical plot.

      Basically the west needs to do its best, but not be under any misconception that everybody will give praise where its due.

      --
      Control is an illusion, order our comforting lie. From chaos, through chaos, into chaos we fly
    207. Re:Flow of Information by capnkr · · Score: 1

      As an aside, to all the people who bring their US hate into unrelated conversations {snip}

      Fixed...

      --
      "...there are some things that can beat smartness and foresight. Awkwardness and stupidity can." ~ Mark Twain
    208. Re:Flow of Information by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Parent:

      "The Earth is six thousand years old." -- God, Deity.

      GP:

      The second places the fictional character of Hamlet in a non-fictional context.

      Since you implicitly accept the GP's scenario, which part of "God, Deity" is non-fictional?

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    209. Re:Flow of Information by j2bryson · · Score: 1

      I think the members of the EU who kept dissing Turkey's entry have a lot to answer for this. How often do France, Spain & Italy have to stand up and say "you can't join us, you are barbaric / insufficiently Christian" before it became almost a patriotic duty to vote for an Islamic party? Of course Italy is doing the same thing -- attacking information & becoming autocratic. Actually, having visited both countries recently, urban Turkey at least feels more like northern Europe than urban Italy does -- Italy feels more like India. (No offense, I like India too.) But the point is, rejecting people as being too different from you is not a good way to get them to behave more like you. And if you think "good, I want to be special", you don't get the information age.

    210. Re:Flow of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Goes along with the photos they released of the "blockade" incident that conveniently cropped out any of the Turkish fighters holding knives, hammers, etc.

    211. Re:Flow of Information by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      I've talked to some Christians and they claim the Bible was handed to Adam by God himself.

      Did you ask them where the bible says so?

      It's a bit like saying Gene Roddenberry got the scripts for Star Trek from Kirk himself.

      That's of course nonsense. He got them from Benjamin Sisko. :-)

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    212. Re:Flow of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The same is true of a lot of the more interesting Christian fundamentalist groups in the US. Unfortunately, they have a fairly large amount political influence and lots of cash, and stopping them would be unconstitutional...

      Most Christian groups of any size, including the large evangelical groups, actually see law as a particularly human matter. In biblical terms, "the law cannot save, but only condemn" and Christians have already been saved from the law (see Pauline epistles). Old Mosaic law was completed (over, done with) by Jesus. That's how the secular state could come about in a largely religious society at the time -- the protestant position is that the state can only ever be a secular institution (render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, etc). Hence why the evangelical Christians have been pro-democracy where other faiths' strong proponents aren't always. Lifestyle and what people argue for, however, is a godly matter. And so, while they're pro-democracy, they will also campaign like mad to get all the social constructs (including laws) to line up with how they believe people should behave.

    213. Re:Flow of Information by shnull · · Score: 1

      best game ever so that's the Turkey that wants to join the EU? i think i hear a veto coming up

      --
      beware he who denies you access to information for in his mind, he already deems himself to be your master (SMAC-ish)
    214. Re:Flow of Information by WNight · · Score: 1

      I don't see the rule-of-law bound nature of our society. Sure, many things are but far more importantly, many things are not. Or at least, not usefully for the citizens.

      For instance, recording police actions. In spite of laws, convention, and common sense multiple judges have upheld crazy-wild cases of wiretapping, interfering with an investigation, etc.

      Look at the CEOs of major criminal corporations. All would have been worse off if they'd been caught with a 2oz bag of marijuana.

      Massive tent-city jails full of people caught with a small bag a pot, housed with the insane and the violent. More citizens in jail per capita than ANYWHERE.

      The wiretapping and telco immunity issue is another example. Bush's signing statements another. Bush leading the country based directly on messages from god... Obama openly professing strong religious beliefs.

      Some countries might be significantly different than Saudi Arabia with its religious leaders and its lack of accountability at the higher levels of government, but the USA and Canada differ only by degree, not class. We are not better - just a few years ahead and with much better PR.

      The "average" person on SA's streets wouldn't see much of the unreasonableness of Sharia law, just like the average person in Canada won't get hassled for taking photos, or tazered to death, etc. But they'd get just as far trying to remove a thuggish police officer - nowhere.

      We'll beat you, declare you a terrorist, ship you overseas for torture or murder, and deny your existence to your family. But then the patriot act (etc) allows for that, so maybe you're right - maybe it is magically lawful.

      I appreciate what we have, but we have it because we have a peaceful educated liberal population - the government didn't give it to us. The government isn't the source of justice or liberty, the people who enacted it are - but the entrenched power interests in government are the source of the red tape and cronyism that are our problem.

      Government isn't a dog that needs to be petted and rewarded when it does well, it's merely a system that worked. When it fails though it needs to be dissected, examined, diagnosed, and fixed. Giving it any credit leads to cutting it slack, like a person, instead of fixing it like a machine.

    215. Re:Flow of Information by nopainogain · · Score: 1

      to quote a fellow atheist... I don't hate god but his followers scare the SHIT out of me!

    216. Re:Flow of Information by oamasood · · Score: 1

      ...Of course, part of the problem with this whole discussion is that the participants apparently haven't even studied 'Shariah law'. People just believe whatever Fox, CNN, etc., says or implies, and consider themselves political commentators. I have in fact studied Shariah law at UC Berkeley. Shariah law gave women many rights that women did not have until very recently, for example, the right to own property, the right to work, and many other things. In fact, in some aspects, the Shariah law gives more rights to women than Western law. For example, according to Shariah, a woman could be a millionaire but she does not have to spend a single cent of her money on providing for her own needs or the household needs. Instead, her husband (though he may be a very poor man) is responsible for providing for the entire family's needs. The husband cannot demand a single cent from the wife. That's just one example...if you study it, you would find many more. Something "upholders of Western freedom and democracy" can learn from.

  3. Who's surprised? by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 4, Informative

    The Turks don't want anyone to talk, write or even think about Armenians or Kurds. And they don't care for Jews all that much either.

    --
    "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
    1. Re:Who's surprised? by couchslug · · Score: 1, Troll

      Not only is Ataturk dead, the Turks are turning Jihadist, so now we'll have Taliban with a taste for dead Kurd (erm, "Mountain Turks").
      The veneer of modern civilization is peeling off (granted, the glue never dried) and they are revealing their true Muslim character.

      Add it to the list of countries Israel should nuke when götterdämmerung comes.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    2. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who's surprised? Maybe those who remember Turkey is part of NATO and is a close ally of the "freedom-loving" Americans?

    3. Re:Who's surprised? by ooloogi · · Score: 1

      Maybe Turkey's support for Gaza is backfiring as people realise there's bigger issues with Turkey and the Kurds, Armenians than there is with Israel and Gaza. Hence moving to censorship for damage control.

    4. Re:Who's surprised? by phantomfive · · Score: 1
      At one point, Turkey was becoming a western, liberal democracy. They are part of NATO, and wanted to join the EU. In the last few years though, they've swung hard in the radical direction. The government has managed to create a disinformation campaign, and the results are depressing. My favorite line from the article:

      Then U.S. ambassador to Turkey Eric Edelman actually felt the need to organize a conference call to explain to the Turkish media that secret U.S. nuclear testing did not cause the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami. One of the craziest theories circulating in Ankara was that the U.S. was colonizing the Middle East because its scientists were aware of an impending asteroid strike on North America.

      I mean, I've heard a lot of conspiracies about why the US attacked Israel, but that is a new one. It is too bad, Turkey is one place that could use Google (and free, true information).

      --
      Qxe4
    5. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And they don't care for Jews all that much either.

      Who does?

    6. Re:Who's surprised? by elloGov · · Score: 0, Interesting

      In summary this is a regime change. It's the centurylong elitist rule of the young Turks that inflicted the crimes against the Armenians and the Kurds. I am sorry if this was counter-productive to your aim. However, being a Turkish Kurd who had to flee Turkey, I speak of front row, real observations of the social, economic and political tyranny in that country.

    7. Re:Who's surprised? by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      Oh PLEASE shut the fuck up. "True Muslim character"? Do you know a damn thing about the history of traditional Islam, the Islam that existed prior to Hassan al-Banna's perversion? No, I don't think you do. You think that Islamism == Islam, so you think that knowing a few violent-sounding Qur'an quotes and the names of a few terrorists means you know the whole religion.

      Try talking to everyday Muslims for 10 damn minutes and seeing what they think of their religion and what they think of political Islamism.

    8. Re:Who's surprised? by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      I mean, I've heard a lot of conspiracies about why the US attacked Israel, but that is a new one.

      I think you mean Iraq.

      Iraq and Iran: Muslim countries. Iraq was ruled by Saddam Hussein, and Iran is ruled by a fundamentalist dictatorship (though it still has a lot of its developed, liberal culture from before the Revolution in places).

      Israel: Jewish country. Liberal and democratic with rising worries of overbreeding by the ultra-Orthodox possibly resulting in a religious state.

    9. Re:Who's surprised? by Xest · · Score: 1

      "The Turks don't want anyone to talk, write or even think about Armenians or Kurds. And they don't care for Jews all that much either."

      That's simply not true, the Turkish people very much case for the jews, which is precisely why Turkey has been Israel's closest muslim ally, doing combat training and war games together etc.

      The problem is that an Islamic party has taken political control, and yes, those in this party, and those supporting it generally do hate the jews and just about everyone who isn't muslim. That's the fundamental problem- it's not all Turks, just a certain subset, and even those who did vote for the Islamic party did not necessarily do so because they support say an anti-Jewish stance- these people are in a minority, the trouble is, it's a minority that's been granted power by a small majority.

    10. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "violent sounding quotes" are among the last revelations of the prophet muhammad. By Islamic law, when a verse contradict the other, the newer verse replaces the older one. Almost all of the violent verses are of the later days of Muhammad when he lived in Medina, while all the nice sounding, peace loving verses are from his days in Mecca.

      Political islamism ? Islam is political by its very nature because it has fine prints and tries to legislate almost all the things of everyday life, it even has detailed laws on succession and heritage for fuck's sake. Sharia doesn't exist in a vacuum, it has a basis in the Qur'an. One of the core tenets of Islam is the tax for the poor called the Zakat, it is one of the "five pillars of Islam". Isn't that political ?

      The major split between two sects of Islam, the Sunni and the Chiit are precisely BECAUSE of the very political nature of Islam, where the major point of contention between the believers is "who gets to rule ?".

    11. Re:Who's surprised? by couchslug · · Score: 1

      Your history doesn't matter because it is as dead as the pyramids. You have nothing to be proud of now, and are trapped longing for a dead, dead past.

      YOUR countries prove my point. YOUR governments,e chosen and run by Muslims, prove my point. I've visited the wealthiest and best societies your superstition has ever produced, in KSA, the Emirates, Kuwait, and Turkey. I've done this for many years, on a very friendly basis (I have social skills, and do very smooth anti-Zionist rants that go over well.)

      I'm not impressed.

      Your superstition doesn't promote personal freedom. I DEMAND personal freedom and don't give a shit about someone's imaginary friend telling them they must have theocracy. Everyday Muslims are quite like everyday Communists. To be is to lend tacit support. To support Islam is to support theocracy (you don't get a choice, as much more faithful members will remind you), to support the seemless blend of religion and state, and thus to empower Jihadists to run your lives. That's why Iran got what it got after the Revolution. Islam, like Communism, ensure "Bolshevists" will take over eventually. Theory doesn't mean shit when your whole construct is designed to always be jacked by extremists.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    12. Re:Who's surprised? by couchslug · · Score: 1

      EDIT:

      I was multitasking and didn't catch the Jewish nic (I don't care for your superstition either), but the statements still apply. You can't escape the actions of your co-religionists because religion is a political movement.

      Muslims in the street don't matter, their masters and the societies they build do. I defy you to find a Muslim country as free as most European countries or the US.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    13. Re:Who's surprised? by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      I defy you to find a Muslim country as free as most European countries or the US.

      So your challenge, if I understand it, is to find a country without freedom of religion that is as free as one that has freedom of religion.

      Okay, fine, I challenge you to make a salient comment without contradicting yourself!

      Impossible tasks, FTW!

    14. Re:Who's surprised? by Clandestine_Blaze · · Score: 1

      And they don't care for Jews all that much either.

      Who does?

      I do care for them - they're good people. And as someone with a Persian background, I would love to see people from all cultures live peacefully with one another. I don't want to see Israel get nuked or taken over by anyone, and I don't want to see any other country in the Middle East get nuked or taken over by Israel. The people of Israel, Iran, Iraq, Palestine, Turkey, Jordan, Egypt, and so on can all coexist peacefully if their leaders would let them get to know one another better. For as long as each country feels like they are "at war" with one another, the propaganda will continue to flow and the people will be brainwashed by it.

      Even as an Atheist, reading some of these anti-religious comments above is really depressing for me. I'm not a religious person, but I certainly don't wish death to anyone who practices a certain religion or are of a certain race.

    15. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First of all,most of the ruling party either ran away or was executed after ww1. So Republic of turkey as a government isn't exactly the "young turks continued".

      "Elitist rule" Yes,trying to turn people from subjects of the sultan to individuals is elitist.

    16. Re:Who's surprised? by WNight · · Score: 1

      It's not that unreasonable. I know what baseline people in the USA/Canada sound like and I know what our religious extremists sound like.

      True religious character is pretty much all about control and hate. That's what's magnified when talking to a True Christian, or presumably a True Muslim. "Our" idiots truly embrace every syllable of dumb in that book, why would we expect their idiots to be different?

      The mistake made is in thinking the religious character is representative of the sane people in the area - for instance unindoctrinated children, atheists, and even the spiritual who don't preach war.

  4. Jive Turkeys! by Gizzmonic · · Score: 1

    Those Turks are real jive turkeys! And to think I was going to blame the Israelis for the flotilla disaster! Now I've got my eyes squarely perched on the Turks! Especially that Bald Bull fella, I don't trust that guy at all!

    --
    (-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
    1. Re:Jive Turkeys! by HypotenuseMan · · Score: 1

      Hey. His barber didn't know when to stop. Will you?

      --
      Doing the things a hypotenuse can.
    2. Re:Jive Turkeys! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aren't they those four giant lads that renamed Constantinople?

  5. Damage by Nerdfest · · Score: 1

    Isn't the 'net supposed to route around that sort of crap?

    1. Re:Damage by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 1

      Isn't the 'net supposed to route around that sort of crap?

      Yes, the Internet seems to be routing right around Turkey... Ah well, if they want to live in the Stone age...

      --
      "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
  6. Seriously by ravenspear · · Score: 1, Troll

    It's about time that Turkey was expelled from NATO. It's turning into a fascist religiously controlled state at an alarming rate.

    1. Re:Seriously by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      NATO doesn't care about dictators, look at how many right-wing military coups we've supported. Heck, look at how most of NATO supported just about everyone who was anti-Soviet. They don't care about human rights, just as long as they aren't communist or allied with Russia.

      All NATO stands for is opposing Russia and its allies, if you think it stands for human rights or anything you should look at the conflicts in the cold war and which side the US supported.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:Seriously by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "It's about time that Turkey was expelled from NATO. It's turning into a fascist religiously controlled state at an alarming rate."

      Leave it in NATO, since Jihadists still hate Commies (Russia still dreams Soviet dreams), but never let it into the European Union.

      No Muslim country belongs there (unless Europeans decide they hate their own culture).

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    3. Re:Seriously by Cryacin · · Score: 1

      No Muslim country belongs there

      You walked the streets of London or Paris recently? Just saying.

      --
      Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
    4. Re:Seriously by Bartab · · Score: 1

      (unless Europeans decide they hate their own culture)

      Already done.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo.
    5. Re:Seriously by astar · · Score: 1

      last I looked the government there was secular and some were trying hard to keep it that way. Perhaps you are upset because it seems a theocracy just committed an act of war against Turkey and the turks were pissy abut it.

      lots of definitions of fascism. the one I favor is murderous austerity during a depression.

    6. Re:Seriously by sznupi · · Score: 1

      ...just as long as they aren't communist...

      I wouldn't be that certain even of this part, either. For just one example - true, when my country entered NATO it was formally a "democracy" for almost a decade, but does anybody really think those were some sudden major shifts? "Communists" were since a long time ago predominantly locals, too; and the best part - the accession happened in the middle of 2-term, decade long presidency of somebody originating from them. And just before parliamentary elections won decisively by...former communists (who also led the place to the EU...). But even among them there was plenty of anti-Russian sentiment.
      Plus - NATO didn't really seem to have a problem with Jugoslavia. Yeah, opposing Russia and its allies (or pretty much any large unaligned block) seems to be the idea.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    7. Re:Seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Larouchian anti-semites in my slashdot?

      It's more likely than you think.

    8. Re:Seriously by sznupi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Muslim" is probably too big of an umbrella - Bosnia and Herzegovina is Muslim in half (and it seems that part of population was one of less warmongering during Balkan wars), is on the way towards EU membership with which it shouldn't have major issues; and generally with integrating. Germany has also large Muslim population, which despite any problems is quite succesfully integrated; Turks, accidentally. Spain should be do well in the future, too; with already over one million Muslims, and more (mostly Moroccans) surely to come.

      There would be of course a problem with many Muslim countries of the group that is more or less bordering the EU sphere of influence, but nobody considers their accession; on either side(*). Except the case of Turkey, of course - and it seems that one might be clearing up soon, eh? (hm, I wouldn't be too surprised if the current situation is considered desirable by many parts of the EU; and with the hopes of slightly pouring oil on the fire - not as some sort of conspiracy of course, but as common goal)

      (*) There's the issue of unwilling to integrate immigrants from many of those places, but that's a separate thing.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    9. Re:Seriously by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you want to look back at history, to the time NATO was formed, around WW2, most of the world was still in some form of monarchy or dictatorship. At that time, lots of people in Europe still favored monarchy/dictatorship/fascism. It wasn't entirely clear at the time that democracy and capitalism were best. Some people even favored communism. It is understandable that NATO supported dictatorships, at a time when the moral superiority of democracy wasn't established.

      One thing was clear though, even at that point, and that was Soviet communism was bad. You speak of Russia's allies, but many of Russia's allies didn't have a choice, they were only puppet governments for Russia. As far as dictators who kill their people go, only Hitler came close to the numbers that Stalin reached. Stalinism/Leninism was worth opposing, it was far worse than your average dictatorship. It is also understandable that NATO's main policy was to oppose the Soviets.

      --
      Qxe4
    10. Re:Seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heck, many countries are still monarchies/etc. Look at Canada, the head of our government is the Governor General, appointed by the Queen to this day.

    11. Re:Seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's about time that Turkey was expelled from NATO. It's turning into a fascist religiously controlled state at an alarming rate.

      I am from Turkey, and I don't understand how this politic comment gets a score of 3. Totally off topic and trolling...

      As for the ban of some of the services of Google, it has to do with the legal system of Turkey, and Youtube's reluctance to remove objectionable content.

      I wonder if no websites get shutdown in USA or in Europe... You also have insult laws, and you also have websites that host objectionable content according to the law of your country; so I am pretty sure this problem is not just Turkey specific.

    12. Re:Seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anti Israel does Not equal anti-semite, despite the best efforts of Israeli sycophants to spin it that way when Israel is justifiably critcised.

    13. Re:Seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's turning into a fascist religiously controlled state at an alarming rate.

      Hey, they're just trying to fit into the EU.

    14. Re:Seriously by master_p · · Score: 1

      It wasn't entirely clear at the time that democracy and capitalism were best.

      And this is proven today how? by corporations milking the people out of existence?

    15. Re:Seriously by GreatBunzinni · · Score: 1

      NATO doesn't care about dictators, look at how many right-wing military coups we've supported.

      You don't need to go that far. Just look at NATO's founding nations, where you will find Portugal in the mix which at the time was ruled by the Estado Novo, a fascist and authoritarian regime.

      --
      Slashdot, fix your code or at least hire someone who is competent at it to do it for you.
    16. Re:Seriously by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      The US and most of the west don't have capitalism, or democracy for that matter.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    17. Re:Seriously by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      And this is proven today how? by corporations milking the people out of existence?

      It was determined by vote.

      --
      Qxe4
    18. Re:Seriously by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      If you want to look back at history, to the time NATO was formed, around WW2, most of the world was still in some form of monarchy or dictatorship.

      Monarchy is not contradictory to democracy, so this is irrelevant. And the only dictatorship among the original NATO members was Portugal, every other country was democratic.

    19. Re:Seriously by geekoid · · Score: 1

      NATO cars about people playing nice.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  7. What does this hope to accomplish? by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

    Seriously, what does this hope to accomplish other than drawing attention towards censorship?

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    1. Re:What does this hope to accomplish? by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Along with the meltdown of the southern European states, I'd say this guarantees that Turkey won't be let into the EU. It also suggests that it is moving full force towards an Islamist state, betraying the desires of its founder, Ataturk, that it would be a modern secular state.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:What does this hope to accomplish? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Depends on the balance between NGO, human rights groups, internal security issues and Google vs long term plain text warrants covering all internal networked computer use.
      Someone at their NSA did the math for long term interception quality vs cryptography on open networks and made a few calls?
      or its just a 'we can make our own internet' effort.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    3. Re:What does this hope to accomplish? by CAIMLAS · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Well, that's kinda what they want to do, from the looks of it (and judging by their social/political behavior over the past several years). "Hey fellow Mohammedans, we're with you now!" First it was denying US air basing into Iraq; most recently it was the vocal support of the flotilla into Israel (of which many of their citizens were participants).

      It probably has something to do with a "religiously conservative" party having taken the seats of power there in 2002. Just maybe.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    4. Re:What does this hope to accomplish? by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      But hasn't Turkey been trying to get into the EU for ages now though? Won't this set them back a whole lot? I mean, honestly, economically there is no point trying to convince the islamic states to become major allies, their economy is based purely on oil which once economies of scale start taking off in solar/nuclear/wind/hydro/etc power, better batteries and such the economy of the Islamic states, already poor will simply collapse.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    5. Re:What does this hope to accomplish? by tftp · · Score: 1

      But hasn't Turkey been trying to get into the EU for ages now though? Won't this set them back a whole lot?

      The "for ages" part is exactly what drives Turkey mad - and perhaps they are correct. Turkey was baited with EU membership for a long time, but each time when something had to be done there was "a word in the street" (usually from Germany) that Turkey is not yet welcome, and why don't they cool their heels for another decade or two. Eventually it became obvious to every Turk that EU is not going to let them in. Greece, a historical foe of Turkey, is in EU, even though it shouldn't be, and Turkey, with GDP nearly triple of that of Greece, isn't wanted. After so many runarounds why should anyone be surprised if Turkey changes course and joins a bloc where they are wanted and appreciated?

  8. Oh yes they did. by unity100 · · Score: 5, Informative

    'Telecommunications and Communication Ministry' has placed a ban on various ips of google, ranging from google analytics to youtube.

    despite the cause on the surface is shown deragotary videos of kemal ataturk on youtube, nothing could justify banning analytics ips. so, in the end one of the ministers slipped the real reason - google doesnt pay tax to turkey.

    there is no reason why it should either. google is a corp that is centered in america, and according to treaty to prevent double taxation, it should not pay tax here, since it pays tax in usa. so there is no legal justification for trying to tax them.

    but then again, you cant expect reasoning, or, abiding by laws, from an islamist government.

  9. Technical explanation? by fyoder · · Score: 1

    Is this a DNS thing, where Turks could get around it by using a different DNS server than their ISP's?

    --
    Loose lips lose spit.
    1. Re:Technical explanation? by Darkness404 · · Score: 0

      No doubt that Turks can get around it by using a proxy or something but I don't think that is Turkey's goal. I think the main thing is to remove Turkey from western media so the government can increase tyranny.

      If I was a freedom-minded Turk, I'd get out of there as soon as possible before things get worse, especially since I would imagine relations between Turkey and Europe haven't deteriorated too much... yet.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:Technical explanation? by juventasone · · Score: 1

      The second sentence of the article includes, "banned access to many of Google IP addresses". Assuming this is accurate, then no, changing DNS servers would not help.

    3. Re:Technical explanation? by Zerth · · Score: 2, Funny

      Probably not, but "DNS" has been a rising keyword in Turkey over the last 6 days.

      What's Turkish for "proxy"?

    4. Re:Technical explanation? by Weezul · · Score: 1

      Afaik, DNS blocking has been the traditional censorship tool in Turkey, but who knows now.

      --
      The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
    5. Re:Technical explanation? by yoonoose · · Score: 1

      sunucu

    6. Re:Technical explanation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's "vekil sunucu" technically. Though the computer jargon is widely accepted as it is.

  10. Do Not Insult Turkishness by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

    It's the law: Learn it, know it, live it.

    Jeff Spicoli: He's the full hot orator.

  11. Crossroads by skam240 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is very worrisome given that it is coming from what is supposed to be the crossroads country between the west and the middle east. If a country like Turkey is engaging in acts like this, what hope does the rest of the Middle East have?

    --
    I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    1. Re:Crossroads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...what hope does the rest of the Middle East have?

      Until the frauds are expelled from Israel, none.. Europeans are not Jews, they are all descendants of converts... They have no claim..

    2. Re:Crossroads by timmarhy · · Score: 1

      you had hope for the middle east? very young, or very naive...

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    3. Re:Crossroads by artson · · Score: 1

      That's just it. They were the crossroads country and now it all seems to be sliding downhill into extremist Islamism. They were the most notable of the secular states. They tried for years to join the European Union and the Europeans found every excuse to keep them out. It seems to have provided all the ammunition the Islamists needed, doesn't it?

      Turkey is a very considerable country. Their geographic location is very strategic, they have a large and industrious population, they are rich and they are (were) progressive, making advances in philosophy and science, not to mention being a major trading nation. Let's hope level heads prevail.

      --
      In times of trouble, the smell of frying onions usually gives confidence and comfort.
    4. Re:Crossroads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More like Turkey found every reason they could think up to make the EU keep them out. The EU were originally quite enthusiastic about it (and about expansion in general) but stipulated that Turkey had to change. Now, years down the line, Turkey has changed but not for the better. This internet censorship thing they have going on is only a small part of the problem. Still, quite a lot of politicians want Turkey to join the EU within the next decade or so...

    5. Re:Crossroads by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      OK, so the thing to do is to tell them that, right now, if they remove censorship and agree to the European Union's democracy and human-rights regulations, they can join immediately.

      If prejudice towards Muslims is fueling the Islamism, remove the prejudice to open a vector of attack on the Islamism.

    6. Re:Crossroads by blind+biker · · Score: 1

      OH yeah, I see. With fundamentalist Islam, it's always someone else's fault.

      If anything, I'd congratulate the wisdom of not accepting Turkey in the EU. Turkey's fundamentalist is only now coming to the fore, but it was always there. No wonder it has been the honor killing capital of the world since forever.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    7. Re:Crossroads by rhizome · · Score: 1

      If a country like Turkey is engaging in acts like this, what hope does the rest of the Middle East have?

      Where is your brain, man? What if they aren't?

      Or, put another way, can you think of anybody who has a motive these days to make Turkey look bad?

      The mere fact that there are tweets in Turkish is supposed to be evidence to corroborate a vague and unnamed source? Pull the other one and it sings Limp Bizkit.

      --
      When I was a kid, we only had one Darth.
    8. Re:Crossroads by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Actually, in retrospect, I'd say the EU made the right decision. And Turkey is just one of many middle eastern and asian countries that have slid further into extremist Islam in the last few decades. And the EU certainly wasn't the cause of *those* slides. Just look at Iran or Afghanistan. Just 30-40 years ago, those were mainstream, westernized countries (where women and men even *gasp* went to college together and women didn't have to cover their heads or faces). Now they're under Sharia.

      It would seem that a good portion of the middle east has been sliding backwards into extremism for some time. And the EU just (rightly) recognized that Turkey wasn't ready to sit at the adult table.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    9. Re:Crossroads by skam240 · · Score: 1

      Much of this slide has taken place because of foreigners belligerently mucking about in the region. Afghanistan was a fair bit more liberal than the Taliban and even a bit prosperous prior to the Soviet invasion. Likewise, before the United States helped overthrow their government to install their own puppet, Iran wasn't doing too bad on these counts either. Both the Taliban and the Shaw rose to power in reaction to these events.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    10. Re:Crossroads by the+entropy · · Score: 1

      Well, I'm the middle east(Lebanon to be specific) and no internet censorship here. Granted, the internet connections are extremely crappy, but they're not censored.

  12. Think. by headkase · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You lack the imagination to apply structure to our world? That entire page is taken from a carefully constructed and coherent extrapolation of human activity and knowledge. There are quite a few examples of quotes on the same page that are taken directly from our actual history as well. Apply your sensibility and winnow out the impossible, what is left are situations to consider. Think.

    --
    Shh.
    1. Re:Think. by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Funny

      You lack the imagination to apply structure to our world? That entire page is taken from a carefully constructed and coherent extrapolation of human activity and knowledge.

      When you quote a character from a video game as if they were a real person, you make yourself look like a total toolbag who needs the fiber to his mom's basement cut to protect the world from having to roll their eyes every time he shares something. There's no other way. I love that game, not a week goes by I don't play it, but I still think that's just amazingly socially retarded. Further, there must be some great quote just like it upon which it is based, and a little looking around could probably turn up something actually worth quoting. And still further, attributing that text to someone who does not exist is incorrect at best. In order to properly attribute it you need to know which of the game's designers wrote that text. Then attribute the quote to them, and see if anyone cares.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Think. by headkase · · Score: 1

      Now your just being pedantic.

      --
      Shh.
  13. As a European... Please no Turkey in Europe, thank by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because this kind of unacceptable behavior is not the only one. They are not at all respecting the human rights set by international rights, for a start. They do not firmly condone nor accept the Armenian genocid. The list is long.

    This is sadly a country that is now going "backwards" and I honestly hope they'll never make it in the Euro (thankfully now that Greece is collapsing the last thing people want is an even more messier Europe, which accepting Turkey would clearly create).

    To half of the Turkish citizens who are progressive and trying to westernize Turkey and to enter Europe: I feel really bad and sorry for you, keep fighting until you overpower the other half. To the other half: f*ck you, we don't you in Europe.

  14. This is not a court order by the way by unity100 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    there has been numerous court orders to ban youtube due to some laws, but telecommunications board was always banning the domain name, and leaving the ip untouched, therefore allowing everyone to use youtube by just a hosts file change or a dns change.

    now, this board, which is under islamist govt's control, decided to try to tax youtube. therefore, they are trying to blackmail google by banning the ips too. the court orders are just an excuse.

    1. Re:This is not a court order by the way by timeOday · · Score: 1

      If you're right, then this case is more about net neutrality than political/religious censorship. Does Turkey have some sort of UK-style TV tax that youtube could be seen as circumventing? This would not be too unlike here were cable or satellite networks sometimes lose access to a TV channel due to payment disputes - except that in this case one side is a government and the other is an overseas company.

    2. Re:This is not a court order by the way by unity100 · · Score: 1

      no. turkey has no such tax. its not related to net neutrality. the law in turkey says if the company is stationed in another country, it doesnt pay tax to turkey. however, the government says it should. which is illegal.

  15. Re:As a European... Please no Turkey in Europe, th by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

    They do not firmly condone nor accept the Armenian genocid.

    I'm really, really hoping you don't want them to condone the Armenian genocide.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  16. Re:As a European... Please no Turkey in Europe, th by qbzzt · · Score: 1

    To half of the Turkish citizens who are progressive and trying to westernize Turkey and to enter Europe: I feel really bad and sorry for you, keep fighting until you overpower the other half.

    The problem is that the progressive Turkish citizens aren't breeding as much as Islamists do. Without numbers on their side, how can they win, except by becoming a dictatorship?

    --
    -- Support a free market in the field of government
  17. haha keep on htinking google is your friend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ya now re-read that and KNOW the truth of google's activities

    1. Re:haha keep on htinking google is your friend by headkase · · Score: 1

      You'll have to be more clear in what you are saying about Google. Keeping information secret to yourself keeps things from changing.

      --
      Shh.
  18. Re:As a European... Please no Turkey in Europe, th by skam240 · · Score: 1

    Clearly you're baiting the question of "why?".

    --
    I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
  19. Re: Suspected Google Ban by Elitehusky · · Score: 1

    This could be a separation from East and West, or it could be a switch to a local search engine by eliminating the competitition. There are various possibilities as to the motive, but the Internet is a service, not yet a right, and as such roadblocks like this will pop up.

  20. Real Time commentary? by joe_cot · · Score: 1

    I'm not seeing much real time commentary on twitter, mostly dozens of people Re-Tweeting the same article. If you want to see the commentary, search #TurkeyCensorGoogle -"Access to certain Google services blocked from Turkey"

  21. im wondering which is the idiot that modded me dow by unity100 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    apparently he was some sort of political correct idiot or a muslim.

    im in turkey. we have an islamist government which clearly stated they are islamist, on top of us. they are engaging in innumerable ways of censorship, of this google thing, is only one of them.

    their main censorship tool is attacking the media outlets which do not publish in the manner they like, with the finance ministry, which is the ministry that governs taxes. if you are such a media company, suddenly finance ministry starts to review your previous tax payments, and, without fail, comes up with a lot of fines to fine you. so high that you cant pay, and they confiscate your company. approximately 2 major media groups consisting of 2-3 major newspapers and a television channel each, have been foreclosed in this way, and have been sold to their backers by zero interest loans from government banks.

    google is an outside company. they were not able to do the same thing to google. therefore, they are trying the method of banning, to subdue google.

    and, to the idiot - dont use your mod points in subjects you dont know about.

  22. Re: Suspected Google Ban by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

    Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

    Universal Declaration of Human Rights, ratified by Turkey in 1948.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Declaration_of_Universal_Human_Rights#Adoption

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  23. Re:As a European... Please no Turkey in Europe, th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They do not firmly condone nor accept the Armenian genocid.

    I'm really, really hoping you don't want them to condone the Armenian genocide.

    Oh, sweet merciful fuck, just when I thought I'd purged Serdar Argic from my memory, you have to remind me of USENET and the SERDAR ARGIC 1994 HOWLING THROUGH THE WIRES WORLD TOUR...

    (No, I'm not looking to see if the 'bot is still spamming USENET. I'm traumatized enough!)

  24. Re:You Turkey! by Cryacin · · Score: 1

    You can't fly like an eagle if you're hanging around in Turkey anyway.

    --
    Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
  25. In retaliation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google has banned turkey. Google staffers will no longer be allowed to consume the tasty foul on Google property.

  26. Re:GOOGLE MANIPULATES SEARCH RESULTS IN THEIR FAVO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, yes, it is ok. As OK as it is for Fox News to show the president getting 2 minutes of silence in a speech in front of soldiers when all other channels showed him getting standing ovations.

    More to the point, it is legal. Whether or not it is morally right or wrong, who gives a fuck in this day and age, the fish in the Golf of Mexico or the waterboarded tourists in Gitmo certainly don't.

  27. Re:GOOGLE MANIPULATES SEARCH RESULTS IN THEIR FAVO by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

    tl;dr

    lrn 2 paragraph plox

    --
    Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  28. GOOGLE MANIPULATES SEARCH RESULTS IN THEIR FAVOR by HighTechGenius · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I think this quote applies here: As the Americans learned so painfully in Earth's final century, free flow of information is the only safeguard against tyranny. The once-chained people whose leaders at last lose their grip on information flow will soon burst with freedom and vitality, but the free nation gradually constricting its grip on public discourse has begun its rapid slide into despotism. Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master. Commissioner Pravin Lal "U.N. Declaration of Rights" source

    IS IT OK FOR GOOGLE TO REMOVE NEGATIVE PRESS ABOUT ITSELF, WHILE THE REST OF OUR LIVES ARE EFECTED BY WHAT GOOGLE DISPLAYS ABOUT EACH OF US. THEY HAVE WON IN THE BUSINESS WORLD, BUT NOW THEIR MONOPOLY EFFECTS ALL OF US AND THEY HAVE A FEDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY TO THE WORLD TO ACT ETHICALLY AND THEY ARE NOT!!! I NEED HELP AND ADVICE ON WHAT TO DO ABOUT GOOGLE. I THINK WAHT THEY DID WAS ILLEGAL AND JUST WRONG!! My name is Rob Shambro, I am the CEO of GenosTV (www.genos.tv) a global broadband cable operator launching on January 6, 2011 at the Consumer Electronics Show. GoogleTV Invigorates the IPTV Market and Genos' CEO, Rob Shambro, Dissects the AlternativeTV Space. Here is a link to hte article. It was an upstanding, educational release just stating the FACTS in the IPTV marketplace. http://www.forbes.com/feeds/prnewswire/2010/05/21/prnewswire201005211326PR_NEWS_USPR_____AQ08961.html In the press release I state, "A quick Google search on GoogleTV today, shows very mixed emotions on the service, leaning towards the "not so impressed." A. Do you think I would even dare to say that if it were not true? Absolutely NOT! B. I issued the release around 9am PST. Here is the good part, at around 10 am I go back to Google and do another quick search on GoogleTV and every single negative press article was gone. I could not believe it. C. On top of that the search results were nice and neatly organized in near chronological order! Do they not have to live by their page rank software? I printed out everything, 30 search results pages deep, before and after. The change would have been IMPOSSIBLE using their software. D. My press release above ranked in the top 100 releases for MAY in PRNEWSWIRE. This release was picked up everywhere, yet it’s nowhere to be found on Google unless you absolutely search for it. E. Then I went to Bing.com and did a search on GoogleTV and Google TV and printed out the search results pages, 30 deep. This how their software would display the search results. F. The NUMBER ONE article about GoogleTV is HULU Unlikely to Run on GoogleTV on mashable.com. http://mashable.com/2010/05/20/hulu-google-tv-android/ In the past I had some negative articles posted by some anonymous people that showed up first every time you did a search on my name. This was like that for years. It has cost me millions of dollars in financing and stress. I almost gave up and never started another company again because of Google.. Just recently a 10 year old negative article that came up first in my search results and CAUSED ME NOT TO GET a $500,000 investment from a local investor. I can prove it. You hear horror stories about Google ruining people's lives because of negative press showing up first in their search results. I am sure I am not alone here!!! I wish I could go into my search results and change them around so they all look positive and neat, JUST LIKE THEY DID. This is NOT fair. You hear about doctors that can not get a single patient because on Google is some old domestic violence case that happened 20 years that comes up first on a search on their name. Google should have to live by the same rules as everyone else. I think this is illegal. They have cau

    --
    Rob Shambro Chairman/CEO GenosTV www.genos.tv
  29. Or, put another way... by zooblethorpe · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Not only is George Washington dead, the Americans are turning Fundamentalist, so now we'll have Theocracy with a taste for dead brown people (erm, "Furreners"). The veneer of modern civilization is peeling off (granted, the glue never dried) and they are revealing their true Christian character.

    I dunno, but it seems to me that dogmatic, xenophobic, recidivist behaviour is on the rise worldwide -- Islam certainly has no corner on the market for running amok, not now, and not historically, and the term "Christian" probably carries as much negative baggage through the years as "Muslim" does.

    Meanwhile, Christianity also has no corner on the market for truly pious, love-thy-neighbour actions -- one of my good friends growing up made it his life's mission to open an elementary school for the poor in his home town, and a book drive at our high school helped get him the beginnings of their library. A fellow named Ali, who is Bangladeshi, and Muslim.

    Just sayin'.

    Cheers,

    --
    "What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
    "A four-foot prune."
    1. Re:Or, put another way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      "just sayin"
      what are you "just sayinjg".
      When is the last time you heard anyone calling for murder of Jews, or demonstrating to kill a book author, a colmunist or a cartoonist?
      Ok, let's make fair and less islamaphobic question.
      name the last 15 times you have heard anyone calling for murder of Jews, demonstrating to kill a book author, a columnist or a cartoonist?

      Like you suggested, no one has that area cornered completely, but some have pretty big chunk of that corner and feel very comfortable with it.

      You know, I am 'just sayin'

      Cheers,

    2. Re:Or, put another way... by jmorris42 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > I dunno, but it seems to me that dogmatic, xenophobic, recidivist behaviour is on the rise
      > worldwide -- Islam certainly has no corner on the market for running amok, not now, and not
      > historically, and the term "Christian" probably carries as much negative baggage through
      > the years as "Muslim" does.

      This quote is a good example of an all too common species of politically correct fool. So much wrong with it. It assumes time is immaterial. That events in the dark past are indisinguishable from current events and carry the exact same moral weight. That persons, events and movements must be judged with the exact same modern politically correct intolerant eye.

      We are still crawling up from the muck, people and events must be viewed from the perspective of the time they occured in. For example the US Founders lived in a time when slavery was accepted as normal and had been since recorded history began. Individual liberty of any sort was a REVOLUTIONARY idea. After exhausting peaceful means they became violent revolutionaries. And most of them understood the inherent conflict between slavery and "All Men are created equal..." but also realized the new nation wasn't ready to follow where that line of thought lead. But notice that less than a century later the only places still practicing slavery were parts of Africa and the Middle East outside the range of the British Navy. Christianity did some nasty things but went through the Enlightenment, pretending that didn't happen and judging it as if that didn't happen and that the religion of the Inquisition still exists unchanged is daft.

      Islam didn't experience the Enlightenment and rejects it today. The past is just that, past; we have a problem in the here and now as a result. Islam's rejection of the foundational principles of modern civilization is a problem NOW. Coexistance isn't even possible because of their expansionist and supremisist ideas. We in the West either abandon our civilization and accept Sharia or sooner or later (and with Nukes spreading it better be sooner) we are going to be forced to end Islam as it is currently known and practiced. That means Ann Coulter's solution of "Invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." It will be the worst human rights atrocity in recorded history but I'm damned if I see a better solution. We just don't have the time left to embark on a psyops action to slowly pervert their religion so as to remove the nastier bits.

      So if it comes down to them or me I'm picking me and mine. Politically incorrect selfish bastard that I am. Future generations can flagelate themselves like the modern campus set do now about the American Indians, the Monroe Doctrine, ending WWII with the Bomb, the Cold War or any of that other stuff. So long as it IS civilization having that discussion in the future and not some starving primitives worshiping an insane child molester in a radioactive wasteland. And they will be sort of 'right' in that by the more advanced civilization our hard choices will allow them to build what we will do in our day will BE wrong... but still making the same mistake modern scholars keep making of judging us by their standards. So be it.

      --
      Democrat delenda est
    3. Re:Or, put another way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > That means Ann Coulter's solution of "Invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." It will be the worst human rights atrocity in recorded history but I'm damned if I see a better solution.

      What are Muslims supposed to think when they read these comments?

      I am pretty sure there are more commonsense people in the world who have better stuff to do than voting for these comments above. The quality of political or religious discussion at Slashdot is really low. It is good source of news, but too many trolls really enjoy war-calling instead of modest peace calls.

    4. Re:Or, put another way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That means Ann Coulter's solution of "Invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." It will be the worst human rights atrocity in recorded history but I'm damned if I see a better solution.

      That's great. Run for office and tell that to your future constituents. Otherwise, you're just another kook, and no one cares what you think. Crap like this deserves to be on a blog, not Slashdot.

    5. Re:Or, put another way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your talk about making hard choices and choosing "me and mine" before "them" makes you sound just like those muslim extremist you are so scared of.

      we are going to be forced to end Islam as it is currently known and practiced.

      Fuck you and all your +5 hip political incorrectness.

    6. Re:Or, put another way... by jmorris42 · · Score: 1

      > What are Muslims supposed to think when they read these comments?

      They can either come up with a third option, or get ready for a very bad future regardless who wins the coming war. The problem is for all the politically correct blather about the existence of moderate muslims they seem to be about as rare as unicorns. There seem to be three kinds, lapsed, terrified into silence or militant. The silent ones are as useless as the 'good Germans' were in the 1930s and the lapsed only tend to exist here in the West for rather obvious reasons. And even 1% of a billion being militant is a dangerous situation when they are willing to use suicide tactics and are sooner or later going to get hold of WMD. And I have this terrible dread the real number who would prefer to see Islam exported by the sword is a lot closer to 50% than 1%. That larger number doesn't have to be willing to strap on the suicide vest, they only have to be accepting and supportive of those who do, giving them aid, comfort and moral support.

      It really is a sign of the madness of our times that discussion of a total, no holds barred, twilight struggle involving most of the human race is something to calmly speak of in civilized company.

      I really would like a third option. But I ain't seeing it. And while quick to denounce, didn't see you mentioning a better idea either and it is a very safe bet none will post any.

      As an agnostic I don't get the option of becoming a Dhimmi so have nothing to lose; victory or death. I'll say it again, if it must be them or me I pick me and if I be damned thereby so be it for any who chose otherwise don't deserve life.

      --
      Democrat delenda est
    7. Re:Or, put another way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OH. MY. GAWD.
      Are you for real? if you are, what are you doing typing on /. and wasting precious time? Some Muslim nut might be stealing a nu'kear bomb right this minute you know. Grab your rifle and go do what you are preaching to do. or maybe you are just some asshole who got no balls except to type some racist insane on the internetS?
      There is SO much bullshit in your rant I don't even know where to start. As if Christians didn't conquer most of the world and killed off the ingenious population the world so they can pillage the natural resources there while preaching "Christianity". Wanna look in the mirror pal and see what phony, racist and many other adjectives I can use Christianity is?
      You are a prime example of self deluded assholes who reject ALL the truths and create fantasy and scary place to live in. No wonder Muslims gotto fight for their very lives.

      Let me repeat: what you waiting for? Grab your rifle and go convert the Muslims yourself if you want to do it so much. Come on, what are you waiting for????

    8. Re:Or, put another way... by chrb · · Score: 1

      Islam didn't experience the Enlightenment and rejects it today

      There are many Christians who feel the same way about the Enlightenment and the way it has led to our modern liberal democracies.

      How many Christians truly support freedom of speech when it comes to pornography? How many truly support homosexual rights? How many truly believe that academic education and the progress of science is a good thing, versus those who rail against academic, science, and "evilution"? How many support the right of a woman to choose an abortion? For that matter, how many support the right of women to work, versus those who would prefer to see all women mothering children in the home? How many Christians truly support the separation of church and state, versus those who would want to see a Christian in control of the country? Someone who truly endorsed the Enlightenment wouldn't care what religion their president was. How many Christians can you truly say that of? How many Christians would like to see a legal system based on Christian principles?

      Fundamentalist beliefs are the same everywhere, regardless of which God they happen to worship.

    9. Re:Or, put another way... by Xest · · Score: 2, Informative

      "And I have this terrible dread the real number who would prefer to see Islam exported by the sword is a lot closer to 50% than 1%."

      That's because you're an ignorant paranoid kook, whose probably never even ventured more than a short distance away from his home town judging by the level of ignorance of the world shown.

      Try travelling the world a bit, try going to some of these muslim countries, you'll soon find that there's hundreds of millions of them who are even more reasonable than you are.

      You really believe that say, the US was more justified in causing the death of thousands of Iraqis than those Iraqis were killing US soldiers defending their country?

      Look how it ended, the US was only able to finally cut back it's troop deployments in Iraq, when the US finally clued into the fact that the solution was to court moderate muslims to help fix their country- sure there are still attacks now, but compare Iraq now to Iraq a few years ago.

      Murdering civilians doesn't work, it never has, and it never will. The only way of winning is to win the support of the general population against extremist elements, this wont work if the extremist elements are less morally corrupt than you are though and are in fact the reasonable ones.

      I don't know what this coming war you're on about is, a skirmish with Iran perhaps but that's about it. You'd be better off looking to your South where Chavez is talking up the idea of building a south-south anti-Western alliance with South American and South African nations, but unfortunately I suppose that doesn't slot well into your ignorant world view, because it involves Christian, not muslim nations.

      For what it's worth, here in the UK we had no problem with religious extremists either until we joined America's war, and really the only reason America had problems (i.e. 9/11) was because of it's meddling overseas in muslim nations. So much for them being interested in expansionism, they didn't actually harass Western shores until long after they got fed up of Western nations meddling on theirs. We did and still do however have a problem with Catholic extremists in the UK though- you might have heard of them, the IRA, but again, I suppose the idea of non-muslim extremists being a bigger, longer running problem hurts your world view. Those were the same Catholic extremists that your America gave refuge too and somewhat supported in their terrorist activities too by the way, all for the sake of winning votes from your Irish population.

      You know, I don't disagree with your comments about political correctness often being taken too far, I agree that perhaps military action is the only solution in nations that are too far gone, and the moderates have too small amount of power to do anything as in Iran, but the rest of your viewpoint is simply based on ignorance, a lack of understanding about the world, and perhaps a bit of patriotism that blinds you to the fact that the religious majority in your nation are equally dangerous, and that your nation itself has supported extremism in Islam, Christianity and so forth over the years too.

      You really want to know the best way to deal with Islam if you're still scared shitless of it despite everything I've said? Look to alternative energy, and stop consuming their oil, and watch as their oil based economies plummet such that they can't even afford to arm themselves anymore even if they wanted to. That trick will solve the old Venezuela problem for you too whilst you're at it, sorry if it doesn't involve the heavy metal and pretty explosions you were hoping for though.

    10. Re:Or, put another way... by Per+Wigren · · Score: 1
      --
      My other account has a 3-digit UID.
    11. Re:Or, put another way... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I agree with parent totally; GP's remark is ignorant in the extreme.

      What we should really do is invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to atheism.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    12. Re:Or, put another way... by jmorris42 · · Score: 1

      As an agnostic I'm perhaps the wrong one to answer, but I was raised Southern Baptist and still usually fight on the same political team so I'll give it a shot.

      > How many Christians truly support freedom of speech when it comes to pornography?

      Depends. Most these days would like to push it back into the 'red light' districts but these days most would be willing settle for keeping it off prime time TV. And is that really such an out of the mainstream oosition?

      > How many truly support homosexual rights?

      Again, depends. Do most Christians favor returning the anti-sodomy laws? Don't think so. Do they consider it a sin? If they are Christian they do, pretty much black letter Biblical law. Of course every other religion agrees and even Science recognized it as a mental defect until political correctness came along in the latter half of the 20th Century. As for "Gay Rights" I have to join in rejecting that notion. Civil Rights for what you happen to be? Of course. Extending that idea to behavior and saying any criticism of what someone DOES is also wrong just doesn't pass the smell test. And 'Gay Marriage' is a simple language issue. No, the word 'Marriage' does not encompass that, and never has in any human language. So no, unelected judges have no lawful authority to redefine words, that way lies madness. In the last year or so actual elected legislatures have taken up the issue, I have no problem with that. Legislatures ARE allowed to make new laws. I may disagree with them but in a Republic we live with the laws passed. Christians generally agree with the notion of obeying the law, and if many make Guns God and Gays a voting issue they have exactly as much right to do so as the Gays do to be single issue voters.

      > How many truly believe that academic education and the progress of science is a good thing, versus those who rail against academic, science, and "evilution"?

      Seeing as a good many of the leading educational institutions, not only in the US but throughoout Western Civilization, are founded as and still operate as Religious institutions I'd venture to guess most christians have few problems with Science.

      > How many support the right of a woman to choose an abortion?

      what right? You are asking a null question. The right question is, "When does a fetus become a Citizen?" The Constitution clearly says birth but medical science has advanced greatly and that question is going to need to be revisited. If it is a Citizen there is no 'right' to murder (except in self defense when it isn't murder) and if it isn't a Citizen the question of whether the state can regulate is no laughable (in a properly limited government) that it would be daft to speak of some sacred 'Right' to something so bloody obvious. Most Christians are firmly of the belief (for religious reasons vs my more scientific ones) that the fetus is a person way before birth, may go so far as conception, thus being 'endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights...'

      If women don't want to worry about abortions keep their damned pants on. This notion that birth control freed sex from reproduction has caused no end of probems.

      > For that matter, how many support the right of women to work, versus those who would prefer to see all women mothering children in the home?

      Yup, many Christians do believe that. And a growing number of sociologists are asking disturbing questions. Should women be allowed to work outside the home? Doubt you would find more than a single digit minority saying "No, under no circumstances." in even the most conservative Christian sects. Since it is sometimes a requirement only a few braindead idjits would want to see women lose the right to do what they think they have to do. But whether it is something to be promoted as an unquestioned good is now open for debate after running the experiment for a couple of generations. And whether we should be structuring society in ways that encourage it to the point of making the two

      --
      Democrat delenda est
    13. Re:Or, put another way... by couchslug · · Score: 0, Troll

      My utter contempt for _all_ superstition and for all religious people doesn't exclude the fact Islam is the most currently toxic superstition. History is worthy of study, but the current problem is the current problem. Fortunately, Muslims kill more of each other in schismatic squabbles than they do of anyone else.

      There is no need to be religious (though there is plenty of convenience in professing faith so the religious don't kill you).

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    14. Re:Or, put another way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can you expect all of humanity to evolve at the same pace?

    15. Re:Or, put another way... by kklein · · Score: 1

      I'm a member of the campus set (faculty--English department, even), and I find very little to quarrel with in your post.

      I think a lot of the politically-correct stuff is drifting away as the Boomers retire and/or die. Those people were so sheltered as children, as their parents tried to make a perfect world for them so they could forget about the horrors of the decades before, that they just plain can't get it into their heads that, although no one is perfect, the generations before them were not evil. They were doing the best they could.

      People in rich countries are so spoiled. They don't understand that none of this bounty was here before people made it. They don't realize how exceptional it is to have this many people working together to build something great for all of us. Our ancestors have done a fine job; they deserve our respect. Mistakes they made are just that: mistakes. They are something to learn from; that is all.

      Finally, I just want to say that a prime example of their success is the entire Western US, which has become breadbasket to the world. Do you know what was there before the European settlers? Dry grass and tiny bands of people scratching out a living by picking berries and running entire herds of buffalo off of cliffs so they could eat one or two (oftentimes causing the stampede by burning the prairie.). What our ancestors brought was better. It was better. It was better. It was better. It helps more people. It is better.

      There's nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade.

    16. Re:Or, put another way... by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile, Christianity also has no corner on the market for truly pious, love-thy-neighbour actions -- one of my good friends growing up made it his life's mission to open an elementary school for the poor in his home town, and a book drive at our high school helped get him the beginnings of their library. A fellow named Ali, who is Bangladeshi, and Muslim.

      Just sayin'.

      The problem is his calling himself a Muslim. See, that allows people who actually FOLLOW the whole Quran, as Muslims are supposed to, to call him one of them. And, to legitimately criticize him for respecting equal rights for woman, a secular state, no Sharia law, and not killing non-Muslims (I'm assuming he doesn't practice this stuff). I don't know why civilized people want to go around associating themselves with this barbaric religion. At least rename what HE practices to New Islam or something.

    17. Re:Or, put another way... by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      That means Ann Coulter's solution of "Invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." It will be the worst human rights atrocity in recorded history but I'm damned if I see a better solution

      Invade their countries, kill their leaders, and educate them about all religions and atheism.

      Finally, kill Ann Coulter.

    18. Re:Or, put another way... by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      Like you suggested, no one has that area cornered completely, but some have pretty big chunk of that corner and feel very comfortable with it.

      I think you judge these people too harshly. Their culture is under attack and they suspect the entire world of being in league against them at the behest of Israel. It is entirely possible that they see Israeli eradication as the cleanest solution to their problems.

      And in at least some ways, they're right, logically speaking.

      The right path, the long road, is towards a peaceful solution. But neither side wants that. We outsiders do, but those embroiled in that conflict will stop at nothing to get what they want. Both sides believe God told them to win, which has to be the greatest example of the existence of Satan I can possibly imagine.

      Anyway, the true answer lies in 'hearts and minds', and that begins by getting past our personal biases and limiting how we judge people so we can be effective in aiding them.

    19. Re:Or, put another way... by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      That means Ann Coulter's solution of "Invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." It will be the worst human rights atrocity in recorded history but I'm damned if I see a better solution.

      Can you picture, for even a moment, Jesus Christ himself saying these words?

      I cannot. It is simply incompatible with what he taught us about love, understanding, and charity. As I understand it he would rather they kill each and every one of us than we resort to this tactic. Christ never, ever wanted religion at the point of the sword or as a form of government. Indeed he rebelled against it, as God himself instructed him to do.

      Christ was a living contradiction to the 'right as a people' belief that had somehow invaded cultural thought. He taught 'right by virtue' instead, even to the point of disobeying what was allegedly God's law.

      Anyway, if you cannot picture Christ leading your army of indoctrination himself, then why would you expect it to work?

    20. Re:Or, put another way... by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      I agree with parent totally; GP's remark is ignorant in the extreme.

      What we should really do is invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to atheism.

      I don't know why we need to go about converting anyone to any specific religion, including atheism.

      It would seem to me that any except the most vilely heretical atheist would oppose the freedom of religion. Good lord you guys need a handbook or something.

    21. Re:Or, put another way... by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      What our ancestors brought was better. It was better. It was better. It was better. It helps more people. It is better.

      If more is better, we should all be slaughtered to make for Indian settlers, the real Indians. Within a few generations they should be able to get the population of North America up to 2 billion.

    22. Re:Or, put another way... by chrb · · Score: 1

      When is the last time you heard anyone calling for murder of Jews

      Documentary on the British National Party. The speaker was white and British.

      Back in the day calling for the murder of Jews was quite the fashion amongst certain circles of European Christians - remember "Why should we not get rid of these parasites [Jews] who suck Rumanian Christian blood? It is logical and holy to react against them." There were Christian militias in WWII that carried out terrible pogroms, killing thousands of Jews at a time. If you're going to argue that Christianity is a peaceful religion, then the treatment of the Jews isn't exactly a great example to use.

      or demonstrating to kill a book author, a colmunist or a cartoonist?

      Author Philip Pullman received threats from militant Christians a couple of months ago.

      Do you remember the arson attack on the Saint Michel theater in Paris when it showed The Last Temptation of Christ in 1988? Many people ended up in hospital. There were Christians all over the world calling for the film to be banned. Muslims hardly have a monopoly on calls for censorship.

    23. Re:Or, put another way... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      The past is just that, past; we have a problem in the here and now as a result. Islam's rejection of the foundational principles of modern civilization is a problem NOW. Coexistance isn't even possible because of their expansionist and supremisist ideas. We in the West either abandon our civilization and accept Sharia or sooner or later (and with Nukes spreading it better be sooner) we are going to be forced to end Islam as it is currently known and practiced.

      Slow down, cowboy. We in the West are culturally expansionist, and are fundamentally supremacist. The cultural value of tolerance (which often goes overboard into cultural relativism, yes), masks this a bit, but it doesn't negate it. It means we're willing to coexist, and even make allowances, but it only goes so far.

      We're also bigger, tougher, smarter, and meaner than the Islamists*. If the "meaner" claim puzzles you, Arabs in general don't have a clue what a good old-fashioned Western war is like. We didn't practice one in Iraq because we didn't need to. We were able to waltz in with conventional forces while keeping the gloves on for the most part. (I'm not defending that particular invasion, just commenting on Western military capability as shown in it.) No non-Western ideology has a chance of waging a successful aggressive war against us. They can commit terrorism, but you saw what happened to the last Islamic government that supported a mildly successful terrorist attack (killing about as many people as we do in one month on the roads).

      Moreover, the Arab fanatic movements are currently oil-fired, which means that they're of limited power and duration. (This is one reason I'm generally against much drilling for oil in the US - I'd rather burn Arab oil, and have some left. The Arabs and Iranians have no real capability to stop the depletion of their reserves.) Once they lose oil power, they'll either remain as a bunch of backward fanatics who can generally be ignored, or they'll change their culture to something more secular and in some respects more Western and get with the modern world.

      So, yes, we can co-exist. Any Islamist attempt to change that will fail, and the real question is how bad the Islamists get hurt doing so.

      *In this post, "Islamist" refers to a doomed political movement to enforce fundamentalist Islam, both in and out of currently Muslim countries. "Islam" refers to a religion, and "Muslim" is an adjective and noun referring to those who believe in Islam. (Notice the "SLM" in Islam and Muslim, and remember that Semitic languages have very little respect for vowels.)

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    24. Re:Or, put another way... by zooblethorpe · · Score: 1

      At least rename what HE practices to New Islam or something.

      Interesting argument, and I see where you're coming from. To play devil's advocate though (perhaps the wrong turn of phrase given the high emotional tone of some posts in this thread?), this could be re-cast as a cultural and linguistic struggle within the greater Muslim movement itself. By way of analogy, my wife self-identifies as Christian, but espouses beliefs and behaviour very different from most televangelists and Bible-thumpers. Should she thus be disallowed from using the label "Christian"? Or, as she herself describes it, should she hold onto that moniker, and strive to make it mean what *she* wants it to mean?

      The second path is harder, sure enough, and it swims upstream against whatever is the mainline public image. But whoever said life was easy "must have been selling something", to paraphrase a wiser author than myself. ;)

      Cheers,

      --
      "What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
      "A four-foot prune."
    25. Re:Or, put another way... by zooblethorpe · · Score: 1

      kklein, for English faculty, you let your language run away with you. "Better" is a purely subjective value judgment. Define your terms -- what does "better" mean here? I'm sure the Lakota don't agree -- does this make your underlying argument "might makes right"? Or is it simply "what helps me and mine is right"? That's what it sounds like, which isn't a very extensible or defensible position. If you'd care to clarify, I'm curious.

      Then there's the historical confusion. Have a look at 1491, among other books and publications taking a second look at the archaeology of the New World. It sounds increasingly like the Mississippi basin was home to sizable urban cultures, such as the Caddoan. And while the drier areas closer to the Rockies were indeed less densely populated, people have known how to smoke meat for time out of mind -- even assuming the pre-horse cultures of the prairie would slaughter a whole herd of buffalo at a time, proper preparation would allow them to harvest far more meat than just one or two animals' worth. There's also a growing consensus that human-set prairie fires weren't some sort of dangerous mistake or unwieldy hunting method, but rather a deliberate way of managing what grew where, to maintain the prairie as prairie and ensure proper pasture for the herds, and of managing when the fires happened -- the lack of deliberate controlled fire-setting allows a build-up of fuel in many areas of the western US, which then goes destructively all at once and of a sudden when things finally catch, due to a lightning strike or cigarette butt or what have you.

      Cheers,

      --
      "What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
      "A four-foot prune."
    26. Re:Or, put another way... by TheSync · · Score: 1

      it seems to me that dogmatic, xenophobic, recidivist behaviour is on the rise worldwide

      The US was just as xenophobic during the last period of high levels of immigration, for example see the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 that banned Chinese immigration for 10 years. Or the Immigration Act of 1924 that had a quota system that reduced Italian immigration from 200,000 per year to 4,000 per year.

      In 1882 a writer in Atlantic Monthly wrote: "Our era . . . of happy immunity from those social diseases which are the danger and the humiliation of Europe is passing away . . . every year brings the conditions of American labor into closer likeness to those of the Old World. An American species of socialism is inevitable." Doesn't this sound like our current concerns about Latin American immigration?

    27. Re:Or, put another way... by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Very ignorant:
      " Individual liberty of any sort was a REVOLUTIONARY idea. After exhausting peaceful means they became violent revolutionaries"
      The revolutionary war had nothing to do with personal liberties.

      Christians are still doing nasty things. They can't get away with them in the US, and probably not in the EU, but poverty stricken 3rd world countries it's another matter.

      "Islam didn't experience the Enlightenment and rejects it today. "

      WRONG WRONG WRONG. the violent Islam we see to day is a product of the mid 20th century.

      here is a funny, irreverent and surprisingly accurate sum up. Read number 4:

      http://www.cracked.com/article_18510_6-supposedly-ancient-traditions-that-totally-arent.html

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    28. Re:Or, put another way... by jmorris42 · · Score: 1

      > What we should really do is invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to atheism.

      Doubt that would work, which is why the mention of Coulter's solution instead. Shifting them from one branch of the monothism tree to another just might be possible in the time[1] that will be available. Especially since they respect strength and it will have most likely been the Christian world that would have defeated them and be in the process of rebuilding their world. And besides, no civilization based on atheism has been a success. One based on pure Reason may be possible someday, and will probably be a major step forward; but we still need to work on the underpinning of such a thing a bit longer. And that is OK, after all it has only been the merest blink of cosmic time since we learned to make fire, be patient and we will work it out eventually.

      [1] We are racing the clock. Science is progressing far faster than even Western moral development and the Islamic world is firmly stuck in the 1st Millenium. Sooner or later a genie will pop out we can't keep stuffed down. Biowarfare on the cheap, nanotech, something we aren't even thinking about now. When that happens, if there are still millions and millions of primitive savages running around with a massive inferiority complex and a belief system based on slaughtering the infidel for instant virgins in the afterlife we are boned. And that is assuming we find an answer to Iran getting nukes sometime next year.

      --
      Democrat delenda est
    29. Re:Or, put another way... by WNight · · Score: 1

      A fellow named Ali, who is Bangladeshi, and Muslim.

      So did he just do it because he's religious. Or is it an irrelevant detail you drag in here?

      Yes, to combat other irrelevant things, sure. But it's this kind of crap that keeps it going.

      I dunno, but it seems to me that dogmatic, xenophobic, recidivist behaviour is on the rise worldwide

      Yes, because we're good people and you're not - whoever you are. See, this guy who was good - well he's my religion so of course. And this guy, he's from my city so he's a good guy. And this mass murderer from my church - ummm, well, he's clearly been corrupted by you.

      Seriously though, I think it's because everyone is so quick to label their helpful friend as part of whatever class they are (male, Bangladeshi, Muslim, whatever). That's a counterpart to selectively blaming your chosen targets for all the evils of the world.

      When your friend is just your friend, and nobody mentions the race of the jerks they deal with, we'll be done.

    30. Re:Or, put another way... by WNight · · Score: 1

      Christianity did some nasty things but the people went through the Enlightenment

      The people changed, the church remains.

      Islam didn't experience the Enlightenment and rejects it today.

      Just like Fred Phelps and all the other religious people.

      The change is due to the non-religious who've rejected both sides' nonsense.

      We in the West either abandon our civilization and accept Sharia or sooner or later (and with Nukes spreading it better be sooner) we are going to be forced to end Islam as it is currently known and practiced. That means Ann Coulter's solution of "Invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." It will be the worst human rights atrocity in recorded history but I'm damned if I see a better solution.

      Hah! You retarded motherfucker - you honestly think your space ghost is a better solution.

      How about we feed Ann Coulter to you and feed you both to sharks?

      We just don't have the time left to embark on a psyops action to slowly pervert their religion so as to remove the nastier bits.

      No we don't. We've been trying to fix christianity forever and it doesn't work. Once you think faith is good you're almost totally lost to the reasoning (and thus reasonable) world?

      The only thing to do is break them of their religion, just like here.

    31. Re:Or, put another way... by zooblethorpe · · Score: 1

      I agree with your general point, that group affiliations should mean bupkus in the end. That said, in the context of this thread, I brought up that my friend is Muslim (which, for whatever it might be worth, I'm not) *and* a good man simply to refute couchslug's implication that all Muslims are violent nasty people.

      Cheers,

      --
      "What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
      "A four-foot prune."
    32. Re:Or, put another way... by WNight · · Score: 1

      My theory is Science is incomplete. It can, in theory, answer What? It can't answer Why? Religion might get the wrong answer but it offers one.

      That says it all about you. You'd rather have a comforting wrong answer than knowledge.

    33. Re:Or, put another way... by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      "It will be the worst human rights atrocity in recorded history but I'm damned if I see a better solution"

      Help their economies until they are ravenous consumers and become pacified by fast food and stupid TV shows?

      The religion of Islam isn't driving the bad behavior, it is used as the justification for it. The driving factors are the same factors that have driven radical "conservative" behavior in all societies in all times: economy, natural resources, education, cultural tradition, isolation and or suppression, etc...

      Just watch the (albeit) slow transformation of China as it gets hooked on the flow of money and consumerism. China will be 'westernized' over time, purely due to economic incentive. On the other side, look at the Muslim community inside a wealthy, opportunity rich country, like the US. The Muslims there are very moderate, educated, and liberal.

    34. Re:Or, put another way... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Shifting them from one branch of the monothism tree to another just might be possible in the time[1] that will be available.

      Interesting. I'd never considered Christianity to be the equivalent of methadone before. Though I suppose it's true that it's easier to get off - apostasy being met with a shrug rather than a fatwa.

      Biowarfare on the cheap, nanotech, something we aren't even thinking about now. When that happens, if there are still millions and millions of primitive savages running around with a massive inferiority complex and a belief system based on slaughtering the infidel for instant virgins in the afterlife we are boned.

      Nobody gets this. All the moral relativists who go on about the crusades, the Spanish inquisition and the like miss the important point[1] that it's impossible to end all life on the planet using halberds and arbalests. Which is why we're here.

      [1] We'll leave aside the fallacy of comparing then and now, and the fact that we have (now - then) extra years of history to learn from - if we choose.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    35. Re:Or, put another way... by oamasood · · Score: 1

      > I dunno, but it seems to me that dogmatic, xenophobic, recidivist behaviour is on the rise > worldwide -- Islam certainly has no corner on the market for running amok, not now, and not > historically, and the term "Christian" probably carries as much negative baggage through > the years as "Muslim" does.

      This quote is a good example of an all too common species of politically correct fool. So much wrong with it. It assumes time is immaterial. That events in the dark past are indisinguishable from current events and carry the exact same moral weight. That persons, events and movements must be judged with the exact same modern politically correct intolerant eye.

      We are still crawling up from the muck, people and events must be viewed from the perspective of the time they occured in. For example the US Founders lived in a time when slavery was accepted as normal and had been since recorded history began. Individual liberty of any sort was a REVOLUTIONARY idea. After exhausting peaceful means they became violent revolutionaries. And most of them understood the inherent conflict between slavery and "All Men are created equal..." but also realized the new nation wasn't ready to follow where that line of thought lead. But notice that less than a century later the only places still practicing slavery were parts of Africa and the Middle East outside the range of the British Navy. Christianity did some nasty things but went through the Enlightenment, pretending that didn't happen and judging it as if that didn't happen and that the religion of the Inquisition still exists unchanged is daft.

      Islam didn't experience the Enlightenment and rejects it today. The past is just that, past; we have a problem in the here and now as a result. Islam's rejection of the foundational principles of modern civilization is a problem NOW. Coexistance isn't even possible because of their expansionist and supremisist ideas. We in the West either abandon our civilization and accept Sharia or sooner or later (and with Nukes spreading it better be sooner) we are going to be forced to end Islam as it is currently known and practiced. That means Ann Coulter's solution of "Invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." It will be the worst human rights atrocity in recorded history but I'm damned if I see a better solution. We just don't have the time left to embark on a psyops action to slowly pervert their religion so as to remove the nastier bits.

      So if it comes down to them or me I'm picking me and mine. Politically incorrect selfish bastard that I am. Future generations can flagelate themselves like the modern campus set do now about the American Indians, the Monroe Doctrine, ending WWII with the Bomb, the Cold War or any of that other stuff. So long as it IS civilization having that discussion in the future and not some starving primitives worshiping an insane child molester in a radioactive wasteland. And they will be sort of 'right' in that by the more advanced civilization our hard choices will allow them to build what we will do in our day will BE wrong... but still making the same mistake modern scholars keep making of judging us by their standards. So be it.

      This comment is so factually incorrect and historically bankrupt it staggers me. Islam and Muslim scientists and thinkers were the reason behind the Enlightenment. The Dark Age of Europe was the Golden Age of the Islamic civilization. Medicine, algebra, geometry, philosophy, and many other fields were founded by or greatly advanced through Muslim scientists and thinkers. Even the idea of empiricism came from Islam - the concept was taught to the Western scientist by Moorish scholars, by his own admitting. In the century after Islam, the Muslim people experienced the greatest turnaround of scientific and cultural progress the world has ever seen in history. Read some books every once in a while. It's quite discouraging to know that some of the great minds in science and technology can also be some of the blindest followers when it comes to history and humanities topics.

  30. Re:GOOGLE MANIPULATES SEARCH RESULTS IN THEIR FAVO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry Rob, life isn't fair. When you run the show you make the rules. Don't kick a hornet's nest unless you're expecting to get stung. And in business, nobody says you gotta fight fair, unless you're a monopoly then you only gotta be fair to both sides of the aisle, not the people. Rome is here again, the only thing is, this time Machiavelli has taught Caesar how to keep the plebs in line for real.

  31. Re:GOOGLE MANIPULATES SEARCH RESULTS IN THEIR FAVO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    With grammar and spelling like that, I'm not surprised you couldn't get an investment. I find it funny when people whine about their past coming back to bite them in their ass. Look up the word "reputation", we have a word for that for a reason. If you ever got anywhere in business, the next ting we'd be hearing would be something like, "THE FTC IS SOOOO EVIL! THEY FINED ME MILLIONS BLAH! BLAH! BOO-HOO!" as they put your ass in jail.

  32. Re:As a European... Please no Turkey in Europe, th by worldthinker · · Score: 1

    Well, let's see. In the Federal Republic of Germany they disallow the depiction or trading of "Nazi" paraphernalia and have laid claim on the term "Gmail". In the French Republic, they will take away your Internet privileges if you share your stuff with others. In the United Kingdom, there are a number of behaviors that are listed as "hate speech" and are severely punishable. Each of these conditions would be considered strange or wrong under the American idea of Free Speech. But at the same time, we have severe restrictions on what language or what is "decent" to be viewed or heard on the "public airwaves" in the United States. Rightly or wrongly each country decides for itself what are the bounds of acceptable behavior.

  33. Re:GOOGLE MANIPULATES SEARCH RESULTS IN THEIR FAVO by skam240 · · Score: 2

    Your overuse of caps-lock precludes anyone from taking you seriously. I just thought I'd let you know for any future crazy rants...

    --
    I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
  34. As Someone from Turkey there is more to it by stikves · · Score: 5, Informative

    Unfortunately this kind of thing happens all the time, and the government cannot do anything about it. Even the president has criticized the ban last week, but it's all up to the courts.

    According to Turkish law, *any* PA can ask for a preliminary injunction to ban *any* web site. The web site has to comply within a month, otherwise TK (which is the telecomunnication authority) will have to block the web site in question. Nobody (including prime minister, or the president) cannot stop the ban (unless the website complies).

    So if a person from a small town complains about a web site (for example Youtube, or Blogger), and the PA for that town finds the case worthy, he/she request a court order for the ban. This has actually happened (Blogger was banned since some bloggers published world cup matches, and the local TV stations which bought WC rights have complained).

    The Google ban comes from Youtube ban. Previously they only removed youtube.com from DNS servers, but people have installed alternate DNS servers, and all was fine. Now they decided to block based on server IP, which is probably shared with other Google services as well.

    Anyways they are trying to amend the law, so that this kinds of bans will be restricted (not just any random PA in any random town), but the best would be abolishing the law altogether.

    1. Re:As Someone from Turkey there is more to it by corbettw · · Score: 1

      Sounds like you're saying this is all a bureaucratic dick-measuring contest and much ado about nothing. That about right?

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    2. Re:As Someone from Turkey there is more to it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Important actions don't always have important causes.

      It could be a case of a bunch of computer illiterate 60-somethings messing with things they don't understand. Someone might think that what they are doing is the equivalent of cencoring a couple of issues of a TV show, or something.

    3. Re:As Someone from Turkey there is more to it by trytoguess · · Score: 1

      You keep saying PA, what does it mean?

    4. Re:As Someone from Turkey there is more to it by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      Thank God this is just bureaucracy. I was worried about Turkey for a bit.

      By the way, what do you think is happening, or will happen, with Edrogan and his Islamist party in the near future?

    5. Re:As Someone from Turkey there is more to it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey fellow mate from Turkey,

      Well summarized, at least you show this issue has to do more with the legal system than the politic system. It is amazing how the trolls can turns this topic into Turk hatred.

    6. Re:As Someone from Turkey there is more to it by nusuth · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not a big deal in the sense that there is no evil administration in Turkey cencoring google search (or facebook, where did the submitter got that?). Google does not share IP range of youtube with the search engine, google news, gmail, groups etc. Most important services are available. But it is a very big deal for Turkish citizens because all websites that use banned IPs one way or the other (most commonly thru google-analytics or google maps) also suffer. They are either inaccessible, or very slow to load. This hits bussinesses hard (our traffic last week dropped to one third before we removed google-analytics.) Also there are almost 7000 websites banned, at least 65% of them without a good reason (about %35 are supposedly banned due to child porn.) Currently vast majority of them are "banned" with removal from Turk Telekom DNSs only, but if they decide to implement IP based cencoring for others too, there will be thousands of inaccessible sites without any legal reason at all, just due to technical incompetence.

      --

      Gentlemen, you can't fight in here, this is the War Room!

    7. Re:As Someone from Turkey there is more to it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I would like to confirm what stikves already mentioned: http://ekonomi.haberturk.com/teknoloji/haber/520422-google-yasaklandi-mi

      In short, they have recently moved from a DNS based blocking of YouTube to an IP-based blocking. However since YouTube is sharing many of its IPs with other google services, they are running slowly or not running at all.

      While I am absolutely disgusted with and ashamed of the YouTube ban, I am now also disgusted to see so many slashdotters jump onto suggesting nonsense like expelling a country from NATO/UN etc. without reading/researching properly.

      As for the rise of religious fundamentalism, this is unfortunately a world-wide phenomenon. I was in the U.S. when intelligent design started to creep into school curricula. Likewise for my first few months in the U.S., I was also dumbfounded to watch the televangelists on the TV every night. The worst thing to do now is to point fingers with sensationalist news like this and jump to conclusions. It will empower the fundamentalists everywhere in the world.

    8. Re:As Someone from Turkey there is more to it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Government has a vast majority in the parliament and has issued these laws themselves. So it is the same bullshit the government supporters say when there is something to blame for the reigning party. Western countries should help take down this radical islamist movement in Turkey before it gets too late, otherwise the hatred for the west will grow and strike them just like 9/11.

    9. Re:As Someone from Turkey there is more to it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The banning of IPs instead of domain names are also the result of court orders. From what I've heard, some lawyers/PAs wising up to the DNS tricks have been requesting & getting court orders against specific IP addresses. Of course, this results in added burden to the ISPs since they have to do more than just a DNS redirection. When Google started to use the same IPs for both YouTube and some other services, those Google services got hit as well.

      So, this has nothing to the with the government ideology as some uninformed commentators claim. Almost all the YouTube banning rulings are the result of videos supposedly insulting the person or legacy of Ataturk. The way the government comes into this is that they've been dragging their feet in changing the law because they want YouTube to open a legal office in Turkey for tax purposes. Google and YouTube have done this in dozens of other countries.

    10. Re:As Someone from Turkey there is more to it by stikves · · Score: 1

      I'll try to answer some of the questions in the follow ups. Sorry for the self reply.

      First, governing party cannot change the law in a day. It's more complicated. Not going into political details (everything is politicized in Turkey), there is also a theoretical law issue.

      We need such a law. However much more abused, you can see it as the DMCA of Turkey. Turkey (like many European - Old World - countries), adapts a variation of Roman Law, which is in contract to US's Common Law. In US courts do actually make up the law, and decide on their on. In Turkey, there must be a written code for prosecution.

      For example in US, if I see my copyrighted work on YouTube, I send a takedown notice, and they comply. (There is a process that everyone knows). In Turkey, I have to go to a PA (prosecuting attorney/state prosecutor), then if he/she finds my complaint worthy, will open a court case. Court will have to decide based on the written law, and send a takedown notice. There is a 30 days period for compliance. This is used to handle cases for copyright/trademark infringement, child pornography, defamation, etc.

      Normally this process is more restricted than DMCA, however it all falls apart due to people involved writing and applying the laws (also international websites not caring about Turkish court orders).

      Due to my best knowledge, the law in question is adapted from TV broadcast regulations. (This is why I want it completely abolished), and many prosecutors/judges are illiterate on the subject. Furthermore there are some who has an agenda of taking down everything they don't like. So an older angry citizen can go to a court saying YouTube has a video defaming Turkey. Normally this is no big deal (one video in millions). But since the law is broad, the complaint causes the takedown.

      The final situation is embarrassing, hope they somehow manage to take down the law itself (and maybe replace it with a much restricted one, as I said unfortunately such a written code is necessary).

    11. Re:As Someone from Turkey there is more to it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually the current government has made the law. So the same President criticising the ban is responsible for it.

      The law is clear, the site should be banned on a court order, not just for some PA asked for it. The ban should just be for the internet site. But as doing it so in a right way needs so much investment to the technology (filtering each opened connection to internet site) for Turk Telekom (owned by Oger Telekom), they have chosen the short way, blocking domains on their DNS servers and blocking the ip addresses. So this is what happens when the blocked ip addresses are used for other sites and servers.

      On the other hand, if all connections are filtered instead of just blocking the ip addresses, other laws apply, that means need a court order for every internet user periodically.

  35. Re:GOOGLE MANIPULATES SEARCH RESULTS IN THEIR FAVO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Regards,
    Rob Shambro

    You need a marketing guy Rob. Someone to make sure you don't post such things on das interwebs :p
    I really feel for you, I do, but the stress shows in your post. Doesn't look so good for investors. ;)

    Best of luck with your venture though! Sounds interesting!

  36. Turkey by jav1231 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ah Turkey. When they're poking their finger in Israel's eye, they're the darling of Leftists far and wide. When they censor, ban, and oppress themselves suddenly we're up in arms. Fuck 'em. It's Turkey!

    1. Re:Turkey by master_p · · Score: 1

      Let's also not forget that Turkey has a 35-year military occupation in Cyprus that nobody talks about.

    2. Re:Turkey by bky1701 · · Score: 1

      It is possible to disagree censorship AND with the military slaughter of civilians, you know. In fact, I'd say anyone who says we should ignore either of those actions has an agenda to push. I know which one you've got.

  37. retaliation by snarkh · · Score: 3, Funny

    Google retaliates by banning turkeys.

  38. Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    What a bunch of Turkeys!

    *ducks*

  39. Re:GOOGLE MANIPULATES SEARCH RESULTS IN THEIR FAVO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    any investor with a brain should stay away from you. you have got to be the stupidest son of a bitch on earth to put your part of Infinium Labs in your bio. You "spearheaded" a fake product. That's probably why they didn't give you 500,000. Seems like a waste to give it to you just to not make something. Bravo.

  40. Critical Thinking. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like his problem is critical thinking skills. Along with his clients.

  41. Correct use of "censorious?" by swebster · · Score: 1

    I'm not sure that's what the word means...

    1. Re:Correct use of "censorious?" by tftp · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm not sure that's what the word means...

      M-W to the rescue... seems to be a perfectly cromulent word :-)

    2. Re:Correct use of "censorious?" by swebster · · Score: 1
      "marked by or given to censure"

      Right, but censure != censor...

  42. Critical Thought. by headkase · · Score: 5, Informative

    Can I be blamed for others lack of critical thought? The quote begins:

    As the Americans learned so painfully in Earth's final century...

    Anyone who is thinking as they read instead of blindly ploughing through the words would have realized that Earth has not reached it's final century yet?

    And it was fully sourced too.. ;)

    --
    Shh.
    1. Re:Critical Thought. by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          On the first reading, I thought that was odd, but I took it to mean the 100 years which have just passed. I've read plenty of good quotes from non-native English speakers that read a bit odd. Since I don't know the game, I'll have to assume Earth ended in imaginary timeline.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    2. Re:Critical Thought. by headkase · · Score: 1

      In the future I will specify further the context of what I am saying.

      The conclusion of that statement I believe is what provides the relevance:

      Beware those who would deny you access to information for in their heart they dream themselves your master.

      What do you think about this statement as it relates to human nature? If you agree that seeking to control information is seeking to control thought is seeking to control action then shutting down Google says something about the nature of Turkey as an entity.

      What do you think it says?

      --
      Shh.
    3. Re:Critical Thought. by gringofrijolero · · Score: 1

      Well here's hoping the earth doesn't share my final century.. I hardly expect to see the next one.. I almost hope I don't.. but chin up and all that

      --
      Todos mis movimientos están friamente calculados
    4. Re:Critical Thought. by mgblst · · Score: 1

      Unless he knows something we don't?

    5. Re:Critical Thought. by JWSmythe · · Score: 2, Funny

          The clock is ticking to December 21, 2012. Tighten your tinfoil hats and stock up on your rations. :)

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    6. Re:Critical Thought. by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      Earth never ended really.

      In Civ/2/3/4 if you built the ship to Alpha C, the game could end or you could keep playing (in later versions). There was no "last century" unless you went all nuclear.

    7. Re:Critical Thought. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Anyone who is thinking as they read instead of blindly ploughing through the words would have realized that Earth has not reached it's final century yet?

      Perhaps we have, but we're less than 100 years into it.

      Though the use of the past tense suggests that isn't what the writer meant.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    8. Re:Critical Thought. by randomsearch · · Score: 1

      > Anyone who is thinking as they read instead of blindly ploughing through the words would have realized that Earth has not reached it's final century yet?

      That's the spirit! Sure we haven't!

    9. Re:Critical Thought. by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      I don't need to stockpile rations. With a sharp knife and a quiet step, I can have both yours and mine.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    10. Re:Critical Thought. by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      Since I don't know the game, I'll have to assume Earth ended in imaginary timeline.

      That's the assumption. At the start and still by the completion of the game, all contact with Earth has been lost and so it's assumed that the humans on AC are all that remains of humanity.

      It's still fun to throw planet busters around, though. :-)

    11. Re:Critical Thought. by cyborch · · Score: 1

      Anyone who is thinking as they read instead of blindly ploughing through the words would have realized that Earth has not reached it's final century yet?

      Perhaps we have, but we're less than 100 years into it.

      We usually are less than 100 years into any given century, seeing as how a century is 100 years long.

    12. Re:Critical Thought. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No shit, Sherlock. Do you have anything relevant to contribute?

    13. Re:Critical Thought. by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      With a sharp knife and a quiet step

      Firearm > sharp knife

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    14. Re:Critical Thought. by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          And now you have my Y2K and Y2K12 plans. :) Have enough ammo to start, and the rest you can acquire if "bad things" happen. If bad things don't happen, you have ammo to burn up at the range. :) Or, "don't bring a knife to an apocalypse fight" :)

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    15. Re:Critical Thought. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      No it wasn't sourced. You need to list the writer.

      For all I knew is was a quote from a U.S.S.R. UN official in 1980.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    16. Re:Critical Thought. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was not fully sourced. How would we know if we are in the final century of Earth until it's gone?

    17. Re:Critical Thought. by Reservoir+Penguin · · Score: 1

      Not if he disables you hand with a knife first.

      --
      US-UK-Israel: The real Axis of Evil
    18. Re:Critical Thought. by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          Then it really doesn't matter, does it. If he does it properly, he'd now hold a gun and knife, and I'd be dead. Failure to kill your opponent in such a situation leaves an adversary who can and will come back to kill you. Well, or an adversary who runs away scared, but I don't fall into the later category.

          If such a situation were to arise, and I don't have a lot of faith other than the humor value that 2012 will be the end of the world, I wouldn't be alone, and our camp would have a well guarded defensive perimeter. It's only in movies that you will see a lone man carrying a knife breach a camp and kill all of the opposing forces as they sleep. A good perimeter would have not only guards with overlapping fields of view of the hostile area, but clear visibility of each other. If one man were to go down, no less than two other guard posts would be able to neutralize the threat, and ensure that position was repopulated with reinforcements.

          Effective range for a .45 ACP = 150 to 300 feet
          Effective range for a 30-06 >= 2400 feet

          These numbers vary by the shooter. I've seen people who can't hit a silhouette target at 10 feet. They also shouldn't be put into a guard post, unless they are bait (and expected not to survive their shift).

          Ideal guard posts would have 50 feet or less separation, with visibility of one to two guard posts in each direction. Each would have no less than two guards, so downed positions could be repopulated quickly (approximately 7 seconds for a soldier to run to the unoccupied post, after instructed to do so).

          Tactics don't just involve bringing a gun to a knife fight. They ensure when a man is lost, integrity of the operation is not compromised.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    19. Re:Critical Thought. by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      If such a situation were to arise, and I don't have a lot of faith other than the humor value that 2012 will be the end of the world, I wouldn't be alone, and our camp would have a well guarded defensive perimeter.

      I'm not one of the gun owners that's preparing for the day the shit hits the fan and I've always found the image of the lone wolf defending his castle to be somewhat laughable. My impression of the 2nd amendment is that it exists to arm the militia, i.e: the whole body of the citizenry. I've always imagined that in a true SHTF scenario it would be up to individual communities to fend for themselves, not individual citizens.

      Ever see the TV series Jericho? That's kind of how I would picture it going down.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    20. Re:Critical Thought. by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

      Well, the 2nd amendment right to bear arms is for the citizenship as a whole, and protects the individuals rights. You have to consider the context for which it was written. The people of the colonies stood up against the English rule. Our founding fathers recognized the fact that the day may come when the government of the United States may become so corrupt that even through the structure they laid out, the people wouldn't be able to correct the problems. (i.e., severe corruption throughout all three branches of the government) At that time, when the people themselves had recognized that something needed to be done, they were still empowered to make a change against their own government.

          The 2nd amendment wasn't a mistake that opened the ability for a civil rebellion, it is there by design.

          I am not advocating taking arms against the government. I've worked through all the possible scenarios, and none of them are without severe losses to both sides.

          But, in a SHTF scenario, no the lone soldier would never make it. Well organized groups would be the survivors. Those organizations will likely not even form until the scenario begins, but with the people armed for their own defense and proper leadership, they will be the survivors.

          I know in apocalypse movies and tv shows, there's always some lunatic fringe group with a chaotic leader. Most normal people wouldn't follow someone like that, but it would be up to strong good leaders of equally or better armed groups, to protect against such things. In that, I'm not saying the police or military, although they'd likely align with friendly peacekeeping civilians. In all out chaos, you have to look for help anywhere you can find it. Even in a situation where the government turns on the people, internal conflict will splinter their ranks. This has been brought up before.

      The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting firearms. A thirty (30) day amnesty period is permitted for these firearms to be turned over to the local authorities. At the end of this period, a number of citizen groups refuse to turn over their firearms. Consider the following statement: I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government.

          If that situation occurred, it would divide not only the enlisted men, but their officers as well. How many US citizens on US soil, following the laws as established by the US Constitution (et al), would be killed before a substantial number of troops refused their orders. Unfortunately, I wouldn't expect it would be significant numbers in the first days or even weeks, and that would be an actual civil war.

          I haven't watched Jericho. Well, I have seen parts of a couple episodes, and got bored very quickly. Maybe I just watched the wrong episodes.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    21. Re:Critical Thought. by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      The 2nd amendment wasn't a mistake that opened the ability for a civil rebellion, it is there by design.

      Agreed. I also agree that it supports the individual right to keep and bear arms. That individual right isn't of much value as a deterrent against encroachments on liberty unless large numbers of people exercise it.

      But, in a SHTF scenario, no the lone soldier would never make it. Well organized groups would be the survivors. Those organizations will likely not even form until the scenario begins, but with the people armed for their own defense and proper leadership, they will be the survivors.

      I guess that's why I liked Jericho, not because the plot was that great but because it showed a community coming together in a SHTF scenario. I guess that sort of ties into why I feel gun ownership is important. I don't own firearms just to defend myself -- I also own them to defend my community.

      The most likely SHTF scenarios involve natural disasters. In such a scenario are you going to descend into "dog eats dog" or are you going to look out for your neighbors and friends? I know which option I would pick. We had a series of nasty floods here in 2006. Not quite a true SHTF (certainly nothing on the scale of Katrina) but it did manage to slice my community into several smaller pieces that were cut off from outside help for upwards of a week. When this happened the people in my neighborhood made a point of having a presence on the streets at all hours and of checking up on our more vulnerable neighbors. We weren't carrying weapons and didn't need them (thankfully) but we all had easy access to them and could have armed ourselves in short order if it had been required.

      If that situation occurred, it would divide not only the enlisted men, but their officers as well. How many US citizens on US soil, following the laws as established by the US Constitution (et al), would be killed before a substantial number of troops refused their orders. Unfortunately, I wouldn't expect it would be significant numbers in the first days or even weeks, and that would be an actual civil war.

      I hope I never live to see that happen. I would like to believe that a majority of our troops wouldn't carry out such an order (I believe 60% or so said as such on that survey?) but even a small minority willing to carry out such an order could do extensive damage before being brought under control.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    22. Re:Critical Thought. by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

      When this happened the people in my neighborhood made a point of having a presence on the streets at all hours and of checking up on our more vulnerable neighbors. We weren't carrying weapons and didn't need them (thankfully) but we all had easy access to them and could have armed ourselves in short order if it had been required.

      A lot of times, that is all that is necessary. Displaying your arms isn't necessary. An area where it's obvious that it is being observed can be just enough deterrent to send folks with bad intentions elsewhere. One kid on a bicycle screaming "help" could bring out a dozen armed men.

      I hope I never live to see that happen. I would like to believe that a majority of our troops wouldn't carry out such an order (I believe 60% or so said as such on that survey?) but even a small minority willing to carry out such an order could do extensive damage before being brought under control.

      Troops generally follow orders. That's their job. It's up to their superiors to know why it needs to be done. That's not to say troops are stupid. The stupid ones don't survive in a conflict. The smart ones do. If 1000 troops were deployed in that situation, that means 600 would likely do as they were told. That number would shift rapidly though, and that's where splintering of the military would occur.

      I thought long and hard about it. Lots of what if scenarios. If there were a government versus people revolution, since I'm not in the military I would obviously be on the side of the people. My standing orders would be to capture and disarm the enemy with no casualties. Disarmed POW's would be returned quickly and safely, with the option of remaining on our side. Basically, "You're free to go. You may stay if you'd like. If you go, tell the others that we have no intention of hurting anyone." When the enemy isn't the a nameless faceless evil enemy, but a friendly peaceful (yet well defended) group, the stop being the "enemy". If your 60% number is correct, it would quickly become 50%, where half the military wouldn't want to act against the civilians, or would act on their behalf.

      I was really worried that a government versus people revolution was going to happen under Bush. I know I wasn't alone in that concern either. We're not as close to that any more. I don't believe Obama would ever have similar intentions. The largest threat that I see out there is by misguided civilian groups.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
  43. Re:You Turkey! by JWSmythe · · Score: 1, Informative

    I was going to reply that they have Eagles, but it seems they don't. They do have a fleet of Falcons though.

    --
    Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
  44. Google and Facebook have one common properties... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    founded by Jews.

  45. Connect the dots... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    * Turkey starts enriching uranium for Iran, saving Iran at the last minute from international sanctions.
    * Turkey government puts mercenaries on Gaza flotilla to violently engage Israeli security and push them to the point of drawing arms, then makes a global media carnival on the brutality of Israelis on a peace-activist ship.
    * Turkey has been at peace with Israel and its Gaza policies for decades until this governments radical Islamization shift
    * Turkey ingaging in promoting the cause of the Hammas, an oppressing, fascist regime which executes those who oppose it and openly supports delivering explosives into civilian population to drive their agenda.
    * Turkey bans free speech

    Can anyone see a trend here?

    On a sombre note, it's now that the world gets to find out if they have a "democracy" or a democracy.

    1. Re:Connect the dots... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope and [citation needed]

    2. Re:Connect the dots... by AHuxley · · Score: 1
      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    3. Re:Connect the dots... by MikShapi · · Score: 2, Informative

      I can Karma-Whore and google for you, but you'll need to do the actual reading:

      GP's Point 1 - http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/iran-inks-deal-to-send-enriched-uranium-to-turkey-20100517-v8uc.html
      GP's Point 2 -
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JaiMjAULWn0&feature=player_embedded#!
      http://libertypundits.net/article/paid-mercenaries-on-turkish-flotilla-ship-and-more-censored-footage-of-violence/
      http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/turkish-paper-releases-censored-photos-of-beaten-israeli-commandos-1.294443
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_O'Keefe
      http://trueslant.com/charlesjohnson/2010/06/06/another-cropped-reuters-photo-deletes-another-knife-and-a-pool-of-blood/
      GP's Point 3 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93Turkey_relations
      GP's Point 4 - http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/columnists-164310-turkey-hamas-relations.html
      GP's Point 5 - RTFA, what we're discussing in this /. post.

      If you don't see Turkish Islamist policy driving this and the bigger picture this fits into (radical Islam, oppressive regimes vs new-internet-driven-world-order, middle-east mentality and its differences from western mentality, arab nation politics, Turkey's NATO/european membership, Turkish internal right-left struggle and dirty laundry, Turkish history (murder/slaughter of 1,000,000 armenians last decade, try mentioning that on Turkish media), you're just another one of those people who just can't get geopolitics and need an oversimplified model - namely, a little demonizing circle drawn around one of the participants of an equation (typically ends being one of Iran, Al-qaeda, USA, Israel, George W, etc) with an "evil" sign pointed at it. If only the world were that simple. Fox and Al-jazeera do it equally well, depending on direction the guys with the remote wants the arrow pointed in.

      I have a demonizing-circle detector. Every time I get someone draw me one (whether Erdogan from Turkey, Benjamin Netanyahu from Israel, Ismail Hanniyeh from Hammas, Al Jazeera or Fox, I immediately know I'm being told a half-truth. Big problems don't fit in little circles, and the root causes are way more complex and way more distributed.
      If complexity can be equated to pain with people who can't grasp it, I'll invoke the following:
      "Life is pain, your highness. Anyone who says otherwise is selling something."

      --
      -
    4. Re:Connect the dots... by Delifisek · · Score: 1

      Yea yea, Turks that, Turks this...

      Same sh*t, another century....

      It was not something about being muslim. It was something about support weak...

      This was our tradition... Not a Muslim tradition, a Turkish Tradition long long before the Islam.

      Of course, a western mind can't understood this. Your education all about winning the game...

      Chechenia, Bosnia, Somali, Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine...

      Onece upon a time all those areas are subjects of the Ottoman Empire ...

      Do you think we left them alone ?

      What happens to Aremeinas are lying the Ottoman Archive, go and dig.

      One upon a time. Christians believe, Prophed Mohammed has was devil and has tails.

      Same sh*t another century.

      When Muslim warriors fight against Russia, all of them hero (Rambo III)

      Now, all off them uber radical, psychopathic, blood thirsty lunatics...

      Your f*cking politics generate another monster to abuse you. You never see.

      Before the Israel government, there where no problem in middle east.

      After a half century, we got,

      A Government who followed religious orders, which supported and pampered by Western governments and does not care any Interntional Law.

      And guess what ???

      They have Nukes....

      --
      [My english is better than most other people's Turkish, so please point out mistakes politely. Thank you.]
    5. Re:Connect the dots... by geekoid · · Score: 1

      NO! you read and the some up in fewer then 5 bullet points, but more then 2.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  46. Re:GOOGLE MANIPULATES SEARCH RESULTS IN THEIR FAVO by __aajfby9338 · · Score: 1

    tl;dr

    I would have thought that a "HighTechGenius" would know about the paragraph tag.

  47. Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Insightful comments. Time to stamp out the Jew World Order.

  48. Did anyone else misread this as by Culture20 · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Turkeys reportedly banned Gobble"?

  49. when you cannot force the media to your will by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a big part of why Turkey is blocking youtube and facebook:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYjkLUcbJWo&NR=1
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFGuwUGaI9o
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOGG_osOoVg

  50. Youtube has been banned in Turkey for years. by blind+biker · · Score: 1

    What do you expect from a country that band Youtube? I wanted to show the "Charlie bit me"-video to a friend in Turkey, a couple of years ago, only to discover that Youtube is not available, together with a plethora of other online services.

    I now firmly believe Turkey is not ready for the EU.

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    1. Re:Youtube has been banned in Turkey for years. by Falconhell · · Score: 2, Funny

      I didnt know there was a band called youtube, what sort of music do they play?

    2. Re:Youtube has been banned in Turkey for years. by blind+biker · · Score: 1

      I didnt know there was a band called youtube, what sort of music do they play?

      Considering that there is a bazillion pop bands, I am quite surprised that there isn't one called "youtube". My bad, the joke is totally on me.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
  51. Re: Suspected Google Ban by tftp · · Score: 1

    Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

    This only ensures that you won't be arrested for holding an opinion or for blogging on Google or elsewhere. This document, however, does not require anyone to make it technically possible. So you may have a right to do something, and no ability, and that's all legal.

  52. I suggest Google bans turkey in retaliation. by Cowclops · · Score: 1

    Google: BAN TURKEY!

  53. Turkey the police state. by blind+biker · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I thought I'd share an account of what hapened to me a couple of years ago, in Istanbul, arguably the most westernized of all of Turkey: my friend and I decided to stay at this hotel outside the center of the city, and had to take separate rooms, since we were not married. In the evening, I went to her room for a chat. After about half an hour she gets a phonecall: some guy tells her that she is not to have male visitors in her room! That's right. They have cameras in each room. Even more sadly, my turkish friend told me this as a matter of fact, "nothing to see here".

    I'm not saying every hotel in Turkey is like that, but I will say this: Turkey is bad news, very fucking bad news.

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    1. Re:Turkey the police state. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't know which hotel you stayed in, but it was probably run by islamists.

    2. Re:Turkey the police state. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And here's an opposite anecdote: when I stayed in Istanbul one year ago, I not only shared a room with my sister, but we shared a queen sized bed. My two other dating, unmarried friends shared a hotel room down the block. I've spent time in other Middle Eastern countries, and the Turkish are some of the nicest and most progressive people you can meet. Generalizing from one anecdote is silly.

    3. Re:Turkey the police state. by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      Sounds like Islamic Turkey is a great place for voyeurs. You can even order any men out of the scene, unless you are into that!

    4. Re:Turkey the police state. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would you please tell which hotel was it?

    5. Re:Turkey the police state. by DarkEmpath · · Score: 1

      That sounds like a complete fabrication.

      You're not even describing Dubai, let alone Istanbul. Did you pluck that anecdote from Glenn Beck?

    6. Re:Turkey the police state. by Reservoir+Penguin · · Score: 1

      Just imagine what would happen if you tried to smuggle some heroin.

      --
      US-UK-Israel: The real Axis of Evil
    7. Re:Turkey the police state. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's common courtesy here. Bachelors and men without female company mostly are not welcomed in places where it's mostly populated with married couples. Not because they are not married, but because they are more inclined to have reckless fun, and more likely cause disturbance to everybody else. It exists in some form everywhere. Though I must add, no one in the hotel business would give a damn about whether two person buying a room is married or not. Your causation remains entirely semantic. And for fuck's sake, is imagination that painful for you lot? Cameras in each room? Have you ever been to an hotel?

  54. Greeks still hate Turks, for a reason by Dukenukemx · · Score: 0, Troll

    If anyone wants to know how screwed up that country is, just ask any Greek, as they've been enslaved by them for 300+ years. They're trying to join Europe to gain the Euro, but Greece won't let them. Turkey was a country that cut off your hand for stealing. That was their version of a mistermeaner.

    They haven't gone a long way from their past. In my book they're just as bad as North Korea, but America doesn't mind because Turkey helps them out in the middle east.

    1. Re:Greeks still hate Turks, for a reason by Falconhell · · Score: 3, Funny

      Mistermeaner than you?

      Is it Slashdot bad spelling day today?

    2. Re:Greeks still hate Turks, for a reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Turkey was a country that cut off your hand for stealing. That was their version of a mistermeaner.

      This was what the British (and probably other parts of Europe as well) did as well in the past. Did you have a point?

  55. IIRC, military Constitutionally allowed to coup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    IIRC, from my Turkish roommate in college, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk the founder of the modern Turkish state (vs. the old WWI Ottoman Empire) setup the Turkish Constitution so that the military had a right to go in and establish a coup whenever the civil government got too Islamic. Then after a reasonable amount of time the military ceded power back to a newly formed civil government. This has happened many many times in Turkish history.
    This is not some South/Central American junta. No-one is electing the Generals "President for Life". The military invokes their Constitutional rights. They de-radicalize the government ("put the train back on the tracks"), and then give the government back ("let the model train run again").

    1. Re:IIRC, military Constitutionally allowed to coup by koiransuklaa · · Score: 1

      That's not the whole truth. The idea of the military as the defender of the secular state is an old one but the constitutional backing is not. The national security council and the new constitution were a result of a coup in the sixties and it was strengthened in the aftermath of the 1980 coup. Pretty convenient, eh?

  56. It's a pronunciation error. by Dutchmaan · · Score: 0, Troll

    I think they're saying it with a soft G... Calling it Jewgle, which might explain lot.

  57. About that Enlightenment... by graymocker · · Score: 1

    This line of thought crops up a lot, and Eurocentric commentators often wave the "Enlightenment" as a sort of mystical talisman without investigating very closely what, exactly, it was about the Enlightenment's interaction with Christianity that created modern civilization as it we know it today. Because on the face of it, the Enlightenment actually did very little to Christianity. The holy text didn't change. The leading institution of the faith didn't change. The number of faithful didn't change (or at least didn't until centuries afterwards).

    So what, exactly did the Enlightenment accomplish that transformed Christianity from a backwards zealous militant ideology to what we know today? (And yes, the preceding sentence is a horrifically reductive caricature and I largely phrase it that way in order to paraphrase a certain way of thinking.) Well, empiricism diluted religion to the point where even if thinking people professed to be Christians, they were no longer stupid enough to actually take the written dictates of their faith all too seriously. That's it. That's all. It wasn't very revolutionary, or very difficult, and there was nothing about it that was particularly unique to Christianity or the West.

    The same process is happening throughout the world, including in Islam, including in Turkey, where the cosmopolitan educated elite professes to be Muslim but finds a YouTube ban just as silly as we do. Trust me, Turkish college students want to be able to watch cute kitten videos. The problem is that the Turkey's highly federalized political structure gives disproportionate voice to fringe elements - imagine if that one Catholic dude who's always on TV bashing South Park could actually get courts to file injunctions on his behalf, and you've have an approximation of what is happening here.

    1. Re:About that Enlightenment... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Because on the face of it, the Enlightenment actually did very little to Christianity. The holy text didn't change. The leading institution of the faith didn't change. The number of faithful didn't change (or at least didn't until centuries afterwards).

      The enlightenment didn't change Christianity much, at least in a direct way. What it did change was Christian societies. And in turn and over time society influenced Christianity, or at least some sects of it.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  58. I don't think this is true by ezzthetic · · Score: 3, Funny

    I just Googled it, and didn't find any information.

    --
    You know what they say about opinions. They're all fabulous!
  59. Re:GOOGLE MANIPULATES SEARCH RESULTS IN THEIR FAVO by HighTechGenius · · Score: 0

    i really dont know about it. I am realatively new to Slashdot input and blgging. Its a user name and thanks for your help. rs

    --
    Rob Shambro Chairman/CEO GenosTV www.genos.tv
  60. Problem NOW is the West's, too by zooblethorpe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Historical allegory aside, my intent was actually more to point out the fallacy of couchslug's professing to have a handle on the "true Muslim character". What is the "true Muslim character"? What is the "true Christian character"? My friend is a devout Muslim, and one of the kindest, gentlest, most sincere people you could hope to meet. I'd much rather spend time in his company than with some of the self-identified Christians I've had the misfortune to know, who claim some personal connection with Jesus at one moment, and happily spout bigoted hateful venom the next.

    Islam's rejection of the foundational principles of modern civilization is a problem NOW.

    Islam has its own foundational principles of modern civilization. That these foundational principles don't happen to match your own is an issue of cultural discourse, not absolutist violence. For that matter, some of the vaunted Enlightenment is actually predicated on learning imported from the Muslim world.

    Coexistance isn't even possible because of their expansionist and supremisist ideas.

    Swap "their" here for "our" -- for can we not say exactly the same thing about the US? The United States, for all its fanfare and mythologizing, has been one of the biggest thugs on the planet for the better part of a century.

    That means Ann Coulter's solution of "Invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." It will be the worst human rights atrocity in recorded history but I'm damned if I see a better solution.

    Given that the core tenet Christianity is essentially "love thy neighbor", it sounds like you've hit the nail on the head here -- I'd hazard that neither Ann Coulter nor yourself are all that familiar with the underlying ideals you both seem to be espousing. Never mind the general ignorance of what Islam is. Yes, there are wacko bad apples, and yes, some of these elements happen to run countries. These do not define Islam, any more than Pat Robertson speaks for all Christianity, though they do appear to define the face of Islam as perceived by many here in the US.

    Moreover, any look at the cultural friction between the many countries and political groups identifying themselves as Islamic must look as well at how the various governments of the West are fully implicated in helping to polarize and poison the dynamics at work. For instance, the situation with Iran and militant Shiism owes much to the hamfisted bungling of MI5, the CIA, and our friend in the Gulf, BP. Being ignorant of the West's role in defining the anger and resentment expressed by many of the more vocal elements of the Muslim world is fixable and excusable; ignoring it is hypocritical. The West helped create this problem, and the West must also help solve it, constructively. Sadly, Afghanistan, Iraq, and now Gaza, among other present issues, aren't helping.

    Cheers,

    --
    "What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
    "A four-foot prune."
    1. Re:Problem NOW is the West's, too by couchslug · · Score: 1

      Being a Muslim is to support Islam, therefore the individual character _does not matter_ because that individual still supports the toxic mass movement.

      "Islam has its own foundational principles of modern civilization. That these foundational principles don't happen to match your own is an issue of cultural discourse, not absolutist violence. For that matter, some of the vaunted Enlightenment is actually predicated on learning imported from the Muslim world."

      Principles don't matter, anywhere. Principles are not more than propaganda. PRACTICE is EVERTYTHING because that is what has effect. The Enlightenment is over, all that old shit doesn't matter HERE, NOW, which is where we are. Muslim government is Iran, Saudi Arabia, and similar areas. FAITHFUL religionists cannot be anything but primitive fundamentalists because faith equals fidelity to the ancient tribal myths and teachings.

      Stripped of the god nonsense, Islam is essentially violent Pan-Arabism in a format easily marketed to the unsophisticated. It is politics, and may be opposed as any other mass movement like Maoism. Religionists want religion to get some special pass so they don't need to disicuss the essence of desert superstition, which is a bunch of tribesmen stabbing/hacking/raping/killing each other while invoking their imaginary friends.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    2. Re:Problem NOW is the West's, too by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      "Historical allegory aside, my intent was actually more to point out the fallacy of couchslug's professing to have a handle on the "true Muslim character". What is the "true Muslim character"?"

      A Muslim who is in the process of beheading an infidel?

      "What is the "true Christian character"? "

      A Christian who is in the process of burning a heretic?

      Look, the problem is not that Christianity is somehow better. The problem is that Christianity has learned (somewhat) to live in peace with the modern civilization. Islam has not learned it and actively drags everything back into the stone age.

    3. Re:Problem NOW is the West's, too by kklein · · Score: 1

      For that matter, some of the vaunted Enlightenment is actually predicated on learning imported from the Muslim world.

      --Which they had imported from India. Nice try.

    4. Re:Problem NOW is the West's, too by hey! · · Score: 1

      Oooh. Time for mad-libs.

      Being a [NOUN MEANING THE MEMBER OF SOME GROUP] is to support [NAME OF A GROUP], therefore the individual character _does not matter_ because that individual still supports [ATROCITY SOMEONE HAS COMMITTED IN THE NAME OF THAT GROUP].

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    5. Re:Problem NOW is the West's, too by Late+Adopter · · Score: 1

      Being a [NOUN MEANING THE MEMBER OF SOME GROUP] is to support [NAME OF A GROUP], therefore the individual character _does not matter_ because that individual still supports [ATROCITY SOMEONE HAS COMMITTED IN THE NAME OF THAT GROUP].

      If you replace "ATROCITY SOMEONE HAS COMMITTED IN THE NAME OF THAT GROUP" with "ATROCITY THAT THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE PURPORTING TO BELONG TO THAT GROUP SUPPORT" then I would actually agree that's a fair statement to make, and applies both to Islam and Christianity.

    6. Re:Problem NOW is the West's, too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pat Robertson speaks for all Christianity

      Fine. Ok. I'll bite, even though this is clearly flamebait.

      The problem with Christian haters like yourself is this: all your examples of "bad" Christians pale in comparison to all of our examples of "bad" muslims. Say these words out loud to anyone and I promise you'll find yourself being ridiculed harshly: "Pat Robertson is exactly the same as Ruholla Khomeini".

      See how that works? Anytime people like you try to drag Christianity down to the level of islam you lose your argument.

      Pat Robertson is exactly the same as Ruholla Khomeini.

    7. Re:Problem NOW is the West's, too by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Ask your friend if he would kill to support his religion.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    8. Re:Problem NOW is the West's, too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Islam has its own foundational principles of modern civilization. That these foundational principles don't happen to match your own is an issue of cultural discourse

      Foundational principles of modern civilizations have nothing to do with culture. Modern civilization is based on basic principles of human rights and freedom, including equality between men and women, freedom of speech and freedom of religion. These principles are being greatly reduced within Islam. Religious group do not have right to govern people's lives just because they did so for so long in the past.

    9. Re:Problem NOW is the West's, too by Reservoir+Penguin · · Score: 1

      Way to show your ignorance to even put Shia Persians of Iran and Sunni Arabs of Saudi Arabia on the same line. SA and Iran are the worst enemies with SA offering Israel it's airspace to attack Iran. FYI Afghans, Pakistanis, Indonesians (citizens of the most populous Muslim country on earth), Turks, Malays are not Arabs. Come to think arabs are a minority among Muslims. So much for your idea of violent pan-arabism. There was in fact a secular pan Arab movement in the second half of 20th century represented by the Baath party bit it's pretty much dead now. Contemporary Muslim countries are fiercely nationalistic first and the idea of global Muslim caliphate does not have many supporters.

      --
      US-UK-Israel: The real Axis of Evil
  61. The full exchange by martin-boundary · · Score: 2, Funny

    Turkey: "You're baaaaaaaaaanned!"
    Google: "Booh, that's fowl play!"

  62. Re:As a European... Please no Turkey in Europe, th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only reason I wouldn't want them in is that we've already got enough pro-censorship assholes and it would tip the balance even more in their favour. Quite the irony isn't it. They'd fit right in.

  63. A communications interuption? by anexkahn · · Score: 3, Funny

    Can only mean one thing, Invasion!

    --
    Curious about Storage and Virtualization? Check out
  64. Re:As a European... Please no Turkey in Europe, th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    condone : to regard or treat (something bad or blameworthy) as acceptable, forgivable, or harmless.

    http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/condone

  65. EU by __aarvde6843 · · Score: 1

    Turkey has been lobbying and pressuring the EU for joining. For many years I've been very afraid that would happen. Now it seems it will not happen in my lifetime... OR should I be even more afraid now?...

  66. Re: Turkey reportedly.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    I tried to read whole conversation but couldn't make it to the end because it is funny how most of you guys talk about things that you do not really know. Mostly blabbering and gossip. None of the posts related to topic of the thread and none of you even asked "why Google is censored" or contributed any thoughts.

      I am Turkish and I don't support current ruling party (actually hate them for what they did to my country) but not because of reasons mentioned here. The things mentioned here are coming from biased and ignorant people in my opinion. You guys hear something from someone and believe it unconditionally. I am sure most of you think because most of the Turks are muslim, they must be Arab.

    About the Google thing; a while ago, YouTube is banned in Turkey because of several videos about founder of modern Turkey posted on it. Censorship is one of many bad things done by Turkish governments in last 40 years but this last one is interesting because it is coming from a party which does not really like the founder of the secular state but they went ahead and did it because of constitution. They tried to ask Youtube to remove the videos but since Google and Youtube has no rerpresentative in Turkey so no Youtube Turks (unless if you know how to do DNS hacks).
    So Google is not banned, this latest incident is completely related to this YouTube ban, communication ministry tried to make it harder to access YouTube.

    On a side note, current party is elected with about 35 percent vote of the population and many of those voters did not vote for them to bring sharia, they voted because Ak Party tricked them by playing with their belief and faith. And for example USA is not more secular than Turkey because in Turkey leaders don’t have to visit bishops in church to make people believe that they are Christian (as Obama did). Oh imam and mosque in this case.

  67. Cut The Crap Please by Delifisek · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This wasn't something about, Turkish yada yada...

    This something about, abusing Law for profit.

    YouTube consumes too much Bandwidth.

    And Privatized Turkish Telekom new owner dont' want to spend too much to increase bandwidth.

    So ?

    Abuse the law...

    And yes. We need improved Law about issue.

    And those politics.

    Wake up Western, you can't always right, you can't always win....

    --
    [My english is better than most other people's Turkish, so please point out mistakes politely. Thank you.]
    1. Re:Cut The Crap Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Wake up Western, you can't always right, you can't always win...."

      We're not the ones losing something here.

  68. This happened before by Max_W · · Score: 3, Informative

    Turkey was a world leading country by 15th century in mathematics, medicine, architecture, etc.

    But while Europe experienced the movable type printing revolution in 15th - 16th centuries, in Muslim countries the movable type print was banned for 200 years for "moral" reason.

    Certainly, as any human invention, printing was also used for producing "adult" materials. But it was also used to produce maps, textbooks, literature, etc.

    So as a result the Europe moved into a modernity, but the countries, where printing was banned, stayed behind. The "moral" reasons were rather an attempt of the patriarchal leaders of society to guard their power.

    In the long run this ban did not benefit the society. Nowadays many Turks have to move to Germany, Austria, etc. to find a job. This is a result of the error, which was made by the Islamic countries' society five hundred years ago.

    Many medieval churches in Europe were build by architects, who learned architecture from Islam mosques' builders. We still use Arabic numerals for mathematics. But now the Islam world is well behind in technology and science, including human science.

    Unfortunately they step on the same rake again, because it is not possible for culture to develop without free discussions, without free access to information.

    1. Re:This happened before by value_added · · Score: 1

      Turkey was a world leading country by 15th century in mathematics, medicine, architecture, etc.

      A young Turk? ;-)

      Turkey is a product of the first world war.

      Your description of that part of the world in the 15th century is generally correct, but it would also be valid for the centuries before when it was the center of Christendom.

    2. Re:This happened before by Max_W · · Score: 2, Interesting

      [quote]Your description of that part of the world in the 15th century is generally correct, but it would also be valid for the centuries before when it was the center of Christendom.[/quote]

      Norman Davies writes in "Europe: a History" (ISBN 0-19-820171-0) about leadership of Islamic countries in all spheres of science and technology just up to 1450, when Johannes Guttenberg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Gutenberg invented the movable type printing.

      Before this some peasants in Europe sometimes could not even find their village after selling farm products in a remote town market and had to start a new life in a new place. There were no maps on hands, they had been too expensive before printing press.

      But after 1450 books, maps, pictures, etc. were sold em mass on all sorts of markets, even along roads. It was an explosion of printing.

      There were negative aspects too: "adult" materials, terrible reformation wars, which were in a way a result of the best-selling Martin Luther's essays http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther , etc.

      But all in all it was the movable type printing Revolution, which catapulted Europe into the leadership role in the whole world.

      And it is exactly what societies in such countries as Turkey, Iran, China, former USSR (partly), do not get, by prohibiting a global access to the information.

    3. Re:This happened before by Waldeinburg · · Score: 1

      Certainly, as any human invention, printing was also used for producing "adult" materials.

      Including the steam engine? ... no, please don't answer that!

    4. Re:This happened before by Max_W · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      But of course, exotic sexuality was part of the colonization drive. I've listened to a talk of a historian on this subject.

    5. Re:This happened before by euroq · · Score: 1

      We still use Arabic numerals for mathematics. But now the Islam world is well behind in technology and science, including human science.

      WE DO NOT USE ARABIC NUMERALS.

      We use Hindu numerals. The only thing the Arabs did was start using them, and tell the Europeans about them. The Europeans then called them Arabic numerals.

      Oh... sorry, actually the Persian mathematicians were the ones who spread their use, but the Europeans called them Arabic.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_numerals

      --
      Just because the U.S. is a republic does not mean it is not a democracy. Democracy/republic are not mutually exclusive.
    6. Re:This happened before by value_added · · Score: 1

      WTF?

      I'm not sure what the purpose is of elaborating on what I wrote (interest for the general reader, I'm guessing), but my point was that you're wrong in attributing any of it to Turkey. Nothing you wrote or cited contradicts that. Again, Turkey is a relatively new nation state that grew out of the aftermath of WW I.

      On the other hand, if this is some misplaced yearning for a fictional past, you'll find your counterpart in the Kossovo Serbs who, in their centuries-old antipathy to All Things Islam, still mutter "Beware the Turks!". Given recent history, you could say that warning is still prescient after all these years (all 500 of them). Oh, the ironies. Either way, one thing seems certain, and that's their grasp of history exceeds yours.

      Hell, attributing any of the accomplishments of that time period to modern Turkey is like suggesting Frank Gehry is a product of the Persian Empire, or that Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait to uphold and protect the noble traditions of English Common Law.

    7. Re:This happened before by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      But while Europe experienced the movable type printing revolution in 15th - 16th centuries, in Muslim countries the movable type print was banned for 200 years for "moral" reason.

      Well, probably because they had seen what it did to the catholic church.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    8. Re:This happened before by olau · · Score: 1

      It's funny that you think adult materials and the reformation were negative aspects.

    9. Re:This happened before by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      Before this some peasants in Europe sometimes could not even find their village after selling farm products in a remote town market and had to start a new life in a new place. There were no maps on hands, they had been too expensive before printing press.

      Really?

      It's kind of cool if it's true: 'Where do I live again? Oh well, this looks like a nice place.'

  69. Can you see the future? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Anyone who is thinking as they read instead of blindly ploughing through the words would have realized that Earth has not reached it's final century yet?

    Just how sure are you about that? :-)

    I mean, we know, but we don't actually know.

  70. EU? by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

    If you (and lots of people) just knew how people in Turkey and some parts of Govt. are sick and tired of "EU stick", you wouldn't mention it on your message.

    EU has nothing to do with it. In fact, Ataturk has nothing to do with it. It is some really deep political matter and some kind of conspiracy by the forces who _really_ wants to exclude Turkey from rest of the secular World... As Slashdot is not really a political site, I refrain from going deeper.

    It even has something to do with Google acting like "Who gives a F to what you think?" lately. Forget the Ataturk video which is supposed to start all, I am just asking one question. What happens if Al Queda starts posting training videos to Youtube and Youtube ignores the removal requests by US courts? I am not even mentioning the "easy way" which even Slashdot admits to do from time to time, e.g. a very credible and serious message from secret service.

    1. Re:EU? by bmcage · · Score: 1
      National security is not comprimised by some Ataturk video's. Video's on How to make a bomb, Train a terrorist, ... do. Failing to make that distinction indicates a lack of understanding free speech and it's limitation.

      The discussion on the Ataturk vidso is a bit the same as the Hitler parody video's. Oh guess what, you can still watch those: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBO5dh9qrIQ

  71. Re:im wondering which is the idiot that modded me by Mushur · · Score: 1

    Do you have more information on this? What where the names of the banned holdings? What do you think was the influence of the EU in this? Did they in any way take the traditional military wing out of the game?

  72. Set back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There isn't much to set back in the first place, they don't stand a chance entering EU.

  73. Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Turkey's ruling party AKP is slowly turning the country into an islamic tyranny. Turkey's most influential free-thinkers, academics and secular activists are jailed with phony accusations. Hundreds of such people have been in jails without any proof of their so called illegal activities for two (2) years. Several of them already died due to health complications caused by this disturbance.

  74. Always an anonymous tough guy by HighTechGenius · · Score: 0

    Its funny you remain anonymous, of course you do. You sit back in your arm chair contribute nothing except negative feedback in every comment. I guess it empowers you. I try, ever heard of that word? I passed the mensa test , i guess thats stupid huh?

    --
    Rob Shambro Chairman/CEO GenosTV www.genos.tv
    1. Re:Always an anonymous tough guy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTF are you babbling about? Your post has no context. Do you have any idea how stupid you sound?

  75. Re:GOOGLE MANIPULATES SEARCH RESULTS IN THEIR FAVO by HighTechGenius · · Score: 0

    If it costs me money, I give a shit. What are you the guy in the lunch room that let everyone beat you up and take your lunch money. Is it ok to stand for yourself these day! Or should we all just roll over and play dead, I am sorry son, that's the day I am dead no blood flows through my viens until then I am standing up for what I beleive in. Is that so bad?

    --
    Rob Shambro Chairman/CEO GenosTV www.genos.tv
  76. PR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I smell some PR campaign against Turkey for not playing ball with US/Israel...

  77. Turkey owns its liberty to dictatorship by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    Turkey is an odd nation. It is most free when it is ruled by its military leaders. It depends on military coups for civil rights... something that western nations, especially the EU can't grasp. They insist that the military plays no political role whatsoever (this is the situation in western nations) and that it is instead controlled by politicians. Rather then the army controlling the politicians.

    But it is the army that is the guardian of the secular nation of Turkey as created by Ata Turk. He wanted to make Turkey from a has been semi-arabic throwback into a modern nation. The guy was about as enlightened as you can get especially considering the region. Make no mistake this guy was a visionary and among the truly great statesmen.

    And Turks loved/love him. To a point. Turkey like so many countries is not all the same. Ankara is not the same as the rural parts of the country just as New York ain't the same as Utah.

    And just as enlightened New York has to deal with voters from backwards parts of the nation, Turkey has a strong religious part in the country side. And when things change a lot, and Turkey has been undergoing enormous change, the religious tend to rise up and demand things slow down to stabilize the country (read: they don't want to give up their positions). Turkey the western nation, alley of Israel, secular and separate from the Arabic world. Well that causes a lot of upset. Among Arabic nations, Turkey stands tall, a clear beacon of light. Among western nations, it is nothing. A pathetic bunch of towel heads with a booming economy because going from 0 to 1 is a huge growth.

    So what is they Turkish identity? Who are they? What is their culture? Is their culture that of Ata Turk? Or is it that of Islam?

    That is what we are seeing right now. The AKP is the religious right wingers mobilizing fueled by the "freedom" emposed by the EU that the military can't slap them down. The military wants to be with the EU. The AKP less so, at least not on the terms that it has to be more western.

    And yes, the recent incident has EVERYTHING to do with this. It is very intresting that at the same day, Turkey once again bombed koerdish positions. Very handy to have this incident with Israel to hide their own occupation and suppression and killing of civilians. Planned? Oh surely not. Especially not when all the people killed by Israel were known trouble makers with clear ties to Hamas. And all the ships that were "honest" protestors (bit suspicious to see a moroccan protest the occupation of gaza when no such protest is heard about her own country occupying the Sahara illegaly) there were no incidents. Just the turks.

    Turkey is playing a game. Torn between the desire to be part of the EU but unable to qualify yet and wanting to be part of the new nations (Turkey and Brazil are trying to use their recent economic success to become more important on their own terms) and not loosing its own identity, it is making some odd choices.

    Turkey also showes clearly why censorship is often not an all or nothing affair. The protection of the image of Ata Turk is part of the protection of the secular nation. So censorship of critism of him is to fight censorship. Because make no mistake, those that attack Ata Turk might right on a banner of free speech, but would tear free speech down first change they got.

    It is like neo-nazi's claiming their have the right to freedom, but would deny it to anyone else.

    Sometimes when you are against censorship, you got to be on the site of people who censor, because the people they censor are even worse. But that is not a catchy slogan.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:Turkey owns its liberty to dictatorship by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      And just as enlightened New York has to deal with voters from backwards parts of the nation

      Is there anyway you could have said that and come off as more of an elitist douche bag?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    2. Re:Turkey owns its liberty to dictatorship by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      Is there anyway you could have said that and come off as more of an elitist douche bag?

      Well, it's obvious that the only correct opinions can come from those who live in highly urbanized environments. And if you disagree, you are obviously wrong. My highly cultured urbanized way of thinking is clearly better, because there is no culture outside of the major cities. Just stay the hell out of my way and accept what's best for you.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    3. Re:Turkey owns its liberty to dictatorship by WNight · · Score: 1

      Sometimes when you are against censorship, you got to be on the site of people who censor, because the people they censor are even worse. But that is not a catchy slogan.

      Not at all. We survive just fine with our past greats being mocked mercilessly even when our enemies do it.

      To say you HAVE to censor is to say you COULDN'T hear those words.

      People with thin skin have an infinite capacity to find fresh wounds. If they aren't offended by one thing they're offended by the idea you find them easily offended. They'll always have a list of things that must be censored, and they'll never be worth listening to.

  78. AKP is highly Euro skeptic. by Weezul · · Score: 2, Insightful

    AKP is highly Euro skeptic. In fact, they're election was partially distrust of Europe.

    Europe will not favor enlarging again for quite some time given the recent economic problems. In fact, Turkey would unquestionably join the ranks of the PIGS. I'm doubtful that Germany, France, etc. will ever feel like they've fixed the PIGS situation, so Turkey is effectively out permanently.

    You know, Turkey never had very good odds for entering anyways. Greece would oppose them for military reasons. France would oppose them since France requires a public referendum for new admission into the E.U. Austria would oppose them for Austrian reasons. In fact, Switzerland would even oppose them now that Switzerland joined Schengen.

    In the long run, Croatia and Montenegro will all be admitted before Turkey, but they'll vote against Turkey for religious reasons. Bosnia and Serbia might not be admitted for quite some time either, but Serbia would also oppose Turkey's entrance too.

    p.s. E.U. expansionism has basically been a substitute for unpopular immigration that allows political elites to lower labor costs. Imho, they are crazy about labor costs not for competing with developing nations, but largely China. China cannot manipulate their currency indefinitely, which will remove the immediate pressure. All the newly admitted countries like Poland will provide cheap labor for some years, with the Ukraine another possible expansion if China holds out.

    p.s.2 There has been however an European policy of educating people from Central and South America, kinda an opposition to the Monroe Doctrine. We're now seeing this policy provide higher quality and more culturally similar immigrants than Turkey, the Middle East, or Africa. Face it, if people see Turks or Africans they think Shira law or female circumcision, but if people see Brazilians they think Carnival and barbecue. And immigration from the Americas could easily provide the required labor force control.

    --
    The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
  79. You sir... by gox · · Score: 1

    ... have been modded up, just because you're blaming religious governance.

    As you have already stated, the ban on YouTube came from the OPPOSING camp. AKP government has always been critical about it, to the extent that the PM told the press that he himself had been watching YouTube despite the ban.

    So, what's your argument? Are they using the taxation excuse to justify the ban (which doesn't conform with the above fact) or are they using the ban as an excuse to impose taxes? What does religion have to do with it? This isn't even about the government, but the State.

    Sorry, I'm an atheist myself, but everything isn't about religion either. Sometimes you should have to consider that the easiest explanation might not be the right one.

    1. Re:You sir... by unity100 · · Score: 1

      the ban on youtube is NOT from the opposing camp. there has been dozens of court orders to ban youtube, yet, the telecoms board have NOT banned the ips, knowingly. they have just banned the domain name, practically leaving the site reachable easily.

      however now, they have not only banned ips of youtube, they have also banned GOOGLE ANALYTICS. there is no reason for banning google analytics ips. google analytics is an important information gathering tool for google. the reason to ban it, is to force google to accept what they want.

      it is about 'religious outlook'. it is the way right wing operates, and this has been no different in usa, or any other country when religious right came to power. these political views can easily ignore and violate existing laws, because the only law that passes valid for them, is their religious ethics. so, despite the law here says because google is in another country, it shall not pay tax to turkey, they are saying that google has to pay tax to turkey, which is, utter bullshit.

    2. Re:You sir... by gox · · Score: 1

      the ban on youtube is NOT from the opposing camp. there has been dozens of court orders to ban youtube

      Sorry but there's no smokescreen here. Youtube was banned because some Greeks put videos insulting Ataturk, and Youtube didn't agree to take them down. This was backed by the most aggressively secular Kemalist organizations, since they're also nationalistic by definition.

      That's why the government never liked it and they actively used this as a proof of how liberal they actually are. It's fair to say that AKP government benefited from this issue immensely.

      I'm not saying the religious side doesn't ban web sites. This just isn't true for this specific case.

      Trying to tax Google is an abuse of technicality, which, in a place like Turkey, happens all the time. There are no religious motives behind it, and AKP government is seemingly not supporting it, at the very least because they don't like bad press.

      Are they benevolent? Absolutely not. But blaming Islamism for something that seculars are more involved in is just damaging. People see this kind of spin and then go vote for AKP. Many AKP voters in Turkey I conversed with weren't even religious themselves.

    3. Re:You sir... by unity100 · · Score: 1

      no. as i said, the videos about ataturk and the court order regarding it has been there for around THREE years already. and supposedly, youtube was 'banned'. only domain name. everyone, including the prime minister, was using hosts files to access youtube without any issues, as prime minister himself once said, 'i dont know about you, i can use youtube myself', when inquired about the ban a year ago. despite, willingly violating a law being a criminal offense in turkey.

      a

      yet however, suddenly it changed, the telecoms board that is in charge of these stuff had decided to ban all ips not only relevant to youtube, but also google analytics as well. that was supposed to happen THREE years ago when the ban was first affected. but, somehow, they decided to do it properly, now. and noone asked, hey, you were supposed to ban this thing 3 years ago, yet your own pm says that he can use it without issues, how come...

      of course its islamism. its the islamist, middle eastern mindset that violates any law if sees the need, and does anything, even stuff that are in lieu of the law when sees fit. its not something new - its the middle eastern approach to governance.

  80. Turkey bans 21st century by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they would, they could; you know how this works.

  81. Turkey would be joint the PIGS by Weezul · · Score: 1

    I'm unsure about Germany a priori, but Austria opposes it vehemently. Switzerland has now joined Schengen and will oppose it to their dying breath. France has decided that future admissions must occur by referendum, which means France will oppose Turkey's entry forever. I'd imagine that Croatia will join first, maybe even Serbia, but those nations will vote against any Islamic member, given the balkan war. It follows that Turkey has zero chance unless the E.U. changes the admission rules, currently even one vote against prevents ascension.

    Turkey would unquestionably join the ranks of the PIGS. I'm doubtful that rich European nations will find a truly bullet proof method for controlling PIGS spending, so after the current crisis Turkey will be permanently kept out of the Euro even. And I'm imagine the PIGS crisis will prevent the E.U. from changing the ascension rules within the next couple generations.

    --
    The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
    1. Re:Turkey would be joint the PIGS by VJ42 · · Score: 1

      Switzerland has now joined Schengen and will oppose it to their dying breath.

      Whilst I agree with most of what you say, Switzerland is not an EU member, so have no say over the issue.

      --
      If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
    2. Re:Turkey would be joint the PIGS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He never said it was, you idiot. Schengen != EU. It is not necessary to be in Schengen if you're in the EU, and vice-versa.

  82. PIGS by Weezul · · Score: 1

    Turkey never had much chance unless the ascension rules were loosened, which then might weaken the E.U. dramatically.

    I'm pretty sure the PIGS crisis has dramatically and permanently altered the European political landscape now though. Eastern European nations have not exactly joint the ranks of the PIGS. Turkey otoh would clearly act like the PIGS. So the crisis has given average Europeans a perfect basis for opposing Turkey's ascension indefinitely.

    --
    The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
    1. Re:PIGS by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      At first, I thought "Turkey wants nothing to do with PIGS; they're mostly Muslim there." then I Googled Turkey and this image showed up on top. http://blog.lib.umn.edu/admisfa/prospective/turkey.jpg Apparently turkey does like pig.

  83. Islamistic Goverment... by Crass+Spektakel · · Score: 1

    Looks like the islamistic Milli Görü based Goverment is now finally departing "the west" and joining up with the jihad union.

    --
    "Life is short and in most cases it ends with death." Sir Sinclair
  84. Re:im wondering which is the idiot that modded me by jez9999 · · Score: 1

    As a Turk, could you tell me why the military is not intervening? It might not be popular, but the longer you leave it the worse it gets, and it seems to me like this religious government needs to be slapped down. Ataturk would approve.

  85. SOP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't think it's anything new here. Muslims, Communists/Liberals, and Fascists have always locked down media. Look at what the White House is pushing now. Cybersecurity Act of 2009 repackaged.

  86. Old news is no longer news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is old news; I heard about this almost two weeks ago.

  87. ORLY? by LanMan04 · · Score: 1

    Islam didn't experience the Enlightenment and rejects it today.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age

    Want to know what ended it? Religious hard-liners coming back into power. Rather similar to a recent president who had Bible quotes printed on the covers of his Iraq war briefings.

    --
    With the first link, the chain is forged.
  88. Re:im wondering which is the idiot that modded me by oreaq · · Score: 1

    I think GP is talking about the Dogan Group. IIRC they accused some of Erdogan's men of being corrupt and then Erdogan fined them $3 billion dollars, Dogan's market capitalization was less than that. Happened last summer or fall. The EU -- as is expected -- condemned the actions but didn't do anything else. I don't know anything about military involvement.

  89. Re:im wondering which is the idiot that modded me by unity100 · · Score: 1

    analytics, and youtube ips are unreachable. any service that uses or alternates with these ips are unreachable. these are in the turkish press for 2-3 days now. there is no relevance of eu to this. islamist government is wrong, what google did is nothing illegal.

  90. Re:im wondering which is the idiot that modded me by unity100 · · Score: 1

    it is not intervening, because the idiots in usa and eu have been pressurizing against it. hence, the islamist government is becoming bolder by the day. today, they have started proceedings about ripping immunity from 2 opposing party mps, in order to arrest and jail them through a 'coup trial' that they have been almost illegally running for 2 years without any charges, by their supporting das and judges. they just accuse and jail you. and then drag the court proceeding for years.

  91. Re:im wondering which is the idiot that modded me by jez9999 · · Score: 1

    My question still rather stands. The army shouldn't give a damn about the USA. Unless the USA is seriously going to invade Turkey, this is an internal Turkish affair. The confidence of politicians shouldn't matter anyway. It isn't any good up against the barrel of a gun.

  92. Turkey quickly deteriorating... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... into another wack-job country. Once upon a time, like many other countries in that region, Turkey seemed on the road to becoming a modern civilization, but lately it has fallen more and more into the Luddite mind-set that is Islam. As a result it is quickly becoming yet another crazy back-water hick town...

  93. It happens again today by cpghost · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So as a result the Europe moved into a modernity, but the countries, where printing was banned, stayed behind.

    Quite true. But since the invention of Copyright, Europe and most of the West have started banning the free copying and sharing of information as well.. And with the successive extensions of Copyright terms (how long until we have Perpetual Copyright?), we're caught in the same downward spiral than those countries.

    --
    cpghost at Cordula's Web.
    1. Re:It happens again today by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Don't worry. They'll stop when they reached "70 years after the end of the universe."

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  94. Proxy Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, guess it's time to fire up the proxies then.

  95. The changes are not limited to Google. by dmesg0 · · Score: 1

    With all that is going in Turkey right now, Atatürk probably does at least 6000 RPM rolling in his grave.

    What a shame, it was a nice country just a few years ago.

  96. Re: Suspected Google Ban by Elitehusky · · Score: 1

    Thank you for sharing this link. The Internet is a new format and hence constitutes affiliation with the right to receive and impart information through any media. Yet, one has to wonder if the potential suspects behind this ban are fully aware of the severity of their actions.

  97. Re:im wondering which is the idiot that modded me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh noes, someone doesn't like you. Boo fuckin' hoo! Life's tough, get a helmet.

  98. Im in Istanbul by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am in Istanbul now, Google has already changed their IP's and Google (the search engine) works fine. As for youtube, that is still banned. Google DNS is NOT banned, trivial.

  99. Everything comes from somewhere, but... by zooblethorpe · · Score: 1

    Algebra, optics, and chivalry all arise as examples of indigenous Arabic or Islamic developments that were later adopted by Europe. Yes, the Arabs imported the concept of zero from India, as well as the basics of algebraic equations. But algebra as a full-blown discipline, independent of arithmetic or geometry, comes into its own in the Arab world.

    Cheers,

    --
    "What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
    "A four-foot prune."
  100. Re:im wondering which is the idiot that modded me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your question is actually not an easy one.

    First: If you are a democracy,do your political parties occasionally get "overruled" by the military?

    Second: When the military has this much power,do you seriously think they will be merciful with their power? Or will they become corrupt and "unquestionable"?

    Third: when there is a coup,your constitution is for naught.The new leaders can effectively silence everyone and suppress free speech by power.

    Fourth: When your biggest ally is Usa and you,the army who declared itself the ruler, need us weapons,do you actually not listen to them?

    In conclusion,there is only one way; democracy should be protected by the people not the army. And liberals love the islamist government!

    "By the people for the people."

  101. Re:As a European... Please no Turkey in Europe, th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Turkey accepts that armenian people died. They are wary of the political power of the word "genocide".

  102. Re:im wondering which is the idiot that modded me by unity100 · · Score: 1

    liberals love the islamist government, because it practically sells EVERYthing in the country almost for free, to outside private interests from usa.

    turkey doesnt need u.s. weapons. russia is more than willing to sell anything.

    a democracy which is being taken towards religious dictatorship, is not a democracy.

    military is set and raised to be the guardian of secular democratic republic, by constitution, and their internal training curriculum. ie, they are brainwashed to protect secular democracy since 80 years.

    people cannot protect democracy, while there is a government that uses all the available means it has to suppress opposition through seemingly legal means. to the extent of going the way of election fraud, as it was certified in various districts, and suspected in many, nationwide. there can especially be no democracy in a country which opposition members are jailed under suspicious accusations, through a 'specially authorized' court that runs the agenda of the government.

    in conclusion : democracy needs to be protected. if it didnt, then we wouldnt have nazis grabbing power in 1932, and then instituting fascism.

  103. Re:im wondering which is the idiot that modded me by jez9999 · · Score: 1

    Second: When the military has this much power,do you seriously think they will be merciful with their power? Or will they become corrupt and "unquestionable"?

    How has it worked in Turkey for 100 years, with the military actually properly enforcing a secular state and not being corrupt?

  104. Rhetoric fail. by zooblethorpe · · Score: 1

    Anon, you've completely missed my point.

    The argumentative structure, "A doesn't do B any more than C does D", means that C does *not* do D, and only compares the relationships between A and B, and between C and D.

    When I say that extremists don't define Islam, I then analogize to say that Pat Robertson doesn't define Christianity. Both are factually true points. This in no way makes the case that Pat Robertson is the same as Ruholla Khomeini, and in no way tries to "drag" anyone down to any level.

    Thanks for playing. Have a nice day.

    Cheers,

    --
    "What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
    "A four-foot prune."
  105. Re:im wondering which is the idiot that modded me by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    military is set and raised to be the guardian of secular democratic republic, by constitution, and their internal training curriculum. ie, they are brainwashed to protect secular democracy since 80 years.

    This is something I never quite understood. Turkey has mandatory military service for males, right? So, vast majority of all male population (excluding those disqualified on health grounds etc) should have gone through the same indoctrination. Why doesn't it persist once they leave the army?

  106. "Majority"? by zooblethorpe · · Score: 1

    Unless you have some serious poll figures to back that up, I don't think you can fairly claim to speak for either any Christian or Muslim majority. Yes, there are a lot of people on both sides making a lot of unpleasant noise -- but there are many more people participating in both religions that we never hear from in this grand media-based echo chamber, and I'd hazard that few of them indeed support any kind of atrocity. Maybe I'm just being naïve, but my life experience to date seems to bear out the position that most people are actually pretty reasonable. There are assholes and idiots everywhere, sure enough, but most people aren't either of these, most of the time.

    Cheers,

    --
    "What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
    "A four-foot prune."
  107. Re:im wondering which is the idiot that modded me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes.Some of the liberals in Turkey, are indeed idiots.

    Democracy brings the ability to question. Even if the middle and lower ranked soldiers were well-meaning,it still takes one not-well-meaning general to actually damage the freedom of speech and secular thinking. "Everyone should know how to pray" Remember that?

    You can't question a coup leader. He can suppress free speech,crack down on the middle class.And he can effectively be worse than the overthrown party. Remember 1980? And the overthrown party wasn't even bad!

    You are right,there are unlawful practices by the ruling party.Hopefully,people will see that and vote "the bum"s out!

    Let's hope that people will choose democracy in the upcoming election.

  108. Mod this up by Naelok · · Score: 1

    Hey Slashdot, stop spending your mod points modding up "THE ISLAMISTS ARE COMING, WE MUST READY THE NUKES" posts so that people can see a post with actual content.

  109. Re:im wondering which is the idiot that modded me by hgzr · · Score: 1

    Second: When the military has this much power,do you seriously think they will be merciful with their power? Or will they become corrupt and "unquestionable"?

    How has it worked in Turkey for 100 years, with the military actually properly enforcing a secular state and not being corrupt?

    But you forget the saying: Power corrupts,absolute power corrupts absolutely. The last big coup in 1980,was exactly that. In fact,that's why islamists are now the ruling party. The army is both secularist and nationalist.So when there is a chance that turkey will go the communist route,the army intervenes. In the 1980 coup,they built up the religious activities and crushed the leftists and even the party which founded the republic! Just to be sure that turkey wouldn't be in the soviet block. When that happened,the religious part of the society began to accumulate serious power. That's why there shouldn't be a coup. Democracy should be protected by democrats. hope that centrists and leftists will win the next election. Turkish people should all realise that power through force is not the way to go if you are a democracy. The army should just be a safekeeper if there is an armed uprising against democracy.

  110. It's all for Orkut! by Ossifer · · Score: 1

    They're blocking all the Google sites that don't start with a Turkish man's given name...

  111. Re:GOOGLE MANIPULATES SEARCH RESULTS IN THEIR FAVO by geekoid · · Score: 1

    When what you believe is a rambling nonsense, yelling, bad spelling, lousy punctuation, yeah, it's bad. Shut up or get your act together.

    I do know this:
    I will pretty much avoid your company. I don't have any hop for a company whose CEO can't present and argument in a logical and sensible manner. I am shocked that you can even managed to put together a business plan.

    Then the Hubris of calling yourself a genius just makes the whole thing sad.

    I'll be sure to mention your little rant at my next investor meeting. Just to be sure Shambro doesn't appear on the list.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  112. Re:im wondering which is the idiot that modded me by unity100 · · Score: 1

    mandatory service lasts only 1.5 years. you dont get any political education during that. the education we speak of are given to career officers of the army.

  113. Re:im wondering which is the idiot that modded me by unity100 · · Score: 1

    top ranks of the army have more indoctrination in regard to the principles than the middle and lower ranks. this, the coups before have shown. even if 1980 can be shown as an exception, one needs to remember that turkey was going either in the direction of totalitarian communism, or in the direction of being another iran, through the outside dominant forces acting on the country in those days. however brutal and repressive 1980 has been, it still effected an independent democratic continuance in which republic of turkey protected its existing characteristics.

    considering how the ruling islamist party is heavily prosecuting the opposition through various means, and considering how the ergenekon prosecution asked the removal of immunity from 2 opposition party parliamentarians to arrest them, from the assembly, you may not have a choice in the next election.

  114. Re:im wondering which is the idiot that modded me by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    So any military coups that happened in the pasts were carried out by officers alone on all levels?

    I'm just wondering if this sort of thing can eventually backfire. If the majority (or even a significant part) of the population is Islamist, then so is most of the army, since officer corps are numerically smaller. Who's to say that, should another coup happen, the soldiers won't just turn their guns against their officers to defend the Islamist regime?

  115. Kill for religion? No. by zooblethorpe · · Score: 1

    We've had this discussion, and his answer was "no". As he explained in more detail, his view is that killing is out of the picture, but that others in the Islam camp do not hew precisely to the "turn the other cheek" doctrine and do condone violence, against an attacker only, in cases of self-defense. Per his take on the issues, the hardliner terrorist bomber types are not proper Muslims. The mainstream of Muslim thought would condone violence to drive out an invader if that's what it took to get them to leave, as with the US in Iraq and Afghanistan, or the Soviets in Afghanistan in years before, but even in such cases, any proper defender of the faith should only act against the oppressing soldiers, and should have compassion and mercy for all others. As such, suicide bombings in crowded markets is the antithesis of Islam.

    Frankly, this strikes me as reasonable. I understand the ideals of Christian love, but I am also aware that if someone is attacking me, I am not guaranteed a favorable outcome either way, should I be passive, or should I actively resist. At least in an active role, I seem to maintain more control over the situation.

    For that matter, when it comes to Iraq and Afghanistan, it's more just the old story of a local population fighting an invading force, no matter how much religion gets bandied about. Vietnam was cast in the light of the Free West against the Iron Curtain of Communism, but in the end the conflict was more about "get these damn furreners out of our country!" That's what we hear now from Arizona, from Palestine/Israel (where both sides claim the country as "ours"), from the Basque regions, from Ireland (though thankfully less these days), from East Turkmenistan/Xinjiang Province, etc. etc.

    Cheers,

    --
    "What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
    "A four-foot prune."
  116. Re:im wondering which is the idiot that modded me by unity100 · · Score: 1

    1980 coup was a very organized coup, in which majority of military top down knew about, and they were all informed on what precise task they were to do when the coup was made.

    the population that is hardcore islamist to the extent that would take up arms to prevent a coup against islamicization of the country is around 20% traditionally. therefore, when army engages in a coup, they are not a factor within the military. because, army continually removes such people from its ranks. (thats why the islamist government is trying to prevent that removal, by issuing various laws, so they can place islamists in officer ranks). since the percentage is rather low, it doesnt create issues in the conscript ranks too.

  117. Is this story bogus? by lpress · · Score: 1

    A colleague in Turkey just sent me this message: "I am using google search engine here so I do not know what the article refers to. I am also using google earth."

  118. Re:GOOGLE MANIPULATES SEARCH RESULTS IN THEIR FAVO by HighTechGenius · · Score: 0

    Out of passion I may not have worded it right for you English major types but at the least I stand up for my shareholders and my company, something they didn't teach you in bschool. Sorry you don't understand. Stick to grading papers.

    --
    Rob Shambro Chairman/CEO GenosTV www.genos.tv
  119. As with sponsoring a flotilla of armed thugs by danielpauldavis · · Score: 1

    So in banning open access to information, the Moslems have taken over the country.

    --
    Cranky educator.
  120. Google tax payment is the reason. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lawmakers are very silly persons.They supposed to block some web sites.But everybody can enter google,youtube etc.Praticaly, nothing banned in Turkiye.Because there’re tons of way to entering blocking sites and whole country know how to use it. e.g. just only change pc dns ip to opendns numbers and everything is allright or proxy programs, sites, several ip numbers, ghost ways However Prime Minister Erdogan watches blocked youtube and suggest peoples to use it and added that people also know how to open blocked sites. Still Turkish users have got high user ratings in these sites.This events occurs because of youtube ip pool complexity with google. And google still do not answer to Turkish government for their tax payments for a long time. Google have got office in Turkey, and they're not registered as tax subject. Google pay taxes to every country except Turkiye. So, TAX is the center of it.