Slashdot Mirror
Taliban Offer Question-and-Answer Service Online
First time accepted submitter nachiketas points out this story about a new online service offered by the Taliban. "Worried about whether Islamic verses on Facebook are allowed? Or that suicide bombers kill innocent civilians? Afghanistan's Taliban have set up a new question-and-answer section on their website to address such issues. The facility on Voice of Jihad, the official website of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan — the Taliban's own name for their movement — allows readers to submit queries to spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid. It is a demonstration of how far the insurgents' attitude towards technology has changed."
I'd love to submit a ton of subversive questions to troll the Islamofascists.
But if I were to do that, I'm pretty sure that the US government's spying-on-our-own-civilians program won't notice the subversive quality of the questions, and the response would be more along the lines of "OMG this guy is talking to the terrorists!"
Looks like a very good way to get yourself tagged as a 'person of interest' if you access it from any western country. Anyone want an all expenses paid holiday to some non-specific Caribbean island?
"It is a demonstration of how far the insurgents' attitude towards technology has changed."
/b/tards discover when they engage Mr. Mujahid in a game of "Haram or Halal?"...
Other than some tactical intimidating-cell-operators-into-shutting-down-at-certain-times, based on the (plausible) theory that NATO was having a merry old time eavesdropping, I don't remember the Taliban being terribly anti-technology... Not particularly big enthusiasts(in public) of internet pornography or applied empiricism; but perfectly happy to use technological artifacts where available.
I do look forward to seeing what the
Neither TFS nor TFA link to the website in question, so here's it:
http://shahamat-english.com/
Unfortunately, it seems that the English version doesn't have a Q&A section, so you can't troll them unless you know Pashto. Too bad.
Can we get that on Slashdot?
Have gnu, will travel.
I am curious of what they think about Fox news ?
Probably big fans. It's pretty hard to have a proper Jihad against the infidel Crusaders if they don't arrive at a battlefield within convenient commuting distance of your favorite rugged hideout and start acting unsympathetically enough that you can keep up the PR campaign.
While the supine American media in general have done a pretty good job of supporting exactly that, Fox has really gone out of their way to emphasize nationalist bellicosity with a sharp Christian edge. Far better foils then some centrist waffler would be.
Looks like a very good way to get yourself tagged as a 'person of interest' if you access it from any western country. Anyone want an all expenses paid holiday to some non-specific Caribbean island?
I'm not sure that it's an encouraging sign when we are more afraid of what our government will do to us for accessing a terrorists' website than what the terrorists will.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
...or generally stupid, but where are the traditional April Fools' stories? Is this the dark side of the serious, corporate slashdot? Did we all grow up and I missed the boat?
First we have an old guy who talks to an invisible man explain to us how Marxism is unrealistic, now 21st century tech is used to teach us 7th century philosophy. I think I'll be starting a new religion which proposes that we're in fact living under bizarro-God who delights in random acts of chaos and irony and the real one is in charge of another universe.
http://shahamat-english.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=14632:diapered-us-soldiers&catid=3:articles&Itemid=5 "I'll let you into a little secret though; some press release has even revealed that the US-NATO forces uncontrollably pee in their pants during the fight with Mujahideen, or for the fear of attack by Taliban. "
I am curious of what they think about Fox news ?
Probably big fans.
Actually, they hate Fox, and are big MSNBC fans. The same piece in the Washington Post also said that they were bummed when Keith Olbermann was fired.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
Be careful with that. "My hovercraft is full of eels." isn't much of an exaggeration.
[End Of Line]
And here I was, thinking that this was TV's duty.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Given that their epistemological gold standard is "I read in a book that a dude said god told him...", it isn't a huge surprise that media literacy might not be among their strengths.
I don't think you just get to fuck them one time you know...
The whole virgin thing probably came about because it was vastly preferable to sloppy seconds with a camel.
They also have something else in common with AskSanta.com in that there is no Allah, either.
http://www.rootstrikers.org/
OK, so they have a web site. It's hosted in Malaysia, runs Joomla content management, and uses Gmail for replies. They have Facebook and Twitter links. Their videos are on Youtube, and they have a movie site to provide a front for them. The video isn't too useful without translation.
"The Afghanistan Of Islam Rejects Pollution of Western Democracy" is interesting reading. It's a good summary of the theocratic position, and gives some insight into why this is such a tough war to end.
I'm not sure they get the irony, but their contact person has a gmail.com e-mail address.
So a) anything he receives or writes probably gets copied to the NSA in realtime and b) he's supporting the US advertisement industry.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Given that their epistemological gold standard is "I read in a book that a dude said god told him..."
oh my goodness there are christians and catholics in the taliban!?
One of the GP's questions was "Can I marry an 8-year old? How about 12? Or 16?". Did you know that the vatican is the only place in Europe where age of consent is 12 years old? (Sure, it was that in Italy when they "separated" and vatican just didn't want to change that when Italy did... but I don't think it makes things any better)
So I agree that comparing most western churches to fundamentalist islamists isn't that clever but I can't keep a straight face when people who are fine with the catholic church call islam a religion of pedophiles or something along those lines.
Hmm... what about virgin camels?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Christians believe first in the New Testament.
A lot of Christians also believe in the Old Testament.
the basis of our law system is ~90% Judaic law
No... The basis of U.S. law is English common law, which followed rulings made by the King's judges based English tradition and legal precedent. There was influence from some other legal systems, including the Roman one where Christianity was the state religion (as it was in England), but no direct link to Judaic law. Some laws developed that were heavily influenced by religious views - the death sentence for blasphemy and homosexuality being two obvious ones (see Thomas Aikenhead, John William Gott). Both of those were argued from Christian religious perspectives, primarily based on passages in the Bible.
Judaic law is far better than islamic law in that it's not racist
613 mitzvot: Wipe out the descendants of Amalek (every man, woman and child). Genocide of another ethnic group is inherently racist.
There are plenty of others, for example, there are explicit passages that mandate setting a Hebrew slave free after 7 years, whilst Canaanite slaves must work forever.
And more recent racist religous law:
Say no to rabbis’ racism: Back in 2010, some 50 of Israel’s most prominent rabbis issued a religious edict against Jews renting property to gentiles, "Leasing land to non-Jews blasphemous, anyone violating ban may be ostracized, rabbis say" Thirty-nine of those rabbis are on the government’s payroll, although their opinions vary drastically from the State of Israel’s official laws and ethos. After this incident, no rabbi was fired or brought to court for incitement.
Killing Non-Jewish Infants is Permitted: "There is justification for killing babies if it is clear that they will grow up to harm us, and in such a situation they may be harmed deliberately, and not only during combat with adults.”In a chapter entitled “Deliberate harm to innocents,” the book explains that war is directled mainly against the pursuers, but those who belong to the enemy nation are also considered the enemy because they are assisting murderers."
King's Torah splits Israel's religious and secular Jews: "Rabbis Dov Lior and Yacob Yousef had endorsed a highly controversial book, the King's Torah - written by two lesser-known settler rabbis. It attempts to justify killing non-Jews, including those not involved in violence, under certain circumstances."
does not have slavery
It does, it is even explicitly permitted for a father to sell his pre-pubescent daughters into slavery as a "last resort" to get money. Judaism and slavery: "Judaism's religious texts contain numerous laws governing the ownership and treatment of slaves."
I of course, sadly, know the justification given in islamic text. Because he won military battles and his tactics will supposedly give his followers military domination over everyone else.
As opposed to the religious law that you apparently support, where the complete genocide of every living thing in a city is ok when "ordered by God"? Where followers are instructed to Wipe out the descendants of another tribe, To burn a city that has turned to idol worship, To destroy idols and their accessories (y
it's not quite as black and white as is often put.
"If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."
This isn't black and white enough for you?
9. Have you sanitised your data inputs?'); DROP TABLE secret_terrorism_targets;--
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
A liberal woman receives full support. Rush Limbaugh called a 30 year-old law student a slut because she wanted her insurance to pay for her birth control -- which she is probably on so she can fuck around and not get pregnant. I don't agree with the term "slut" in any case, but here at least it was in context.
Compare to the left's treatment of Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann (for the record, I like neither of them). Downright vile content is constantly spewed at their mere mention.
That's just a small sampling.
And they even go after their own when that woman is out of favor. Hillary Clinton received some pretty sexist remarks for challenging Obama for the nomination.
Where's the outrage? It won't be there among the left. They don't have principles when it comes to women. Respect for women is conditional upon whether they agree with that woman politically. If they don't, they make Limbaugh's comment look downright benign.