Slashdot Mirror
Of 8 Tech Companies, Only Twitter Says It Would Refuse To Help Build Muslim Registry For Trump (theintercept.com)
On the campaign trail last year, President-elect Donald Trump said he would consider requiring Muslim-Americans to register with a government database. While he has back-stepped on a number of campaign promises after being elected president, Trump and his transition team have recently resurfaced the idea to create a national Muslim registry. In response, The Intercept contacted nine of the "most prominent" technology companies in the United States "to ask if they would sell their services to help create a national Muslim registry." Twitter was the only company that responded with "No." The Intercept reports: Even on a purely hypothetical basis, such a project would provide American technology companies an easy line to draw in the sand -- pushing back against any effort to track individuals purely (or essentially) on the basis of their religious beliefs doesn't take much in the way of courage or conviction, even by the thin standards of corporate America. We'd also be remiss in assuming no company would ever tie itself to such a nakedly evil undertaking: IBM famously helped Nazi Germany computerize the Holocaust. (IBM has downplayed its logistical role in the Holocaust, claiming in a 2001 statement that "most [relevant] documents were destroyed or lost during the war.") With all this in mind, we contacted nine different American firms in the business of technology, broadly defined, with the following question: "Would [name of company], if solicited by the Trump administration, sell any goods, services, information, or consulting of any kind to help facilitate the creation of a national Muslim registry, a project which has been floated tentatively by the president-elect's transition team?" After two weeks of calls and emails, only three companies provided an answer, and only one said it would not participate in such a project. A complete tally is below.
Facebook: No answer. Twitter: "No," and a link to this blog post, which states as company policy a prohibition against the use, by outside developers, of "Twitter data for surveillance purposes. Period." Microsoft: "We're not going to talk about hypotheticals at this point," and a link to a company blog post that states that "we're committed to promoting not just diversity among all the men and women who work here, but [...] inclusive culture" and that "it will remain important for those in government and the tech sector to continue to work together to strike a balance that protects privacy and public safety in what remains a dangerous time." Google: No answer. Apple: No answer. IBM: No answer. Booz Allen Hamilton: Declined to comment. SRA International: No answer.
Facebook: No answer. Twitter: "No," and a link to this blog post, which states as company policy a prohibition against the use, by outside developers, of "Twitter data for surveillance purposes. Period." Microsoft: "We're not going to talk about hypotheticals at this point," and a link to a company blog post that states that "we're committed to promoting not just diversity among all the men and women who work here, but [...] inclusive culture" and that "it will remain important for those in government and the tech sector to continue to work together to strike a balance that protects privacy and public safety in what remains a dangerous time." Google: No answer. Apple: No answer. IBM: No answer. Booz Allen Hamilton: Declined to comment. SRA International: No answer.
Bush and Clinton tried to build one before, part of it eventually was used to become what we now know as the no-fly list. Obama had the chance to get rid of it and didn't. But I guess it's okay if the establishment does it.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Does being a Muslim rule you out from also being a traditional American?
The first muslims arrived in Jamestown VA in the year 1619, aboard a Portuguese slave ship. That was a year before the Mayflower landed at Plymouth Rock.
I think I speak for anyone who's read a history book when I say this is an absolutely awful idea. I know Twitter gets a lot of stick but well done them. If you're in favour of this then you're a fascist or you're an idiot. There's literally no middle ground. This is how it starts.
This story is based on an NPR interview with Muzaffar Chishti who directs the Migration Policy Institute's office at NYU School of Law. So, we're talking about a Muslim professor at an extremely Left-wing university being interviewed by a Left-wing government-funded "news" service. Naturally there will be a balanced, fair, and unbiased tone regarding PE Trump in any reporting.
They noted that Trump has made a number of statements, many contradictory, regarding the influx of immigrants, refugees, and temporary-visa visitors from nations known for harboring and exporting radical Islamic terrorists.
Currently there are only minimal and mostly ineffective systems for vetting/screening these people and enforcing deportation of those who violate the conditions of their visas and/or overstay the temporary-visa limits. This IS a problem that needs to be addressed.
They were not discussing, as many here attempt to imply, that Trump wants to 'register' every Muslim, including US citizens who have lived here their whole lives. They are talking about recent/current immigrants and visa applicants from regions that many radical Islamic terrorists call home. I'd call it common sense to keep better tabs on visitors/new immigrants from such regions, particularly as (like with Somalia) there are often no criminal or other databases from those regions with which to vet them against, or to even verify where they were born.
If you think it's a good idea to just throw open the doors and let anyone into the US from those regions, can we place them all into your neighborhood/city? You may want to visit Londonistan and look around a bit before you answer.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
Based on how I understand the teachings of Islam
Then you should learn about islam.
It is their job, their purpose, to spread 1) Islam and the 2)Sharia law to every corner of the globe.
No it is not.
1) it is their Puprose to spread islam to the unbelievers. Which are heathens and/or Pagans. Which excludes by definition Jews and Christians and other religions that believe in the same god as Muslims do.
2) wrong on all accounts. Traditional islam has nothing to do with late middle ages Sharia Law. Sharia law is spread/held up by idiots that are still stuck in the middle ages. Hint: Christian law was not very different to Sharia law in the middle ages.
Islam - and by extension (an unknown sized subset of) muslims - does not.
That is an idiotic claim. Muslims that emigrated from muslim countries are usually those that don't want to live under Sharia but want to live in a free society. A free society where they can celebrate and interpret Islam as they see fit and not as the Imam sees fit. As it was e.g. during the high times of Islam, when that "world view" was the most advanced of the planet, when science, medicine, art and philosophy where at their prime.
But you likely never have heard about those times.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
It is their job, their purpose, to spread Islam and the Sharia law to every corner of the globe.
Exactly, as the Quran says:
“And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.'” - Mark 16:15-16
“And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.” - Matthew 24:14 NKJV
And what about those that are sinners?
Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man intimately. But all the girls who have not known man intimately, spare for yourselves - Numbers 31:17-18
And let us not forget how the Quran deals with unruly children:
If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die. Deuteronomy 21:18-21
And what if someone mentions other faiths?
If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, 7 gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), 8 do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. 9 You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people. 10 Stone them to death, because they tried to turn you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. 11 Then all Israel will hear and be afraid, and no one among you will do such an evil thing again. - Deuteronomy 13
At least I swear that was the Quran, I always get my fairy tales mixed up.
You make it sound like this was an official statement of policy from Microsoft's Board of Directors, with BG himself consulted to help craft the appropriate response.
It was an official response to a media inquiry. Nobody at Microsoft PR would do that without making sure it was the company's position.
Why are you so determined to give them cover for this?
Nope, no sig
And I don't see how any of these 'tech' companies can make any such lists.
Oh, you're wrong there. Google and Facebook both know every Muslim who's been online in the US (to some imperfect but high degree of precision and accuracy). They already have the "Muslim registry", not to mention, Christian, Jewish, atheist, etc registry. It's their core business.
I spent an hour once chatting with one of Google's professional racists. His job was racial discrimination*: analyze every "signal" from your browsing habits, search history, gmail, etc to determine your race. No different for religion, income, etc. They were quite good at it. Of course, Google has no intent for this more nefarious than targeted advertisement. But the database exists, and it's a US company.
*discrimination - n. The ability or power to see or make fine distinctions; discernment.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
In the last election, while not the only choices, were the major choices.
And that's the problem right there.
Your problem is not Trump or Clinton. It's a system that culminated in a choice between two candidates which a large portion of your countrymen believe are both unsuitable for the job.
Address the cause, not the symptoms.