The system actually works very well, but unfortunately I can't go into the details much. There are also systems in place that give commanding elements more overview, down to individual soldiers, anywhere from 10 feet away to the White House.
Of course, being able to keep tabs on a soldier and knowing where s/he should be in the first place are two totally different things...
In most of the hospitals throughout the US, there are tracking systems in place to prevent infants from being taken from the premesis, and I think it would be logical to believe the same systems could be used in a similar manner at amusement parks. The band is put on, and certain activation points, such as doors, elevators, stairs, and the like, activate an alarm at the monitoring station (as well as the security department, normally). If the band is removed or tampered with, same thing.
To be fair though, the systems that I've seen in place at hospitals are NOT foolproof, and it still takes the eyes and ears of responsible people, even with such a system in place, to keep kids safe. But personally I think that both technology and parenting, working in partnership with each other, would be safer than just one or the other. Both have their flaws; parents are human and make mistakes, and technology...well, I'll just leave it at that. But this doesn't seem like a "Won't someone think of the children" issue so much as a "Let's act socially responsibly (and make a few bucks) and possibly do some good (and give our establishment a good reputation)."
I agree with you that the perpetrators of each and every one of the acts on your referenced site's list should be held responsible. But I also think that for every person wrongfully killed in the name of Allah, at least an equal amount has been killed in the name of other religions. The Crusades and the Inquisition spring immediately to mind. And even though Pope John Paul II apologized for that, do you honestly think a formal apology from Muslim leaders be treated the same, and give everyone a 'clean slate' to continue further atrocities, only on a smaller scale, as it has with other mainstream religions? There is no doubt that various atrocities have been, and likely will continue to be, committed in the name of religion. But to brushstroke a large population of individuals because of religious fanatics is short-sighted, and yes, propagandist.
The problem with lists on sites such as the one you vehemently advertise for (which I did peruse, by the way; seemed a rather financially motivated site, what with click-through book sales and donation links), is that it fosters a state of 'us' vs. 'them', and that's exactly where the religious leader of these religions are trying to sheperd their flocks toward. They're all grasping for power, and spreading their respective 'word' in whichever ways gains them the most influence.
I personally don't have any more or less tolerance for Islam than I do for Western organized religions when their adherents act like asshats, but as long as we have people preaching one against the other, I'm happy to try to show them that the problems are not confined to any one religion, or its followers.
1927 the deadliest mass murder in US school history was perpetrated by?
A. Tom Cruise? B. Beetle Bailey? C. Muslim extremists? D. A white male?
In 1955 United Airlines Flight 629 was blown up by?
A. Oprah Winfrey? B. The Riddler? C. Muslim extremists? D. A white male?
In 1996 the record-breaking Port Arthur Massacre was commited by?
A. Carlos Mencia? B. Dragons? C. Muslim extremists? D. A white male?
The Alfred P. Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City was blown up by?
A. Dale Earnhardt? B. Ghandi? C. Muslim extremists? D. A white male?
The deadliest attack on children in UK history, the Dunblane Massacre, was committed by?
A. Roy Rogers? B. KISS? C. Muslim extremists? D. A white male?
On 9/11, Muslim male extremists successfully hijacked four planes, and successfully crashed three of them into their intended targets. Your five examples of non-Muslim events have only two planes going down, one of them 21 years ago, the other one 44 years ago. And only the one 44 years ago was in the US.
So, is your point that Muslims make more successful terrorists, or what? Or that terrorism by Muslims is a more recent trend? Not sure what point you're trying to make by asking for more 'recent' examples. Just because it happened outside of your attention span doesn't make it any less pertinent.
So, can we PLEASE drop the racial/religious profiling, and just focus on the individuals involved, instead of blindly regurgitating hateful propoganda? Thanks.
Tell you what; if I was omnipotent I sure wouldn't be playing this crappy version of 'The Sims', just to mess with all the insignificant life-forms I'd created earlier. Do people honestly think that if God created us in his image, he'd be content to just tool around in the heavens because he couldn't find anything better to do?
I was right there with you until you mentioned Islam ;
Which, by the way, is the problem with the current religiocentric political climate. Everyone is hell-bent on turning everything into an 'us vs. them' thing, and the rest of us who just want to live our lives in relative peace get caught in the middle.
"I'd rather my ISP limit my bit torrent downloads so my BF2 doesn't lag. Works for me."
But that's exactly the point. In your example, let's substitute the bit torrent users for a large corporation. Now, said corporation can go to your ISP, plop a wad of cash on the table, and throttle their bandwidth up, causing your BF2 to be completely screwed. Since you don't have the same deep pockets, you end up paying the same amount for your service that you had been, only the service is now degraded. Currently, ISPs are (AFAIK) restricted from doing this without giving up common carrier status. However, the legistature currently in front of Senate would remove these restrictions, and allow the service providers to play favorites, catering to the clients with the fattest wallets.
Slashdot Mirror
The system actually works very well, but unfortunately I can't go into the details much. There are also systems in place that give commanding elements more overview, down to individual soldiers, anywhere from 10 feet away to the White House. Of course, being able to keep tabs on a soldier and knowing where s/he should be in the first place are two totally different things...
In most of the hospitals throughout the US, there are tracking systems in place to prevent infants from being taken from the premesis, and I think it would be logical to believe the same systems could be used in a similar manner at amusement parks. The band is put on, and certain activation points, such as doors, elevators, stairs, and the like, activate an alarm at the monitoring station (as well as the security department, normally). If the band is removed or tampered with, same thing. To be fair though, the systems that I've seen in place at hospitals are NOT foolproof, and it still takes the eyes and ears of responsible people, even with such a system in place, to keep kids safe. But personally I think that both technology and parenting, working in partnership with each other, would be safer than just one or the other. Both have their flaws; parents are human and make mistakes, and technology...well, I'll just leave it at that. But this doesn't seem like a "Won't someone think of the children" issue so much as a "Let's act socially responsibly (and make a few bucks) and possibly do some good (and give our establishment a good reputation)."
The problem with lists on sites such as the one you vehemently advertise for (which I did peruse, by the way; seemed a rather financially motivated site, what with click-through book sales and donation links), is that it fosters a state of 'us' vs. 'them', and that's exactly where the religious leader of these religions are trying to sheperd their flocks toward. They're all grasping for power, and spreading their respective 'word' in whichever ways gains them the most influence.
I personally don't have any more or less tolerance for Islam than I do for Western organized religions when their adherents act like asshats, but as long as we have people preaching one against the other, I'm happy to try to show them that the problems are not confined to any one religion, or its followers.
Unless it's thrown straight upwards... ;)
1927 the deadliest mass murder in US school history was perpetrated by?
A. Tom Cruise?
B. Beetle Bailey?
C. Muslim extremists?
D. A white male?
In 1955 United Airlines Flight 629 was blown up by?
A. Oprah Winfrey?
B. The Riddler?
C. Muslim extremists?
D. A white male?
In 1996 the record-breaking Port Arthur Massacre was commited by?
A. Carlos Mencia?
B. Dragons?
C. Muslim extremists?
D. A white male?
The Alfred P. Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City was blown up by?
A. Dale Earnhardt?
B. Ghandi?
C. Muslim extremists?
D. A white male?
The deadliest attack on children in UK history, the Dunblane Massacre, was committed by?
A. Roy Rogers?
B. KISS?
C. Muslim extremists?
D. A white male?
On 9/11, Muslim male extremists successfully hijacked four planes, and successfully crashed three of them into their intended targets. Your five examples of non-Muslim events have only two planes going down, one of them 21 years ago, the other one 44 years ago. And only the one 44 years ago was in the US.
So, is your point that Muslims make more successful terrorists, or what? Or that terrorism by Muslims is a more recent trend? Not sure what point you're trying to make by asking for more 'recent' examples. Just because it happened outside of your attention span doesn't make it any less pertinent.
So, can we PLEASE drop the racial/religious profiling, and just focus on the individuals involved, instead of blindly regurgitating hateful propoganda? Thanks.
Tell you what; if I was omnipotent I sure wouldn't be playing this crappy version of 'The Sims', just to mess with all the insignificant life-forms I'd created earlier. Do people honestly think that if God created us in his image, he'd be content to just tool around in the heavens because he couldn't find anything better to do?
I was right there with you until you mentioned Islam ; Which, by the way, is the problem with the current religiocentric political climate. Everyone is hell-bent on turning everything into an 'us vs. them' thing, and the rest of us who just want to live our lives in relative peace get caught in the middle.
Yeah, I can see it now, "Really honey, I'm only looking through these porn sites to find the sales department!"
"I'd rather my ISP limit my bit torrent downloads so my BF2 doesn't lag. Works for me."
But that's exactly the point. In your example, let's substitute the bit torrent users for a large corporation. Now, said corporation can go to your ISP, plop a wad of cash on the table, and throttle their bandwidth up, causing your BF2 to be completely screwed. Since you don't have the same deep pockets, you end up paying the same amount for your service that you had been, only the service is now degraded. Currently, ISPs are (AFAIK) restricted from doing this without giving up common carrier status. However, the legistature currently in front of Senate would remove these restrictions, and allow the service providers to play favorites, catering to the clients with the fattest wallets.