Data point: using axfr-get to download approximately 63,667 records from a host 16 hops away takes about nine seconds. The file 2.7MB in size. Most zones aren't that large, so the IXFR thing isn't a real problem.
Anyone remember that "three degrees" thing that Microsoft came out with several years ago? It used IPv6 and Teredo to work. I guess it was more like P2P for small groups, than really social networking, but it was targeted at young (late teens, early 20ish) kids.
Yes, and no. I have provided proof in previous posts of human rights abuses of which Hindus are victims in Pakistan. Sorry, your propaganda only works on liberal westerners, not on me.
And not one of the links substantiated any of the claims you made. Sorry, but no. Try again. Surely such abuses can't be that hard to find documented, if they actually occurred!
Hindus are regarded as "Kaffirs" and "Dhimmis" in Pakistan. Pakistani muslims regard all non-muslims as animals and deserving only death. Pakistanis love death. I wonder why they wail so much when our armed forces give it to them.
Wow, so much hate towards Pakistanis. I'd say you're a bigot, and openly proud of your bigotry.
>Having molten metal poured into ears is a Hindu punishment for a religious crime, not a Muslim one
No, my friend. It was invented by Tamurlang, a muslim. Hindus retaliate, never instigate. We are people, not beasts.
Obviously history is not your strongest point. Having molten tin or lead was the punishment meted out to lower caste Hindus who had simply overheard a Veda recitation. I am not making this up. You can read about it in Dharma Theertha's History of Hindu Imperialism.
South Asian muslims spread usury, bribery, Jihad, and how to reproduce by rape. Now they can't stand the fact that we are free, and they are not.
Obviously not free from racism or bigotry, as evidenced in your comments.
Changing the wikipedia article won't change the truth, only that Islamic terrorists are good at lies and propaganda...
You've lied about everything you've said about the treatment of Hindus. Either back it up, or accept that your post was just what you accuse others of: lies and propaganda. Every single thing: the bit about the armbands, the molten metal, the hijab thing.
Are they? For what crime? For just existing? That is an outright lie.
forced to wear armbands (like the Jewish people during the Nazi Ausrotten in Poland)
No, their passports list them as Hindu, just like Christians' passports list them as Christian and Muslims' passports identify them as Muslim. They are not forced to wear any identifying clothing, nor are other religious minorities.
Hindu women often get gang-raped and molten metal poured into their eyes and ears and buried alive for wearing makeup in public or for not following the Islamic 'hijab'.
1. Gang rape, as it occurs, affects more Muslim women than Hindus. 2. Having molten metal poured into ears is a Hindu punishment for a religious crime, not a Muslim one. 3. Why would Hindu women be punished at all for wearing makeup in public or not wearing Hijab when at least 50% of all Muslim women in Pakistan are guilty of the same?
These are state sanctioned atrocities advertised as "blasphemy laws".
Nope. Wrong again!
You're just another confused Muslim-hater. It's sad that you need to invent reasons to hate them, but hey, as long as you get people riled up against Muslims, it's all good, right?
Is there not five forms of Jihad, and are they not as follows?
I had never heard of the term "Jihad al-faasiqeen" until I read it in your post, and looked it up on google. I suppose that's a formal term for it, though I've never heard it described as such. Anyway, that means I can't answer your question fully. I did find a web page that describes the five in detail; perhaps you'll find that useful.
Please demonstrate how killing and violence are not, and have never been, valid means of carrying out all of the above, particularly the last three.
I can only say that violence is used for Jihad al-kuffaar. The rest are where violence is not logically applicable (the first two), or where historically non-violence has been used (Jihad al-munafiqeen, Jihad al-faasiqeen). For the hypocrites, you already have God's word, as described in the link I gave you: read 9:73-110 to see how hypocrites should be treated. In no place is violence mentioned. Crack open any impartial history of Muhammad's life, or that of his four immediate successors: they didn't use violence against hypocrites or the corrupt unless the latter gave them a reason to (like, sedition or treason). The (known) hypocrites of that time prayed at the same mosques as the other Muslims, and were not turned away.
As Muslims are supposed to emulate Muhammad's example when it comes to living their lives and dealing with other people (Muslims or otherwise), I'd say that's a pretty important demonstration, no?
And please to tell how so many Muslims around the world could have it so wrong that they want to see cartoonists put to death for simply offending them.
Please to tell? Hmm. I don't know how many Muslims want the cartoonists dead. Do you? I don't know anything about them: I'm not one of them, nor do I personally know anyone who has openly espoused the opinion that they should die. So, who are they?
This argument is a common tactic to assign "guilt by association" to the source, without even naming the specific phantom source, or putting even one example into "context". It is slanderous, presumptuous, and a very weak argument.
I can't name your source because I don't know where you got it from (why don't you name your source?). I just happen to have run across those verses on several pages, all with the same claim, that "Islam is evil" or "Islam is not peaceful". The same verses, the same translations of the verses -- it gets boring after a while. Put some original thought in your argument.
I noticed that you only put links, and not the entire body. This is yet another attempt at discrediting without the use of actual facts.
Linking to the translated verses is somehow different from copying and pasting them here? How? Are linked verses not factual, and the copied/pasted verses are? I notice that you didn't paste all the verses you listed here, either.
Let me summarize just how these verses appear to me, and you can correct me with your far more vast knowledge of the "real" context of these verses.
Your summary is a pretty loose interpretation of the verses ("beg", "by any means necessary", etc). Anyway, by quoting the two verses around the one you quoted alone, we've gone from "kill the disbelievers unless they convert" to "don't kill the ones you have a treaty with, kill the ones who won't submit, and if they are ignorant and ask for your protection, teach them your ways and let them leave in peace." Sounds slightly different to me.
I'll also add that the word used in those verses is mushrikeen, not kafireen. The result is obvious: your first quoted verses says "disbelievers" where it should've been "idolators". And, at the time of the revelation (more "context"), the "idolators" were Arabs who lived in Arabia, and also kept and worshipped the idols in the Kaabah, in Mecca.
That isn't to say the rest of the chapter doesn't have instructions on fighting non-Muslims (and how to go about that). Are you honestly unaware of the 1400 years of scholarly research into what the verses meant, or are you simply ignoring it?
ou want to see what hate speech is? How about you read oh, ANYTHING that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has to say about Israel? THAT's hate speech. Hate speech encourages violence, or dehumanization of some group of people.
And you see nothing at all on the delisted sites that dehumanizes Muslims, as a group? No calls to "Nuke Mecca" or anything like that?
In January 2003 she told the Dutch paper Trouw, "Muhammad is, seen by our Western standards, a pervert".
An odd thing to do, to compare an event of 1400 years ago (which might've been a cultural norm then) to today's societal norms. Western standards for marriage let older men marry girls as young as 12, less than a hundred years ago. Heck, the age of consent is still 13 in Spain.
I believe that she was intentionally inflammatory when talking about Islam. I don't doubt that she lived in a repressive society, and escaped that to come to the Netherlands. I just don't understand why she thinks that all Muslim women are treated the same in all Muslim societies, even minority ones in Europe.
Please, there 'religeon' is barbaric, and should have been left behind in the 20th century.
How so? Is Eastern Orthodox Christianity also an anachronism, something to be left behind (see: Balkans war)? Orthodox Judaism as well (women in Islam cover their hair, Orthodox Jews shave their heads and wear wigs)?
He's only alleged to have taken one young girl as a wife.
Why doesn't this make him a pedophile? Why is it hateful to suggest it? Line up any other big figure in politics or religion and show him or her having sex with a 12-year old and tell me they wouldn't be judged a pedophile.
Surely you'd rather compare an event of 1400 years ago with the cultural norms of that period? Let's try Jewish Law (which is still in effect, by the way).
Now ask the question: why do we forbid this judgement because a person was the founder of a religion? Why should he be immune from common sense?
I don't know about forbidding judgement, but I do know it makes no sense to judge his actions of almost 1500 years ago with today's norms (ignoring for the fact that the age of consent is 13 in Spain/Japan/other places).
It's not a "Linux people" thing. XFS, for example, is from SGI (but you probably knew that).
The main difference is, there is no fsck in XFS. None whatsoever. With ext3, or ufs2 with soft updates, you can still type "fsck/dev/whatever" on an unmounted filesystem, and it'll grind through it, but try to fsck an XFS filesystem, and nothing will happen. It's a no-op.
I've been noticing LiveJournal is really slow and it hangs a lot lately.
Are you a paid user? Paid users end up in a higher priority queue, so they get their pages a lot faster. For example, I just loaded my friends page, and this is in the comments near the top of the page:
LiveJournal ExpressLane: You received this page before 4 free users, saving approximately 1 seconds!
Slashdot Mirror
Data point: using axfr-get to download approximately 63,667 records from a host 16 hops away takes about nine seconds. The file 2.7MB in size. Most zones aren't that large, so the IXFR thing isn't a real problem.
Anyone remember that "three degrees" thing that Microsoft came out with several years ago? It used IPv6 and Teredo to work. I guess it was more like P2P for small groups, than really social networking, but it was targeted at young (late teens, early 20ish) kids.
Looks like it closed down in 2005.
Funny, I've been thinking of doing the same. P2P encrypted backups.
I give you... All My Data. Its distant cousin (Mnet) is still around, but sorta moribund.
It depends on how you subnet things. In a /24, yes, .0 and .255 are lost, but in a /23, you only lose one pair of .0 and .255; you can use the other two.
I wonder if he'll open them up to the general public now.
Yes, and no. I have provided proof in previous posts of human rights abuses of which Hindus are victims in Pakistan. Sorry, your propaganda only works on liberal westerners, not on me.
And not one of the links substantiated any of the claims you made. Sorry, but no. Try again. Surely such abuses can't be that hard to find documented, if they actually occurred!
Hindus are regarded as "Kaffirs" and "Dhimmis" in Pakistan. Pakistani muslims regard all non-muslims as animals and deserving only death. Pakistanis love death. I wonder why they wail so much when our armed forces give it to them.
Wow, so much hate towards Pakistanis. I'd say you're a bigot, and openly proud of your bigotry.
>Having molten metal poured into ears is a Hindu punishment for a religious crime, not a Muslim one
No, my friend. It was invented by Tamurlang, a muslim. Hindus retaliate, never instigate. We are people, not beasts.
Obviously history is not your strongest point. Having molten tin or lead was the punishment meted out to lower caste Hindus who had simply overheard a Veda recitation. I am not making this up. You can read about it in Dharma Theertha's History of Hindu Imperialism.
South Asian muslims spread usury, bribery, Jihad, and how to reproduce by rape. Now they can't stand the fact that we are free, and they are not.
Obviously not free from racism or bigotry, as evidenced in your comments.
Changing the wikipedia article won't change the truth, only that Islamic terrorists are good at lies and propaganda...
You've lied about everything you've said about the treatment of Hindus. Either back it up, or accept that your post was just what you accuse others of: lies and propaganda. Every single thing: the bit about the armbands, the molten metal, the hijab thing.
Ball's in your court.
They are publicly stoned to death
Are they? For what crime? For just existing? That is an outright lie.
forced to wear armbands (like the Jewish people during the Nazi Ausrotten in Poland)
No, their passports list them as Hindu, just like Christians' passports list them as Christian and Muslims' passports identify them as Muslim. They are not forced to wear any identifying clothing, nor are other religious minorities.
Hindu women often get gang-raped and molten metal poured into their eyes and ears and buried alive for wearing makeup in public or for not following the Islamic 'hijab'.
1. Gang rape, as it occurs, affects more Muslim women than Hindus. 2. Having molten metal poured into ears is a Hindu punishment for a religious crime, not a Muslim one. 3. Why would Hindu women be punished at all for wearing makeup in public or not wearing Hijab when at least 50% of all Muslim women in Pakistan are guilty of the same?
These are state sanctioned atrocities advertised as "blasphemy laws".
Nope. Wrong again!
You're just another confused Muslim-hater. It's sad that you need to invent reasons to hate them, but hey, as long as you get people riled up against Muslims, it's all good, right?
Very useful this connection will be since Pakistan implements a 700ms latency to all Internet connections so Paktel maintains a telecom monopoly.
700ms latency? I don't know where you get your news. Try pinging lg.nexlinx.net.pk; that's a machine on the ISP side of my DSL ISP.
Is there not five forms of Jihad, and are they not as follows?
I had never heard of the term "Jihad al-faasiqeen" until I read it in your post, and looked it up on google. I suppose that's a formal term for it, though I've never heard it described as such. Anyway, that means I can't answer your question fully. I did find a web page that describes the five in detail; perhaps you'll find that useful.
Please demonstrate how killing and violence are not, and have never been, valid means of carrying out all of the above, particularly the last three.
I can only say that violence is used for Jihad al-kuffaar. The rest are where violence is not logically applicable (the first two), or where historically non-violence has been used (Jihad al-munafiqeen, Jihad al-faasiqeen). For the hypocrites, you already have God's word, as described in the link I gave you: read 9:73-110 to see how hypocrites should be treated. In no place is violence mentioned. Crack open any impartial history of Muhammad's life, or that of his four immediate successors: they didn't use violence against hypocrites or the corrupt unless the latter gave them a reason to (like, sedition or treason). The (known) hypocrites of that time prayed at the same mosques as the other Muslims, and were not turned away.
As Muslims are supposed to emulate Muhammad's example when it comes to living their lives and dealing with other people (Muslims or otherwise), I'd say that's a pretty important demonstration, no?
And please to tell how so many Muslims around the world could have it so wrong that they want to see cartoonists put to death for simply offending them.
Please to tell? Hmm. I don't know how many Muslims want the cartoonists dead. Do you? I don't know anything about them: I'm not one of them, nor do I personally know anyone who has openly espoused the opinion that they should die. So, who are they?
This argument is a common tactic to assign "guilt by association" to the source, without even naming the specific phantom source, or putting even one example into "context". It is slanderous, presumptuous, and a very weak argument.
I can't name your source because I don't know where you got it from (why don't you name your source?). I just happen to have run across those verses on several pages, all with the same claim, that "Islam is evil" or "Islam is not peaceful". The same verses, the same translations of the verses -- it gets boring after a while. Put some original thought in your argument.
I noticed that you only put links, and not the entire body. This is yet another attempt at discrediting without the use of actual facts.
Linking to the translated verses is somehow different from copying and pasting them here? How? Are linked verses not factual, and the copied/pasted verses are? I notice that you didn't paste all the verses you listed here, either.
Let me summarize just how these verses appear to me, and you can correct me with your far more vast knowledge of the "real" context of these verses.
Your summary is a pretty loose interpretation of the verses ("beg", "by any means necessary", etc). Anyway, by quoting the two verses around the one you quoted alone, we've gone from "kill the disbelievers unless they convert" to "don't kill the ones you have a treaty with, kill the ones who won't submit, and if they are ignorant and ask for your protection, teach them your ways and let them leave in peace." Sounds slightly different to me.
I'll also add that the word used in those verses is mushrikeen, not kafireen. The result is obvious: your first quoted verses says "disbelievers" where it should've been "idolators". And, at the time of the revelation (more "context"), the "idolators" were Arabs who lived in Arabia, and also kept and worshipped the idols in the Kaabah, in Mecca.
That isn't to say the rest of the chapter doesn't have instructions on fighting non-Muslims (and how to go about that). Are you honestly unaware of the 1400 years of scholarly research into what the verses meant, or are you simply ignoring it?
ou want to see what hate speech is? How about you read oh, ANYTHING that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has to say about Israel? THAT's hate speech. Hate speech encourages violence, or dehumanization of some group of people.
And you see nothing at all on the delisted sites that dehumanizes Muslims, as a group? No calls to "Nuke Mecca" or anything like that?
Nine years old would still have been excessive even then.
There's conflicting evidence whether she was actually nine. But, compared to old Jewish law, it's not excessive at all.
In January 2003 she told the Dutch paper Trouw, "Muhammad is, seen by our Western standards, a pervert".
An odd thing to do, to compare an event of 1400 years ago (which might've been a cultural norm then) to today's societal norms. Western standards for marriage let older men marry girls as young as 12, less than a hundred years ago. Heck, the age of consent is still 13 in Spain.
I believe that she was intentionally inflammatory when talking about Islam. I don't doubt that she lived in a repressive society, and escaped that to come to the Netherlands. I just don't understand why she thinks that all Muslim women are treated the same in all Muslim societies, even minority ones in Europe.
Please, there 'religeon' is barbaric, and should have been left behind in the 20th century.
How so? Is Eastern Orthodox Christianity also an anachronism, something to be left behind (see: Balkans war)? Orthodox Judaism as well (women in Islam cover their hair, Orthodox Jews shave their heads and wear wigs)?
Yes, Mohammed took very young girls as wives
He's only alleged to have taken one young girl as a wife.
Why doesn't this make him a pedophile? Why is it hateful to suggest it? Line up any other big figure in politics or religion and show him or her having sex with a 12-year old and tell me they wouldn't be judged a pedophile.
Surely you'd rather compare an event of 1400 years ago with the cultural norms of that period? Let's try Jewish Law (which is still in effect, by the way).
Now ask the question: why do we forbid this judgement because a person was the founder of a religion? Why should he be immune from common sense?
I don't know about forbidding judgement, but I do know it makes no sense to judge his actions of almost 1500 years ago with today's norms (ignoring for the fact that the age of consent is 13 in Spain/Japan/other places).
Because, you know, the only Muslims in Amsterdam are immigrants.
If I had a dollar for every time I came across someone pointing at 9:5 without quoting 9:4 or 9:6, I'd be a rich man.
Why are you quoting verses out of context?
"Also the problem isn't Islam itself read the Quran yourself before passing judgement on it. "
I have.
But you didn't come up with that list, did you? There are hundreds of sites out there quoting those exact verses, all of them quoting out of context.
Sure, and I've never needed it despite all the crashes my main desktop has had (flaky power).
I've used XFS for about four years now, on three systems.
The good news is, you don't need to install plan 9 to use venti. You can do it with plan9port on a Linux/FreeBSD/Mac OS X/etc box today.
It's not a "Linux people" thing. XFS, for example, is from SGI (but you probably knew that).
/dev/whatever" on an unmounted filesystem, and it'll grind through it, but try to fsck an XFS filesystem, and nothing will happen. It's a no-op.
The main difference is, there is no fsck in XFS. None whatsoever. With ext3, or ufs2 with soft updates, you can still type "fsck
I've been noticing LiveJournal is really slow and it hangs a lot lately.
Are you a paid user? Paid users end up in a higher priority queue, so they get their pages a lot faster. For example, I just loaded my friends page, and this is in the comments near the top of the page:
LiveJournal ExpressLane: You received this page before 4 free users, saving approximately 1 seconds!
What's the battery life of the Macbook Pro? I can't find that info on Apple's site.
Applescript is the hook you want.
It's only free for a year...