Maybe they were trying to figure out how to defend Iraq against shells fired at them in the Iran-Iraq war? I see you went immediatly for the most pessimistic of theories
...or maybe they just want to work in a hospital or build one.
Why so quick to assume the sinister? Last century there was a fuss about the fact that a lot of butchers in America were Jewish; was it so that they would be trained in slaughtering people? Just as ridiculous.
Don't bash "religion" when you mean Christianity. Not every religion forces dogmas on people.
I doubt you've actually read anything of the Quran (and saying you read 10 verses from a chain letter does not count). Islam actually makes it a requirement to learn to read (compare that with Christianity, where the Bible wasn't in the vernacular for centuries). Islam created the first constitution (in Medina) and guaranteed freedom of religion (in the Charter of Principles) so your accusations just don't stand up.
If you want to rail against right-wingers, or dictatorships (ie the un-islamic Saudi royalty) then go ahead. Just don't blithely overgeneralize about all religion or try to grossly oversimplify and dismiss a Billion-plus follower faith.
First of all no muslim is required to obey any contract with a infidel. Infidel, if you are not a muslim you are in infidel. This contract rule applies even to lying to you. A muslim can lie to you for any reason, tell you anything, for any reason.
Islam started as a moon cult.
Do you have any evidence for that? No, because it doesn't exist. It's simply not part of islam, its a myth that never was completely killed. The Quran even says to be fair and just to everyone, not just other Muslims. The prophet Muhammad (pbuh) did business deals with the Jewish tribes and never broke his word to them, ergo you are following the Sunnah (his example) correctly if you do the same.
Saying that Muslims secretly band together to lie to you is nothing more than a modern anti-semitism; the same story was told about the Jews (they wanted to rule the world, they lie to the gentiles, etc). Give it a rest. Lying is a sin according to Muslims.
That's not true, its a myth fomented by Christian missionaries.
Allah is the Arabic word for God. "Al-Lah" means The God. The Arabs at the time believed that Allah created the universe, then had daughters and other gods to intercede for Him. If you read islamic history, you'll see that the polytheists already believed in God, but also in others as well.
As for the "moon" hoax, that never existed. The Quran specifically says not to worship the sun or the moon, but to the One God that made all of creation. The crescent is a pre-islamic symbol, and made popular by the Ottoman empire. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) never used the crescent, instead using flags that said the Kalimah ("No god but God") writen on them.
Allah is how you say God in Arabic. Even the Arab Christians and Jews of the time never disputed that Allah was the real God. The Arabic translation of the Bible uses "Allah" as it is how you say God. The Pope and other religious leaders of Christianity and Judaism and Islam even agree on this.
The Quran refers to Christians and Jews as "Ahl-ul-kitaab" (people of the Book) meaning they worship the same God. The ayah you referred to (9:73) is referring to the "kuffar," those who disbelieve. Scholars say that is referring to the polytheists of Mecca, so it is not discussing the Christians or Jews (who are referred to by name in the Quran).
Look at Quran 5:83 "And you will find that the closest people in friendship to the believers are those who say, "We are Christian." This is because they have priests and monks among them, and they are not arrogant."
As for your claim that you won't find this in other religions, are you blind? Nazis quoted the New Testament to say that the Jewish people accepted blame for trying to kill Jesus (peace be upon him). Hindu extremists killed masses of Muslims (ever heard of the Gujurat massacre?) and attack Christians in India. Buddhists in Burma rioted in 2002 and killed minority Muslims. The Japanese persecuted and executed Christians from the 1500's to last century. The list goes on. In fact, Islam is the only religion that says Christians have some validity in their worship of God. In an authentic Islamic state, money from the government is supposed to go to the construction and upkeep of churches and synagogues for the citizens of their respective faiths. It's the only religion I know to acknowlegde that Christians worship the same God, otherwise there would be a commandment to stamp out the other religions; and that just isn't found in the Quran.
For a long time, people felt slavery was moral, except religious groups disagreed. For a long time, people felt women didn't deserve equal rights like voting, but some religious groups disagreed way before it was fashionable.
In history, Religion in general helps morals and rights that the secularists just didn't attend to yet.
Why are you indicting the religion? These newspapers self-edited and removed the comic without anyone asking. Muslims were somewhat surprisied to hear about this after the fact.
If you're going to rehash your arguements for the Danish cartoons uproar, I suppose you don't think the fact that Denmark had soldiers in Iraq while the cartoons were circulating had ANYTHING to do with it? It was a catalyst for anger over the war, and the double-standards the Danish were maintaining, censoring anti-Semitic speech (rightly so I might add) but endorsing anti-Muslim speech. Yes, the center-right Danish PM pretty much agreed with the content, making the issue worse.
That's not honest to say that Christians are peaceful and Muslims are not. Christians blow stuff up too and vandalize and are just as intolerant etc.
The difference is how they're percieved in America. You have Christian neighbors, you see nice Christians on TV, Americans have a high opinion of Christians and good experiences and exposure to them. Muslims, in American context, are seen as the Other, the violent people on TV. You can show a violent christian on TV, but the stereotype won't change the same way it seems to change for Muslims, because Americans will think of themselves as Christian, their relatives and neighbors etc. In contrast, Americans think of Afghanistan or 24 when they think of Muslims.
How is this news? If anything, it's the sumbitter trying to make a big deal over a newspaper declining to run a tasteless comic.
If the same newspapers refused to run a comic strip that made fun of Jews, would slashdot also post the mirror on the front page? Is there some sort of implcit or subconscious bigotry at work?
Interesting stuff, I hadn't heard the patriarchs stuff before.
I'm not the person to ask about your last question, since I didn't bring that question up. The best response I can think is that Israel didn't exist as a state until the 1940's, under a mess of conflicting legal agreements by the British, so they question that.
It is the historic homeland of the Jewish people. People don't get up and choose a different place because their home is too "strategic". I was pointing out that Israel gets prominence in the press because of its location, I never quibbled on why it was chosen and I didn't accuse you of anything.
...and the Jews are in control, which means that everybody gets access to their holy sites. The tomb of the Patriarchs, a holy site to all 3 faiths, is closed to non-Jews. I'm afraid your assertion is incorrect.
I'm happy that Israel has so much going for it, but there's still room for criticism. They ignore UN resolutions so much that other countries including Saddam's felt it was OK to do the same. Israel's press freedom index is kinda far down the list. At the same time, their unilateral strategies and border disputes, and (arguably) aggression is making a bad example. Turkey is threatening to invade Kurdistan, citing the reasons Israel gave with its Lebanon war. I praise Israel for a lot, and criticize it for much as well.
As Bill O'Reilly says, you cant deflect the blame by pointing out others did it.
Israel is a big deal because it's in a strategic area and destabilizing the region, Arab governments deflect criticism by pointing to them, it's a Holy site for Muslims and Christians and Jews, Israel is being a bad role model to the developing world, etc.
$500, as Steve Jobs explained it, is the price a person pays when they buy an iPod nano, and a cell phone. According to research, a very high percentage of iPod owners also own phones. They priced it at the price a person would pay for both separately, and didn't even charge more for the additional features like widescreen, the touch controls, the Web browser or the Wifi.
According to Pentagon investigations after the Abu Ghraib scandal, officials cited the fact that interrogation tactics as well as personnel were moved to Abu Ghraib after their success in "breaking" detainees at Guantanamo. More focus was paid to Guantanamo since then, but the military has stonewalled everyone, even the Red Cross.
Even if you want to cast doubt on his story, how about Khalid El-Masri? The guy who was detained in Macedonia for having a the same name as a terrorist, kidnapped using "extraordinary rendition," held for months and then dumped on a desolate road in Albania (too embarrasing to release him with an apology or any acknowledgement of their mistake).
This debacle resulted in a lawsuit and a costly souring of German-US relations. He was cleared of all charges and by all accounts it was a mistake. Are you going to defend that mistake too? This wasn't some "No-fly" list inconvenience of a few hours, this involved torture and violations of international extradition laws.
Internment of the Japanese during World War II. First they rounded up all the non-citizen immigrants, then went and arrested thousands of Japanese-American citizens and their children (also citizens). Once they justify rounding up all non-citizens of a specific group (Arabs, Mecixans, etc) then that justification can be used to minority citizens too, in the name of National Security. When the government aims at noncitizens it often hits citizens as well, particularly when it encourages or engages in ethnic profiling, since one cannot tell without investigation whether a person who "looks Arab" or "looks Mexican" is a citizen or a foreign national.
American citizens Yaser Hamdi and Jose Padilla have been declared "enemy combatants" as well. (Hamdi is alleged, but has not been proven, to have fought for the enemy abroad; Padilla is alleged, but has not been proven, to have conspired on U.S. soil to aid terrorists in procuring a "dirty bomb.") As a result, both men were held, in military prisons. It took years to charge either with a crime, and only did so for Padilla after a large public outcry. Neither citizen was afforded access to a lawyer for years after their arrest. And when Padilla, a U.S. citizen finally goes on trial, the government may prosecute them based on "secret evidence - "proof" that they will never have the opportunity to challenge because they won't know what it is. So much for limiting civil rights infringements to aliens alone.
The Fifth Amendment says, in relevant part, "no person shall . . . be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Person, not citizen.
I suggest reading "Enemy Aliens" by legal expert David Cole. He has a good grasp of US legal history and how it applies to current events.
Yes, of course, and living in UK they had no reason to arrest him for years, but one day, with a battery charger in his luggage, then BAM they need to send him to Guantanamo immediately.
This whole thing, years of painful separation and allegations of mistreatment, could have been avoided if he was treated according to international standards and rule of law.
Legally speaking, stuff that happens to "non-citizens" often eventually winds its way into being applied to "citizens."
Also, read the constitution, it does not distinguish between citizens and non-citizens. Habeus corpus is not a citizen-only right, but for anyone arrested.
"Presumed" innocent until proven guilty.
How about if he was accused of starting fires? What do you do with someone accused of something? That's why judges have the power of bail.
I'd still rather be held in gitmo than be held in a WWII German or USSR POW camp Under the Geneva conventions, you are guaranteed food, shelter, and not to be tortured. The inmates of Guantanamo have none of the above. If someone tortures a POW, they can go to jail for war crimes. In Guantanamo, they'd probably get a commendation or job security.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe they were trying to figure out how to defend Iraq against shells fired at them in the Iran-Iraq war? I see you went immediatly for the most pessimistic of theories
...or maybe they just want to work in a hospital or build one.
Why so quick to assume the sinister? Last century there was a fuss about the fact that a lot of butchers in America were Jewish; was it so that they would be trained in slaughtering people? Just as ridiculous.
Don't bash "religion" when you mean Christianity. Not every religion forces dogmas on people.
I doubt you've actually read anything of the Quran (and saying you read 10 verses from a chain letter does not count). Islam actually makes it a requirement to learn to read (compare that with Christianity, where the Bible wasn't in the vernacular for centuries). Islam created the first constitution (in Medina) and guaranteed freedom of religion (in the Charter of Principles) so your accusations just don't stand up.
If you want to rail against right-wingers, or dictatorships (ie the un-islamic Saudi royalty) then go ahead. Just don't blithely overgeneralize about all religion or try to grossly oversimplify and dismiss a Billion-plus follower faith.
First of all no muslim is required to obey any contract with a infidel. Infidel, if you are not a muslim you are in infidel. This contract rule applies even to lying to you. A muslim can lie to you for any reason, tell you anything, for any reason.
Do you have any evidence for that? No, because it doesn't exist. It's simply not part of islam, its a myth that never was completely killed. The Quran even says to be fair and just to everyone, not just other Muslims. The prophet Muhammad (pbuh) did business deals with the Jewish tribes and never broke his word to them, ergo you are following the Sunnah (his example) correctly if you do the same.Islam started as a moon cult.
Saying that Muslims secretly band together to lie to you is nothing more than a modern anti-semitism; the same story was told about the Jews (they wanted to rule the world, they lie to the gentiles, etc). Give it a rest. Lying is a sin according to Muslims.
That's not true, its a myth fomented by Christian missionaries.
Allah is the Arabic word for God. "Al-Lah" means The God. The Arabs at the time believed that Allah created the universe, then had daughters and other gods to intercede for Him. If you read islamic history, you'll see that the polytheists already believed in God, but also in others as well.
As for the "moon" hoax, that never existed. The Quran specifically says not to worship the sun or the moon, but to the One God that made all of creation. The crescent is a pre-islamic symbol, and made popular by the Ottoman empire. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) never used the crescent, instead using flags that said the Kalimah ("No god but God") writen on them.
Allah is how you say God in Arabic. Even the Arab Christians and Jews of the time never disputed that Allah was the real God. The Arabic translation of the Bible uses "Allah" as it is how you say God. The Pope and other religious leaders of Christianity and Judaism and Islam even agree on this.
It's not aimed at screwing linux users, it's aimed at making sure Real and WMP can't write to the device. Both companies have tried.
Completely incorrect.
The Quran refers to Christians and Jews as "Ahl-ul-kitaab" (people of the Book) meaning they worship the same God. The ayah you referred to (9:73) is referring to the "kuffar," those who disbelieve. Scholars say that is referring to the polytheists of Mecca, so it is not discussing the Christians or Jews (who are referred to by name in the Quran).
Look at Quran 5:83 "And you will find that the closest people in friendship to the believers are those who say, "We are Christian." This is because they have priests and monks among them, and they are not arrogant."
As for your claim that you won't find this in other religions, are you blind? Nazis quoted the New Testament to say that the Jewish people accepted blame for trying to kill Jesus (peace be upon him). Hindu extremists killed masses of Muslims (ever heard of the Gujurat massacre?) and attack Christians in India. Buddhists in Burma rioted in 2002 and killed minority Muslims. The Japanese persecuted and executed Christians from the 1500's to last century. The list goes on. In fact, Islam is the only religion that says Christians have some validity in their worship of God. In an authentic Islamic state, money from the government is supposed to go to the construction and upkeep of churches and synagogues for the citizens of their respective faiths. It's the only religion I know to acknowlegde that Christians worship the same God, otherwise there would be a commandment to stamp out the other religions; and that just isn't found in the Quran.
For a long time, people felt slavery was moral, except religious groups disagreed.
For a long time, people felt women didn't deserve equal rights like voting, but some religious groups disagreed way before it was fashionable.
In history, Religion in general helps morals and rights that the secularists just didn't attend to yet.
If you can't actually defend your side with facts, it's not valid. Ad insultium attacks are not a real defense. The AC fails it.
Why are you indicting the religion? These newspapers self-edited and removed the comic without anyone asking. Muslims were somewhat surprisied to hear about this after the fact.
If you're going to rehash your arguements for the Danish cartoons uproar, I suppose you don't think the fact that Denmark had soldiers in Iraq while the cartoons were circulating had ANYTHING to do with it? It was a catalyst for anger over the war, and the double-standards the Danish were maintaining, censoring anti-Semitic speech (rightly so I might add) but endorsing anti-Muslim speech. Yes, the center-right Danish PM pretty much agreed with the content, making the issue worse.
That's not honest to say that Christians are peaceful and Muslims are not. Christians blow stuff up too and vandalize and are just as intolerant etc.
The difference is how they're percieved in America. You have Christian neighbors, you see nice Christians on TV, Americans have a high opinion of Christians and good experiences and exposure to them. Muslims, in American context, are seen as the Other, the violent people on TV. You can show a violent christian on TV, but the stereotype won't change the same way it seems to change for Muslims, because Americans will think of themselves as Christian, their relatives and neighbors etc. In contrast, Americans think of Afghanistan or 24 when they think of Muslims.
How is this news? If anything, it's the sumbitter trying to make a big deal over a newspaper declining to run a tasteless comic.
If the same newspapers refused to run a comic strip that made fun of Jews, would slashdot also post the mirror on the front page? Is there some sort of implcit or subconscious bigotry at work?
Ah! She blinded me with science!
Bill O'Reilly to this day is boycotting France, and I don't hear of an outcry.
Interesting stuff, I hadn't heard the patriarchs stuff before.
I'm not the person to ask about your last question, since I didn't bring that question up. The best response I can think is that Israel didn't exist as a state until the 1940's, under a mess of conflicting legal agreements by the British, so they question that.
...and the Jews are in control, which means that everybody gets access to their holy sites. The tomb of the Patriarchs, a holy site to all 3 faiths, is closed to non-Jews. I'm afraid your assertion is incorrect.I'm happy that Israel has so much going for it, but there's still room for criticism. They ignore UN resolutions so much that other countries including Saddam's felt it was OK to do the same. Israel's press freedom index is kinda far down the list. At the same time, their unilateral strategies and border disputes, and (arguably) aggression is making a bad example. Turkey is threatening to invade Kurdistan, citing the reasons Israel gave with its Lebanon war. I praise Israel for a lot, and criticize it for much as well.
As Bill O'Reilly says, you cant deflect the blame by pointing out others did it.
Israel is a big deal because it's in a strategic area and destabilizing the region, Arab governments deflect criticism by pointing to them, it's a Holy site for Muslims and Christians and Jews, Israel is being a bad role model to the developing world, etc.
$500, as Steve Jobs explained it, is the price a person pays when they buy an iPod nano, and a cell phone. According to research, a very high percentage of iPod owners also own phones. They priced it at the price a person would pay for both separately, and didn't even charge more for the additional features like widescreen, the touch controls, the Web browser or the Wifi.
According to Pentagon investigations after the Abu Ghraib scandal, officials cited the fact that interrogation tactics as well as personnel were moved to Abu Ghraib after their success in "breaking" detainees at Guantanamo. More focus was paid to Guantanamo since then, but the military has stonewalled everyone, even the Red Cross.
May I suggest:
The Road to Guantanamo
Tipton Three Complained of Beatings
Washington Post: FBI Agents Allege Abuse of Detainees at Guantanamo Bay and FBI Files Detail Guantanamo torture tactics
Red Cross Finds Detainee Abuse in Guantánamo
Even if you want to cast doubt on his story, how about Khalid El-Masri? The guy who was detained in Macedonia for having a the same name as a terrorist, kidnapped using "extraordinary rendition," held for months and then dumped on a desolate road in Albania (too embarrasing to release him with an apology or any acknowledgement of their mistake).
This debacle resulted in a lawsuit and a costly souring of German-US relations. He was cleared of all charges and by all accounts it was a mistake. Are you going to defend that mistake too? This wasn't some "No-fly" list inconvenience of a few hours, this involved torture and violations of international extradition laws.
Internment of the Japanese during World War II. First they rounded up all the non-citizen immigrants, then went and arrested thousands of Japanese-American citizens and their children (also citizens). Once they justify rounding up all non-citizens of a specific group (Arabs, Mecixans, etc) then that justification can be used to minority citizens too, in the name of National Security. When the government aims at noncitizens it often hits citizens as well, particularly when it encourages or engages in ethnic profiling, since one cannot tell without investigation whether a person who "looks Arab" or "looks Mexican" is a citizen or a foreign national.
American citizens Yaser Hamdi and Jose Padilla have been declared "enemy combatants" as well. (Hamdi is alleged, but has not been proven, to have fought for the enemy abroad; Padilla is alleged, but has not been proven, to have conspired on U.S. soil to aid terrorists in procuring a "dirty bomb.") As a result, both men were held, in military prisons. It took years to charge either with a crime, and only did so for Padilla after a large public outcry. Neither citizen was afforded access to a lawyer for years after their arrest. And when Padilla, a U.S. citizen finally goes on trial, the government may prosecute them based on "secret evidence - "proof" that they will never have the opportunity to challenge because they won't know what it is. So much for limiting civil rights infringements to aliens alone.
The Fifth Amendment says, in relevant part, "no person shall . . . be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Person, not citizen.
I suggest reading "Enemy Aliens" by legal expert David Cole. He has a good grasp of US legal history and how it applies to current events.
Yes, of course, and living in UK they had no reason to arrest him for years, but one day, with a battery charger in his luggage, then BAM they need to send him to Guantanamo immediately.
This whole thing, years of painful separation and allegations of mistreatment, could have been avoided if he was treated according to international standards and rule of law.
Legally speaking, stuff that happens to "non-citizens" often eventually winds its way into being applied to "citizens."
Also, read the constitution, it does not distinguish between citizens and non-citizens. Habeus corpus is not a citizen-only right, but for anyone arrested.