So is there a population decline even in countries that are notorious for population increases through high birthrates? Like China, India, the Muslim world, Africa, et al?
How the fuck do you or anyone else know that the people in question are okay? To know they are safe, one would have to do a background check on them, and in case of these 7 countries, it would mean having to talk to their governments to find out more about what they did while they lived there. And that's where the crux is. Of these 7 countries, Libya, Somalia and Yemen have no functioning government, Iraq and Syria have governments that do not control huge portions of their territory, so it's impossible for the Assad regime for instance (even if we had diplomatic relations w/ them) to tell us whether someone from Raqqa was a part of ISIS or not. Iran is a downright hostile country, so it would make about as much sense to trust them to tell us which of their citizens are okay and which ones would be terrorists (although I suspect Obama would have taken them on their word), and Sudan is listed as a state sponsor of terrorism.
First of all, the claim by a lot of Leftists, including the Seattle judge, that no terror incidents have happened from the countries in Trump's list is downright false, and it didn't help that the lawyer defending the EO had no clue. But the Ohio State Attack was done by a Somalian. The stabbings in Minneapolis a few months back (at the same time as the trash bombs in NY and NJ) were also done by Somalis. There had been Yemenis in the plots in Ft Hood or Ft Dix. Not including Syria or Iraq, both of where ISIS is active, would have been insane. Anyway, bottom line - you people are wrong in claiming that there have been no attacks from these 7 countries.
The Pulse nightclub shooter was 'American' as an accident of birth. Not only was his father deeply connected to Afghanistan - to the extent of claiming to be its rightful president(!): Omar Mateen himself made trips to Quetta, Pakistan, which is a place one only goes to meet up w/ Taliban people. It's not the same as Trump's 'Mexican judge': that judge was doing his job according to the constitution, and did nothing that flies in the face of US law. That's not the same as Omar Mateen, who not only retained his deep Afghan connections, but also used them to coordinate w/ them. So yeah, he's a US citizen in the same way that Yaser Esam Hamdi was a US citizen: born in the US, but happy to engage in treasonous activities.
Not just that, if someone from one of these countries who's let in shoots up a mall or any place in the US, which is a soft target, will the GP's French colleagues accept responsibility for what happened? Europeans or other non Americans have no business telling the US what its immigration policy should be, any more than they should tell the US whether Common Core ought to be retained.
Iran was also where the Chappell Hill shooter, Mahmoud Taheriazar, who killed a number of students there, was from. Normally, Iran would have to vet anyone that the US accepts, except that Iran is a theocratic terror regime, and so that would assume that Teheran would allow into the US Iranians who are genuinely unhappy w/ them, while blocking any Jihadists. There is no rational basis for believing that to be the case
What was an acceptable level of casualties in the 19th century is no longer acceptable today, Especially when wars are fought less on battlefields and more by infiltration of terrorists who then do what they can to take out as many people possible
It's not like the people protesting this ban would have been for it had it included Pakistan, Afghanistan (where that Pulse night club attacker was really from), Saudi Arabia or Emirates. So let's not use that straw man
Since the president doesn't have jurisdiction over Canada, it's up to Ottawa to decide what works there. But in the US, there haven't been anywhere near the number of anti Muslim terror attacks as there have been US terror attacks
Person opposing a ban on Muslims entering this country cites a president who ordered the internment of citizens based on their ethnicity - not even their religion
THIS!!! Absolutely this!!! Also, if these countries are so vital to the companies in question, why doesn't Amazon open an office in Benghazi? Why doesn't Microsoft open an office in Aden? Why doesn't Google open an office in Baghdad? If people from all these countries are so safe that these companies consider it worth risking American lives for them, then why don't these companies open up branches in these countries, so that those people can contribute their skills, and also be near their families (not talking about the ones who have families here)
The word "Mecca" in English has come to be used to refer to any place that draws large numbers of people. That's what the GP was referring to, not the fact that those places are all within a certain radius of Mecca
I'm sure the people who did not bother about terrorism, like the ones killed at a Christmas party in San Bernardino or the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, are proud that they were not pathetic cowards
If you noticed, Intel is not in the above list. In fact, during the elections, Brian Krzanich once planned to host a rally of some sort for Trump, but canned it b'cos of the tolerant shaming by Libs across the board. Intel probably is the one company left that still invests heavily in their own R&D and Quality, and for that, they dip directly into the Universities and pluck students from there
I have a *really* hard time believing these companies have such a large part of their workforce that they depend on daily coming in and out of Syria, Iran, etc....
I never knew those were the tech Mecca of the world....
Precisely what struck me when these companies filed suit
if you are legal to live in the US. stay here. if not. get a clue or get deported. this is not rocket science. there are some people that the US citizen is simply not comfortable with and this is why they voted for trump.
The lucky thing for these companies is that by playing to the gallery of people in the major cities, like Silicon Valley, Seattle, New York, et al, they are hip and have nothing to lose by pretending that they know what is or ain't constitutional. After all, when there is a Jihadist attack anywhere, like in Orlando or San Bernardino, they're not the ones who will be questioned about 'Why didn't we catch this', so it's easy for the likes of Cook or Brin to bellyache about this ban.
/. moderation has gone to shit, which is why your post, as well as anyone who agrees w/ you, is and will be modded down.
Conferences about 'hip new things' are a window into what could come next. I recall visiting Bluetooth conferences when that spec was first out, so that our company could sell its flash into Bluetooth modules. Today, you have Bluetooth in laptops, phones, cars, tablets and a wide variety of products. And that'll escalate too, as IoT picks up.
'Insightful' for dragging the president into a topic that has nothing remotely to do w/ him. That's how/. moderation works these days
If you are at such a conference and are a nerd, a good way to start is to talk to someone at a booth about their product/company, then about your product/company, and then let the conversation escalate to other related topics, so that they get to know you. In the event they see an opening where your experience matches the req, that person gets to recommend you.
A really moronic assertion. One can work while travelling and address any hot items. The idea that they should not make the trip even if it's needed is inane
I've attended conferences - CES, ESD and JEDEC. In the case of JEDEC, I had to go w/ my company's proposal and present it to the committee. The agreements are usually made in teleconferences in advance, so the conference is just a way of formally endorsing things that have already been voted on. This was in Toronto, so I did a bunch of work on my laptop during the flight - didn't need internet there - and in the hotel when I wasn't attending the seminars. Had I not gone, the agreements would have gone on w/o us, and our proposal wouldn't have been endorsed as a standard
The other conferences I've been to involved manning the booth. Usually, if they were in town, it simply meant rotating duties w/ one's colleagues
Slashdot Mirror
Where does he stand on Muslim immigration? Same as Hollande, or more similar to Le Pen?
Yeah, somehow busts the myth that Republicans are against privacy and for an intrusive law enforcement all in the name of security
So is there a population decline even in countries that are notorious for population increases through high birthrates? Like China, India, the Muslim world, Africa, et al?
How the fuck do you or anyone else know that the people in question are okay? To know they are safe, one would have to do a background check on them, and in case of these 7 countries, it would mean having to talk to their governments to find out more about what they did while they lived there. And that's where the crux is. Of these 7 countries, Libya, Somalia and Yemen have no functioning government, Iraq and Syria have governments that do not control huge portions of their territory, so it's impossible for the Assad regime for instance (even if we had diplomatic relations w/ them) to tell us whether someone from Raqqa was a part of ISIS or not. Iran is a downright hostile country, so it would make about as much sense to trust them to tell us which of their citizens are okay and which ones would be terrorists (although I suspect Obama would have taken them on their word), and Sudan is listed as a state sponsor of terrorism.
First of all, the claim by a lot of Leftists, including the Seattle judge, that no terror incidents have happened from the countries in Trump's list is downright false, and it didn't help that the lawyer defending the EO had no clue. But the Ohio State Attack was done by a Somalian. The stabbings in Minneapolis a few months back (at the same time as the trash bombs in NY and NJ) were also done by Somalis. There had been Yemenis in the plots in Ft Hood or Ft Dix. Not including Syria or Iraq, both of where ISIS is active, would have been insane. Anyway, bottom line - you people are wrong in claiming that there have been no attacks from these 7 countries.
The Pulse nightclub shooter was 'American' as an accident of birth. Not only was his father deeply connected to Afghanistan - to the extent of claiming to be its rightful president(!): Omar Mateen himself made trips to Quetta, Pakistan, which is a place one only goes to meet up w/ Taliban people. It's not the same as Trump's 'Mexican judge': that judge was doing his job according to the constitution, and did nothing that flies in the face of US law. That's not the same as Omar Mateen, who not only retained his deep Afghan connections, but also used them to coordinate w/ them. So yeah, he's a US citizen in the same way that Yaser Esam Hamdi was a US citizen: born in the US, but happy to engage in treasonous activities.
But we'll have software that can write software, which will make even this redundant. I can't wait for the day when NOBODY has a job
I'm crying all the tears for those rich wall street investors who will get outsourced. Really, I am.
You beat me to this
Not just that, if someone from one of these countries who's let in shoots up a mall or any place in the US, which is a soft target, will the GP's French colleagues accept responsibility for what happened? Europeans or other non Americans have no business telling the US what its immigration policy should be, any more than they should tell the US whether Common Core ought to be retained.
Iran was also where the Chappell Hill shooter, Mahmoud Taheriazar, who killed a number of students there, was from. Normally, Iran would have to vet anyone that the US accepts, except that Iran is a theocratic terror regime, and so that would assume that Teheran would allow into the US Iranians who are genuinely unhappy w/ them, while blocking any Jihadists. There is no rational basis for believing that to be the case
No he doesn't. What does he have in Chad, Afghanistan, Djibouti or Tajikistan, to pick just a few examples from the above list?
What was an acceptable level of casualties in the 19th century is no longer acceptable today, Especially when wars are fought less on battlefields and more by infiltration of terrorists who then do what they can to take out as many people possible
It's not like the people protesting this ban would have been for it had it included Pakistan, Afghanistan (where that Pulse night club attacker was really from), Saudi Arabia or Emirates. So let's not use that straw man
Since the president doesn't have jurisdiction over Canada, it's up to Ottawa to decide what works there. But in the US, there haven't been anywhere near the number of anti Muslim terror attacks as there have been US terror attacks
Person opposing a ban on Muslims entering this country cites a president who ordered the internment of citizens based on their ethnicity - not even their religion
THIS!!! Absolutely this!!! Also, if these countries are so vital to the companies in question, why doesn't Amazon open an office in Benghazi? Why doesn't Microsoft open an office in Aden? Why doesn't Google open an office in Baghdad? If people from all these countries are so safe that these companies consider it worth risking American lives for them, then why don't these companies open up branches in these countries, so that those people can contribute their skills, and also be near their families (not talking about the ones who have families here)
Most of those people would have become European citizens in that case, and would not have been affected by that ban
The word "Mecca" in English has come to be used to refer to any place that draws large numbers of people. That's what the GP was referring to, not the fact that those places are all within a certain radius of Mecca
I'm sure the people who did not bother about terrorism, like the ones killed at a Christmas party in San Bernardino or the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, are proud that they were not pathetic cowards
If you noticed, Intel is not in the above list. In fact, during the elections, Brian Krzanich once planned to host a rally of some sort for Trump, but canned it b'cos of the tolerant shaming by Libs across the board. Intel probably is the one company left that still invests heavily in their own R&D and Quality, and for that, they dip directly into the Universities and pluck students from there
I have a *really* hard time believing these companies have such a large part of their workforce that they depend on daily coming in and out of Syria, Iran, etc....
I never knew those were the tech Mecca of the world....
Precisely what struck me when these companies filed suit
if you are legal to live in the US. stay here. if not. get a clue or get deported. this is not rocket science. there are some people that the US citizen is simply not comfortable with and this is why they voted for trump.
The lucky thing for these companies is that by playing to the gallery of people in the major cities, like Silicon Valley, Seattle, New York, et al, they are hip and have nothing to lose by pretending that they know what is or ain't constitutional. After all, when there is a Jihadist attack anywhere, like in Orlando or San Bernardino, they're not the ones who will be questioned about 'Why didn't we catch this', so it's easy for the likes of Cook or Brin to bellyache about this ban.
Conferences about 'hip new things' are a window into what could come next. I recall visiting Bluetooth conferences when that spec was first out, so that our company could sell its flash into Bluetooth modules. Today, you have Bluetooth in laptops, phones, cars, tablets and a wide variety of products. And that'll escalate too, as IoT picks up.
'Insightful' for dragging the president into a topic that has nothing remotely to do w/ him. That's how /. moderation works these days
If you are at such a conference and are a nerd, a good way to start is to talk to someone at a booth about their product/company, then about your product/company, and then let the conversation escalate to other related topics, so that they get to know you. In the event they see an opening where your experience matches the req, that person gets to recommend you.
A really moronic assertion. One can work while travelling and address any hot items. The idea that they should not make the trip even if it's needed is inane
I've attended conferences - CES, ESD and JEDEC. In the case of JEDEC, I had to go w/ my company's proposal and present it to the committee. The agreements are usually made in teleconferences in advance, so the conference is just a way of formally endorsing things that have already been voted on. This was in Toronto, so I did a bunch of work on my laptop during the flight - didn't need internet there - and in the hotel when I wasn't attending the seminars. Had I not gone, the agreements would have gone on w/o us, and our proposal wouldn't have been endorsed as a standard
The other conferences I've been to involved manning the booth. Usually, if they were in town, it simply meant rotating duties w/ one's colleagues
Fine! Then al Bawaba got it wrong, not Breitbart, Infowars nor Sputnik