Yeah, but planned obsolescence. They can't keep steady cash flow if they don't convince you to constantly buy the "latest" and "greatest" and drop what you just bought from them 4 years ago; it's almost like they're in competition with themselves.
It really does depend on the state. Our teachers just have off, for the most part, though a few weeks before school restarted, they'd have some prep work. . My wife used to teach, my sister-in-law is a teacher.
Well, you can count separate small incidents from the past 40 years in a report that stops at 10 years ago, or look at the overall scope of the attacks and look at a more current report which follows recent trends. http://www.fbi.gov/stats-servi... particularly page 22.
That Norwegian guy was a monster, but there's another difference: he didn't belong or claim fealty to a large active terror organization. He might've had some loony friends in a small group but by and large he acted alone. There is no current large active christian group that is in anyway remotely equivalent to a group with the size and power of ISIS or Al Quaida.
Right, because a guy who actually was a lone wolf is somehow equivalent to entire organizations comprised of thousands of followers like ISIS, Al Quaida, Al Shabab, Al Nusra, Boko Haram, etc..etc..
That was still localized christians fighting other christians, and leaving most of the rest of the world out of it. That would be analogous to the fighting between Sunni and Shia, and no one in the West complained about that either, as that's their business (though it certainly throws a wrench in their claim as THE religion of PEACE).
This is far, far, larger, and spans continents. There are far more people in these terror groups than the IRA could have dreamed of.
Largely because they're not allowed to profile anymore. Instead of ousting the extremist elements in their country, they don't dare because everyone starts screaming about Islamophobia and discrimination. And then, OTOH, boldly proclaim that ISIS is not Islamic. Go figure.
Instead of taking away more of everyone's rights, maybe the peeps at 10 Downing Street should be a little more precise in their targeting the problem and exile idiots like Anjem Choudary, and get his followers out of their country. Religion is no excuse for violence, it already gets away with too much.. like not paying taxes.
What difference does it really make that guns, specifically, were used or not? It is less of a crime if they were all stabbed and cut to death (and/or beheaded) with knives, machetes or swords, or doused with gasoline and set afire, or grenades were thrown through the doorway, or a car bomb was set off, or a hundred other ways you can kill someone?
Yeah, I just saw those yesterday after posting. However, I also read some Nexus 7 owners who said L was worse than K, so now I'm thinking I'll just sit tight. Maybe even backrev a bit.
I have a first gen 2012 Nexus 7 tablet, and they haven't released lollipop for it yet that I can tell I check daily.
Chrome on 4.4.4, at least on my Nexus, is worse than a horrible joke. It's beyond slow and buggy, so I stopped using it, Dolphin is 400% faster.
I'd attribute a good portion of that delay to the disarray and infighting the christian world was in after the fall of the Roman Empire. There was a lot of ebb and flow in the hostilities and peaceful times between the two religions, there was no unbroken 500 year long period of calm between them. Eventually Europe got it's own act together enough to have the wherewithal to do what was seen by the crusaders as a way to recapture lost glory.
It'll always be controversial, even professional historians are disagreed on motive, but there are likely more than one.
The trolls are taking over. I read it can even be a source of income now, from certain countries. Oh yay. Now, jokes, OTOH.. a little levity never hurts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B...
A bacteriophage/bæktr.i.ofed/ (informally, phage/fed/) is a virus that infects and replicates within a bacterium.
Not all bacteria are bad. The point is, it's a virus as I said, it's destructive, it replicates, and goes well with the whole 'phobe 'phile suffix thing.
Also, http://en.memory-alpha.org/wik...
Again with the "brown skinned people" trope. Maybe that's all you care about, yes? Goes both ways.
There's a difference between Verden and south America: The conquistadors primary aim was secular, to claim territory and riches for Spain, and to forge a better trade root to China and India; the religious component was there, and I admit I'd not thought of that, it certainly adds to the tally; but their evangelical motives, while strong, were secondary; they'd have slashed their way through South America even if it were already Christian (but technologically inferior), same as they tried warring against the English in vying for land and gold.
I stand by my statement: the attack on Verden massacred 4,500 pagan saxons directly for their refusal to convert to Christianity. That was an attack committed expressly in the name of Christianity, much like Islamic extremists are doing today.
Besides, slavery/= death. The post I replied to claimed the Catholic church was responsible for more deaths than all other religions combined. Granted, death was prevalent among the american natives due to diseases which the Europeans already had immunity to and probably didn't think much about. I doubt there was anything they could have done about it anyway, as they had no knowledge of microbes and viruses in the 15th century. . I've seen no evidence it was deliberate religiously based biological warfare, though I'm sure they figured it was a sign from God that He was on their side.
Unfortunately, you're right about American journalists/cartoonists. It's politically incorrect to allow free speech where Islam is concerned, that must be deemed, "hate speech"; of course, any and every other religion or group is fair game every day.
AKA Dearbornistan.
My worry is, though the moderate majority may indeed intend no harm nor foul to non-muslims, if the time comes when their hand is forced to pick a side when things get more heated, I'm betting more than half will fall on the side of their islamic brethren.
I'm also sick of hearing people, including Obama, state that IS is "not Islamic". I've never heard a more prime example of the "No True Scotsman" logical fallacy.
The Crusades were a series of events where the leaders of a religion (which believes there's an invisible Man up in the sky who makes you an offer you can't refuse) decided that going off to kill innocent people is a great idea and compatible with the faith.
It should seem very familiar to anyone in the modern age. Crusades then, crusades now.
"Innocent"? Not exactly. Muslims captured Jerusalem and sent their armies out into the world (Moors, mamluks, etc..) The claim that the crusades were nothing more than unprovoked rampaging and looting is muslim apologist bullshit. When one religious group attacks another's holy site and captures it, what do they expect to happen??
Many horrible things have been done in the name of every religion on Earth, but I tire of seeing the crusades constantly misrepresented as nothing more than a murdering/looting spree, and the false portrayal of muslims as their innocent victims.
Clearly you are not looking at the Muslim armies, the Moors, and Mamluks of history. You're not looking at the war between Hindus and Muslims in India during Ghandi's time I'll wager that all you know about is the Inquisition (which had a strong Spanish secular component) and the Crusades, which were in fact a response to Muslim Imperialism. Actually, probably the worst atrocity committed in the name of Christianity was the Massacre at Verden by Charlemagne, not dissimilar to what Islamophages are doing now, today.
I don't believe we have it perfect, far from. It's a hell of a balancing act. I just believe the best system is a hybrid system. There are certainly lots of socialist elements to our capitalist system, and that's why we no longer have child labor and 16 hour work days, why we have have an Interstate highway system, etc... OTOH, we still allow people to make most choices for themselves, and even become stupid rich if that's what's really important to them.
Ah. Sorry. I agree. I should've had more coffee before replying. Yeah, the cold war actually did wonders for our tech development, as did post WWII sentiment. I guess the perceived threat of nuclear annihilation tends to do that though.;-)
Slashdot Mirror
At least he didn't say "massive".
Yeah, but planned obsolescence. They can't keep steady cash flow if they don't convince you to constantly buy the "latest" and "greatest" and drop what you just bought from them 4 years ago; it's almost like they're in competition with themselves.
It really does depend on the state. Our teachers just have off, for the most part, though a few weeks before school restarted, they'd have some prep work. . My wife used to teach, my sister-in-law is a teacher.
Well, you can count separate small incidents from the past 40 years in a report that stops at 10 years ago, or look at the overall scope of the attacks and look at a more current report which follows recent trends.
http://www.fbi.gov/stats-servi... particularly page 22.
That Norwegian guy was a monster, but there's another difference: he didn't belong or claim fealty to a large active terror organization. He might've had some loony friends in a small group but by and large he acted alone. There is no current large active christian group that is in anyway remotely equivalent to a group with the size and power of ISIS or Al Quaida.
Right, because a guy who actually was a lone wolf is somehow equivalent to entire organizations comprised of thousands of followers like ISIS, Al Quaida, Al Shabab, Al Nusra, Boko Haram, etc..etc..
That was still localized christians fighting other christians, and leaving most of the rest of the world out of it. That would be analogous to the fighting between Sunni and Shia, and no one in the West complained about that either, as that's their business (though it certainly throws a wrench in their claim as THE religion of PEACE).
This is far, far, larger, and spans continents. There are far more people in these terror groups than the IRA could have dreamed of.
Largely because they're not allowed to profile anymore. Instead of ousting the extremist elements in their country, they don't dare because everyone starts screaming about Islamophobia and discrimination. And then, OTOH, boldly proclaim that ISIS is not Islamic. Go figure.
Instead of taking away more of everyone's rights, maybe the peeps at 10 Downing Street should be a little more precise in their targeting the problem and exile idiots like Anjem Choudary, and get his followers out of their country. Religion is no excuse for violence, it already gets away with too much.. like not paying taxes.
What difference does it really make that guns, specifically, were used or not? It is less of a crime if they were all stabbed and cut to death (and/or beheaded) with knives, machetes or swords, or doused with gasoline and set afire, or grenades were thrown through the doorway, or a car bomb was set off, or a hundred other ways you can kill someone?
Yeah, I just saw those yesterday after posting. However, I also read some Nexus 7 owners who said L was worse than K, so now I'm thinking I'll just sit tight. Maybe even backrev a bit.
I was hoping against hope that might speed it up, because even 4.4.4 sorta sucks on my mine, especially Chrome.
I have a first gen 2012 Nexus 7 tablet, and they haven't released lollipop for it yet that I can tell I check daily. Chrome on 4.4.4, at least on my Nexus, is worse than a horrible joke. It's beyond slow and buggy, so I stopped using it, Dolphin is 400% faster.
I'd attribute a good portion of that delay to the disarray and infighting the christian world was in after the fall of the Roman Empire. There was a lot of ebb and flow in the hostilities and peaceful times between the two religions, there was no unbroken 500 year long period of calm between them. Eventually Europe got it's own act together enough to have the wherewithal to do what was seen by the crusaders as a way to recapture lost glory.
It'll always be controversial, even professional historians are disagreed on motive, but there are likely more than one.
The trolls are taking over. I read it can even be a source of income now, from certain countries. Oh yay. Now, jokes, OTOH.. a little levity never hurts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B... A bacteriophage /bæktr.i.ofed/ (informally, phage /fed/) is a virus that infects and replicates within a bacterium.
Not all bacteria are bad. The point is, it's a virus as I said, it's destructive, it replicates, and goes well with the whole 'phobe 'phile suffix thing.
Also, http://en.memory-alpha.org/wik...
Your turn to enlighten me further.
Again with the "brown skinned people" trope. Maybe that's all you care about, yes? Goes both ways.
/= death. The post I replied to claimed the Catholic church was responsible for more deaths than all other religions combined. Granted, death was prevalent among the american natives due to diseases which the Europeans already had immunity to and probably didn't think much about. I doubt there was anything they could have done about it anyway, as they had no knowledge of microbes and viruses in the 15th century. . I've seen no evidence it was deliberate religiously based biological warfare, though I'm sure they figured it was a sign from God that He was on their side.
There's a difference between Verden and south America: The conquistadors primary aim was secular, to claim territory and riches for Spain, and to forge a better trade root to China and India; the religious component was there, and I admit I'd not thought of that, it certainly adds to the tally; but their evangelical motives, while strong, were secondary; they'd have slashed their way through South America even if it were already Christian (but technologically inferior), same as they tried warring against the English in vying for land and gold.
I stand by my statement: the attack on Verden massacred 4,500 pagan saxons directly for their refusal to convert to Christianity. That was an attack committed expressly in the name of Christianity, much like Islamic extremists are doing today.
Besides, slavery
Nope, not a typo. Islamic extremists ARE a virus, and they intend to spread their virus to all uninfected hosts, AKA "infidels".
Noted.
Unfortunately, you're right about American journalists/cartoonists. It's politically incorrect to allow free speech where Islam is concerned, that must be deemed, "hate speech"; of course, any and every other religion or group is fair game every day.
AKA Dearbornistan.
My worry is, though the moderate majority may indeed intend no harm nor foul to non-muslims, if the time comes when their hand is forced to pick a side when things get more heated, I'm betting more than half will fall on the side of their islamic brethren.
I'm also sick of hearing people, including Obama, state that IS is "not Islamic". I've never heard a more prime example of the "No True Scotsman" logical fallacy.
We? Are you French? The French aren't allowed guns for the most part. They're sitting ducks for these guys.
The Crusades were a series of events where the leaders of a religion (which believes there's an invisible Man up in the sky who makes you an offer you can't refuse) decided that going off to kill innocent people is a great idea and compatible with the faith.
It should seem very familiar to anyone in the modern age. Crusades then, crusades now.
"Innocent"? Not exactly. Muslims captured Jerusalem and sent their armies out into the world (Moors, mamluks, etc..) The claim that the crusades were nothing more than unprovoked rampaging and looting is muslim apologist bullshit. When one religious group attacks another's holy site and captures it, what do they expect to happen??
Many horrible things have been done in the name of every religion on Earth, but I tire of seeing the crusades constantly misrepresented as nothing more than a murdering/looting spree, and the false portrayal of muslims as their innocent victims.
Clearly you are not looking at the Muslim armies, the Moors, and Mamluks of history. You're not looking at the war between Hindus and Muslims in India during Ghandi's time I'll wager that all you know about is the Inquisition (which had a strong Spanish secular component) and the Crusades, which were in fact a response to Muslim Imperialism. Actually, probably the worst atrocity committed in the name of Christianity was the Massacre at Verden by Charlemagne, not dissimilar to what Islamophages are doing now, today.
I don't believe we have it perfect, far from. It's a hell of a balancing act. I just believe the best system is a hybrid system. There are certainly lots of socialist elements to our capitalist system, and that's why we no longer have child labor and 16 hour work days, why we have have an Interstate highway system, etc... OTOH, we still allow people to make most choices for themselves, and even become stupid rich if that's what's really important to them.
Ah. Sorry. I agree. I should've had more coffee before replying. Yeah, the cold war actually did wonders for our tech development, as did post WWII sentiment. I guess the perceived threat of nuclear annihilation tends to do that though. ;-)