Mac OS 10.2, 10.3, and 10.4 were all released while Vista was vaporware. Vista isn't totally public beta, and Leopard is public in that you can sign up as a developer, pay the fees and get a copy and test it.
It's not a struggle against the "West." Turkey is Western and Muslim, so is Malaysia, and a substantial portion of Muslims live in and moved to the West. They don't rail against the "West."
The Caliphate is a mainstream idea, the Muslims had a caliph for over 1300 years, the equivalent of a Muslim Pope. The Muslim world is suffering from disunity and divisive nationalism, its a widespread belief that a caliph is necessary for the religion, and the last one was 1924, and hasn't been restored since the fall of the Ottoman empire and World Wars. Bin Laden is extreme for his violence, not because he wants a caliph. And relax, it's not a worldwide domination idea, no more than the Pope rules the world; the Muslims leave non-Muslims alone.
I prefer the interpretation by Abdullah Yusuf Ali, he also has some generally good commentary.
Online, a simple google search provides an online copy at Islam101 and MuslimAccess, but it has no commentary. Keep in mind it's an interpretation, the actual Arabic has a rhythm and even rhymes.
The "overwhelming majority of terrorists" aren't Muslim. South America and Europe had more terrorism than the Middle East, which took 3rd place in the US State department reports. What, you want to let Colombian drug dealers off the hook, while going through a Malaysian Muslim's bags?
Profiling doesn't work. When police use race or ethnic appearance as a factor in law enforcement, their accuracy in catching criminals decreases. Even worse, it can lead to accidental deaths, such as the fatal shooting by London police of an innocent Brazilian man after the bombings there.
New York had a "stop and frisk" campaign in the late 1990s, when police were stopping people in the streets on a regular basis in an effort to confiscate illegal weapons and reduce crime. The campaign created tension between the police and minority communities, who thought they were being unfairly targeted for frisks. It turned out they were right.
After Amadou Diallo, an unarmed West African immigrant, was killed during a stop, New York attorney general Eliot Spitzer ordered a study of 175,000 "stop and frisk" records and found that although African-Americans composed only 25 percent of New York City's population at the time, they made up 50 percent of the people who were stopped. Latinos were roughly 23 percent of the population and 33 percent of those stopped, while whites were 43 percent of the population and 13 percent of those stopped.
The results: Police were going to a lot of trouble for little reward, especially when the people they stopped were African-Americans.
Look at the statistics for "hit rates" -- the percentage of stops in which the police found drugs, a gun or something else that led to an arrest. The number of hits in general was very low for the number of stops that police made. But more interesting was that the rate for African-Americans was much lower than the rate for Caucasians. Police had a hit rate of 12.6 percent when they stopped Caucasians and only 10.5 percent when they stopped African-Americans. The hit rate for Latinos was 11.5 percent. You might say that we have a difference of 2.1 percent between blacks and whites. But it's actually a difference of 20 percent when you do the math right. The difference between whites and Latinos is about 10 percent.
Essentially, police were stopping more African-Americans than Caucasians but finding fewer criminals among the former. Why? Not because blacks commit proportionately fewer crimes than whites do (the data vary according to the type of crime and other factors) but because police were looking at the wrong factors when they stopped people
They're focusing on appearance when they should be focusing on behavior. When they're not distracted by race, they're actually doing a more accurate job of picking out the right people.
Focusing on appearance produces a lot of false positives. And every time you introduce a false positive, you take resources away from your ability to focus on people who are really of interest -- those who are behaving suspiciously. If it's a question of finding a needle in a haystack... don't put more hay on the top.
What DOES work in preventing terrorism is behavior profiling. Look at how Israel does security, they ask everyone a serious of questions before boarding and watch their reactions. It's how they caught Anne Murphy trying to smuggle a bomb on board. Face it, you don't actually care if they're young Muslim men... You care about keeping anyone from boarding the airplane who is going to behave like a terrorist.
Sura 5.51: O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.
This is actually not a good translation of the original, which has a very specific context. In the Arabia of Muhammad's time, it was possible for an individual to become an honorary member or "client" of a powerful tribe. But of course, if you did that you would be subordinating yourself politically to that tribe. The word used in Arabic here does not mean "friend." It means "political patron" (wali). What the Quran is trying to do is to discourage stray Muslims from subordinating themselves to Christian or Jewish tribes that might in turn ally with pagan Mecca, or in any case might have interests at odds with those of the general Muslim community.
So the verse actually says:
[5:51] O you who believe, do not take Jews and Christians as tribal patrons; these are tribal patrons of one another. Those among you who become clients of these belong with them.
Since the Quran considers Christians nearest in love to Muslims, it obviously does not have an objection to friendship between the two. But apparently now it is some Christians who have that hateful attitude, of no friendship with "infidels."
As for 3:51 and 2:190, and 9:123, completely out of context. It was addressing the polytheists of Mecca and those who wanted to exterminate the Muslims. The Quran also says "if they make peace, then you [must] make peace."
8:12 refers to the Battle of Badr, where the Muslims fought in self-defense. By taking it out of context, you're trying to make it seem as if that battlefield command applies to living in Europe or something. Not at all.
Sharia only applies to Muslims. Muslims are supposed to allow Christians and non-Muslims to have alcohol, for example, and even their own idols and stuff. India was ruled by Muslims for centuries, yet still there are millenia-old Hindu temples, for example. Abu Dhabi serves alcohol to their non-Muslim guests in their hotels. My point still stands; Muslims don't care what non-Muslims do with their own time.
Should any Arab country hold unbiased elections, the Islamists will win by a large margin. Then what?
Then they'll probably settle down. I don't like where this is heading. Christians took over and control all three branches of American government, and have bombed 2 countries since and started a war by choice. What war has a Muslim government started recently?
I don't like the "those peaceful Christians, those violent Muslims" stereotype floating around here.
In 1985, Air India Flight 182 was blown up over the Atlantic by:
a. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40 b. Bill O'Reilly c. The Mormon Tabernacle Choir d. Indian Sikh extremists, in retaliation for the Indian Army's attack on the Golden Temple shrine in Amritsar
In 1986, who attempted to smuggle three pounds of explosives onto an El Al jetliner bound from London to Tel Aviv?
a. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40 b. Michael Smerconish c. Bob Mould d. A pregnant Irishwoman named Anne Murphy
In 1962, in the first-ever successful sabotage of a commercial jet, a Continental Airlines 707 was blown up with dynamite over Missouri by:
a. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40 b. Ann Coulter c. Henry Rollins d. Thomas Doty, a 34-year-old American passenger, as part of an insurance scam
In 1994, who nearly succeeding in skyjacking a DC-10 and crashing it into the Federal Express Corp. headquarters?
a. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40 b. Michelle Malkin c. Charlie Rose d. Auburn Calloway, an off-duty FedEx employee and resident of Memphis, Tenn.
In 1974, who stormed a Delta Air Lines DC-9 at Baltimore-Washington Airport, intending to crash it into the White House, and shot both pilots?
a. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40 b. Joe Scarborough c. Spalding Gray d. Samuel Byck, an unemployed tire salesman from Philadelphia
Political correctness isn't the problem here. Not everyone looks Muslim or Arab. I don't look Muslim, but I am. If you tried to profile me, what is to stop me from having a non-Muslim relative or girlfriend carry my bag for me? Israel learned this, which is why everyone is searched.
" Western culture itself is offensive to fundamental Muslims."
Oh, so do you mean they hate Sweden? Argentina? Tokyo? Athens? Why are they leaving those alone? Oh right, those countries aren't giving weapons to Israel or the Saudi dictatorship, or backing the coup in Algeria...
Muslims Don't care what you do with your own time. Go drink lots of beer and eat pork at a strip club if you want. Do you see Muslims advocating prohibition laws? Are Muslims asking for pork to be banned in America? No. They want the US to stop backing the Saudi dictatorship and be evenhanded in the Israel-Palestine conflict, among other things. ("Israel Asks US for Rockets with Wide Blast.") Oh, and maybe not destabilizing the middle east with Iraq wars and stuff.
"Free people do not relinquish their security. This is contrary to Bush's claim that we hate freedom. Let him tell us why we did not strike Sweden, for example." --Bin Laden's speech
Remember, they come back and become neighbors. By that point, you would be looked down upon if you criticized a veteran, even if they may have domestic abuse issues (it's true that they have a higher rate).
If you watch the video, which I believe another poster linked to, it was in fact a mosque. They avoided targeting the mosque, but killed the people. It's sad when politicians will hold a building as more sacred than human life.
Muslim societies don't do honor killings. It's like saying American societies practice murder; it's a heinous act that's illegal and condemned by the vast majority of the population.
We could still have fun with the blockbusters. What about in LOTR when Elrond (Hugo Weaving) is telling Gandalf how dangerous it is, someone in the audience yelled "Don't trust him! He's an agent!"
There's a big difference between using your CVS extracare discount card and using a personally hacked card encoded by your own programmable cardswipe. make it harder for crooks.
You lost me after you said conversion was "at the point of a sword." It didn't happen that way. Muslims are commanded to never ever force a person to convert. The Quran says "La iqraha fe ad-deen," There is no compulsion in religion (2:255). Islam wasn't spread by the sword. Look at India, the Muslims ruled for centuries yet India is 85% Hindu and all historians agree there was no mass convert or slaughter action taken. Indonesia is almost all Muslim, despite having no Muslim armies ever getting so far.
The restoration of a caliphate is a goal of moderate Muslims too, since they lost the closest thing to a Pope in 1924. However, it's for the Muslims, the rest of the world can go hell if they want to do so.
I'm well aware that the US isn't going to change, but I think that's fueled by ignorance and conflict of interest. You're incorrect in saying that you can't find alcohol or pork in Muslim countries, they allow non-Muslims to use it all. Algeria had wine groves and Lebanon has all the alcohol and pork you can eat, it's why European tourists flock there.
Better go after Israel then too. David Ben Gurion, Israel's first PM, was a wanted terrorist criminal by the British, for bombing civilians and hotels. Ariel Sharon, a convicted war criminal, was elected to power, but nobody cared when Israel did it, only when the Palestinians decided to match him with their own.
It makes perfect sense. Look at any pharmacy, the pharmacist is on his feet the entire time. They stand so much that they actually have to get special stockings or surgery for varicose veins. It makes me very active at work. Not sure if cashiers get the same amount of energy.
On the opposite side, standing does not always make you do a good job. "I stand for 8-10 hours a day," wrote Donald Rumsfeld.
Sorry, that's just false. Why do the terrorists care about America, and leave Sweden or Norway alone? Why waste time on America when they could easily bomb and kill more people in South America or something? Easy, because America was helping Israel oppress the Palestinians, because America was propping up the Saudi dictatorship; both reasons Osama Bin Laden gave in his speech.
Muslims, to be perfectly honest, don't care what non-Muslims do. Go get as drunk as you want and eat as much pork as you can at a strip club, they don't care. Why is pork served to Christians in Muslim countries? Because nobody cares what the non-Muslims do.
Muslims have nothing in common to Hitler or Nazis.
If the US reversed its foreign policy, everyone would leave Bin Laden. Honestly, he's not a popular guy, and everyone knows he kills innocent people. All the moderate countries like Turkey are dropping their support of America because of outrage over the Iraq war and other American foreign policy. They don't support Bin Laden, but they don't think we're right either.
Well, the US had troops in Saudi Arabia and Yemen, as well as Pakistan. They didn't invade, but they meddled enough to hurt people, like overthrowing Iran's government and installing the Shah, giving weapons to Saddam Hussein, restoring the dictator of Kuwait instead of using that liberation to build a democracy, Iran-Contra, CIA admitted involvement in the coup in Venezuela, supporting the anti-democratic coup in Algeria, the list goes on.
Go check again, we GAVE billions in weapons, and provided interest-free loans. It was given the status of "major non-NATO ally" and given preferences in weapons contracts. According to this, Israel still owes $3Billion to the US in unpaid loans as well.
We supported the coup in Algeria, had troops in Saudi Arabia, and gave weapons and money and backing to Israel. Three very good reasons for people to be upset.
Slashdot Mirror
Mac OS 10.2, 10.3, and 10.4 were all released while Vista was vaporware. Vista isn't totally public beta, and Leopard is public in that you can sign up as a developer, pay the fees and get a copy and test it.
It's not a struggle against the "West." Turkey is Western and Muslim, so is Malaysia, and a substantial portion of Muslims live in and moved to the West. They don't rail against the "West."
The Caliphate is a mainstream idea, the Muslims had a caliph for over 1300 years, the equivalent of a Muslim Pope. The Muslim world is suffering from disunity and divisive nationalism, its a widespread belief that a caliph is necessary for the religion, and the last one was 1924, and hasn't been restored since the fall of the Ottoman empire and World Wars. Bin Laden is extreme for his violence, not because he wants a caliph. And relax, it's not a worldwide domination idea, no more than the Pope rules the world; the Muslims leave non-Muslims alone.
Online, a simple google search provides an online copy at Islam101 and MuslimAccess, but it has no commentary. Keep in mind it's an interpretation, the actual Arabic has a rhythm and even rhymes.
The "overwhelming majority of terrorists" aren't Muslim. South America and Europe had more terrorism than the Middle East, which took 3rd place in the US State department reports. What, you want to let Colombian drug dealers off the hook, while going through a Malaysian Muslim's bags?
... don't put more hay on the top.
... You care about keeping anyone from boarding the airplane who is going to behave like a terrorist.
Profiling doesn't work. When police use race or ethnic appearance as a factor in law enforcement, their accuracy in catching criminals decreases. Even worse, it can lead to accidental deaths, such as the fatal shooting by London police of an innocent Brazilian man after the bombings there.
New York had a "stop and frisk" campaign in the late 1990s, when police were stopping people in the streets on a regular basis in an effort to confiscate illegal weapons and reduce crime. The campaign created tension between the police and minority communities, who thought they were being unfairly targeted for frisks. It turned out they were right.
After Amadou Diallo, an unarmed West African immigrant, was killed during a stop, New York attorney general Eliot Spitzer ordered a study of 175,000 "stop and frisk" records and found that although African-Americans composed only 25 percent of New York City's population at the time, they made up 50 percent of the people who were stopped. Latinos were roughly 23 percent of the population and 33 percent of those stopped, while whites were 43 percent of the population and 13 percent of those stopped.
The results: Police were going to a lot of trouble for little reward, especially when the people they stopped were African-Americans.
Look at the statistics for "hit rates" -- the percentage of stops in which the police found drugs, a gun or something else that led to an arrest. The number of hits in general was very low for the number of stops that police made. But more interesting was that the rate for African-Americans was much lower than the rate for Caucasians. Police had a hit rate of 12.6 percent when they stopped Caucasians and only 10.5 percent when they stopped African-Americans. The hit rate for Latinos was 11.5 percent. You might say that we have a difference of 2.1 percent between blacks and whites. But it's actually a difference of 20 percent when you do the math right. The difference between whites and Latinos is about 10 percent.
Essentially, police were stopping more African-Americans than Caucasians but finding fewer criminals among the former. Why? Not because blacks commit proportionately fewer crimes than whites do (the data vary according to the type of crime and other factors) but because police were looking at the wrong factors when they stopped people
They're focusing on appearance when they should be focusing on behavior. When they're not distracted by race, they're actually doing a more accurate job of picking out the right people.
Focusing on appearance produces a lot of false positives. And every time you introduce a false positive, you take resources away from your ability to focus on people who are really of interest -- those who are behaving suspiciously. If it's a question of finding a needle in a haystack
What DOES work in preventing terrorism is behavior profiling. Look at how Israel does security, they ask everyone a serious of questions before boarding and watch their reactions. It's how they caught Anne Murphy trying to smuggle a bomb on board. Face it, you don't actually care if they're young Muslim men
Paraphrased from Salon.com: Why profiling doesn't work
This is actually not a good translation of the original, which has a very specific context. In the Arabia of Muhammad's time, it was possible for an individual to become an honorary member or "client" of a powerful tribe. But of course, if you did that you would be subordinating yourself politically to that tribe. The word used in Arabic here does not mean "friend." It means "political patron" (wali). What the Quran is trying to do is to discourage stray Muslims from subordinating themselves to Christian or Jewish tribes that might in turn ally with pagan Mecca, or in any case might have interests at odds with those of the general Muslim community.
So the verse actually says:
Since the Quran considers Christians nearest in love to Muslims, it obviously does not have an objection to friendship between the two. But apparently now it is some Christians who have that hateful attitude, of no friendship with "infidels."
As for 3:51 and 2:190, and 9:123, completely out of context. It was addressing the polytheists of Mecca and those who wanted to exterminate the Muslims. The Quran also says "if they make peace, then you [must] make peace."
8:12 refers to the Battle of Badr, where the Muslims fought in self-defense. By taking it out of context, you're trying to make it seem as if that battlefield command applies to living in Europe or something. Not at all.
Sharia only applies to Muslims. Muslims are supposed to allow Christians and non-Muslims to have alcohol, for example, and even their own idols and stuff. India was ruled by Muslims for centuries, yet still there are millenia-old Hindu temples, for example. Abu Dhabi serves alcohol to their non-Muslim guests in their hotels. My point still stands; Muslims don't care what non-Muslims do with their own time.
Should any Arab country hold unbiased elections, the Islamists will win by a large margin. Then what?
Then they'll probably settle down. I don't like where this is heading. Christians took over and control all three branches of American government, and have bombed 2 countries since and started a war by choice. What war has a Muslim government started recently?
I don't like the "those peaceful Christians, those violent Muslims" stereotype floating around here.
In 1985, Air India Flight 182 was blown up over the Atlantic by:
a. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
b. Bill O'Reilly
c. The Mormon Tabernacle Choir
d. Indian Sikh extremists, in retaliation for the Indian Army's attack on the Golden Temple shrine in Amritsar
In 1986, who attempted to smuggle three pounds of explosives onto an El Al jetliner bound from London to Tel Aviv?
a. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
b. Michael Smerconish
c. Bob Mould
d. A pregnant Irishwoman named Anne Murphy
In 1962, in the first-ever successful sabotage of a commercial jet, a Continental Airlines 707 was blown up with dynamite over Missouri by:
a. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
b. Ann Coulter
c. Henry Rollins
d. Thomas Doty, a 34-year-old American passenger, as part of an insurance scam
In 1994, who nearly succeeding in skyjacking a DC-10 and crashing it into the Federal Express Corp. headquarters?
a. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
b. Michelle Malkin
c. Charlie Rose
d. Auburn Calloway, an off-duty FedEx employee and resident of Memphis, Tenn.
In 1974, who stormed a Delta Air Lines DC-9 at Baltimore-Washington Airport, intending to crash it into the White House, and shot both pilots?
a. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
b. Joe Scarborough
c. Spalding Gray
d. Samuel Byck, an unemployed tire salesman from Philadelphia
The answer, in all cases, is D.
Political correctness isn't the problem here. Not everyone looks Muslim or Arab. I don't look Muslim, but I am. If you tried to profile me, what is to stop me from having a non-Muslim relative or girlfriend carry my bag for me? Israel learned this, which is why everyone is searched.
" Western culture itself is offensive to fundamental Muslims."
Oh, so do you mean they hate Sweden? Argentina? Tokyo? Athens? Why are they leaving those alone? Oh right, those countries aren't giving weapons to Israel or the Saudi dictatorship, or backing the coup in Algeria...
"Free people do not relinquish their security. This is contrary to Bush's claim that we hate freedom. Let him tell us why we did not strike Sweden, for example." --Bin Laden's speech
Remember, they come back and become neighbors. By that point, you would be looked down upon if you criticized a veteran, even if they may have domestic abuse issues (it's true that they have a higher rate).
If you watch the video, which I believe another poster linked to, it was in fact a mosque. They avoided targeting the mosque, but killed the people. It's sad when politicians will hold a building as more sacred than human life.
Muslim societies don't do honor killings. It's like saying American societies practice murder; it's a heinous act that's illegal and condemned by the vast majority of the population.
We could still have fun with the blockbusters. What about in LOTR when Elrond (Hugo Weaving) is telling Gandalf how dangerous it is, someone in the audience yelled "Don't trust him! He's an agent!"
Well, there's Wag the Movie but they're so-so and audio only. Dumb college kids.
There's a big difference between using your CVS extracare discount card and using a personally hacked card encoded by your own programmable cardswipe. make it harder for crooks.
You lost me after you said conversion was "at the point of a sword." It didn't happen that way. Muslims are commanded to never ever force a person to convert. The Quran says "La iqraha fe ad-deen," There is no compulsion in religion (2:255). Islam wasn't spread by the sword. Look at India, the Muslims ruled for centuries yet India is 85% Hindu and all historians agree there was no mass convert or slaughter action taken. Indonesia is almost all Muslim, despite having no Muslim armies ever getting so far.
The restoration of a caliphate is a goal of moderate Muslims too, since they lost the closest thing to a Pope in 1924. However, it's for the Muslims, the rest of the world can go hell if they want to do so.
I'm well aware that the US isn't going to change, but I think that's fueled by ignorance and conflict of interest. You're incorrect in saying that you can't find alcohol or pork in Muslim countries, they allow non-Muslims to use it all. Algeria had wine groves and Lebanon has all the alcohol and pork you can eat, it's why European tourists flock there.
Better go after Israel then too. David Ben Gurion, Israel's first PM, was a wanted terrorist criminal by the British, for bombing civilians and hotels. Ariel Sharon, a convicted war criminal, was elected to power, but nobody cared when Israel did it, only when the Palestinians decided to match him with their own.
It makes perfect sense. Look at any pharmacy, the pharmacist is on his feet the entire time. They stand so much that they actually have to get special stockings or surgery for varicose veins. It makes me very active at work. Not sure if cashiers get the same amount of energy.
On the opposite side, standing does not always make you do a good job. "I stand for 8-10 hours a day," wrote Donald Rumsfeld.
Sorry, that's just false. Why do the terrorists care about America, and leave Sweden or Norway alone? Why waste time on America when they could easily bomb and kill more people in South America or something? Easy, because America was helping Israel oppress the Palestinians, because America was propping up the Saudi dictatorship; both reasons Osama Bin Laden gave in his speech.
Muslims, to be perfectly honest, don't care what non-Muslims do. Go get as drunk as you want and eat as much pork as you can at a strip club, they don't care. Why is pork served to Christians in Muslim countries? Because nobody cares what the non-Muslims do.
Muslims have nothing in common to Hitler or Nazis.
If the US reversed its foreign policy, everyone would leave Bin Laden. Honestly, he's not a popular guy, and everyone knows he kills innocent people. All the moderate countries like Turkey are dropping their support of America because of outrage over the Iraq war and other American foreign policy. They don't support Bin Laden, but they don't think we're right either.
Well, the US had troops in Saudi Arabia and Yemen, as well as Pakistan. They didn't invade, but they meddled enough to hurt people, like overthrowing Iran's government and installing the Shah, giving weapons to Saddam Hussein, restoring the dictator of Kuwait instead of using that liberation to build a democracy, Iran-Contra, CIA admitted involvement in the coup in Venezuela, supporting the anti-democratic coup in Algeria, the list goes on.
Go check again, we GAVE billions in weapons, and provided interest-free loans. It was given the status of "major non-NATO ally" and given preferences in weapons contracts. According to this, Israel still owes $3Billion to the US in unpaid loans as well.
We supported the coup in Algeria, had troops in Saudi Arabia, and gave weapons and money and backing to Israel. Three very good reasons for people to be upset.
It would be cheaper and easier if America and Israel fixed their foreign policies so that they'd bully less people and make less enemies.