I am no more likely to buy their product than before. In fact, plenty of ads are annoying enough that I'm less likely to buy their product.
Sorry to break the bad news to you but your own statement shows you DO pay attention to ads - you acknowledge a negative affect from ads therefore ads do influence your buying patterns - hence your "filtering" has a bug in it - unless you do want to pay attention to annoying ads?
I am not aware of any other group with similiar goals. But yes, I guess it's important to blame everyone equally so nobody's feelings are hurt. How this novel approach will let the British deal with the problem posed by Muslims in the country is anyone's guess.
Indians in the 60's and 70's, asians, Blacks... all were accused of "changing the beloved country" Enoch Powell would have told you about how "they don't share our values". I couldn't care less about whether other's feelings are hurt, I am not a pacifist by a long shot. I believe that there should be no knee jerk reactions to things - treat people as individuals, judge them by their actions, not by their colour or belief. If you don't you WILL create more "enemies" and instead of fixing the problem, it will make it worse
It's the same story everywhere in Europe. Muslims don't have the same attachment to nationalism as most other people do. The Ummah is more important to them.
only some and then no more than some Catholics or Hindus or Buddhists.
There are approximately 2 million muslims in the UK, the trouble mainly coming from the least educated, poorer section, the same as the christian and black "houligans" - of which there are plenty. There were a few muslims that bombed the railways and I suspect there are some more that have similar intentions but the IRA, which last I looked was not muslim, also did similar things so it is not JUST muslims.
Something to ponder:
If a group of football supporters break the law, do you punish all football supporters?
while providing sanctuary to thousands of Muslims who want to change the UK into something different than the soft-hearted fools who let them become citizens envisioned.
And that's justification for researchers being arrested for getting information from an allied country's government site????
I suspect the muslims are not the only segment of the British population that are trying to change the UK. Picking on one minority will only exacerbate the situation - a lot of these "muslims" you object to are British by birth, a lot of them were born British citizens although born in another country (a consequence of empire building).
You sound like you would prefer a cold hearted Britain, be careful for what you wish.
You do not have a right to what you did not create. If you want something, you should make it yourself. It's my land, my idea, my property, and you can go find your own. Your laziness and lack of creativity does not give you a right to steal. How did you create your land? How did you create your idea? How did you create your property?
How did you get +5 informative with such blatant contradictions in your logic????
and if taken together imply that the Eastern District of Texas is phenomenally good at eliminating meritless cases prior to trial. You seem quite happy accepting statistics and using phrases like "phenomenally good" to bolster your argument without worrying about "different products" but do not want to accept measurement of performance by the judges themselves. Thats like showing me two products, asking me to choose one and then concluding that because I picked the first shown over the second more often that I was biased to pick the first one No, one person picking would not be enough to form an opinion, If you show said products to say 1000 people and analyse the results, you would get an indication, double blind tests would be better but the argument is not comparable to the topic. Are companies deliberately filing in one district?
If so, is it because of speed or the more likely possibility of getting a desired outcome?
Is the 88% statistic out of character with other districts?
Are the speed gains due to this metric?
88% is such a large number....
I do take your point that it does not prove or disprove impartiality but it does give a better indication than your argument (i.e. for every 100 cases aproximately 64 are heard and 57 ruled in one way is a serious statistic, what are the statistics for other districts? I would argue that if they are closer to the 50 / 50 mark, it would be a strong indication of bias. If they are similar- within a few percentage points to allow for anomalies, then it would not be.).
You can only rate the judges by their rulings and actions. 88% of their rulings went in one direction, what about the other districts?
88%!!
and if taken together imply that the Eastern District of Texas is phenomenally good at eliminating meritless cases prior to trial.
It could also mean that knowing 88% of the cases heard are won by the plaintiff, you cut your losses and settle as you will more than likely lose. plaintiff-patent holders won 57 percent of the suits they filed in the Eastern District, which is below the national average win rate for patent holders, he says.
More importantly, what is the national average win rate for cases HEARD? That would indicate whether the court is impartial or not.
it's an offering for the poor that want a halfed assed option for cheaper.
Perhaps he should consider the half-assed option and use the savings to pay for spelling lessons - either that or Mr rich should have ordered his PA to type his comment - or was he/she busy trying to find his "fuck knob" at the time?
Tesco disagrees with home gardening, they think people should be able to charge for their vegetables.
Tesco disagrees with home gardening, they think people have to charge for their vegetables... unless they're supplier of course.
It is hard on a person to tour, most small bands lose money touring and you talk about bands that make millions and how hard it is on them....... but the argument is about RECORD COMPANIES. You admit that copyright is misused, you must also know record companies have been known to take advantage of artists, that the cost of producing/distributing music is a fraction of the cost it used to be and the artists haven't benefited from that, with the track record of these companies, what makes you think it will change (interesting how the money they are getting from law suits are not being given to the artists....)? - how about sorting out those injustices first as they would be a lot easier to sort out than holding out your hands to stop the tide.
We are entering a new phase and having people try to break it and dismantle it because it affects their bottom line is the real crime, no backups, no downloads, can't play it on the pc, can't play it without a key.... these all conflict with fair use. I want quality music with quality reproduction (I prefer flac), I want to know the artists are making money and not being abused. I do buy music (not Sony and am quite happy to hear them get some of their own back) - especially at concerts and small venues where I know they are self produced, happy to buy several albums which is a sign of how disaffected I am with the record labels.
Oh and how about some sympathy for the lesser known artists as well as the millionaires?
WRONG!!
There are no real enemy countries. There are no terrorists. It is all made up to keep the people in line, the "enemy" is a fabrication to keep the working class in check. Any underground movement is actually set up by the ruling class to capture troublesome workers - Bin Laden as everybody knows, was trained by the CIA... he is still working for the CIA!
It's about who you want to do business with.
They have regulations that that outline "who they can do business with"... according to the regulations, Microsoft is not a company they can do business with. I wonder if the release of source code by Microsoft the other day is related to this (i.e. fulfill it's obligations)?
but the fact that a court has already ruled in Lucas' favor suggests a scenario like the one above.
No offence but it was a US court that ruled on it... a California court.... I think I'll wait to see what another court makes of it before I form an opinion on whether the court screwed this particular "little guy".
The US still has better internet access than much of the third world.
Much of the third world? So... there are third world countries that have better internet access than the US.
I will answer that for you: none, except one can garnish your wages and throw you in prison if you refuse to pay for their services, whether you need them or not. and the other owns them....
Nice statement ANONYMOUS COWARD, it might be more believable if you didn't hide behind anonymity. How many "rogue admins" are there employed by Sony? Will ANONYMOUS COWARD guarantee there is only one? two? three? ten? a hundred.... I believe large corporations use software auditing tools and actually have people auditing what software is installed where (to protect their intra-net) as well as tracking licenses, to say that ONE admin was a rogue is accusing Sony of not having procedures in place to ensure proper compliance with licenses and placing their network at risk - it is important (more important IMO) to protect against rogue admins as well as ignorant users.
Thank you for the link, he appears an interesting man.
Modified means it could have been altered to fit current doctrine and manipulated to suit what the current leadership wants (note that they appear capable of doing that regardless which is why I'm not a big fan of censorship - something for you to bite on) .
Again, you appear to use sentences out of context with the entire passages, most of those phrases are about defending themselves from oppression and against invasion.
It is also important to note what jihad means in order to understand how a minority twist it to their own ends as opposed to what was meant (usually at the threat of death if they do not do what is required) Iran is a good example of this (IMO). It is also interesting what is transpiring in Iraq where what was once a relatively secular country is being driven to fundamentalism.
No it is not a fact that muslim nations punish apostasy with death, some might (as some christian nations did unspeakable things to non-believers) but again, this is more to do with maintaining their power over the people, if we do not point the finger accurately at the persons offending (Saudi royals come to mind - great friends of the West I hear and Iran, Egypt, PAKISTAN!!! ) and be consistent, we alienate the people and force them into a position of having to do the bidding of the likes of the Iranian Supreme council or die, far better to encourage and to communicate. The people were finally getting a voice when some idiot suddenly called all of them terrorists and the axis of evil. All of a sudden, anyone that spoke out within was called a traitor (no I am not saying it was all fixed and going well but there were genuine improvements being made, now the conservatives have total control (again nothing to do with religion, just as the inquisitions had nothing to do with religion). Don't know about you but if I ran into a lion in the plains, I would more than likely not attempt to run (they are faster than me) I would not try to shake it's hand as it does not have a hand. If it were possible for me to talk to it I would but I do not know how to speak lion so I would move steadily and purposefully to my destination (I hope it was a resort you had me going to) but as far as I can see, there are more than 2 options (didn't resort to nuking the animal either). It might attack (unlikely from what I read about lions, THEY attack as a group, interesting that it is primarily the females that hunt), I might have a weapon to defend myself (being retarded, I'm sure I'd have shot it and any other animal within site because lions eat people and lions are animals so all animals are dangerous - psalm 45:13 from the fear and hatred).
Thank you again for wishing me a happy life, it is quite good, lots of entertainment is being provided by you at the moment. I shall read Patrick Sookhdeo, he does sound interesting and look forward to his views, at first glance he has some good insights but again from what I can see, it appears he is also saying what I have been saying, the religion is being manipulated for the advantage of a few. I also note that he was for censorship (banning a translation of the koran):
There is one particular version of the Qur'an in English which Dr Sookhdeo believes should be banned in the UK because it clearly advocates violence. This version is called "Interpretation of the Meanings of the Noble Qur'an in the English Language" by Dr Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din Al-Hilali and Dr Muhammad Muhsin Khan ( Darussalam Publishers and Distributors, Riyadh, 1996).(email from Barnabas Fund). that was in the other great font of knowledge to us "scholars" - Wikipedia. That action does lend support to the theory that people like to "re-interpret" to suit their own ends (I am referring to the likes of Bin Laden there, not Sookhdeo -he is also doing a lot of cherry-picking from what I can see). keep the insults coming, never know your luck , you might make me smile. Oh yes, I do agree with you on the contradictions in all religions though.
FYI, a major problem with Islam is that, in order to deal with discrepancies in the Koran, Muslim "scholars" have decided to asses the accuracy of their scriptures based on the order in which they appear, with the more recent portions superseding the older ones. In other words, if earlier in the history of the Koran it said to live in peace with all "people of the scripture", but then later on it says to "kill all infidels or make them submit", then the later phrase wins out. Unfortunately for everyone involved, it's the earlier portions of the Koran which are the peaceful ones, while the latter portions deal with Mohammed's Jihad against everyone and everything.
Fascinating, just where did you read that from? I thought he koran is supposed to only be in one language so that it does not get mis-interpreted and has not been modified (as opposed to the bible) what is your source please? I also thought jihad meant struggle and the only true jihad is the inner struggle. Just where in the koran does it say to kill infidels? I thought it said to kill the infidels if they attack you (in self fdefence) And fight in the cause of Allah with those who fight with you, and do not exceed the limits, surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits. And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from where they drove you out and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque (in Makkah) until they fight with you in itbut if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the reward of the unbelievers. But if they desist, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. And fight with them until there is no persecution, and religion should be only for Allah, but if they desist, then there should be no hostility except against the oppressors.
Power hungry zealots twist things around to suit their own ends and are helped by peoples fears of things that are different (as you are of muslims) making it easier to portray the people as inhuman, which religion it is is immaterial. Thank you for the compliment of being a scholar but I would never atttempt to end a debate, it is important to hear other peoples points of view and to argue my view-point. The idea is to actually find out what is dis-information and what is correct, I am always forth-coming where my information comes from, lest it be wrong. You made statements but have not shown where you "got" the facts from.
I also got that you said you weren't religious, it obviously went over your head that hatred is a religion and you appear to be a regular at that congregation. Nazis, Marxists, Capitalists, Catholics, Muslims are all labels as far as I'm concerned, I will continue to treat people as people. I hope you can come up with evidence that shows what you are saying but so far the only things I can find that backs up what you're saying appears to only quote small phrases that can easily be twisted (I have looked, it appears YOU might be the one that only sees what they want to see).
Oh yes, I do judge, I judge the actions and words of the individuals.
Score of 2... interesting. Did John Lennon receive death threats for saying the Beatles were more popular than Jesus? Fascinating how statements are made without any proof at all. There were death threats regarding piss christ. What were the crusades? I'm sure if you look you will find numerous examples of brutality committed in the name of most religions.
You appear to be no better than the radical muslims you hate, there were plenty of fine arguments as to why the take-down notice might be wrong (at least SEE the film before passing judgment) but to show such intolerance against ALL muslims - just because they are muslims..... Do not argue with the people of the scripture (Jews, Christians, and Muslims) except in the nicest possible manner - unless they transgress - and say, "We believe in what was revealed to us and in what was revealed to you, and our god and your god is one and the same; to Him we are submitters.
Thought you might like that, from the koran (I'm a devout follower of all knowing all powerful GOOGLE). They worship the same god, they apparently believe in christ as well (but only as a prophet).
Being a true infidel myself (one who does not believe in god) unlike you, I believe in compassion, tolerance and forgiveness. Judge Not, Lest Ye Be Judged. I think God was referring to the American Idol judges when he/she/it came up with that.
Bowl of rice? luxury I tell you! Back when I was young I had to work all week on a piece stale bread (you try standing on a piece of stale bread all week).
Someone has already said it seems to be directed at people switching from yes to no but regardless, who is the one to decide if the conditions have been met? Rules have been thrown out the window when it did not suit the application, if someone wants to change from no to yes, I believe they will "make exceptions, that is the price one pays for deviating from normal procedure - people view your later actions with disdain and suspicion.
The standards board has given the impression that they are corrupt. They needed to be seen as above reproach and they have let all sides down by their actions, If the bill is passed it will always be viewed as a bought one and I'm sure Microsoft would not want it seen that way, the only fair outcome (IMO) is for the bill to fail (I believe this is for fast-tracking it) and to then follow the normal course.
Slashdot Mirror
I am no more likely to buy their product than before. In fact, plenty of ads are annoying enough that I'm less likely to buy their product.
Sorry to break the bad news to you but your own statement shows you DO pay attention to ads - you acknowledge a negative affect from ads therefore ads do influence your buying patterns - hence your "filtering" has a bug in it - unless you do want to pay attention to annoying ads?
I know I'm not influenced, I use adblock.
I am not aware of any other group with similiar goals. But yes, I guess it's important to blame everyone equally so nobody's feelings are hurt. How this novel approach will let the British deal with the problem posed by Muslims in the country is anyone's guess.
Indians in the 60's and 70's, asians, Blacks... all were accused of "changing the beloved country" Enoch Powell would have told you about how "they don't share our values". I couldn't care less about whether other's feelings are hurt, I am not a pacifist by a long shot. I believe that there should be no knee jerk reactions to things - treat people as individuals, judge them by their actions, not by their colour or belief. If you don't you WILL create more "enemies" and instead of fixing the problem, it will make it worse
It's the same story everywhere in Europe. Muslims don't have the same attachment to nationalism as most other people do. The Ummah is more important to them.
only some and then no more than some Catholics or Hindus or Buddhists.
There are approximately 2 million muslims in the UK, the trouble mainly coming from the least educated, poorer section, the same as the christian and black "houligans" - of which there are plenty. There were a few muslims that bombed the railways and I suspect there are some more that have similar intentions but the IRA, which last I looked was not muslim, also did similar things so it is not JUST muslims.
Something to ponder:
If a group of football supporters break the law, do you punish all football supporters?
while providing sanctuary to thousands of Muslims who want to change the UK into something different than the soft-hearted fools who let them become citizens envisioned.
And that's justification for researchers being arrested for getting information from an allied country's government site????
I suspect the muslims are not the only segment of the British population that are trying to change the UK. Picking on one minority will only exacerbate the situation - a lot of these "muslims" you object to are British by birth, a lot of them were born British citizens although born in another country (a consequence of empire building).
You sound like you would prefer a cold hearted Britain, be careful for what you wish.
You do not have a right to what you did not create. If you want something, you should make it yourself. It's my land, my idea, my property, and you can go find your own. Your laziness and lack of creativity does not give you a right to steal.
How did you create your land? How did you create your idea? How did you create your property?
How did you get +5 informative with such blatant contradictions in your logic????
and if taken together imply that the Eastern District of Texas is phenomenally good at eliminating meritless cases prior to trial.
You seem quite happy accepting statistics and using phrases like "phenomenally good" to bolster your argument without worrying about "different products" but do not want to accept measurement of performance by the judges themselves.
Thats like showing me two products, asking me to choose one and then concluding that because I picked the first shown over the second more often that I was biased to pick the first one
No, one person picking would not be enough to form an opinion, If you show said products to say 1000 people and analyse the results, you would get an indication, double blind tests would be better but the argument is not comparable to the topic.
Are companies deliberately filing in one district?
If so, is it because of speed or the more likely possibility of getting a desired outcome?
Is the 88% statistic out of character with other districts?
Are the speed gains due to this metric?
88% is such a large number.... I do take your point that it does not prove or disprove impartiality but it does give a better indication than your argument (i.e. for every 100 cases aproximately 64 are heard and 57 ruled in one way is a serious statistic, what are the statistics for other districts? I would argue that if they are closer to the 50 / 50 mark, it would be a strong indication of bias. If they are similar- within a few percentage points to allow for anomalies, then it would not be.).
You can only rate the judges by their rulings and actions. 88% of their rulings went in one direction, what about the other districts?
88%!!
and if taken together imply that the Eastern District of Texas is phenomenally good at eliminating meritless cases prior to trial.
It could also mean that knowing 88% of the cases heard are won by the plaintiff, you cut your losses and settle as you will more than likely lose.
plaintiff-patent holders won 57 percent of the suits they filed in the Eastern District, which is below the national average win rate for patent holders, he says.
More importantly, what is the national average win rate for cases HEARD? That would indicate whether the court is impartial or not.
it's an offering for the poor that want a halfed assed option for cheaper.
Perhaps he should consider the half-assed option and use the savings to pay for spelling lessons - either that or Mr rich should have ordered his PA to type his comment - or was he/she busy trying to find his "fuck knob" at the time?
Tesco disagrees with home gardening, they think people have to charge for their vegetables... unless they're supplier of course.
It is hard on a person to tour, most small bands lose money touring and you talk about bands that make millions and how hard it is on them....... but the argument is about RECORD COMPANIES.
You admit that copyright is misused, you must also know record companies have been known to take advantage of artists, that the cost of producing/distributing music is a fraction of the cost it used to be and the artists haven't benefited from that, with the track record of these companies, what makes you think it will change (interesting how the money they are getting from law suits are not being given to the artists....)? - how about sorting out those injustices first as they would be a lot easier to sort out than holding out your hands to stop the tide.
We are entering a new phase and having people try to break it and dismantle it because it affects their bottom line is the real crime, no backups, no downloads, can't play it on the pc, can't play it without a key.... these all conflict with fair use. I want quality music with quality reproduction (I prefer flac), I want to know the artists are making money and not being abused. I do buy music (not Sony and am quite happy to hear them get some of their own back) - especially at concerts and small venues where I know they are self produced, happy to buy several albums which is a sign of how disaffected I am with the record labels.
Oh and how about some sympathy for the lesser known artists as well as the millionaires?
I'd like to have some goodwill too - how about giving me all your money then I'll donate half of it to charity (ducks to avoid hurtling chairs).
Umm... KWord can do that...
WRONG!!
There are no real enemy countries. There are no terrorists. It is all made up to keep the people in line, the "enemy" is a fabrication to keep the working class in check. Any underground movement is actually set up by the ruling class to capture troublesome workers - Bin Laden as everybody knows, was trained by the CIA... he is still working for the CIA!
Thank you MR Eric Arthur Blair.
It's about who you want to do business with.
They have regulations that that outline "who they can do business with"... according to the regulations, Microsoft is not a company they can do business with. I wonder if the release of source code by Microsoft the other day is related to this (i.e. fulfill it's obligations)?
but the fact that a court has already ruled in Lucas' favor suggests a scenario like the one above.
No offence but it was a US court that ruled on it... a California court.... I think I'll wait to see what another court makes of it before I form an opinion on whether the court screwed this particular "little guy".
I'd rather schools teach children to read/write/think... How good a job are they doing on that front in Virginia?
Priorities please.
The US still has better internet access than much of the third world.
Much of the third world? So... there are third world countries that have better internet access than the US.
I will answer that for you: none, except one can garnish your wages and throw you in prison if you refuse to pay for their services, whether you need them or not.
and the other owns them....
Nice statement ANONYMOUS COWARD, it might be more believable if you didn't hide behind anonymity.
How many "rogue admins" are there employed by Sony? Will ANONYMOUS COWARD guarantee there is only one? two? three? ten? a hundred....
I believe large corporations use software auditing tools and actually have people auditing what software is installed where (to protect their intra-net) as well as tracking licenses, to say that ONE admin was a rogue is accusing Sony of not having procedures in place to ensure proper compliance with licenses and placing their network at risk - it is important (more important IMO) to protect against rogue admins as well as ignorant users.
Thank you for the link, he appears an interesting man.
Modified means it could have been altered to fit current doctrine and manipulated to suit what the current leadership wants (note that they appear capable of doing that regardless which is why I'm not a big fan of censorship - something for you to bite on) .
Again, you appear to use sentences out of context with the entire passages, most of those phrases are about defending themselves from oppression and against invasion.
It is also important to note what jihad means in order to understand how a minority twist it to their own ends as opposed to what was meant (usually at the threat of death if they do not do what is required) Iran is a good example of this (IMO). It is also interesting what is transpiring in Iraq where what was once a relatively secular country is being driven to fundamentalism.
No it is not a fact that muslim nations punish apostasy with death, some might (as some christian nations did unspeakable things to non-believers) but again, this is more to do with maintaining their power over the people, if we do not point the finger accurately at the persons offending (Saudi royals come to mind - great friends of the West I hear and Iran, Egypt, PAKISTAN!!! ) and be consistent, we alienate the people and force them into a position of having to do the bidding of the likes of the Iranian Supreme council or die, far better to encourage and to communicate. The people were finally getting a voice when some idiot suddenly called all of them terrorists and the axis of evil. All of a sudden, anyone that spoke out within was called a traitor (no I am not saying it was all fixed and going well but there were genuine improvements being made, now the conservatives have total control (again nothing to do with religion, just as the inquisitions had nothing to do with religion).
Don't know about you but if I ran into a lion in the plains, I would more than likely not attempt to run (they are faster than me) I would not try to shake it's hand as it does not have a hand. If it were possible for me to talk to it I would but I do not know how to speak lion so I would move steadily and purposefully to my destination (I hope it was a resort you had me going to) but as far as I can see, there are more than 2 options (didn't resort to nuking the animal either). It might attack (unlikely from what I read about lions, THEY attack as a group, interesting that it is primarily the females that hunt), I might have a weapon to defend myself (being retarded, I'm sure I'd have shot it and any other animal within site because lions eat people and lions are animals so all animals are dangerous - psalm 45:13 from the fear and hatred).
Thank you again for wishing me a happy life, it is quite good, lots of entertainment is being provided by you at the moment.
I shall read Patrick Sookhdeo, he does sound interesting and look forward to his views, at first glance he has some good insights but again from what I can see, it appears he is also saying what I have been saying, the religion is being manipulated for the advantage of a few. I also note that he was for censorship (banning a translation of the koran):
There is one particular version of the Qur'an in English which Dr Sookhdeo believes should be banned in the UK because it clearly advocates violence. This version is called "Interpretation of the Meanings of the Noble Qur'an in the English Language" by Dr Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din Al-Hilali and Dr Muhammad Muhsin Khan ( Darussalam Publishers and Distributors, Riyadh, 1996).(email from Barnabas Fund).
that was in the other great font of knowledge to us "scholars" - Wikipedia.
That action does lend support to the theory that people like to "re-interpret" to suit their own ends (I am referring to the likes of Bin Laden there, not Sookhdeo -he is also doing a lot of cherry-picking from what I can see).
keep the insults coming, never know your luck , you might make me smile.
Oh yes, I do agree with you on the contradictions in all religions though.
FYI, a major problem with Islam is that, in order to deal with discrepancies in the Koran, Muslim "scholars" have decided to asses the accuracy of their scriptures based on the order in which they appear, with the more recent portions superseding the older ones. In other words, if earlier in the history of the Koran it said to live in peace with all "people of the scripture", but then later on it says to "kill all infidels or make them submit", then the later phrase wins out. Unfortunately for everyone involved, it's the earlier portions of the Koran which are the peaceful ones, while the latter portions deal with Mohammed's Jihad against everyone and everything.
Fascinating, just where did you read that from? I thought he koran is supposed to only be in one language so that it does not get mis-interpreted and has not been modified (as opposed to the bible) what is your source please?
I also thought jihad meant struggle and the only true jihad is the inner struggle. Just where in the koran does it say to kill infidels? I thought it said to kill the infidels if they attack you (in self fdefence)
And fight in the cause of Allah with those who fight with you, and do not exceed the limits, surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits. And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from where they drove you out and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque (in Makkah) until they fight with you in itbut if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the reward of the unbelievers. But if they desist, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. And fight with them until there is no persecution, and religion should be only for Allah, but if they desist, then there should be no hostility except against the oppressors.
Power hungry zealots twist things around to suit their own ends and are helped by peoples fears of things that are different (as you are of muslims) making it easier to portray the people as inhuman, which religion it is is immaterial.
Thank you for the compliment of being a scholar but I would never atttempt to end a debate, it is important to hear other peoples points of view and to argue my view-point. The idea is to actually find out what is dis-information and what is correct, I am always forth-coming where my information comes from, lest it be wrong. You made statements but have not shown where you "got" the facts from.
I also got that you said you weren't religious, it obviously went over your head that hatred is a religion and you appear to be a regular at that congregation.
Nazis, Marxists, Capitalists, Catholics, Muslims are all labels as far as I'm concerned, I will continue to treat people as people. I hope you can come up with evidence that shows what you are saying but so far the only things I can find that backs up what you're saying appears to only quote small phrases that can easily be twisted (I have looked, it appears YOU might be the one that only sees what they want to see).
Oh yes, I do judge, I judge the actions and words of the individuals.
Score of 2... interesting. Did John Lennon receive death threats for saying the Beatles were more popular than Jesus? Fascinating how statements are made without any proof at all. There were death threats regarding piss christ. What were the crusades? I'm sure if you look you will find numerous examples of brutality committed in the name of most religions. /she/it came up with that.
You appear to be no better than the radical muslims you hate, there were plenty of fine arguments as to why the take-down notice might be wrong (at least SEE the film before passing judgment) but to show such intolerance against ALL muslims - just because they are muslims.....
Do not argue with the people of the scripture (Jews, Christians, and Muslims) except in the nicest possible manner - unless they transgress - and say, "We believe in what was revealed to us and in what was revealed to you, and our god and your god is one and the same; to Him we are submitters.
Thought you might like that, from the koran (I'm a devout follower of all knowing all powerful GOOGLE). They worship the same god, they apparently believe in christ as well (but only as a prophet).
Being a true infidel myself (one who does not believe in god) unlike you, I believe in compassion, tolerance and forgiveness.
Judge Not, Lest Ye Be Judged. I think God was referring to the American Idol judges when he
Bowl of rice? luxury I tell you! Back when I was young I had to work all week on a piece stale bread (you try standing on a piece of stale bread all week).
Sadly right now it appears it is enforced impartially - whoever pays the most gets what they want.
If rules are changed there is every reason to be outraged - regardless of who or what it ends up favouring. Have the rules been changed?
Someone has already said it seems to be directed at people switching from yes to no but regardless, who is the one to decide if the conditions have been met? Rules have been thrown out the window when it did not suit the application, if someone wants to change from no to yes, I believe they will "make exceptions, that is the price one pays for deviating from normal procedure - people view your later actions with disdain and suspicion.
The standards board has given the impression that they are corrupt. They needed to be seen as above reproach and they have let all sides down by their actions, If the bill is passed it will always be viewed as a bought one and I'm sure Microsoft would not want it seen that way, the only fair outcome (IMO) is for the bill to fail (I believe this is for fast-tracking it) and to then follow the normal course.