Check out the many number of books and articles written by Arun Shourie during his journalistic days I know Shourie's works vry well. Communists hate Shourie and loathe him...
They came into being because the 'State' failed to do its duties and instead abused the citizens. It is a well known fact that the police and the politicians abuse their power and the poor are hapless observers. This was the cause for the naxalites to come into being Bollox. Naxalism is pure and simple terrorism. They are merely a subversive group of thugs and murderers
who decided to take over a bunch of colleges and start raping babies. Might want to read about Their gangster leaders Charu Mazumdar and Kanu Sanyal. Kanu Sanyal invented the Naxalite terror tactic (called Yugantar). Sanyal openly admitted that he was a terrorist. He was proud of it. He is no better than Osama bin-Laden and deserves the same fate. Instead, he stands merrily prancing about the country as a statesman.
they are equally reticent about any disruptive actions of the Indian military in Kashmir and the various Kashmiri leaders that are under house arrest Sure, sure, and 9/11 was a joint US/Israeli conspiracy, the 2004 tsunami was secretly planned by the Indian government, and the Protocols of the learned elders of Zion actually happened, right?
/sarcasm
Nice try Osama, but the Indian Military's actions in Kashmir are a response to massive human rights violations by the Islamists against the Kashmiri Hindus, millions of them have been ethnically cleansed by Muslim militants. It is the religious intolerance and racism of the Islamists that brought their fate upon them.
The problem with many of the Indians living outside India is that they have been fed a lie that Hinduism is under attack in India and is dying. The problem with Indians in India is that they are too blinded by propaganda disseminated by a Communist intelligentsia, moderated by a socialist regime, and aggravated by the rising tide of Islamist militancy in the country. It is precisely the objectivity of outside observation that Naipaul brings to the Indian social landscape, something which Indians in India do not possess, unfortunately. It is a sad day for the Indian intellect when an outsider like Naipaul is needed to expose the reality...
they're never doing anything constructive, Really? Who do you think improved living conditions in the Dharavi Slum in Mumbai (the worst slum in Asia)? The Shiv Sena. Yet, nobody but Naipaul wrote about that obvious fact (known to most Mumbaikars). Who do you think build all those expressways in Mumbai and removed the congested traffic that was choking the city's economy, the Shiv Sena. Also a fact known to most Mumbaikars. Yet, it is only mentioned by the media as an insignificant footnote.
There is most definitely a pervasive media bias against the Shiv Sena. A bias that stems from Islamist votebank politics, motivated primarily by a sense of "My enemy's enemy is my ally" style of realpolotik and the desire of the left to ultimately eradicate all criticism from Hindus and render India a totalitarian, communist regime.
What about the thuggery and villany of the Communist Party? What about the decades of nepotism, corruption, and state-sponsored buggerry conducted by Communist bastard despots like Jyoti Basu in West Bengal? What about the thugs and murderer Communists called Naxalites inIndia's red corridor (Bengal, Bihar, orissa and northern AP)? How well does the Indian Media report about their killings, rapes, bombings and Pakistani support? No, the Indian media is only obsessed with Hindus.
How well does the media report the attacks on poor Hindus carried out by the Communist thugs in Nandigram just a few months ago? In the finest traditions fo Stalin and Mao, the CPM massacred dozens of poor Hindus in Nandigram , and the media conveniently hid the whole damn thing under the rug. Only the international media reported on it with any degree of objectivity.
Hindu reformists are probably more hated by hindu fanatics than by any other group. Wrong. You obviously have read nothing of Indian history beyond the socialist propaganda taught in Indian schools. If you have read about the Hyderabad massacres after India's independence, you will see that radical Muslim "Razakars" attacked many Hindu reformers and spread hatred against them, including Gandhi (who was more of a dictator than a reformer, but I digress) and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, a reformer. Christian missionaries routinely spread hatred against Hindu reformers like Swami Dayanand Saraswati who was perceived as a "threat" to their activities.
Besides, there are no "Hindu Fanatics". That is merely a propaganda term invented by the Communist politburo in India to justify terrorism against Hindus in general. If you know anything about Hinduism as a religious system you wills see that it is essentially humanly impossible to be a "fanatic" about Hinduism in the same sense that it is possible to be one for Abrahamic religions. The terms "Hindu Fanatic", "Hindu animal", "Hindu Nazi", or "Hindu scum" are essentially opprobria invented to silence criticism and debate through fear and hatred directed at Hindus, nothing more.
In fact, I'm willing to bet that for moderate muslims or christians, hindu reformists are a good thing Is that the reason why an average of five Hindus are murdered by the Islamist Bangladesh Nationalist Party and the Jamaat-e-Islami every day?Both groups see themselves as "moderate" Muslims. During partition, to be a Hindu in East Bengal or Pakistan meant instant lynching and death. Were the victims of the Partition riots, the Noakhali pogroms, the Morichjhanpi pogrom, the Direct Action riots, the Wandhama MAssacre, the Kaluchak Massacre, the Lahore Massacres all "Fanatic Hindus"? The ones who perpetrated these acts were not all "fanatic" Muslims either. Many were self-perceived moderates attacking Hindus, many of the Hindus were modern and educated intellectuals who can be thought of as "reformers". During the 1971 Bangladesh atrocities http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1971_Bangladesh_atroc ities, millions of Hindu intellectuals were targeted by the "moderate Muslim" populated Pakistan Army for extermination. These people, by construction, were reformers.
The Christian Fundamentalist "National Liberation Front of Tripura" murdered an average of 13,000 Hindus per year in the North-East? The NLFT saw themselves as "moderate" too.
You can't really chalk up a wandering squad of goons to "fighting anti-Hinduism". That as about as logical as justifying a bunch of country yokels in white hoods as just "fighting anti-white people-ness". As expected, you totally misunderstood my contention. I do not approve of their actions, but I do understand them, and provided the context for that understanding.
For one culture to grow another must shrink Kaun Bola (says who)? The British and French were always perceived as antagonistic to each other at a cultural level, yet both cultures grew and neither "shrank"
Culture is so mutable that modern "Jews" would be unrecognizable to middle-ages Jews Yes, yes, I accept that. There is reformist and reconstructionist Judaism and all that. However, that does not negate the fundamental right of Jews to exist as an identifiable cultural entity. The Hindus of today would be totally unrecognizable to Hindus of the Vedic period (in fact, some don't even regard Vedic period Indians as Hindus per se, but the followers of an older faith). Cultures may change and evolve and all that, but they still have a fundamental right to exist.
To ascribe cultures "rights" is to invite racism, ethnocentrism, and massive logical fallacies That will only happen if that cultures grows at the expense of another. I do not believe that this will happen with Hindus.
Past wrongs do not justify current wrongs These are not "past wrongs". Hindus are being persecuted right now, even as we speak. Again, that does not justify these particular actions, but it does provide a broader context for them.
..Speaking as a Brahmo
Samaaji, I've long held the same views that you have about
the Shiv Sena. After all, the media and polity have bashed the Shiv
Sena so much so that it is impossible to not hate them after watching
the selection bias reporting of the crap-socialist Indian media.
However, the rise of Islamist terrorism in India, coupled with the
systematic ethnic cleansing and genocides of Hindus in Kashmir,
Bangladesh, Pakistan and several parts of India proper itself (remember
Morichjhanpi, Tripura, Naxalites etc. etc?) have rendered me "a former
liberal mugged by reality" (as famous American political visionary
Irving Kristol put it). I may not particularly enjoy the Shiv Sena's
antics, but they have done a lot to emancipate the poor in Maharashtra
(something that the moonbat media never reports, obviously),
drastically improved the local infrastructure (a much needed boon in a
developing country) and provide a much needed balance against the
rising tide of radical Communism and Islamist bigotry that plagues out
society. Remember, the essense of a modern democracy is the presence of
checks and balances.
I suppose the only thing there to see is if the DoE would succumb to
the 'pressure' and actually block Orkut (it's possible, trust me), or,
if the Internet Cafe Association of India (or whatever their
organization calls itself) organizes itself, and throws up a counter
bandh to protest these mofos. I wonder where your righteous indignation
against bans was when the West Bengal government banned Taslima Nasreen's
Lajja
(Some of her other "banned" books are available
online here) because a
bunch of Islamist bigots felt that it "insulted Islam"? Or
when the government of Andhra Pradesh in South India "banned" the
screenings of the Da-Vinci Code becuase a bunch of evangelical
Christians got their undies in a tizzy?Were you just as indignated
then, or did you not notice because the pro-Islamist/Leftist media in
India convenientlyignored reporting about them? Eh?
It is precisely this intrinsic evocation of double standards against
Hindus that is the litmus test for anti-Hinduism.
but a lot of the reforms that I am aware of that effect Hindu's tend to be positive human rights related things (laws regarding the untouchables). Quite so, but most of those reforms were done by Hindus. Hindus are hated even more because they reformed. The hatred stems from those communities and political groups who do not show the same propensity for reform as Hindus, and, instead of observing and learning from them, wind up loathing them instead.
The dynamic of anti-Hindu bigotry is basically the same as that of Anti-Semitism in Europe and the Middle east. Jews were/are hated primarily for their social and cultural pliability by Anti-Semites, as are Hindus by Anti-Hindus.
No culture has any intrinsic right to exist So you're saying that Israel does not have an intrinsic right to exist as a Jewish State? You might want to read something about the long and tragic history of Antisemitism in Europe and the Middle East before reaching such a radical conclusion. How about the Irish? Didn't they have a fundamental and intrinsic right to fight anti-Irish persecution and discrimination by the English for the preservation of their right to exist? Hindus are doing just that. Fighting with increasing desperation for their right to exist without fear of persecution or discrimination.
Usually "cultural protection" is just another name for racism In my view, I consider such a statement to be itself a racist one, though perhaps in an "equal opportunity offender" sense. Every culture has a fundamental right to survive and grow, so long as it is not at the expense of others (a very significant proviso). To hold a view that is as radical as yours creates an atmosphere of conflict and violence between cultures, and sounds too much like political anarchism for comfort.
I will agree that violence has it place but you explore other avenues first I don't disagree that violence is a last refuge, but when a people are being systematically persecuted, attacked and their collective backs are against a wall, and when those who hate and loathe them intransigently refuse to engage in "negotiations" or "diplomacy",what is left to do, other than the "last refuge"? You should perhaps read about the often brutal and genocidal nature of anti-Hindu persecution in the history of South Asia before you arrive at your perorations.
Bhere is right, your comment and the report of RSS and Shiv Sena actions have greatly diminished my idea of Hindu's. Although I respect his position more and I assume he is a Hindu. Violence is the last resort of the incompetent and the action reported in the article clearly high light this. If they were competent they would ignore the small slights and aim for larger political goals. Instead they storm around like goods giving Hindu's a bad name. If a comment and a report converts you into an anti-Hindu bigot then I suppose debating with you is a waste of time, but here goes. Hindus have the same rights to protect, preserve and practice their faith, culture and society as anyone else. While I do not support mindless violence, the only reason why these people have gone that far is because they have been pushed there by the Communist-dominated Indian government, polity and intelligentsia, who spend a good deal of their time and political power creating a culture of hatred against Hindus in general.
Violence is the last resort of the incompetent Not in the real world. The real world often require defense with weapons and armies. Otherwise America and her allies could never have liberated Germany from the Reich, and India would never have liberated a brutally persecuted Bengali population from Pakistan in 1971. Those wars were violent, but necessary.
Here
is an interesting interview of Nobel Laureate V.S. Naipaul
that points out how the "Indian Intelligentsia" (ie communist fanatics
and Islamists) deliberately skew media reports against the
Shiv Sena as part of a systematic campaign of hatred directed against
Hindus. The Shiv Sena has done more for the emancipation of the
Maharashtrian poor then any of the leftist parties who attack and
villify them.
Also notable is Naipaul's famous observation in his bestseller "India,
A Wounded Civilization":
<quote>
There was one portrait. And interestingly, it was not of the leader of
the Shiv Sena or of Shivaji, the 17 th century Maratha King, but of the
long-dead Dr. Ambedkar...Popular-and near-ecstatic-movements like the
Shiv Sena ritualize many different needs. The Sena here, honouring an
angry and (for all his eminence) defeated man, seemed quite different
from the Sena the newspapers wrote about
</quote>
I'm not a big fan of Shiv Sena or the RSS in general. But when I see
our own media attack and villify them as part of a shameless excuse to
pander to a rising tide of Communist and Islamic Fundamentalism, while
ignoring the brutal and barbaric massacres and atrocities against
Hindus in Kashmir, Pakistan, Bangadesh, and even at times condoning
them, and when Communists in the media openly attack Hindus and demand
for their mass killings, I have no choice but to speak out,
even though, on leftist-dominated slashdot,
that makes me a "Filthy Hindu animal" worthy only to be a hateful
object.
Sorry, but in an atmosphere when rabid Indophobia and anti-Hinduism is
tolerated and a culture of hatre is built against them, how the hell do
you expect them to react? Bend over and take it?
The RSS was basically founded as a social service organization for the
emancipation and protection of poor Hindus during the 1940's in a
rising tide of violence directed against Hindus by Islamic
Fundamentalist mobs during the Islamic Caliphate resurrection movement
in India and the days following the anti-Hindu genocides in Bengal (the
Direct Action Riots instigated by the Pakistani Nationalists and the
Partition massacres). In that sense, they were more like the
Anti-Defamation League in the US contemporary to that period. For the
most part, even currently their primary goals are social service, the
emancipation of the poor (the RSS spent millions coordinating relief
efforts during the 2004 Tsunami disaster in South India), an active
campaign against untouhability and caste bigotry (60% ofRSS
members are Dalits and other lower castes), and trying to provide a
unified political emancipation movement for Hindus in a rising climate
of hostility against them, much like Irish Nationalism or Zionism in
Israel.
However, because this would endanger the power base upper-caste
dominated left wing government and polity in India and their Islamist
votebank, they started a virulent hate campaign against the RSS, one
that spilled over to hatred against Hindus in general. Eventually, they
were pushed hard enough to the wall to start pushing back, that's all.
MythTV requires a little tinkering to get running, but is very
flexible. I think this is really what it comes down to with most
Windows VS. FOSS situations
</quote>
True, but if you use a canned distro designed to run on dedicated PVR
boxen, such as Knoppmyth
or Mythdora,
you can get mythtv to "just work off the bat" too (at least with most
standard configs). I installed Knoppmyth version R5E50 from scratch a
couple of weeks ago in my hauppauge pvr-350 + pvr 150 dual tuner box
with the silver remote for the pvr-350's ir receiver and the whole
shabang was up-and-running in about an hour, no worries. Plus, I could
then spend the rest of the day tweaking it to my needs (the Knoppmyth maintainer
has already added some extra functionality, including a fully installed
democracy player etc.)
Forget the whiners. KnoppMyth is awesome. I just installed version R5E50 from scratch in my dedicated box. Lots of people here are talking about problems with lirc and the Hauppauge PVR remotes in from-scratch installs. I had the whole system up-and-running in an hour. My system has a Hauppauge pvr350 and pvr-150 with the pvr350 silver remote and lirc worked just fine right off the bat. It didn't work with earlier versions (I installed version R5A16 some months back and had to recompile lirc and manually config the grey remote's keystroke mapfile back then), but now it works just fine.Same with the pvr350 tv-out (which, with the earlier versions, required manual compilation of the ivtv driver and manual configuration of XFree86config file, not anymore).
The whole process was easy as pie and anyone who wants to have a Linux MCE system up-and-running swiftly would be wise to use a well-established distro like KnoppMyth.
That is synchronous message passing. Async would involve setting a callback and continuing. Hold on there, the library call explicitly says "bufferred" ie not-synch, the MPI_Wait() is simply a blocking call to make sure that the data has been sent completely before continuing. It will be operationally different from synchronous mode because the implementation is different, at least that's what my prof said in class.
but async removes deadlock that happens for silly reasons like order of executing just a couple of ops. Ah, but then how do you know that the data received is complete or reliable? If the data is being sent over the distributed network by Remote Direct Memory Access then we don't know if the transfer was complete before the instructions following the receive were posted in the local pipeline.
for me, deadlock is a situation where several objects compete for acquisition to a set of resources Well the wikipedia article certainly alludes to that definition (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadlock) but the article may be general and not pertain to parallel computing (there is no mention of parallel computing in that article). I thought what you're describing fell into "race condition".
The IBM Redbook on MPI (Page 26 of http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/abstracts/sg245380.htm l) explains deadlock as follows (pages 26,
27,
28):
When two processes need to exchange data with each other, you have to be careful about deadlocks. When a deadlock occurs, processes involved in the deadlock will not proceed any further. Deadlocks can take place either due to incorrect order of send and receive... which is what I said in the last post
...,or due to the limited size of the system buffer The first pseudocode on page 27 basically shows what you called a "datalock", right?
Also, see Michael Quinn "Parallel Computing in C with MPI and OpenMP" page 148 section 6.5.3 first para
A Process is in a deadlock state if it is blocked waiting for a condition that will never become true Which seems to not cover your case...
Maybe we're talking about different subsets of the same thing, not sure. I'm till rather new to parallel computing.
Asynchronous message passing removes the deadlock problem I don't understand, you could just as easily deadlock a proggie in MPI point-to-point communication using asynchronous mode as follows
if(pid==x) { MPI_bIRecv(some data tagged 1);/*Unblocked bufferred mode i.e asynch*/ MPI_Wait(Until request struct matches data); MPI_bISend(some data tagged 2); }
if(pid==y) { MPI_bIRecv(some data tagged 2);/*Unblocked bufferred mode i.e asynch*/ MPI_Wait(Until request struct matches data); MPI_bISend(some data tagged 1); }
You'll have to move the MPI_Wait() below the MPI_bISend to remove the deadlock. In Synch mode the deadlock can also be removed by alternating the Send() and Recv() in alternating processes. The deadlocks are not due to synchronization issues, they are due to blocking issues.
Most of the people in this discussion are talking about multithreading programs as a means of parallelization. While multithreading is one way, it's applicability in parallel processing is restricted to SMP (Shared Memory) systems only and thus is not very scalable by problem size. Far more general and powerful is Message Passing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Message_passing) which can be implemented in distributed grids and is very scalable. Multithreaded programs can be scaled upwards to distributed grids only by hybridizing it with MPI codes.
Of course it's "selfless." "Sewa" does not mean selfless. It means "Service" (typically towards one's community/family/nation) in most of the Indic languages. This was most definitely a "service", just not a selfless one.
Part of the Western tradition is a belief that there is a natural law, and that this law dictates many things that other cultures don't respect. It is a religious belief in many respects, but it is the idea that there is a universal order that mandates liberty, accountability and peace, rather than subordination of the individual to the herd. Sooo by your logic it is equally acceptable within the norms
of the so-called "Western Traditions" to divide people based
on racialist concepts of "Martial race"
and "Non-Martial Race", cause
famines that killed millions and prevent "N---ers"
from public
gatherings or walking on roads?
Why is it that all of this High and Mighty western egalitarianism vanished in the case of the Rwandan genocide (where the west did practically nothing) and the Apartheid Regime in South Africa? No oil involved, eh?
Gee thanks!
Because they are nice people, they are friends of mine. I believe them as I believe any other friends of mine who do nice things.
There are many good people in this world, a lot of them Muslims. Most Muslims are very decent people. Islamic cultures generally emphasize on "Tehezeeb" or courteous behavior at the individual level. Collectively, however, it is another story altogether.
The problem here is that there are many kind, decent and caring Muslims who turn into insane, raving maniacs at the drop of a hat if the right kind of stimulus is provided by the power-hungry Mullahs. Do you seriously think that the millions of rioters over the Muhammad Cartoons were all identifiably "bad" in some way? No. Many of them would otherwise qualify as good decent people. It's the societal structure created by the Mullahs that brainwashes them into behaving in this way. This is the reason why their society itself is in dire need of reform. This is the point that many reformists among Muslims try to make, and the mullahs make death threats against them because the reforms would take their stranglehold away. You really need to read Taslima Nasreen's books on Islamism. They are most illuminating. Plus, they are banned in every Muslim country. For a broader perspective read the works of Kazi Nasrul Islam on Islamic Fundamentalism (he didn't like it). Both Islam and Nasreen were/are Bengalee Muslim reformers. Bengalees have produced some of the most intellectual and self-critical Muslims in the world, which is why other Muslims hate and revile them so much.
You complain about the intolerance of Islam and respond by intolerance. You don't seem prepared to accept that some muslims are good people. This is bigotry.
Wrong. I respond with suspicion, and that's simple statistics. Liberals call it "profiling". I call it common sense. Too much of this PC crap can get you in front of the business end of a Kalashnikov...
Actually I generally am quite fond of Muslims. I grew up near a mosque, and, during my childhood, my tailor (with whom I had a therapist-client'esque relationahip) was a Muslim, as was my local butcher, cobbler, two of my teachers in school and many others. My tailor was a very devout Muslim, and, with his guidance, I became quite well-read on the Qu'ran, the Hadiths, Sharia and other aspects of Islamic jurisprudence or Fiqh, as well as Muslim history. I am not some liberal moonbat apologist for Islamist barbarity, however, and can clearly recognize and identify the source of the problems in their society.
I think you'll find it was the USA
Wrong again. The USA never funded the Taliban. They funded the Mujahiddeen resistence against the Communist Soviet invaders. The Taliban were the product of a subset of the Mujahiddeen who were directly trained by the Inter-Services Intelligence (basically the Pakistani version of the Gestapo).
Disclaimer: I am not an American,Israeli, or westerner, so please don't resort to the "Kaffir Yankee Zionist-Neocon" accusations that are so much a part of the liberal playbook these days...
How Pakistan, with a completely destroyed economy, is supposed to fund a regime in another country is beyond me
Fanatic regimes led by Islamist zealots seldom adhere to the needs of their people, or are you going to tell me now that the Islamization and state mandate of Sharia Law in Pakistan under Mohannad Zia-ul-Haq, their state sponsored genocide of Hindus and moderate Bengalee Muslims in Bangladesh, their Huddood laws (husbands getting brownie points for honor-killing their wives) and Hasba Bills (policemen patrolling the markets of the North-Western Frontier Provinces trolling for violations of "Islamic Law") never happened because "How Pakistan, with a completely destroyed economy, can do all these things..."? There is a reason why Pakistan is such a dirt poor country, their Islamist government has not cared about their people or their economic and social upliftmen
Have you been to a Muslim country?
I had.
Several as a matter of fact. So have I. I have been to Bangladesh
in 1971 where organized armies of Pakistani Muslims massacred some 2
million Hindus (I saw the dead bodies piled up in a village in Comilla
cantonment before my eyes), and they were helped along by a significant civilian majority throught the Jamaat-e-Islami, al-Shams and al-Badr militias. Even today, the reigning Bangladesh Nationalist Party colludes with the Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh to commit some pretty brutal atrocities against non-Muslims (read Taslima Nasreen's books on this sometime, books that are "banned" in Bangladesh)
And as for the so-called "moderate" Malaysia, whose erstwhile prime
minister publicly denies the holocaust and glorifies Hitler, and whose
legal system is defined by racist ideologies like "Bumiputra" ( special
priviledges for "Sons of the Soil" ie true Malays
defining a Muslim as the only "true Malaysian", Article 160 of the
Malaysian contsitution defines a Malay as being one who professes the
"true religion of Islam"; compare that to the Nazi ideology of "Blut
und Boden" ie Blood and Soil and you'll see that the similarity is not
just a perceived Godwinning)...
not sure about this, most Iranians I know are perfectly persobale people There you are 100% correct. Iran is the LEAST of our troubles. Iran is a SHIA Muslim majority, and SHIA Islam is a much more moderate sect than the SUNNI sect(s). With Shia Muslims you can make the legitimate argument that the extremism is a minority, restricted primarily to the batshit-crazy Ayatollahs, Ahmadinezhad and Hezbollah. The majority of the Muslim world is Sunni, however, and the batshit-craziness is far more prevalent as a systemic problem among Sunnis than Shia, or any of the other minority sects of Islam (Ahmadiyya, Islamili), which reinforces my assertion that egalitarian movements in Islam are quickly relegated to the minority fringe by the majority of the batshit-crazies.
because they strongly believe that terrorism is anti-islam How do you know they mean what they say? Statistically, a lot of these groups have proven themselves to be little more than money-laundering propaganda fronts for radical Islamist groups (read about CAIR, for instance). Frankly, with the dangerous intolerance and many-headed hydra of Islamism spreading the way it is it's safest to presume guilt until innocence is firmly established. Also, a lot of the legitimate reformist groups are very much outside the mainstream "madhhabs" of Islamic thought (like the Progressive Dawoodi Bohras in India or the Ahmadiyya Muslims in Pakistan etc.)
remember who funded the Taliban for years, and who armed them, and trained them (Hint: it wasn't a muslim country). Pakistan is very much a Muslim country, I assure you.
Indonesia, the most populous Muslim country in the world, has been for many years a very tolerant country, where different faiths have coexisted. Oh really? Might want to read "Riots, Pogroms, Jihad:Religious violence in Indonesia" by John Sidel where he details some of the most brutal pogroms organized by Islamist mobs in Indonesia against Christians and Hindus and see how "tolerant" Islamists in Indonesia have been towards "Kaffirs". Some of the most brutal slaughters of non-Muslims by Islamists have occurred in Indonesia over the past few decades.
You also have Turkey, a secular country ..where the largest Islamist movement of the twentieth century (the Khilafat restoration movement) originated. While admittedly Turkey is not as bad as most other Muslim countries, the Islamic Refah Party, a massively Islamist, racist and antisemitic hate group with links to Hamas, Hezbollah and Ahmadinezhad is alive and well.
but that can't be accussed of promoting Islamism Have you been living in a madrassah these past few years???
That may be true, but the problem is that the moderate elements in the Islamic world aren't doing enough to curb the spread of the extremists. This is largely because Islamists conflate Islam with ethnocentrism (the Taliban were as much Pukhtun racial supremacists as they were Islamists, and the largest Islamist political party, the Jamaat-e-Islami in Pakistan, was founded by a fascist named Sayyid Abdul Ala Mawdudi who derived his rhetoric from Hitler's ideas of Herrenvolk, except that the "Aryans/Usermensch" were Sunnis and the "Jews/Untermensch" were just about all non-Sunnis, including Christians, Hindus, Shia Muslims and members of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community in Pakistan, who were targeted for genocide by the JI). When they try to coat Islamism (something very abstract and intellectual and not very useful as a propaganda tool) in the language of ethnocentrism (Pukhtuns are true Muslims, Arabs are true Muslims, the "others" are waging war on Islam, die for Islam etc. etc, something that the common man can understand and identify with), it spreads like wildfire across the Muslim world, and even the moderates get sucked in. In addition, this type of rhetoric can be used against reformists among Muslims. There have been many reform attempts in Islam (Shia Islam, for instance, can be seen as a reformation because it rejected the Islamist ideology of the Khilafat), but they are quickly killed/silenced/dispensed with in other ways. Look at the numerous cases of reform attempts like the Islamili movement, the Ahmadiyya movement, Kazi NAzrul, Taslima Nasreen etc. all demonized, villified and massacred by the Sunni Mullahs and their mobs...
An even wackier idea is the possibility of intelligent beings made of
dark matter, such as science fiction writer Stephen Baxter's
fictitious Photino
Birds
Sorry to be a buzzkill, but...
TFA says (and I quote)
In work submitted to a major physics journal, he and colleagues report that... and provides a ling to lanl.gov (e-print archives). The E-print archives are not a peer-reviewed "Major Physics Journal". Anyone can submit to them. They may have sent it for publication/peer-review, but then they need to say "Sent to so-and-so" in their e-print submission. As of now, the article is not peer-reviewed. Of course, if the work is deemed notable and correct then that should change, but let's not crystal-ball here.
Yeah, even most of the so-called "religious fundamentalists" (extremist left wing propaganda) don't give a hoot about somebody slobbering over somebody on television They're not religious fundamentalists really, there has only been one movement in Hinduism that can be called "Fundamentalist" in the sense that it was used in Christianity and more recently, Islam, which is scriptural literalism, and that was the Arya Samaaj.That movement died a quick death coz all of them had nervous breakdowns trying to literally adhere to the 100 libraries or so worth of Hindu religious scripture.
I mean, come on, I admit that the Shiv Sena (the morons who allegedly pulled these shenanigans off) is grossly misrepresented and maligned by the far-left moonbat liberal media in India , but this is fucking ridiculous. They need to get lives.
And this to Richard Gere, a man who has been a valuable friend to India. Ridiculous!
Geographically, only half of Pakistan is in the Indian Subcontinent (Pakistani Punjab and Sindh). The other half (Balochistan and the Tribal areas) are outside the tectonic plate that characterizes the Indian subcontinent. Even culturally, the Baluch and the tribals are markedly different from the Punjabis and Sindhis (the Baluch are ethnically Iranian), which is why there is such unrest there. The Baluch are poorly represented in Pakistani politics (which is dominated by ethnic Punjabis) and are largely oppressed, which is why there is such a massive insurgency there.
Slashdot Mirror
Nice try Osama, but the Indian Military's actions in Kashmir are a response to massive human rights violations by the Islamists against the Kashmiri Hindus, millions of them have been ethnically cleansed by Muslim militants. It is the religious intolerance and racism of the Islamists that brought their fate upon them.
There is most definitely a pervasive media bias against the Shiv Sena. A bias that stems from Islamist votebank politics, motivated primarily by a sense of "My enemy's enemy is my ally" style of realpolotik and the desire of the left to ultimately eradicate all criticism from Hindus and render India a totalitarian, communist regime.
What about the thuggery and villany of the Communist Party? What about the decades of nepotism, corruption, and state-sponsored buggerry conducted by Communist bastard despots like Jyoti Basu in West Bengal? What about the thugs and murderer Communists called Naxalites inIndia's red corridor (Bengal, Bihar, orissa and northern AP)? How well does the Indian Media report about their killings, rapes, bombings and Pakistani support? No, the Indian media is only obsessed with Hindus.
How well does the media report the attacks on poor Hindus carried out by the Communist thugs in Nandigram just a few months ago? In the finest traditions fo Stalin and Mao, the CPM massacred dozens of poor Hindus in Nandigram , and the media conveniently hid the whole damn thing under the rug. Only the international media reported on it with any degree of objectivity.
However, the rise of Islamist terrorism in India, coupled with the systematic ethnic cleansing and genocides of Hindus in Kashmir, Bangladesh, Pakistan and several parts of India proper itself (remember Morichjhanpi, Tripura, Naxalites etc. etc?) have rendered me "a former liberal mugged by reality" (as famous American political visionary Irving Kristol put it). I may not particularly enjoy the Shiv Sena's antics, but they have done a lot to emancipate the poor in Maharashtra (something that the moonbat media never reports, obviously), drastically improved the local infrastructure (a much needed boon in a developing country) and provide a much needed balance against the rising tide of radical Communism and Islamist bigotry that plagues out society. Remember, the essense of a modern democracy is the presence of checks and balances.
I suppose the only thing there to see is if the DoE would succumb to the 'pressure' and actually block Orkut (it's possible, trust me), or, if the Internet Cafe Association of India (or whatever their organization calls itself) organizes itself, and throws up a counter bandh to protest these mofos.
I wonder where your righteous indignation against bans was when the West Bengal government banned Taslima Nasreen's Lajja (Some of her other "banned" books are available online here) because a bunch of Islamist bigots felt that it "insulted Islam"? Or when the government of Andhra Pradesh in South India "banned" the screenings of the Da-Vinci Code becuase a bunch of evangelical Christians got their undies in a tizzy?Were you just as indignated then, or did you not notice because the pro-Islamist/Leftist media in India convenientlyignored reporting about them? Eh?
It is precisely this intrinsic evocation of double standards against Hindus that is the litmus test for anti-Hinduism.
Really?
Here is an interesting interview of Nobel Laureate V.S. Naipaul that points out how the "Indian Intelligentsia" (ie communist fanatics and Islamists) deliberately skew media reports against the Shiv Sena as part of a systematic campaign of hatred directed against Hindus. The Shiv Sena has done more for the emancipation of the Maharashtrian poor then any of the leftist parties who attack and villify them.
Also notable is Naipaul's famous observation in his bestseller "India, A Wounded Civilization":
<quote>
There was one portrait. And interestingly, it was not of the leader of the Shiv Sena or of Shivaji, the 17 th century Maratha King, but of the long-dead Dr. Ambedkar...Popular-and near-ecstatic-movements like the Shiv Sena ritualize many different needs. The Sena here, honouring an angry and (for all his eminence) defeated man, seemed quite different from the Sena the newspapers wrote about
</quote>
I'm not a big fan of Shiv Sena or the RSS in general. But when I see our own media attack and villify them as part of a shameless excuse to pander to a rising tide of Communist and Islamic Fundamentalism, while ignoring the brutal and barbaric massacres and atrocities against Hindus in Kashmir, Pakistan, Bangadesh, and even at times condoning them, and when Communists in the media openly attack Hindus and demand for their mass killings, I have no choice but to speak out, even though, on leftist-dominated slashdot, that makes me a "Filthy Hindu animal" worthy only to be a hateful object.
Sorry, but in an atmosphere when rabid Indophobia and anti-Hinduism is tolerated and a culture of hatre is built against them, how the hell do you expect them to react? Bend over and take it?
The RSS was basically founded as a social service organization for the emancipation and protection of poor Hindus during the 1940's in a rising tide of violence directed against Hindus by Islamic Fundamentalist mobs during the Islamic Caliphate resurrection movement in India and the days following the anti-Hindu genocides in Bengal (the Direct Action Riots instigated by the Pakistani Nationalists and the Partition massacres). In that sense, they were more like the Anti-Defamation League in the US contemporary to that period. For the most part, even currently their primary goals are social service, the emancipation of the poor (the RSS spent millions coordinating relief efforts during the 2004 Tsunami disaster in South India), an active campaign against untouhability and caste bigotry (60% ofRSS members are Dalits and other lower castes), and trying to provide a unified political emancipation movement for Hindus in a rising climate of hostility against them, much like Irish Nationalism or Zionism in Israel.
However, because this would endanger the power base upper-caste dominated left wing government and polity in India and their Islamist votebank, they started a virulent hate campaign against the RSS, one that spilled over to hatred against Hindus in general. Eventually, they were pushed hard enough to the wall to start pushing back, that's all.
MythTV requires a little tinkering to get running, but is very flexible. I think this is really what it comes down to with most Windows VS. FOSS situations
</quote>
True, but if you use a canned distro designed to run on dedicated PVR boxen, such as Knoppmyth or Mythdora, you can get mythtv to "just work off the bat" too (at least with most standard configs). I installed Knoppmyth version R5E50 from scratch a couple of weeks ago in my hauppauge pvr-350 + pvr 150 dual tuner box with the silver remote for the pvr-350's ir receiver and the whole shabang was up-and-running in about an hour, no worries. Plus, I could then spend the rest of the day tweaking it to my needs (the Knoppmyth maintainer has already added some extra functionality, including a fully installed democracy player etc.)
Hey Cecil,
Forget the whiners. KnoppMyth is awesome. I just installed version R5E50 from scratch in my dedicated box. Lots of people here are talking about problems with lirc and the Hauppauge PVR remotes in from-scratch installs. I had the whole system up-and-running in an hour. My system has a Hauppauge pvr350 and pvr-150 with the pvr350 silver remote and lirc worked just fine right off the bat. It didn't work with earlier versions (I installed version R5A16 some months back and had to recompile lirc and manually config the grey remote's keystroke mapfile back then), but now it works just fine.Same with the pvr350 tv-out (which, with the earlier versions, required manual compilation of the ivtv driver and manual configuration of XFree86config file, not anymore). The whole process was easy as pie and anyone who wants to have a Linux MCE system up-and-running swiftly would be wise to use a well-established distro like KnoppMyth.
Weblink: http://www.mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html
...,or due to the limited size of the system buffer The first pseudocode on page 27 basically shows what you called a "datalock", right? Also, see Michael Quinn "Parallel Computing in C with MPI and OpenMP" page 148 section 6.5.3 first para A Process is in a deadlock state if it is blocked waiting for a condition that will never become true Which seems to not cover your case... Maybe we're talking about different subsets of the same thing, not sure. I'm till rather new to parallel computing.Most of the people in this discussion are talking about multithreading programs as a means of parallelization. While multithreading is one way, it's applicability in parallel processing is restricted to SMP (Shared Memory) systems only and thus is not very scalable by problem size. Far more general and powerful is Message Passing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Message_passing) which can be implemented in distributed grids and is very scalable. Multithreaded programs can be scaled upwards to distributed grids only by hybridizing it with MPI codes.
Why is it that all of this High and Mighty western egalitarianism vanished in the case of the Rwandan genocide (where the west did practically nothing) and the Apartheid Regime in South Africa? No oil involved, eh?
Gee thanks!
Because they are nice people, they are friends of mine. I believe them as I believe any other friends of mine who do nice things.
There are many good people in this world, a lot of them Muslims. Most Muslims are very decent people. Islamic cultures generally emphasize on "Tehezeeb" or courteous behavior at the individual level. Collectively, however, it is another story altogether.
The problem here is that there are many kind, decent and caring Muslims who turn into insane, raving maniacs at the drop of a hat if the right kind of stimulus is provided by the power-hungry Mullahs. Do you seriously think that the millions of rioters over the Muhammad Cartoons were all identifiably "bad" in some way? No. Many of them would otherwise qualify as good decent people. It's the societal structure created by the Mullahs that brainwashes them into behaving in this way. This is the reason why their society itself is in dire need of reform. This is the point that many reformists among Muslims try to make, and the mullahs make death threats against them because the reforms would take their stranglehold away. You really need to read Taslima Nasreen's books on Islamism. They are most illuminating. Plus, they are banned in every Muslim country. For a broader perspective read the works of Kazi Nasrul Islam on Islamic Fundamentalism (he didn't like it). Both Islam and Nasreen were/are Bengalee Muslim reformers. Bengalees have produced some of the most intellectual and self-critical Muslims in the world, which is why other Muslims hate and revile them so much.
You complain about the intolerance of Islam and respond by intolerance. You don't seem prepared to accept that some muslims are good people. This is bigotry.
Wrong. I respond with suspicion, and that's simple statistics. Liberals call it "profiling". I call it common sense. Too much of this PC crap can get you in front of the business end of a Kalashnikov...
Actually I generally am quite fond of Muslims. I grew up near a mosque, and, during my childhood, my tailor (with whom I had a therapist-client'esque relationahip) was a Muslim, as was my local butcher, cobbler, two of my teachers in school and many others. My tailor was a very devout Muslim, and, with his guidance, I became quite well-read on the Qu'ran, the Hadiths, Sharia and other aspects of Islamic jurisprudence or Fiqh, as well as Muslim history. I am not some liberal moonbat apologist for Islamist barbarity, however, and can clearly recognize and identify the source of the problems in their society.
I think you'll find it was the USA
Wrong again. The USA never funded the Taliban. They funded the Mujahiddeen resistence against the Communist Soviet invaders. The Taliban were the product of a subset of the Mujahiddeen who were directly trained by the Inter-Services Intelligence (basically the Pakistani version of the Gestapo).
...
Disclaimer: I am not an American,Israeli, or westerner, so please don't resort to the "Kaffir Yankee Zionist-Neocon" accusations that are so much a part of the liberal playbook these days
How Pakistan, with a completely destroyed economy, is supposed to fund a regime in another country is beyond me
Fanatic regimes led by Islamist zealots seldom adhere to the needs of their people, or are you going to tell me now that the Islamization and state mandate of Sharia Law in Pakistan under Mohannad Zia-ul-Haq, their state sponsored genocide of Hindus and moderate Bengalee Muslims in Bangladesh, their Huddood laws (husbands getting brownie points for honor-killing their wives) and Hasba Bills (policemen patrolling the markets of the North-Western Frontier Provinces trolling for violations of "Islamic Law") never happened because "How Pakistan, with a completely destroyed economy, can do all these things..."? There is a reason why Pakistan is such a dirt poor country, their Islamist government has not cared about their people or their economic and social upliftmen
I had. Several as a matter of fact.
So have I. I have been to Bangladesh in 1971 where organized armies of Pakistani Muslims massacred some 2 million Hindus (I saw the dead bodies piled up in a village in Comilla cantonment before my eyes), and they were helped along by a significant civilian majority throught the Jamaat-e-Islami, al-Shams and al-Badr militias. Even today, the reigning Bangladesh Nationalist Party colludes with the Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh to commit some pretty brutal atrocities against non-Muslims (read Taslima Nasreen's books on this sometime, books that are "banned" in Bangladesh)
And as for the so-called "moderate" Malaysia, whose erstwhile prime minister publicly denies the holocaust and glorifies Hitler, and whose legal system is defined by racist ideologies like "Bumiputra" ( special priviledges for "Sons of the Soil" ie true Malays
defining a Muslim as the only "true Malaysian", Article 160 of the Malaysian contsitution defines a Malay as being one who professes the "true religion of Islam"; compare that to the Nazi ideology of "Blut und Boden" ie Blood and Soil and you'll see that the similarity is not just a perceived Godwinning)...
not sure about this, most Iranians I know are perfectly persobale people There you are 100% correct. Iran is the LEAST of our troubles. Iran is a SHIA Muslim majority, and SHIA Islam is a much more moderate sect than the SUNNI sect(s). With Shia Muslims you can make the legitimate argument that the extremism is a minority, restricted primarily to the batshit-crazy Ayatollahs, Ahmadinezhad and Hezbollah. The majority of the Muslim world is Sunni, however, and the batshit-craziness is far more prevalent as a systemic problem among Sunnis than Shia, or any of the other minority sects of Islam (Ahmadiyya, Islamili), which reinforces my assertion that egalitarian movements in Islam are quickly relegated to the minority fringe by the majority of the batshit-crazies.
That may be true, but the problem is that the moderate elements in the Islamic world aren't doing enough to curb the spread of the extremists. This is largely because Islamists conflate Islam with ethnocentrism (the Taliban were as much Pukhtun racial supremacists as they were Islamists, and the largest Islamist political party, the Jamaat-e-Islami in Pakistan, was founded by a fascist named Sayyid Abdul Ala Mawdudi who derived his rhetoric from Hitler's ideas of Herrenvolk, except that the "Aryans/Usermensch" were Sunnis and the "Jews/Untermensch" were just about all non-Sunnis, including Christians, Hindus, Shia Muslims and members of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community in Pakistan, who were targeted for genocide by the JI). When they try to coat Islamism (something very abstract and intellectual and not very useful as a propaganda tool) in the language of ethnocentrism (Pukhtuns are true Muslims, Arabs are true Muslims, the "others" are waging war on Islam, die for Islam etc. etc, something that the common man can understand and identify with), it spreads like wildfire across the Muslim world, and even the moderates get sucked in. In addition, this type of rhetoric can be used against reformists among Muslims. There have been many reform attempts in Islam (Shia Islam, for instance, can be seen as a reformation because it rejected the Islamist ideology of the Khilafat), but they are quickly killed/silenced/dispensed with in other ways. Look at the numerous cases of reform attempts like the Islamili movement, the Ahmadiyya movement, Kazi NAzrul, Taslima Nasreen etc. all demonized, villified and massacred by the Sunni Mullahs and their mobs...
An even wackier idea is the possibility of intelligent beings made of dark matter, such as science fiction writer Stephen Baxter's fictitious Photino Birds
Yeah, even most of the so-called "religious fundamentalists" (extremist left wing propaganda) don't give a hoot about somebody slobbering over somebody on television They're not religious fundamentalists really, there has only been one movement in Hinduism that can be called "Fundamentalist" in the sense that it was used in Christianity and more recently, Islam, which is scriptural literalism, and that was the Arya Samaaj.That movement died a quick death coz all of them had nervous breakdowns trying to literally adhere to the 100 libraries or so worth of Hindu religious scripture.
I mean, come on, I admit that the Shiv Sena (the morons who allegedly pulled these shenanigans off) is grossly misrepresented and maligned by the far-left moonbat liberal media in India , but this is fucking ridiculous. They need to get lives.
And this to Richard Gere, a man who has been a valuable friend to India. Ridiculous!
Geographically, only half of Pakistan is in the Indian Subcontinent (Pakistani Punjab and Sindh). The other half (Balochistan and the Tribal areas) are outside the tectonic plate that characterizes the Indian subcontinent. Even culturally, the Baluch and the tribals are markedly different from the Punjabis and Sindhis (the Baluch are ethnically Iranian), which is why there is such unrest there. The Baluch are poorly represented in Pakistani politics (which is dominated by ethnic Punjabis) and are largely oppressed, which is why there is such a massive insurgency there.