enjoy. i wonder if there are STILL any apple fans who would come up and defend this kind of crookery. wait - there would. some idiot would come up and say that it was illegal for the site to expose the prototype.
i wont even touch that idiocy, which goes in line with 'it would be illegal to touch them scandalous tapes even if nixon left them out in the open', however i will comment on one thing :
1.5 years ago microsoft was increasingly coming up in news with crooked, bastardly, or oppressive actions like these. back then there were fools who were defending it. 1.5 years later, most of them seem to have shut up, not being able to take shit from their favorite company even themselves, anymore.
i said this before ; a corporate culture shows itself in all aspects of a corporation's activities. it will be same with apple.
"Calling these rabble revolutionaries is as good as calling rats people"
you could hear this being said in early days of french revolution. look how it turned out.
'movements' do not start with some mouthpiece channel spending funds and beating drums to incite some segment of society against laws that are detrimental to private interests like in u.s.
movements start as a behavior pattern in society. a choice.
piracy is exactly like that, a choice. you wont find the same people stealing cars, despite they are pirating software or games. it is basically a reactionary, instinctive behavior, just like how french were stealing potatoes from king's potato fields during the famine decade of 1780, while all the produce was owned by french aristocrats and food was very expensive. the same people who stole potatoes from those fields wouldnt rob you if they found you in a dark alley.
similarly, current society of this planet doesnt see the reason that they should be forced to pay some certain price because marketing decisions of numerous companies decided that it should be priced as such, and then this price be enforced to public through various laws these corporations purchase in assemblies.
they are 'the market' and they decide what is worth what. definitely NOT the producers of that good/service, coming together and ganging up to arrange prices in a sweet point of profit for them, and then enforcing it. this kind of price fixing happens in every sector without there being a cartel agreement or even any talk in between companies. one does it, the other sees another does it and copies, 3 more copies it and then it becomes the standard of that industry.
example is, manufacturing costs going down to dimes because of manufacturing moving to china, but goods are still being sold from similar prices as before, with HUGE profit margins. one would think that at least one company would come and do serious competition. but, noen is doing it. why ? cartel without agreement.
so, just like in french revolutionary period, or just like how spanish STILL smuggled despite king of spain's private company made it an offense punishable by death, people pirate.
they think that they are paying too much for those goods. something that is that easily reproducable and distributable, shouldnt be that expensive. and here is the result.
the only way to 'combat' piracy is to sell digital goods cheaper. i put the word combat in scare quotes, because you cant fight the people, as in 'we the people'. the people eventually wins.
when you compare the level of brutality and the number of casualties in 20th century, and what has been going on aside from those in the 20th century and the population of earth to the population, customs, way of life, total brutality, total casualties etc in the earlier ages, 20th century comes up shining.
entire generations have lived after example of mohammad since mohammad's death. you can be assured there are millions of people doing the same around middle east, despite the modern age.
if there is any good going to come to society from this, it will be from people like you who stand in deep in the middle of the shit, but do not immerse in it themselves.
all the life in civilization has to be as greedy, arrogant, reckless as us, and should have used their resources wastefully, waging war on each other, developing philosophies that would justify that kind of abuse like we do, and, SOMEHOW, despite all this destructive behavior, they should be able to escape any kind of planetary disaster these could induce, and rise into the stars to be able to conduct effective interstellar travel.
what an arrogant and earth centric view of existence.
hawking is a great man indeed, but his vision is narrow in this regard, because he apparently assumes any intelligent life in universe has to follow the same path for social evolution. in reality, any average history hobbyist with some research under his/her belt would be able to say that, even our civilization's advancement has been tied to our declining levels of agression throughout history, especially in the last 200 years. it is very low chance that, an aggressive, oppressive society would be able to easily elevate to effective interstellar travel level, since aggressiveness in ANY form causes much resource and time to be lost due to the waste belligerent activity creates.
google, facebook, twitter has he resources to unload huge development time to compatibility, assurance, whereas REST of the web does NOT.
nothing happens if an average joe's computer locks up while visiting twitter, he is just one in a million or more hits every day, and he will just come back, because it is a prominent site.
for the rest of the web, for example for a small estore that gets 2000 uniques a day and does 10 sales, one potential customer lost is a big deal.
therefore, due to its expensiveness and lack of guarantees for assurance, so far client side didnt spread around the net, except only the big boys.
im repeating this in every discussion related to client side. there are innumerable reasons why client side is a bad idea and it shouldnt be leaned on. ill recide :
- it is something that happens in a remote client pc, on which you dont have any control. there may be one small applet running in the tray, and it may fuck up execution of your code on that pc, costing you a visitor/sale/whatever.
- client side scripting is a VERY good channel to infect visitor pcs, and this is why trojans, viruses are being written exclusively on client side stuff for a decade or more.
- due to the above fact, privacy, security, firewall, antivir programs etc are very hostile to client side scripting, and scrutinize it. most cause failures in client side with execution, or block it altogether, killing your site for your visitor. you wont know any of these cases unless some enterprising visitor can understand whats going on and report - even then you will lose heaps of visitors for every report you get.
- on the web you cant take risks - every visitor is important in our time. therefore, the above problem constitutes a very good reason why not to use client side scripting - you must make sure you catch every visitor.
- scaling and shit. you cant trust it. it is something that also happens on client side, according to the code you have written, and even the scaling back code itself is prone to the issues above. it may get locked up due to some app causing it to malfunction, it may be prevented by security programs, it may fail due to lack of memory, it may fail due to innumerable things.
- EVEN if it doesnt fail, you still wont know how did your website present itself on the other side. maybe some important widgets malfunctioned, so the client cant order now ? or communicate ? you will never know because most visitors will just close down your site and move away, instantly forgetting that they have ever been at your site.
.......
thats why you need to go with server side scripting :
- ALL the parameters are under your control. you will be sure your code executes, doesnt run out of memory, successfully completes and sends the result to the client, in acceptable speed.
- Because youre sending pure html and css to the visitor client computer, you will be sure that what you sent has reached them. there is little reason as of now for security programs to shun html and css, or any runaway or irrelevant app causing any lockdowns, crashes or any other issue. what you produced serverside, goes to client side much more probably than client side.
Then please tell me why jews at large are not stoning people for having sex with someone that is married to another person.
longer history, much more (and many conflicting or obscure or dubious) theological/'divine' input to judaism, no centralization of belief as in koran without any precedent.
at any point in judaism there were numerous orders, scripture, customs that were attributed to god. it was widespread knowledge, and was hard to repress. with islam, even at the start the information/scripture was there rather intact (or we are told) and at the time koran was scripted into a book by the kaliph any other script was destroyed and any other thought on that matter was totally repressed.
so as it stands, in islam you dont have any point to use as an excuse for not adhering to its strict rules.
lso, please tell me why the reformists that you describe in your reply to me can not be in a majority, at some point in the future. If their views are so internaly consistent in a "muslim logic way" that they can carry over to the current somewhat sizeable minority then clearly what is stopping them from spreading is not the inbuild reasoning of the 'new' interpretation.
the views of reformists can never be consistent in a muslim logic way at any given point. because, as i said, reformism in islam requires refusal of its many aspects. therefore, at any given point in which reformists start to become a noticeable percentage in a predominantly muslim and islamist country, the islamist majority fiercely and brutally lashes back, and represses them. in addition, the perpetuation of the religious dogma is provided by indoctrinating kids at an early age to the dogma, and forcing them to live in a certain way, basically brainwashing kids. so, because islam caters more to the lower segments of society, and these segments are always in big majority, the system perpetuates itself.
The problem of the middle eastern region is a cultural and governing one as well as a historical one. A mindset that rests outside of Islam and is prevalent in many other parts of the world. They could all be Hindi and the exact same patterns would turn up.
you are rather correct in earlier part, but not in the latter part.
islam is the final product of the autocratic, repressive priest-king (later evolves to prophet-king) culture of ancient middle east. you can see aspects of that culture (starting from early agricultural societies) in anything that middle east produced, including all the religions out of it. it is the ultimate codification of this repression system, in a seemingly self consistent way - ie you either accept the package or refuse the package or else.
this is not correct for any other religion. in hinduism you can and do worship a phletora of gods, each with different character and aspect. therefore, there are always a broad array of behavior patterns that are acceptable to the society. islam doesnt provide that kind of liberty.
And please bear in mind, through all this I am simply forgoing the argument of who are in a majority and minority, outside of the controlling forces. For the sake of argument I'm willing to accept your view because even with that handicap, your reasoning comes out short.
you neednt. bring the minority/majority aspect into the issue too. for, its also an important aspect of islam.
mohammad and his followers were 'tolerant' of other thoughts and religions, and their verses in koran and sayings were in accordance up until they got the majority in the place (medinah city) they were invited to escape repression in mecca city. when they got the majority there, no trace of that tolerance was left, and instantly verses ordering them to wage war and repress minorities started to be 'revealed' and they started night raids, and exterminations (beni kuraizah jew tribe for starters).
huh ? you think so ? you think that, only because the storefront is different, and, you are allowed vertical social mobility in appearance, you do not live in a caste system ?
in your country, top 5% of the society has 74% of financial wealth. similar applies for income and total wealth. note that, financial wealth is much important because they are major tools for generating more wealth (investments, interest, instruments) and getting even richer.
so you live in this country, where 80% of society does with approx 15% of wealth. and in that country EVERYthing costs money. education costs money. a lot, so that if you dont find a scholarship, you start life deeply in debt. if you do find a scholarship you probably start life as an indentured servant. to start life without being bonded or indebted you have to be in the very, very tiny genious margin of 1/1000 of society. how many people are in there ? are you ?
staying alive costs money. getting a nose patched can cost an arm and a leg. (until the recent healthcare bill of yours), it was possible that you could be denied treatment even if you were able to pay your insurance payments, even if you were a kid.
rents cost arm and a leg. everything is sold from exorbitant prices despite being manufactured in china for dimes.
so. tell me.
are you fool enough to believe that a caste system in a country which 5% has 74% of wealth and 80% of society does with 15%, does not exist ? it was better in medieval code for fuck's sakes - serf was legally and customarily entitled to 33% of the produce from the farm they tilled for their lord...
you love your job, its not going to be outsourced, and every single aspect of your life is controlled by corporations with big money, including your judiciary and your democracy.
actually we arent of track, this issue is specifically the gist of this thread. the medieval core of islam. there is a great difference in between the oppressions in china, russia and the oppression in muslim countries. however i will first clear some misconceptions:
If you want to argue that a lot of the places I just mentioned isn't as screwed up as, say, Saudi Arabia or Iran then I'd like to point out that for example Malaysia and Indonesia, two countries that are by no means top-notch countries, do however have muslim majorities and are run at least on par with some of the less bad oppressors, if there is such a thing.
in malaysia muslims only recently gained power. and immediately started to steer the country towards another saudi arabia example. from the start, various measures to discriminate against women were introduced. indonesia had a lot of oppression in its history, but this wasnt exclusively due to muslim leaning administrations. a true islamist party hasnt come to power there yet. on top of that, indonesia is a handful geography to control - you cant exercise tight control over thousands of islands, and therefore any kind of grand scale social engineering or oppression becomes impossible.
.......
back to the difference of oppression in islam and other kinds of oppression - in islam oppression stems from dogma. whereas in china, it stems from ideology, which can easily be questioned and rejected in a philosophical basis. you cant do this in islam, because, first, it claims to be divine, and therefore is dogma, second, it produces various logical conditions tied to each other that, if you want to refuse any of them, you need to question and refuse all of them. its an all or nothing package.
basically, the oppression in countries like china stems from the tight control of a central government and the faction that is controlling it tightly. if, by any chance, that control weakens, or the faction on top of control mechanism changes, oppression also changes, and the country, the new ruling faction still can change some of the societal values, rules and practices and stay within the same cultural boundaries. a good example is ussr under mikhail gorbachev.
however in islam, even if the ruling faction changes, the level of oppression, the ruleset, the practice cannot change, because, they are hardcoded into logical sets and dogma that you cant refuse partially. so, when you start to change policies, reduce oppression, (going unislamic, infidel in the eyes of the populace), you start to become out of place, because what you do dont fit in with islam. therefore your legitimacy stats becoming questionable. just like the 'reformist' regimes in iran, and their situation vs the public. this is because the oppression, control structure, medieval laws are nestled in islam itself, and islam is the religious dogma AND also the custom with which populace conducts their daily lives. this goes far beyond the brainwashing that was done in ussr or in china, or in any other country. the minority reformist percentages in muslim countries (like iran) cannot cope and be a power base for a reformist government for long.
this is the reason why there havent been any sort of peaceful revolution, reform in any islamist/muslim controlled country up to this date from the start of islam. this includes turkey - turkey was reformed from remnant of ottoman empire by a reformist army general through control of army and the reforms were forced upon otherwise (then) unwilling populace.
basically my point is, due to the above aspects of islam, it would be naive to evaluate islamism, and islam as it is today as just like any other kind of oppressive thought or ideology.
One reason to think this is the millions upon millions of 'shepherds' that define themselves as muslim and live perfectly peacefull, happy lives next to denominations and non-denominations of all kinds.
only when they are in minority. when they are in majority, what happens in middle east happens. not only they themselves live under oppressed rules, happily, but also all other minorities (if they are still allowed to exist) live as second class citizens. there is no country on the face of the world in which muslims are in majority, have power and there is no oppression.
all i see here is, unbridled capitalism infiltrating and skewing judicial system in america as well as anything else. and its bad. the one with the most money buys the law, literally.
stop tagging this story with politically correct or watered down words people. this is outright fascism. denying right to travel on undeclared, non court warranted 'suspicion'.
if someone is guilty, you charge them. if someone is persona non grata, you extradite them. you do not do such charade like 'no fly lists'.
its a remnant of bush era stupor, and it smells cheney all around. it should go.
Slashdot Mirror
enjoy. i wonder if there are STILL any apple fans who would come up and defend this kind of crookery. wait - there would. some idiot would come up and say that it was illegal for the site to expose the prototype.
i wont even touch that idiocy, which goes in line with 'it would be illegal to touch them scandalous tapes even if nixon left them out in the open', however i will comment on one thing :
1.5 years ago microsoft was increasingly coming up in news with crooked, bastardly, or oppressive actions like these. back then there were fools who were defending it. 1.5 years later, most of them seem to have shut up, not being able to take shit from their favorite company even themselves, anymore.
i said this before ; a corporate culture shows itself in all aspects of a corporation's activities. it will be same with apple.
"Calling these rabble revolutionaries is as good as calling rats people"
you could hear this being said in early days of french revolution. look how it turned out.
'movements' do not start with some mouthpiece channel spending funds and beating drums to incite some segment of society against laws that are detrimental to private interests like in u.s.
movements start as a behavior pattern in society. a choice.
piracy is exactly like that, a choice. you wont find the same people stealing cars, despite they are pirating software or games. it is basically a reactionary, instinctive behavior, just like how french were stealing potatoes from king's potato fields during the famine decade of 1780, while all the produce was owned by french aristocrats and food was very expensive. the same people who stole potatoes from those fields wouldnt rob you if they found you in a dark alley.
similarly, current society of this planet doesnt see the reason that they should be forced to pay some certain price because marketing decisions of numerous companies decided that it should be priced as such, and then this price be enforced to public through various laws these corporations purchase in assemblies.
they are 'the market' and they decide what is worth what. definitely NOT the producers of that good/service, coming together and ganging up to arrange prices in a sweet point of profit for them, and then enforcing it. this kind of price fixing happens in every sector without there being a cartel agreement or even any talk in between companies. one does it, the other sees another does it and copies, 3 more copies it and then it becomes the standard of that industry.
example is, manufacturing costs going down to dimes because of manufacturing moving to china, but goods are still being sold from similar prices as before, with HUGE profit margins. one would think that at least one company would come and do serious competition. but, noen is doing it. why ? cartel without agreement.
so, just like in french revolutionary period, or just like how spanish STILL smuggled despite king of spain's private company made it an offense punishable by death, people pirate.
they think that they are paying too much for those goods. something that is that easily reproducable and distributable, shouldnt be that expensive. and here is the result.
the only way to 'combat' piracy is to sell digital goods cheaper. i put the word combat in scare quotes, because you cant fight the people, as in 'we the people'. the people eventually wins.
it is inevitable that someone asks that.
by relative measure.
when you compare the level of brutality and the number of casualties in 20th century, and what has been going on aside from those in the 20th century and the population of earth to the population, customs, way of life, total brutality, total casualties etc in the earlier ages, 20th century comes up shining.
entire generations have lived after example of mohammad since mohammad's death. you can be assured there are millions of people doing the same around middle east, despite the modern age.
if there is any good going to come to society from this, it will be from people like you who stand in deep in the middle of the shit, but do not immerse in it themselves.
all the life in civilization has to be as greedy, arrogant, reckless as us, and should have used their resources wastefully, waging war on each other, developing philosophies that would justify that kind of abuse like we do, and, SOMEHOW, despite all this destructive behavior, they should be able to escape any kind of planetary disaster these could induce, and rise into the stars to be able to conduct effective interstellar travel.
what an arrogant and earth centric view of existence.
hawking is a great man indeed, but his vision is narrow in this regard, because he apparently assumes any intelligent life in universe has to follow the same path for social evolution. in reality, any average history hobbyist with some research under his/her belt would be able to say that, even our civilization's advancement has been tied to our declining levels of agression throughout history, especially in the last 200 years. it is very low chance that, an aggressive, oppressive society would be able to easily elevate to effective interstellar travel level, since aggressiveness in ANY form causes much resource and time to be lost due to the waste belligerent activity creates.
sorry hawking, but you lost me on this one.
why so anonymous ?
google, facebook, twitter has he resources to unload huge development time to compatibility, assurance, whereas REST of the web does NOT.
nothing happens if an average joe's computer locks up while visiting twitter, he is just one in a million or more hits every day, and he will just come back, because it is a prominent site.
for the rest of the web, for example for a small estore that gets 2000 uniques a day and does 10 sales, one potential customer lost is a big deal.
therefore, due to its expensiveness and lack of guarantees for assurance, so far client side didnt spread around the net, except only the big boys.
im repeating this in every discussion related to client side. there are innumerable reasons why client side is a bad idea and it shouldnt be leaned on. ill recide :
.......
- it is something that happens in a remote client pc, on which you dont have any control. there may be one small applet running in the tray, and it may fuck up execution of your code on that pc, costing you a visitor/sale/whatever.
- client side scripting is a VERY good channel to infect visitor pcs, and this is why trojans, viruses are being written exclusively on client side stuff for a decade or more.
- due to the above fact, privacy, security, firewall, antivir programs etc are very hostile to client side scripting, and scrutinize it. most cause failures in client side with execution, or block it altogether, killing your site for your visitor. you wont know any of these cases unless some enterprising visitor can understand whats going on and report - even then you will lose heaps of visitors for every report you get.
- on the web you cant take risks - every visitor is important in our time. therefore, the above problem constitutes a very good reason why not to use client side scripting - you must make sure you catch every visitor.
- scaling and shit. you cant trust it. it is something that also happens on client side, according to the code you have written, and even the scaling back code itself is prone to the issues above. it may get locked up due to some app causing it to malfunction, it may be prevented by security programs, it may fail due to lack of memory, it may fail due to innumerable things.
- EVEN if it doesnt fail, you still wont know how did your website present itself on the other side. maybe some important widgets malfunctioned, so the client cant order now ? or communicate ? you will never know because most visitors will just close down your site and move away, instantly forgetting that they have ever been at your site.
thats why you need to go with server side scripting :
- ALL the parameters are under your control. you will be sure your code executes, doesnt run out of memory, successfully completes and sends the result to the client, in acceptable speed.
- Because youre sending pure html and css to the visitor client computer, you will be sure that what you sent has reached them. there is little reason as of now for security programs to shun html and css, or any runaway or irrelevant app causing any lockdowns, crashes or any other issue. what you produced serverside, goes to client side much more probably than client side.
and many more.
Phishing education phishy phished for phishy phishing the pish. pish.
Then please tell me why jews at large are not stoning people for having sex with someone that is married to another person.
longer history, much more (and many conflicting or obscure or dubious) theological/'divine' input to judaism, no centralization of belief as in koran without any precedent.
at any point in judaism there were numerous orders, scripture, customs that were attributed to god. it was widespread knowledge, and was hard to repress. with islam, even at the start the information/scripture was there rather intact (or we are told) and at the time koran was scripted into a book by the kaliph any other script was destroyed and any other thought on that matter was totally repressed.
so as it stands, in islam you dont have any point to use as an excuse for not adhering to its strict rules.
lso, please tell me why the reformists that you describe in your reply to me can not be in a majority, at some point in the future. If their views are so internaly consistent in a "muslim logic way" that they can carry over to the current somewhat sizeable minority then clearly what is stopping them from spreading is not the inbuild reasoning of the 'new' interpretation.
the views of reformists can never be consistent in a muslim logic way at any given point. because, as i said, reformism in islam requires refusal of its many aspects. therefore, at any given point in which reformists start to become a noticeable percentage in a predominantly muslim and islamist country, the islamist majority fiercely and brutally lashes back, and represses them. in addition, the perpetuation of the religious dogma is provided by indoctrinating kids at an early age to the dogma, and forcing them to live in a certain way, basically brainwashing kids. so, because islam caters more to the lower segments of society, and these segments are always in big majority, the system perpetuates itself.
The problem of the middle eastern region is a cultural and governing one as well as a historical one. A mindset that rests outside of Islam and is prevalent in many other parts of the world. They could all be Hindi and the exact same patterns would turn up.
you are rather correct in earlier part, but not in the latter part.
islam is the final product of the autocratic, repressive priest-king (later evolves to prophet-king) culture of ancient middle east. you can see aspects of that culture (starting from early agricultural societies) in anything that middle east produced, including all the religions out of it. it is the ultimate codification of this repression system, in a seemingly self consistent way - ie you either accept the package or refuse the package or else.
this is not correct for any other religion. in hinduism you can and do worship a phletora of gods, each with different character and aspect. therefore, there are always a broad array of behavior patterns that are acceptable to the society. islam doesnt provide that kind of liberty.
And please bear in mind, through all this I am simply forgoing the argument of who are in a majority and minority, outside of the controlling forces. For the sake of argument I'm willing to accept your view because even with that handicap, your reasoning comes out short.
you neednt. bring the minority/majority aspect into the issue too. for, its also an important aspect of islam.
mohammad and his followers were 'tolerant' of other thoughts and religions, and their verses in koran and sayings were in accordance up until they got the majority in the place (medinah city) they were invited to escape repression in mecca city. when they got the majority there, no trace of that tolerance was left, and instantly verses ordering them to wage war and repress minorities started to be 'revealed' and they started night raids, and exterminations (beni kuraizah jew tribe for starters).
huh ? you think so ? you think that, only because the storefront is different, and, you are allowed vertical social mobility in appearance, you do not live in a caste system ?
...
in your country, top 5% of the society has 74% of financial wealth. similar applies for income and total wealth. note that, financial wealth is much important because they are major tools for generating more wealth (investments, interest, instruments) and getting even richer.
so you live in this country, where 80% of society does with approx 15% of wealth. and in that country EVERYthing costs money. education costs money. a lot, so that if you dont find a scholarship, you start life deeply in debt. if you do find a scholarship you probably start life as an indentured servant. to start life without being bonded or indebted you have to be in the very, very tiny genious margin of 1/1000 of society. how many people are in there ? are you ?
staying alive costs money. getting a nose patched can cost an arm and a leg. (until the recent healthcare bill of yours), it was possible that you could be denied treatment even if you were able to pay your insurance payments, even if you were a kid.
rents cost arm and a leg. everything is sold from exorbitant prices despite being manufactured in china for dimes.
so. tell me.
are you fool enough to believe that a caste system in a country which 5% has 74% of wealth and 80% of society does with 15%, does not exist ? it was better in medieval code for fuck's sakes - serf was legally and customarily entitled to 33% of the produce from the farm they tilled for their lord
so america enjoys a much more nuanced and free, and is at terms with its sexuality.
WHERE ?
in east coast, and west coast, a few enclaves, and maybe a few scattered enclaves around the continent.
excluding those you have bigots, mormons, rednecks, innumerable religious cliches that shun many aspects of sexuality.
give me a break.
you love your job, its not going to be outsourced, and every single aspect of your life is controlled by corporations with big money, including your judiciary and your democracy.
its a great time to be an american !!
and mcdonalds and kfc alleviate hypocrisy, how ?
according to government statistics. hahaha. yea. you can trust on that.
actually we arent of track, this issue is specifically the gist of this thread. the medieval core of islam. there is a great difference in between the oppressions in china, russia and the oppression in muslim countries. however i will first clear some misconceptions :
If you want to argue that a lot of the places I just mentioned isn't as screwed up as, say, Saudi Arabia or Iran then I'd like to point out that for example Malaysia and Indonesia, two countries that are by no means top-notch countries, do however have muslim majorities and are run at least on par with some of the less bad oppressors, if there is such a thing.
in malaysia muslims only recently gained power. and immediately started to steer the country towards another saudi arabia example. from the start, various measures to discriminate against women were introduced. indonesia had a lot of oppression in its history, but this wasnt exclusively due to muslim leaning administrations. a true islamist party hasnt come to power there yet. on top of that, indonesia is a handful geography to control - you cant exercise tight control over thousands of islands, and therefore any kind of grand scale social engineering or oppression becomes impossible.
back to the difference of oppression in islam and other kinds of oppression - in islam oppression stems from dogma. whereas in china, it stems from ideology, which can easily be questioned and rejected in a philosophical basis. you cant do this in islam, because, first, it claims to be divine, and therefore is dogma, second, it produces various logical conditions tied to each other that, if you want to refuse any of them, you need to question and refuse all of them. its an all or nothing package.
basically, the oppression in countries like china stems from the tight control of a central government and the faction that is controlling it tightly. if, by any chance, that control weakens, or the faction on top of control mechanism changes, oppression also changes, and the country, the new ruling faction still can change some of the societal values, rules and practices and stay within the same cultural boundaries. a good example is ussr under mikhail gorbachev.
however in islam, even if the ruling faction changes, the level of oppression, the ruleset, the practice cannot change, because, they are hardcoded into logical sets and dogma that you cant refuse partially. so, when you start to change policies, reduce oppression, (going unislamic, infidel in the eyes of the populace), you start to become out of place, because what you do dont fit in with islam. therefore your legitimacy stats becoming questionable. just like the 'reformist' regimes in iran, and their situation vs the public. this is because the oppression, control structure, medieval laws are nestled in islam itself, and islam is the religious dogma AND also the custom with which populace conducts their daily lives. this goes far beyond the brainwashing that was done in ussr or in china, or in any other country. the minority reformist percentages in muslim countries (like iran) cannot cope and be a power base for a reformist government for long.
this is the reason why there havent been any sort of peaceful revolution, reform in any islamist/muslim controlled country up to this date from the start of islam. this includes turkey - turkey was reformed from remnant of ottoman empire by a reformist army general through control of army and the reforms were forced upon otherwise (then) unwilling populace.
basically my point is, due to the above aspects of islam, it would be naive to evaluate islamism, and islam as it is today as just like any other kind of oppressive thought or ideology.
i still make many people believe or doubt it if i repeated it long enough and to a wide enough audience.
One reason to think this is the millions upon millions of 'shepherds' that define themselves as muslim and live perfectly peacefull, happy lives next to denominations and non-denominations of all kinds.
only when they are in minority. when they are in majority, what happens in middle east happens. not only they themselves live under oppressed rules, happily, but also all other minorities (if they are still allowed to exist) live as second class citizens. there is no country on the face of the world in which muslims are in majority, have power and there is no oppression.
all i see here is, unbridled capitalism infiltrating and skewing judicial system in america as well as anything else. and its bad. the one with the most money buys the law, literally.
that was quite enlightening. thanks.
ok libel is against the law ...
so lets say that i start saying that us constitution wasnt adopted in 1787, but in 1532.
can i get away with that ?
so, i can basically come up, say that barack obama is a muslim, or dick cheney eats babies, as 'news', and then get away with it.
what kind of judicial system a country has to have, for some news channel to win the 'right' to lie while delivering news, one wonders ...
it has a lot to do with fox news.
fox news, rupert murdoch is doing the mouthpiece work of private interests, incessantly.
stop tagging this story with politically correct or watered down words people. this is outright fascism. denying right to travel on undeclared, non court warranted 'suspicion'.
if someone is guilty, you charge them. if someone is persona non grata, you extradite them. you do not do such charade like 'no fly lists'.
its a remnant of bush era stupor, and it smells cheney all around. it should go.