OSDev.org

Cognition wrote:If it wasn't for the fact that **** Cheney is even worse than G.W he probably would have been impeached by now, I'm not sure how closely you follow US politics but there is ongoing criminal prosecution targeted at a lot of administration here. I'm sure a lot of congressional figures are regretting ever passing the Patriot Act as well at this point.

What your government needs is a presidential election system less vulnerable (let's just say "Florida recount"), and/or a President with a lot less power. As it is now, your president is more or less a 4-year dictator if he plays his cards right.

There is an impeachment system, but I'd agree it might not be as quick and flexible as being able to accelerate or call for a new election. It's given the executive branch a lot more discretionary power while simultaneously shrouding it in a massive amount of secrecy. Likewise the legislative branch does have a lot of say in the matter that are not being exercised properly because of partisan squabbling that's resulted in an effective deadlock of congress on any issue of significance. However, I do think people have learned some lessons from this, I'm sure the whole world is aware at this point of the bailout bill. Which is another example of a congressional act that would grant broad sweeping powers to a person in the executive branch and it's undergoing extremely heavy criticism and inquiry before anyone signs it. Likewise for the whole Florida recount thing, it pretty much came down to a manipulation of the Supreme Court, though it had the authority to do so was abused as a delay tactic. It actually could have been fought further, but Al Gore decided not to after pressure from the Republican party eventually convinced him that it would somehow undermine Democracy to question a shady election process. It should have been fought further and that assertion was essentially ridiculous, though I do think in an odd sense of things it did kind of reveal Gore to be a bad selection for a presidential canidate.

At any rate this is another one of those tangents worthy of it's own thread. Ultimately I just want to stress that we're in a bind now as a nation we can't really be released from until this next election. The poll and survey numbers reflecting what the US public actually thinks about a lot of these issues is all around the news media and web, sadly we're in a state where a lot of what goes on in our government does not reflect this. Election terms are part of restricting the power of an elected official too, if we're in the same situation after them I'd say the system is totally broken too. I'll note that I live about 30 minutes from Washington D.C. myself and if Bush does some power play or declares some state of emergency to try and complicate this that -I- will be there protesting it, so give the system a bit more time to work itself out here.

Solar wrote:

abuashraf wrote:I think TverrBjelke made the nuclear bomb stuff very clear...so I won't go there
unless you want to.

Depleted Uranium munitions are not "nuclear bombs".

Moron.

"nuclear bomb stuff" means the whole subject...genius

Solar wrote: You wouldn't recognize a rethoric exageration if hit about the head with one, would you?

sure I would...

Solar wrote: But as long as one side of the argument has this hard core behind it that's foaming at the mouth, cries "kill all infidel!" and considers the only good world a world where everyone lives by the laws of the Koran - while most of the rest of that side doesn't condemn them, fight them themselves, and even go "they've got a point, you know" - that whole side is a threat.

But I don't think this is can considered as an exaggeration at all,you are demanding for condemning,and fighting who's saying so
so it's one of two:

1:you have heared someone(orgnaization,country...)saying so,
in this case you should show me your sources.

2:you have blind believes.

Solar wrote: What I sorely miss is an open willingness of the muslim world at large to openly and steadfastedly dissociate from those who preach hatred, violence and "holy war" (which, by generally agreed-upon Koran science, is a complete misinterpretation of what "Jihad" actually means).

and If we didn't do what you want,you'll simply come to "spreading democracy and freedom"
with your invasion troops.

why don't you take the first step,by stop insolting our religion and believes,
pretext of freedom of opinion.

why don't you stop supporting and supplying Israel with all kind of weapons,
including nuclear bombs,pretext of Israel is the only democratic country in an area full of radical countries.

why don't you condemn Israel when it uses cluster bombs against civillian villages,
and kills children with this bombs.

You (America,Europ) only asks Muslim world to change stuff you hate,or to do stuff you like
such as stop supporting terrorism in Iraq which means:

don't support Iraqi national resistance,and let America to do what the hell
ever she wants,stealling oils,killing,...etc.

so before asking me to fight radicals in my own society,
why don't you start fighting yours...

abuashraf wrote:"nuclear bomb stuff" means the whole subject...genius

There are no nuclear bombs involved in "the whole subject".

Relieved of the burden of rational deliberation, I see.

so it's one of two:

1:you have heared someone(orgnaization,country...)saying so,
in this case you should show me your sources.

2:you have blind believes.

1 - 2 - 3.

And that's not even on the subject of anyone killing anybody or someone occupying some country or somesuch.

"Blind"? I don't think so.

and If we didn't do what you want,you'll simply come to "spreading democracy and freedom"
with your invasion troops.

"Your" invasion troops? Last time I looked, "we" invaded nobody. But "we" are put into the same box as the US, get bombed and shot at, because - as the cartoon incident showed - some people are too stupid to tell the difference between countries, or perhaps don't get the concept that one country might differ from another.

why don't you take the first step,by stop insolting our religion and believes,
pretext of freedom of opinion.

That is a very important subject, but I don't think this rather heated thread is the place to discuss this. To sum it up in one sentence, the freedom of the individual ends at the point where it infringes on the freedom of another. And while I am more than ready to discuss personal freedom and its limits, that discussion stops immediately when the other side starts "reinforcing" its position with threads and violence.

Freedom of opinion is the opinion of the individual, not the opinion of the mob, and I strongly oppose evangelism of any kind.

I hold that same position when it comes to e.g. Neonazis in my society. May they believe what they want, but the second they start spreading their bile and hatred, I will oppose them. Same for Christian fundamentalists / Creationists, for example. Muslim fundamentalist don't get a "special treatment" there.

why don't you stop supporting and supplying Israel with all kind of weapons...

Last time I looked, it's illegal for my country to export weapons to Israel.

...including nuclear bombs...

If you spread this unproven bullshit one more time, I'm going to go balistic, I swear.

And just so you know, we don't even have nuclear weapons ourselves, so how could we provide Israel with them?

why don't you condemn Israel when it uses cluster bombs against civillian villages,
and kills children with this bombs.

I do, which puts me into a rather sensitive spot from time to time, because Israelis don't take it lightly when a German starts blaming them for anything.

You (America,Europ) only asks Muslim world to change stuff you hate,or to do stuff you like
such as stop supporting terrorism in Iraq which means:

don't support Iraqi national resistance,and let America to do what the hell
ever she wants,stealling oils,killing,...etc.

No, I do not demand you let America do what it wants. But terrorist violence is sure as hell not going to stop them, either, as it gives them the excuse they're looking for to stay in those countries.

I won't go to the point of anybody "stealing" oil. Another, completely different can of worms.

so before asking me to fight radicals in my own society,
why don't you start fighting yours...

Who tells you we don't?

1 - 2 - 3 (counter-demonstrations against an anti-islamist convention in Cologne last week, which eventually cancelled the convention, or police forces controlling the anti-islamists).

You know what? Show me one picture, or even report, about the caricature mobs that shows counter-demonstrations for tolerance and peace, or police forces holding the demonstrators in check. Because that is exactly what I meant.

Solar wrote:

so it's one of two:

1:you have heared someone(orgnaization,country...)saying so,
in this case you should show me your sources.

2:you have blind believes.

1 - 2 - 3.

And that's not even on the subject of anyone killing anybody or someone occupying some country or somesuch.

"Blind"? I don't think so.

for the second and the third pictures ,the Syrian government made an apologize about it.
but you should put in mind that no one ever got hurt.
for the first picture,those people will never ask for this actions,if the infringement on the prophet
and Islam never happened,so the first step came from the other side(US,Europ)
which storngly supported who infringed on Islam.
and most of Europian magazines published the danish cartoons over and over again,
so this strong the idea,that Europ is trying (as much as it can) to insult Islam.

Solar wrote: "Your" invasion troops? Last time I looked, "we" invaded nobody. But "we" are put into the same box as the US

go and look one more time,you (Germany) have troops in Afghanistan.
You (Europ) have troops in Afghanistan,and some countries also have troops in Iraq.

Solar wrote: But "we" are put into the same box as the US, get bombed and shot at,

But I don't remember any one shot or bombed any places in Germany.But I do remember
that you went to Afghanistan with America.

Solar wrote: If you spread this unproven bullshit one more time, I'm going to go balistic, I swear.

west(US,Europ) hides behind its finger,Israel has nuclear weapons.
take a look
here's another prove take a look

Solar wrote: And just so you know, we don't even have nuclear weapons ourselves, so how could we provide Israel with them?

by "we" if you mean Germany,I know you don't have nuclear weapons.
but if you mean Europ,France has helped Israel in the begining of its nuclear program,
and America took care of the rest of the program...tell this days.

Solar wrote: You know what? Show me one picture, or even report, about the caricature mobs that shows counter-demonstrations for tolerance and peace, or police forces holding the demonstrators in check. Because that is exactly what I meant.

here you go...
you've said you don't have blind believes,why don't you try to
look out there and see what prophet means to Muslims before trying to isult him.

there's alot and alot of examples about saying no to violance,and
protest in a civile way.
protesting against the danish cartoons is part of the freedom of opinion.

Also in the second picture there was some German sentence,what does it mean?
I would translate it,but my keyboard dosen't support Germans letters...

Oh, Come on! What major first-world country doesn't make a few nukes now and then?

cr2 wrote:Oh, Come on! What major first-world country doesn't make a few nukes now and then?

Old insurance policies die hard I guess.

@abuashraf: If you have to argue about this, please do it properly.

Israel has nuclear weapons.

All of your sources explicitly mention that Israel's nuclear arsenal is a popular believe yet completely unproven. Yet you claim it as proof. Watch out there.

As for the anti-islamic things. The middle-east repeatedly erupts into a riot when one person publicates something that might insult Islam. There was a big riot about the danish cartoons, there was a riot about the movie from our own dutch extremist. The problem is, one European can set off a fight in the middle east. If one of the people over at your place pull something off, it merely hits the newspaper after which everybody thinks "oh, interesting" and then goes on as if nothing happened.

What I find poor, is that you generalize what you think about europe in general to every person in that country, which is a logical fallacy of your side.

I spotted at least the following:
Proof by verbosity, Arguments of repetition, Poisoning the well, Hasty generalisation: (repeating that all eurpopeans are anti-islamists), Red herring: (Having to talk about nuclear warheads), Cherry picking (everything we do is publish danish cartoons). Affirming the Consequent (there are troops stationed in a foreign country, so it must be an invasion)
And if I'd take a closer look I could probably find quite a few more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

All of your sources explicitly mention that Israel's nuclear arsenal is a popular believe yet completely unproven. Yet you claim it as proof. Watch out there.

The reason for this is, Israel never allowed IAEA to go there and look for the nuclear arsenal,
I don't know why,but it very obvious that Israel has somthing to hide(something illegal),
Europ and America always supported Israel in refusing searching and looking for its nuclear arsenal.
while Iran has been facing international sanctions for its nuclear program even if
it's in the early stages,and IAEA is looking and searching for any secret military nuclear program,which hasn't been proven yet.
so Iran got international sanctions even if it allowed IAEA to go to Iran,and search
where ever it wants,while Israel never facied international sanctions of any kind,although
never allowed IAEA to go there and search.
so it's very double standard.

As for the anti-islamic things. The middle-east repeatedly erupts into a riot when one person publicates something that might insult Islam. There was a big riot about the danish cartoons, there was a riot about the movie from our own dutch extremist.
problem is, one European can set off a fight in the middle east. If one of the people over at your place pull something off, it merely hits the newspaper after which everybody thinks "oh, interesting" and then goes on as if nothing happened.

It's never been a matter of one person,danish cartoons was published by the most famous newspapers in Europ
over and over again,and painters got national support
in Denmark also they were supported by people from Europ.

it was a campaign designed to provoke Muslims around the world.

What I find poor, is that you generalize what you think about europe in general to every person in that country, which is a logical fallacy of your side.

Europian people here talk in general,they say "we..",so I should answer and say "you.." in general.
Also American people say "we..",and sometimes they were meaning both Europ and US.
so I'm not the only one.

abuashraf wrote:It's never been a matter of one person,danish cartoons was published by the most famous newspapers in Europ over and over again,and painters got national support in Denmark also they were supported by people from Europ.

Yes they were, rightfully so, and in my opinion there was not enough of it.

After people in the Middle East started rioting, as a sign that we will not have our (legal) rights of freedom be infringed upon by mobs half a globe away, who wouldn't even have known about the caricatures if some hate preachers hadn't seen an opportunity to start a fuzz.

I have said elsewhere that, of the dozen caricatures in question, about 3/4 of them had a very, very valid point that would perfectly apply to exhibit "abushraf" here. You really think going on a rampage because someone drew a picture is an appropriate reaction? Jeez, get a life.

You might note the noteable absence of violent muslim mobs anywhere in Europe, where you could actually have been exposed to the pictures without someone with an agenda pushing them under your nose.

Note again that most if not all of the mobsters have never actually seen the caricatures. You have one guess who told them they'd be something to get mobby about.

"PR Stunt"
"Easy my friends, when it comes to the point it is only a drawing made by a non believing Dane."
"The journalists of Jylands-Posten are a gang of reactionist provocateurs."

That, too, was the content of three of the caricatures.

it was a campaign designed to provoke Muslims around the world.

You might think that such a campaign would have been fielded in the Muslim world, not a Danish newspaper. The "campaign designed to provoke Muslims around the world" was started by the very hate preachers in your midst I am talking about all the time.

And you might want to consider that such a campaign always needs two - the one provoking, and the one getting provoked. You guys need to relax, not a bit, but a big bit.

What you believe is nice and dandy, but you can't expect the whole world to live by your standards.

abuashraf wrote:for the second and the third pictures ,the Syrian government made an apologize about it.

Uh-huh... if you put so much stake into apologies, what about the one published by the Jylands Posten?

I won't continue here, it's fruitless. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-P ... ontroversy.

Yes they were, rightfully so, and in my opinion there was not enough of it.

After people in the Middle East started rioting, as a sign that we will not have our (legal) rights of freedom be infringed upon by mobs half a globe away

sure most Europian people supported the danish cartoons and the cartoonist,
but this people(europian supported)supported something(newspaper,cartoonist) which
was trying to describe another things(Islam,prophet Muhamed),sure the cartoonist
never met Muhamed,and they know nothing about him,so the cartoonist just fake what
they were drawing,so Europian supported, actually supported people who have no idea
about what they were doing except some faking.....Hello, blind support->blind believes.

, who wouldn't even have known about the caricatures if some hate preachers hadn't seen an opportunity to start a fuzz.

Bullshit,media here, sure never published the cartoons.but they told about it.
and people here saw the draws via internet.

I think there were two problems,the cartoonist ,knew nothing about what they were drawing.
and many many Europian newspaper published the draws over and over again.

the first problem is just stupidity of the cartoonist,the second problem was the newspapers
way to say:we hate Islam,we hate everything related to it,and we'll hurt you
as mush as we can.

If the draws wasn't insulting why there's some main American medias never republished
the draws,and even some of them refused to publish the draws even for one time,
take a look.

You might think that such a campaign would have been fielded in the Muslim world, not a Danish newspaper. The "campaign designed to provoke Muslims around the world" was started by the very hate preachers in your midst I am talking about all the time.

Ahu...so why the same danish newspaper refused to publish some draws about Jesus
because they might offend some people,while they published the draws about
Mushamed and Islam,isn't this very double standars against Muslims.
take a look.

so when it comes to Muslims it the freedom of opinion,and when it comes to
anything else, they take into account the feelings of the people.

Ok, I'll bite.

abuashraf wrote:sure most Europian people supported the danish cartoons and the cartoonist

Fallacy: You only ever saw the people who did support the cartoons. Europe is much larger than that.

but this people(europian supported)supported something(newspaper,cartoonist) which
was trying to describe another things(Islam,prophet Muhamed)

Fallacy: prove first that we did not know what we were actually supporting.

sure the cartoonist never met Muhamed

Red Herring: I met so many Mohammed's, its just I never met the Prophet, because he's dead (and neither did you).

and they know nothing about him,

False statement. They knew enough that virgins await in the afterlife.

so the cartoonist just fake what they were drawing

Fallacy: does not follow

Europian supported, actually supported people who have no idea

Fallacy: does not follow

about what they were doing except some faking.....Hello, blind support->blind believes.

Fallacy: Your premises are wrong, so the conclusion is invalid.

, who wouldn't even have known about the caricatures if some hate preachers hadn't seen an opportunity to start a fuzz.

Bullshit,media here, sure never published the cartoons.but they told about it.
and people here saw the draws via internet.

Fallacy: that isn't a counterargument.

I think there were two problems,the cartoonist ,knew nothing about what they were drawing.

False, as per above.

and many many Europian newspaper published the draws over and over again.

Fallacy: prove the link between publishing the cartoons in europe versus you keep seeing them in the middle east

the first problem is just stupidity of the cartoonist

Personal attack

the second problem was the newspapers way to say:we hate Islam,we hate everything related to it,and we'll hurt you as mush as we can.

Fallacy: You're ignoring the fact that publishing the cartoons could have many other goals than insulting the islam. Therefore the conclusion is again wrong.

If the draws wasn't insulting

Fallacy: Hasty generalisation. Many of the cartoons were puns on the cartoonists themselves.

why there's some main American medias never republished
the draws

Fallacy: Prove that an insult is the only reason not to republish something

and even some of them refused to publish the draws even for one time

Fallacy - the same as above.

take a look.

As per above invalid reasoning, the conclusion is invalid.

You might think that such a campaign would have been fielded in the Muslim world, not a Danish newspaper. The "campaign designed to provoke Muslims around the world" was started by the very hate preachers in your midst I am talking about all the time.

Ahu...so why the same danish newspaper refused to publish some draws about Jesus
because they might offend some people

Fallacy: Prove first that that was the only reason. In fact your 'proof' states the valid alternative "for being not funny".

while they published the draws about
Mushamed and Islam, isn't this very double standars against Muslims.

Your reasoning is flawed, therefore the conclusion is invalid.

take a look.

Again, take a closer look at your so-called 'proofs', you seem to not understand them properly over and over again.

so when it comes to Muslims it the freedom of opinion,and when it comes to
anything else, they take into account the feelings of the people.

There is no valid reasoning anywhere in this post, therefore the conclusion is also invalid.

Conclusion: Solar won this round. Try a bit better next time.