For having a higher amount of melanin in his skin, and for not being George Bush.

You know, that's the first time I've seen someone raise this point, and it is a very good one. The sad thing is, the security council is pretty much, well, a stopping point for any effectiveness of the UN. It'd only get worse if we didn't keep ourselves there - at least we (theoretically) can push for our voice there to say something (if the people of the US could stop watching Miley Cyrus' twerking and stuffing their faces for the 2 minutes it takes to call their congress critters). To my knowledge, China doesn't offer that. And I won't say I have enough knowledge of Russia's civic system to venture a guess one way or the other.

Error, infinite loop detected.

That was something that always fascinated me. It seems like nearly all religions are organized against it. Even the normally super-tolerant Jains and Buddhists are anti-homosexual. Almost all cite it as "unnatural," and yet it's incredibly common in the natural world which completely guts that argument. So far as I know, the only older religions I've read about which were accepting of homosexuality were held by the Greeks and Romans, and some Native American tribes. Now, there are thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of religions I'm unaware of, so there could be more. It just always seemed weird.

What say I? I say spend 2 months in the UAE, Qatar, or Bahrain. Not every place is what your caricature of the Middle East describes.

You mean the people are supporting the only group in the area that is offering to build and staff schools, give them food, add some stability, and provide some sense of a security force? I am shocked, I say, SHOCKED!

You mean a country that had a democratically elected leader until the US and UK organized a coup and then spent several years training secret police to murder and torture any secularists who didn't support the friendly puppet that they put in place? What do you have left when you have paid for all of the secularists to be killed? Let's be entirely honest about the history there. I admit that that country does have a grudge against us, but they have a really, REALLY good reason for it.

Fair enough, what I was reading apparently was misquoted. However, I am sure that there are negative things in the Jewish holy books, just like there are in the Christian ones and Islamic ones. None of them are innocent - that's my real point.

Fair enough - I am not a Talmud scholar, and I honestly don't care to be. It is a shame that most searches for the Talmud automatically bring up some pretty nasty things. Either way, all of the religious texts have horrible things. The bible talks about rape and murder in the name of God, incest to carry on the family name, murdering children for talking back to you, etc. I'm sure there is gruesome stuff in the Torah, Talmud, Zohar, and other texts. Likewise there is bad stuff in the Quran. All of them are guilty, probably due to having common Abrahamic roots. My real point is that despite the nasty things that are in them, most people realize that it's either dated or misquoted or injected due to racism and personal bias and not indicative of the religion as a whole. Christians in the west seem to be especially blind to this - some going so far as trumpeting how homosexuals should be killed, while talking about how Islam is an overtly evil religion that celebrates murder.

Prove me wrong on the other fronts. And so far as I know, most Muslims don't want to be associated with extremists, or those advocating for extremism (you know, like WBC advocates for violence against people). Likewise Christians don't want to be associated with those groups. Now piss off.

It's also sad because almost every religion has bad examples. Hell, the Talmud says that all gentiles should be slaughtered like animals simply for not being Jewish, but we don't keep Jews off of planes.

You realize, that Muslim extremists are to Islam what the Westboro Baptist Church, Tripura, Assam, Odisha, anti-abortion bombers, and Hutaree are for Christianity, right? Sickening examples that leave the majority just as disgusted as you, the outside observer.

I think that's pretty solidly grey hat. You're technically breaking the law by accessing a system you're not supposed to and without authorization, but you're doing it entirely for benevolent reasons directly benefitting the party whose security you're compromising.

Screw them, the onus is on them to take action when someone reports a bug. If you don't have enough information when there is a security problem, maybe, JUST MAYBE, you should follow up with the submitter. If I was the submitter I'd just publish the exploit and be done with it.

It has several variable speeds and vibrating patterns. Buzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.