Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Maybe it would be good if the Ayatollah wins? (Score 1) 278

by cold fjord (#47798673) Attached to: Grand Ayatollah Says High Speed Internet Is "Against Moral Standards"

You mean like in Syria where the end result has been ISIS?

That's not really a good example since the US and the West didn't back the moderates in a timely fashion. That allowed the Islamist extremists like al Qaida to stream into Syria to form ISIS. If the moderates had been stronger earlier that might not have happened.

I don't think that the current Iranian president is particularly liberal.

As to the Saudis versus the Iranians - at least our friends aren't looking to attack us and work with us on many matters of common interest. You can't really say that about the Iranians.

Comment: Re:Temptation (Score 1) 278

by cold fjord (#47798581) Attached to: Grand Ayatollah Says High Speed Internet Is "Against Moral Standards"

Matthew Parris: As an atheist, I truly believe Africa needs God

it wasn't that long ago that there were unofficial death sentences for not embracing Christianity, at least for natives sent to the residential schools here in Canada.

Color me skeptical.

On the other hand, persecution of Christians around the world, including murder, is well known. The record of the officially atheist communist regimes was often quite bad.

Comment: Re:It'll lead to dancing (Score 1) 278

by cold fjord (#47798521) Attached to: Grand Ayatollah Says High Speed Internet Is "Against Moral Standards"

Go over to several middle-eastern shitholes, and there's plenty of barbaric behavior dressed up in the name of both religions.

Where in the Middle East is all this "Christian" head chopping going on? That isn't really happening, is it?

No, it's because they are of the opinion that it's fantasy designed to scare primitive people into accepting social rules (aka "Law").

No, that is yet another but different mistaken idea that some people have. What I was referring to are the people who think that Hell is where all the "fun" will be so they like the idea of going there. Neither belief nor disbelief in it changes its existence any more than the existence of London or Brigadoon.

Comment: Re:If the Grand Ayatollah's against it.... (Score 4, Informative) 278

by cold fjord (#47798481) Attached to: Grand Ayatollah Says High Speed Internet Is "Against Moral Standards"

The pope essentially said the same thing recently when he said that young people spend too much time on the Internet.

Did he? It looks like you don't quite have that right.

Pope Francis says the Internet is a 'gift from God'
Pope Francis: Internet is a blessing

The Pope's view is a bit more insightful and nuanced than you state.

Comment: Re:Same thing from ultra-orthodox Jews. (Score 2) 278

by cold fjord (#47798395) Attached to: Grand Ayatollah Says High Speed Internet Is "Against Moral Standards"

There is a meaningful difference. In Iran the government chooses the rules and you have no choice but to comply. In New York the followers of the rabbis choose if they want to comply. They are acknowledging that the various communications technologies are tools, that can be used for good or ill, and they are trying to choose what they believe is good. They are choosing, not the government.

Comment: Re:The key bit (Score 1) 278

by cold fjord (#47798333) Attached to: Grand Ayatollah Says High Speed Internet Is "Against Moral Standards"

Thank you for sharing about the Philippines, but that isn't quite the same as it notes in the article.

As for the rest, its nonsense. You also overlook the rights of audiences, organizations, and governments to conduct their assemblies for the intended purpose. Your right to free speech doesn't allow you to prevent others from engaging in theirs. You are simply embracing another form of censorship, an attack on free speech, and one popular with fascists by the way. There are 8760 hours in a year. A limitation during 2 of those hours as to where you protest so as to allow another free speech event to take place for the intended purpose is a minor burden at most even if it is worth discussing and some of them go too far. The much bigger problem is what goes on in college campuses.

Comment: Re:It'll lead to dancing (Score 1) 278

by cold fjord (#47798313) Attached to: Grand Ayatollah Says High Speed Internet Is "Against Moral Standards"

.... but the name dropping of Catholics or Mennonites doesn't have the same guilt-by-association.

To be fair they do a lot less chopping off of heads or hands.

Those without the character to resist sin are damned. Except Jesus specifically conserved with, converted, and saved sinners.

It is Christian teaching that everyone needs that salvation from Christ, not only for forgiveness of sin, but to address ones sinful nature.

The ones who chuckle to themselves about going to hell? I think very few actually embrace going to hell.

Plenty do, but that is because they misunderstand the nature of Hell.

Comment: Re:The key bit (Score 1) 278

by cold fjord (#47798295) Attached to: Grand Ayatollah Says High Speed Internet Is "Against Moral Standards"

And which governments are those? The only enduring "free speech zones" you find in the US on are some college campuses when they are often struck down in court. The only other use I can think of is some limited use during some events or parades. Although there are problematic aspects to their use in the US, it is still a long ways from fascism. Or does the existence of the hecklers veto provide the only true measure of freedom?

Comment: The key bit (Score 5, Informative) 278

The key bit FTA is here:

“All third generation [3G] and high-speed internet services, prior to realization of the required conditions for the National Information Network [Iran’s government-controlled and censored Internet which is under development], is against Sharia [and] against moral and human standards.”

In short the position is that if you have freedom you will abuse it. That's overall pretty similar to the thinking of al Qaida and ISIS. Strike up the banjos and play "Dueling Theocracy!" Oops, sorry, no music allowed. Or kite flying.

Comment: Re: But is it reaslistic? (Score 1) 353

This is nothing but cultural imperialism - imposing our own, "correct" values at gunpoint and forcing the native peoples to accept it or die.

Women in traditional Muslim countries are pushing for reform as they can. Saudi women drive in protest. Afghan women and girls go to school despite death threats and acid attacks. There are plenty of examples. Why would you think that women would be satisfied with being confined to burkas, forced to be escorted outside the home by a male relative, accept being beaten with sticks, and so on?

P.S. "Islamist" is a right-wing term used only by Islamophobes.

My impression has been that you're usually better informed than that.

Comment: Re:But is it reaslistic? (Score 1) 353

It doesn't make sense unless your theory is that Evil President Obama is intentionally dismantling any programs we may have had in order to make terrorist domination of the world easy, twirling his mustache all the way. . . .

You seem to be speculating that Obama is doing things to actively undermine any defenses we have based on... I'm not sure what exactly. This seems to be part of the "bizarro world" theory that people have about political opponents. They think, "I'm against policy X and they're for policy X" means that the other guy is their exact mirror image and end up with, "I'm for fighting terrorism, so he must be for enabling it." No actual evidence of policy disagreement or bad policy is necessary. It's just reasonable to assume that the other guy is making a hash of it because he's your opposite and you'd be doing everything right.

Apparently you believe that all well intentioned actions regardless of how different they are have the same result in the end. Cut 100,000 troops to the Army and slash its budget by $50 billion is the same as adding 100,000 troops to the Army and adding $50 billion to its budget. Refusing to capture and interrogate terrorists provides just as much information as capturing and interrogating them. Is there any chance that you can spot the nonsense there? Can you make an allowance for well intentioned but flawed, counterproductive actions resulting from decision making based on ideology divorced from the facts? Is that a possibility? Or does it all devolve to "mustache twirling"? That is just so tedious. Do you pay any attention to the news?

Pentagon Set to Slash Military to Pre-World War II Levels it would be kind of surprising if the DOD ignored the whole thing for all those years and should start scrambling now that some guys playing solider in homebrew camps are thinking about it.

DOD is great for the 1% of Americans involved with the military. Unfortunately that doesn't do much for the other 99%.

My understanding is that it's a "treat with antibiotics after exposure" type of thing. And we have and produce lots of antibiotics, many of which I remember us ramping up production on post 9/11.

There are vaccines for plague, but other than the military or some travelers not many people get them. Even with treatment the plague still kill around 10% of its victims. When untreated it kill a far higher percentage. About 100 years ago it kill about 2/3 of its victims in the US.

I suspect not, given that they appear to be trying to get it from dead animals at the moment.

There are plenty of groups associated with al Qaida and ISIS. The fact that one is doing that says nothing about what another has been able to do.

"The vast majority of successful major crimes against property are perpetrated by individuals abusing positions of trust." -- Lawrence Dalzell