Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re: How is the virus even still around? (Score 4, Informative) 254

I don't think it survives in the environment, and it doesn't seem to have any animal hosts. There are places in the world where it's endemic and somewhat common, and it can live in the pharynx of vaccinated or asymptomatic humans. So it probably comes into a country from an immigrant or traveler with some frequency, it just doesn't spread because of vaccination.

Then there's this kid.

From microbewiki (emphasis added): "C. diphtheriae is a Gram-positive, aerobic, nonmotile, toxin-producing, rod-shaped bacteria belonging to the order Actinomycetales, which are typically found in soil, but also have pathogenic members such as streptomyces and mycobacteria."

Comment Re:obamas fault (Score -1) 490

The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.

This is anti-First Amendment, is it not? Free Speech *requires* the ability to 'slander' the superstitions of any group - Mohammed being no exception. The Supreme Court has ruled on this again and again and again. Obama is not only wrong, he is a danger to Free Speech (which is probably why he let Hillary Clinton push the disgustingly pro-Sharia UN HRC 16/18 criminalizing criticism of Islam for the citizens of all UN signatory states - unbelievable that a sitting US Secretary of State would do this - but hey, she is a disciple of the Marxist Saul Alinsky so not unexpected).

Are you one of those who believe Charlie Hebdo "deserved what they got" because they "had it coming" ? this is Obama's position in the speech you give. Do you think that is moral? or serves the causes of Free Speech and Liberty?

“The real division is not between conservatives and revolutionaries but between authoritarians and libertarians.” -- George Orwell

Which side do you think President Obama and his administration are on? which side are you on?

Comment Re:obamas fault (Score -1) 490

The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.

This is anti-First Amendment, is it not? Free Speech *requires* the ability to 'slander' the superstitions of any group - Mohammed being no exception. The Supreme Court has ruled on this again and again and again. Obama is not only wrong, he is a danger to Free Speech (which is probably why he let Hillary Clinton push the disgustingly pro-Sharia UN HRC 16/18 criminalizing criticism of Islam for the citizens of all UN signatory states - unbelievable that a sitting US Secretary of State would do this - but hey, she is a disciple of Saul Alinskly so not unexpected).

Comment Re:What I'd expect now from the muslim world (Score 0) 490

In Sharia "terrorism" is unlawful warfare. Jihad is lawful warfare, and any counter-terror operations against Muslims are considered unlawful warfare, aka "terrorism".

In Sharia "innocents" are Muslims (only). Non-Muslims cannot be innocent, ever - our very existence is "oppression of Muslims" and affront to Allah. This is why the last non-abrogated commandment in the Koran is Sura 9:29 which commands Islams to take over the World and convert or kill all disbelievers (I don't make up the rules of abrogation, I'm just reporting them for you).

The problem is that people who demand Muslims condemn violence actually don't care what Muslims have to say. It's just posturing.

No. The problem is Islam (which is a totalitarian ideology). Stop blaming the victims of jihad, you are enabling evil.

Comment Re:Bar fucking barians ... (Score 0) 490

Do you understand the "kitman" deception? Please let m explain:

When a Muslim leader condemns "terrorism" against "innocents" we lap it up, right? We praise them for not wanting to kill us - because we know about 50% of Muslims agree with parts of the Sharia (Islamic law) - at least according to a 2012 Pew Survey. What most don't understand (even Slashdotters) is that the definition of "terrorism" and "innocence" comes from Sharia (Islamic Law).

In Sharia "terrorism" is "unlawful warfare". Jihad is lawful warfare and combating jihad is unlawful warfare. Condemning "terrorism" means condemning the countrer-terror forces of the West, who are trying to save our lives. They understand how you will misinterpret this, and this is permitted for them to deceive because it advances the cause of Islam (after all, the Koran states many times that "Allah is the Greatest of Deceivers").

In Sharia "innocents" are Muslims. All Muslims are always innocent and all kafir (non-Muslims) cannot ever be innocent. Our act of disbelief is a crime under Sharia. Our act of existence is an affront to their Allah (who, if you do the research cannot be YHWH the God of Abraham as they claim, but must be the Nabatean God Dushara based on Koran 53:19-20 - of course none of these ghosts in the sky exist, but it is worth knowing the details so you can defeat their superstition).

So, lets put that back together. A Muslim cleric condemning "terrorism" and the harming of "innocents" is actually saying, "I condemn Western counter-terror forces who are harming Muslims".

Islam is very specific in is wording (it is a totalitarian, theocratic poltiical system with some badly plagiarised superstition on top - it is NOT a personal faith as we understand religion to be).

The only acceptable phrase a Muslim can use is:
"I condemn jihad and the murder of any civilians"

but they NEVER do this. Ever. They are relying on a deception to advance their agenda - which is your submission to Islam and you living under Sharia.

More details about kitman and the other *obligatory* forms of lying in Islam:
http://www.islam-watch.org/aut... (currently offline as it is under DDoS by pro-Sharia groups)

The political ideology called "Islam" is truly evil and deceptive and verifyably false (based on historical evidence). Slashdotters need to educate themselves about it so we can fight for Liberty by discrediting it. Are YOU prepared to fight for Liberty? we have to attack and discredit that ideology, and we can only do that if you understand the enemy.

Pro-Sharia folks always mod be down when I point things like this up. They mistake telling the truth about Islam for some form of "racism". This is crazy. Stop censoring those to tell the truth about Islamic ideology (and who are not condemning the slaves trapped in the evil system, called "Muslims"). Please mod me up so my karma recovers and I can share more and more about the ideology of Islam and its deceptions - there is a whole lot more to tell you guys so you are armed for the ideological battle against Islam (which is an existential struggle between 21st Century Enlightenment Civilization and 7th Century Sharia barbarism).

Comment Re: When you are inside the box ... (Score 0) 289

Do you have any evidence to refute what is in Pacepa's "Disinformation"? I would be most interested to hear it. Otherwise, the person living the "pipe dream" would be you, would it not? the Scientific Method requires me to look for evidence counter to Pacepa's facts. I suggest you also start using the Scientific Method and evaluate statements based on their factual content, rather than dismissing them based on your preconceptions - it really will revolutionize your outlook, and allow to you see outside the disinformation we are being fed.

Comment Re: When you are inside the box ... (Score 0, Troll) 289

After the Fall of the Soviet Union it was found that McCarthy had underestimated the degree of communist penetration - once archives were available. Today the White House has substantial Muslim Brotherhood penetration (and probably a great deal more competing agents, but not to the same degree as the Ikhwan).

McCarthy was *right*. It is the Collectivist Matrix that controls the media that tell you he was wrong. A great book to read is "Disinformation" by Lt Gen Ion Mihai Pacepa. It explains who killed Kennedy and why - and why the Conspiracy Theories are the conspiracy. The media marinates you in Cultural Marxism these days so that people cannot see the truth in plain sight. America has gone off the rails because the Collective (run by a 'political elite') is now valued over the Individual. The Government now feels it can micro-regulate every aspect of your life and treat you like a child. This is Marxism with a smile - and it is what is bankrupting America - yet anyone who opposes the collective is smeared by the media, the academics, the elites and by all the people still in the Collectivist Matrix. McCarthy was right, and is even more right today. Hint: who did Hillary Clinton write here senior thesis about? the same person Obama moved to Chicago to find acolytes of.

There is no substitute for Liberty!

Comment Re:news for nerds? (Score 0) 215

FALSE. The jihad has been going on for 1400 years and is just gaining up a head of steam again due to petrodollars and the obvious pathetic 'leadership' of the West. The reason the jihadis attack on 9/11 each year is to reverse the defeat at the Gate of Vienna on 9/11 *****1583****.

Bleating about Sykes-Picot is a distraction so you never understand the fourteen century war that is commanded in Qur'an Sura 9:29, 9:5 and hundreds of other verses. Unfortunately, many smart Slashdotters fall for this ruse.

In order to understand jihad you must listen to what they say for the benefit of other jihadis - not the projections that Westerners place as the motivations of the jihadis:
For an example of how the jihadis see history, please see the following: "Why We Are Afraid - A 1400 Year Secret : Dr Bill Warner" [45 mins]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Comment Re:Dissappointed (Score -1) 291

G'day Ozzie. I'm a kiwi. How about you check out the statistics of carbon emission, and see whether destroying your economy with a carbon tax that achieves absolutely nothing for the environment:

"What an Engineer Finds Extraordinary about Climate" http://wattsupwiththat.com/201...

We all want to preserve our environment. But we have to look at it objectively rather than emotionally. Please also note that ***pollution*** (which everyone rightly shuns) is not the same as CAGW in any way.

Comment The Guardian? (Score -1, Offtopic) 126

The Guardian spends a huge amount of effort banning 'mavericks' from its comment boards regarding things like 'Global Warming'. Where you stand on the 'Anthropic Global Warming' (AGW) is less important than understanding that both proponents and opponents can provide insights into the issue. What matters is not 'consensus' (which is only invoked if the observations don't support a hypothesis), but the *data* ... and sometimes the 'mavericks' are pointing to critical data you may not have come across before.

It is thoroughly excellent the Guardian are promoting Free Speech for science, through their 'maverick' meme. I really just wished they'd put what they preach into practice - as we all should :)

There is *no substitute* for Free Speech. And Free Speech is not about what we all agree one, but the right of a 'maverick' to disagree and voice their opinion - and the right of many many more to listen to that maverick and then make their own minds up. Without this we have *no* Liberty - no matter how well intentioned the censors are.

Comment Re:Uh what? (Score 5, Insightful) 180

The New Zealand Maori (of which I am a member) sometimes claim that our culture promotes sustainability and care for the environment. This has always been revisionist bs, but it was useful into guilting the pakeha into giving settlement money (which our tribal elites pocket). This study on moa is useful to show that *all* humans have and will be destructive to the habitat. Being hypocritical for the purpose of guilt-tripping another ethnic group is false and immoral. My fellow New Zealanders should not fall for this scam any longer!

Slashdot Top Deals

The best book on programming for the layman is "Alice in Wonderland"; but that's because it's the best book on anything for the layman.

Working...