Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Censorship Communications Google Social Networks The Courts The Internet Youtube

Egyptian Court Wants To Block YouTube For a Month 188

Posted by timothy
from the new-regime-of-youthful-exuberance dept.
First time accepted submitter rogue-girl writes that a "Cairo Administrative Court announced earlier on Feb. 9 that a ruling has been issued to block YouTube within the country for 30 days. This decision comes after a lawsuit was filed back in September 2012 during the turmoil caused by the infamous trailer 'The Innocence of Muslims' spread through the popular video platform. The Court has also asked for all websites having published parts or the entire trailer to be banned for 30 days."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Egyptian Court Wants To Block YouTube For a Month

Comments Filter:
  • 30 days? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    That should be long enough to reclaim their "innocence."

    • by flyneye (84093)

      Wonder how /. fares in Egypt?
      We may not be so uhm, kosher.
      Thoughts?

      • ... then they will ask for one more month, and one more, and three more, and one more year ... ... and then they will ask to expand the censorship to other form of media ... ... there is no way to fully satisfy the insatiable appetite for censorship for the Islamists ... ... ask the people in North Mali how them Islamists had treated them ... ... no music, no tee vee, not even ringtones on the phones

        • by Shavano (2541114)

          ... then they will ask for one more month, and one more, and three more, and one more year ... ... and then they will ask to expand the censorship to other form of media ... ... there is no way to fully satisfy the insatiable appetite for censorship for the Islamists ... ... ask the people in North Mali how them Islamists had treated them ... ... no music, no tee vee, not even ringtones on the phones

          There's no asking involved. They're blocking the service.

        • ... then they will ask for one more month, and one more, and three more, and one more year ... ... and then they will ask to expand the censorship to other form of media ... ... there is no way to fully satisfy the insatiable appetite for censorship for the Islamists ... ... ask the people in North Mali how them Islamists had treated them ... ... no music, no tee vee, not even ringtones on the phones

          Was that a play on "Jesus Christ Superstar [wikipedia.org]?" Damn, man....

      • Don't you mean "halal"?
        • Don't you mean "halal"?

          Other than any specific prayers said over the food, kosher and halal are basically identical. Muslims regularly eat kosher food when officially blessed halal food is not available. It is no big deal.

          • Kosher and halal are identical for food. However, "halal" refers to any permitted action in Islam, not just the list permitted foods. Similarly, the exact antonym "haraam" refers to any forbidden action, not just forbidden foods. And there are definitely many differences between forbidden acts between Judaism and Islam.

      • by spongman (182339)

        Yeah slashdot would be halal unless it was renamed to 'slashed through the neck and hung upside-down to bleed to death.' Disgusting.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 09, 2013 @08:04PM (#42846775)

    They are blocking it because they are ashamed of the police abuse caught on videos. The 'Innocence of Muslims' video is excuse they are using to hide.

    Here's the real thing they want to hide from:

    Man being dragged, beaten, and stripped of clothes - http://youtu.be/AlgUUGKZ4R4

    Man in wheel chair shot by police - http://youtu.be/WAOkfxibwr0

    Police use live ammunition and shoot randomly in the city of Tanta - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k27pETl46qg

    More photos and videos here of the stuff going on: http://egyptianstreets.com/2013/01/29/revolution-2-0/

    Thanks to StormXMX on reddit for the links. I only repost so others can be aware of what is happening.

    • by PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) on Saturday February 09, 2013 @11:10PM (#42847697)

      Meanwhile, what authorities are allowing on Egyptian television, http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/02/09/fear-of-assassinations-haunt-egypt-opposition/1905675/ [usatoday.com]

      CAIRO (AP) — Watching the events in Tunisia, where a leading anti-Islamist politician was shot to death this past week, members of Egypt's liberal opposition are fearfully asking: Could it happen here too?

      Their fears of a renegade Islamist attack on any of the top opposition leaders have been hiked by religious edicts issued by hardline clerics on TV saying they must be killed.

      Islamic democracy functions like this: One man, one vote . . . once.

      Once they get in power, the first order of the day is to kill off any opposition. There is never a real election again.

      • by athmanb (100367)

        This stuff happens everywhere there is a strong state religion and the state relies on religious authorities to manage the population. You inevitably get a religious elite that meshes with the government and profits from the status quo. Those are then of course thoroughly unfriendly to anyone wanting to change the system.

        Your "Islamic democracy" really isn't any different than the "Orthodox democracy" in Russia or "Buddhist democracy" in Thailand so there's absolutely no need to be especially islamophobic a

    • Man being dragged, beaten, and stripped of clothes - http://youtu.be/AlgUUGKZ4R4 [youtu.be]

      You sure that's not Los Angeles circa 1991 with some terrorist lettering superimposed on the video?

  • What a tragic farce

  • Good! (Score:2, Troll)

    by gelfling (6534)

    Anything they can do to hasten their slide back into the Dark Ages the better it is for the rest of us.

    • Re:Good! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by flyneye (84093) on Saturday February 09, 2013 @08:15PM (#42846853) Homepage

      Looking at world history, uhm, this can't end well

    • by Jawnn (445279)

      Anything they can do to hasten their slide back into the Dark Ages the better it is for the rest of us.

      Hasn't yet improved the lot of "the rest of us", and we have recent examples aplenty to demonstrate just how stupid it is to ignore it when it happens. In fact, it's going to end very badly for us when a bunch of religious fundamentalists with a "Dark Ages" world view get their hands on a real WMD. September 11 will look like a picnic.
      Seriously. It is the fear and ignorance that is borne of neglect that breeds the kind of despair that produces suicide bombers and those who can be manipulated into believin

      • by gelfling (6534)

        Oh dear me. The 911 guys were upper middle class graduate students in Germany. They all came from the best of modern Arab Muslim backgrounds and families. Your excuse is redolent of the one applied to Nazis who 'of course had not other option in those dark economic times'.

        • by Jawnn (445279)

          Oh dear me. The 911 guys were upper middle class graduate students in Germany.

          ...who were motivated entirely by what they saw as injustice (social, religious, take your pick) going on "back home". The dichotomy may not be lost on you or me, but it most certainly was on those guys. Nice try.

          • by gelfling (6534)

            Going back home to nice comfortable middle class lives -which they rejected in favor or extremist asceticism and violence. In fact in the Arab world most suicide bombers, terrorists and such are culled from the ranks of the middle class lead by an intelligentsia that itself often arises out of the professional classes such as doctors, lawyers and religious scholars.

            Hey if you're fine with terrorism that's ok. Emma Goldman and Benito Mussolini would agree with you. As would Bakunin, Lenin, and Pol Pot. All h

  • by pla (258480) on Saturday February 09, 2013 @08:38PM (#42846993) Journal
    Yo dawg, I heard you wanted some violence with your violence, so I sent you a prophet!

    Believe whatever you want in private, but the sooner we start considering overt belief in a sky-friend as nothing short of a disease, the better. Religion would count as no fewer than half a dozen major diagnostic categories from the DSM (v4, anyway - who the fark knows what else they screwed up in v5), except that it explicitly exempts religious delusions.

    So no, you all don't actually get a pass any more. You chat with god? Take your olanzapine like a good little psychotic! There we go. Don't we all feel less like blowing up buildings and raping Western reporters now? Hmm, I wonder if we could get it added to their water...


    / And if you consider this trolling... Well, suffice it to say I wish I meant this as a sad attempt at trolling. Not so funny that we really live in this fucked up world.
    • by Skinkie (815924)
      They tried this in Russia a few years ago. Everything that is prohibited comes around (hard). Better to have it slowly getting extinct over a generation or two. The only problem we have to overcome is the exporting of the religion and have it seed somewhere else, getting more stricter, more correct, than it was where it came from. While I agree with the general vision, the next worst thing to religion is someone that considers himself god and uses politics to get more equal than someone else. This kind of s
  • They told me... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by AntiBasic (83586)

    They told me if I voted for Rmoney, we'd see an administration increasingly supporting despotic, middle eastern regimes... and they were right!

    https://twitter.com/betsy_hiel/status/276027241115295744/photo/1

  • by SplashMyBandit (1543257) on Saturday February 09, 2013 @08:47PM (#42847053)

    Analyses of the Innocence of Muslims video has shown it to be mostly factually correct
    http://www.pi-news.org/2012/09/fact-check-the-innocence-of-the-muslims/ [pi-news.org]

    Now it might be a crummy video, but don't mistake poor production values for being factually incorrect. The video is based on statements in the Qur'an and hadiths - please go and check these things for yourself: http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/index.htm [skepticsan...dbible.com] [Skeptics Annotated Qur'an].

    It gets worse though. Both Secretary of State Clinton and President Obama were opposed to the video to cover up their arming of Al Qaeda elements in Libya through the embassy in Benghazi - and this backfired because the Obama Admistration are in total denial about jihad as a motivation of Islamism (as *mandated* by the Qur'an). The foreign policy of the US Administration is unbelievably misguided - because the political Left (which this State Department and Administration is) will not let the facts on the ground get in the way of their narrative. They are denying reality but the reality is rapidly catching up - and the securitry of the Free World is being traded for appeasement (in the hope that Islamists will be "moderate" - which is a ridiculous idea if you have ever read the Qur'an, hadiths and have an understanding of Islamic history for the last 1400 years).

    Appeasement will not work with Islamists. Selling Israel out will not work (the jihadis have been in business for 14 centuries before Israel was established - you can't blame the joos for the actions of the jihadis). Making concessions to Muslims will not work (since the Islamists do not believe in quid-pro-quo; they believe they are right, the Free World is wrong, and its their way *only*). The Obama Administration abandoning the rest of the globe comes at exactly the wrong time - but perhaps this is no surprise given the number of Muslim Brotherhood members in the Administration influencing policy (which is why they are so afraid of Michelle Bachmann calling for an investigation - such an investigation would reveal that the Administration is so thoroughly penetrated it can barely be trusted to lead the Free World).

    Fortunately there are signs of hope. Florida just passed a bill to outlaw Sharia. If other US states and other sovereign nations do the same then the Free World will remain Free. Then we only have to convince the wannabe dhimmis in the West to actually check the facts of what is going on - and not rely on the narrative they have been fed - they are in the Matrix and resist the truth of what is happening - preferring to *factual* arguments as some kind of 'racism' [absolutely crazy; Islam is a violent and totalitarian ideology, just like Naziism and Soviet Communism, it has nothing to do with 'race'].

    Wake up folks. The biggest enemy of Freedom and Liberty in the World is the ideology of Islam (and those who apologize for it, eg. Obama and the political hard-Left). The video the Innocence of Muslims was a clumsy (but factual) attempt by an Egyptian Coptic to highlight the evils of the ideology and its warlord founder. To bad so many people simply ignored the film based on the lies of Islamist apologists (as in, the narrative from the Left-biased media). If you checked the facts you'd see the video was right - Mohammed was evil and against every the Free World stands for (but not against what the political Left now stands for - destruction of the system of the Free World).

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by DaMattster (977781)
      I know this is off-topic but I can't resist an anti-religion rant. Religion in all of its forms is bad. I love to point out two particular flaws in religion: namely that devout Christians espouse pro-life ideals whilst supporting the death penalty and the prophet Muhammad's absolute hatred of women that manifests itself in today's Islamic society. I don't need a religion dictating to me how to lead my life. I don't need some archaic, anachronism like the Bible or the Quran to know what is right or wrong.
      • by SplashMyBandit (1543257) on Saturday February 09, 2013 @10:36PM (#42847559)

        Good on your for not resisting :)

        I agree with you - I just didn't want to get side-tracked on the fact that none of the claims of religions are scientifically verified. Unfortunately some of the people resisting True Evil (tm) also known as "The Ideology called Islam" just happen to be hard-core Christians and Hindus. They are right about Islam, even if it is what an atheistic might consider the wrong reasons (atheists/humanists see Islam as a dire and increasing threat to liberty; other religious just claim Islam is wrong). At this stage of the game I'll accept them into my camp.

        Once we defeat "The Religion of Peace" (ha, what a joke - this is such a lie as shown by the facts: http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/ [thereligionofpeace.com]) then we can have reasoned debate with those with religious delusions (eg. show them the massive amount of contradictions documented in the Skeptics Annotated Bible: http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/ [skepticsan...dbible.com])

        At the moment most of the Free World are not aware of the 57-country Organization of Islamic Cooperation's (OIC) control of the UN (they are the largest single voting bloc, and dominate outfits like the UN Human Rights Council). The OIC claims jurisdiction over any country that has Muslims (that's right, their claim includes where you live). Since they dominate the UN HRC they are slowly but steadily making progress in implementing Islam-friendly laws. Then we have the muppets in the Free World going along with this to be 'nice' (eg. Hiliary Clinton's abject sell-out of the US First Amendment when she co-sponsored the Sharia-compliant UN HRC Resolution 16/18; disgusting behaviour for a US leader). The Muslim Brotherhood has just taken the chair of the OIC. Their plans are proceeding quite nicely and the West mostly remains asleep. A few do notice but are mostly stiffled by those with an ideological Left bent (part of the Red-Green Alliance; where the political Left support the Islamist goal of bringing down the existing international order that has maintained some semblance of international stability).

        So yeah, I agree with your anti-Religious 'rant'. However, I think it is prudent to use all the Allies we can muster to defeat the rising tide of Islamism. If we stay balkanized in factions (atheists vs Christians, Catholics vs Protestants, Democrats/Progressives vs Republicans/Libertarians) then we remain divided and weak against the single biggest and focussed ideological threat to all of us: devout Islam.

        It is important to note that while Christianity may be wrong, it is definitely a mistake to assert it is equally wrong as Islam. Islam is much more wrong because it is totalitarian and covers all aspects of life (especially political). Islam claim full dominion over non-adherents (that means *you*, Slashdotters) whereas Christianity does not make this claim (not these days at least).

      • Religion in all of its forms is bad

        Sorry, can't agree with this. In my city, religious organizations feed the hungry, shelter the poor, hold the hands of the dying lonely and help make children smile.

        I don't see any secular humanist orgs stepping up to that.

        I'm an atheist, but I still give money to the Salvation Army.

        • Religion in all of its forms is bad

          Sorry, can't agree with this. In my city, religious organizations feed the hungry, shelter the poor, hold the hands of the dying lonely and help make children smile. I don't see any secular humanist orgs stepping up to that. I'm an atheist, but I still give money to the Salvation Army.

          Religions do not do this altruistically. They do it with conscious efforts toward recruiting members to join their faith. I would be curious to see if a homeless person declared himself as atheist, would he or she be treated the same as one claiming to be a believer. Furthermore, I'm no fan of charity. Charity only serves a person's immediate needs while not empowering them to self-sufficient. The old axiom, "Give a man an apple and he'll eat for a day, teach him how to plant a tree and he'll eat for l

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      Here's a recent article talking about how the US Mainstream Media (MSM) are ignoring facts (Britain's media is also particularly bad in this regard, the once impartial BBC has a horrific anti-Israel pro-Islamist bias these days, no wonder, its journalists are all graduates of Lefty-dominated Liberal Arts universities): http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/020713-643641-islamists-gagging-americans-through-religious-speech-code.htm?p=full [investors.com]

      Political Correctness is the *enemy* of Free Speech and Liberty.

    • by gallondr00nk (868673) on Saturday February 09, 2013 @11:38PM (#42847809)

      Mohammed was evil and against every the Free World stands for (but not against what the political Left now stands for - destruction of the system of the Free World).

      Hey fella, you know the Soviet Union died back in 1990 right? The Cold War's over. We've been drinking the authoritarian right kool-aid for quite some time now.

      Snarkiness aside, what exactly would be a solution to the "Islamic problem"?

      Don't forget that the US is a major backer of Saudi Arabia, one of the most repressive Islamic countries in the region.

      A US tactic in the past has been to keep Islamic parties from power by supporting secular dictatorships (though with Afghanistan, they destroyed a secular government for an Islamic party), mainly in Egypt, Iran and Libya. All of these have unravelled for one reason or another.

      The reason then as now isn't ideological or humanitarian, it's because the hand picked dictators didn't nationalise their country's oil industry.

      The west doesn't give a hoot about Sharia law cutting people's hands off, or the fact that in Saudia Arabia women are forbidden from driving. It's only painted as an ideological struggle by the thick-as-pigshit servile media.

      It's a shame, because the humanitarian problems in the region are plentiful. If it wasn't for oil, no-one would give a shit about the middle east.

      • You give the solution in the post. The Free World needs to enact laws that essentially state the following:

        • All citizens are subject to the same laws (no exceptions!), and
        • Citizens are only subject to national laws (no foreign laws).

        These conditions prohibit the application of Sharia in the West. This is the most substantial part of what needs to be done. The last thing to do is to enforce the existing local laws. That means you don't let Muslim rapists off "because they didn't know" (as happened very r

        • by drinkypoo (153816)

          I thought you might be credible until you started ranting about the leftists. The religious reich (I will not call them the "right") is the problem in this case, not the atheist[s] left. The left is on the sight of all personal rights except, usually, firearm ownership and the right to self-defense. The reich is the side calling for laws honoring their particular establishment of religion, and the left is on the side of [most] "individual liberties, Free Speech, Freedom of Conscience, Women's Rights, Homose

          • I understand your point of view but it is two decades out of date. The Left is not for individual liberties or Free Speech. Look at how the Left demonize anyone with any dissenting view. Example: If you believe in global warming (undeniable) but are still skeptical/researching its cause (whether the most significant cause is anthropomorphic or not) then you will shot down in flames. If you criticize Islam (an ideology) you are shot down as a racist (its a non-sequiteur, that that doesn't matter to the Left)
            • by drinkypoo (153816)

              Example: If you believe in global warming (undeniable) but are still skeptical/researching its cause (whether the most significant cause is anthropomorphic or not) then you will shot down in flames.

              The primary reason for that is that the primary source of funding for research which is supposed to show that AGW isn't a serious problem is from people who are primary GW contributors. It doesn't make the science bad, but it does make people suspicious.

              If you criticize Islam (an ideology) you are shot down as a racist (its a non-sequiteur, that that doesn't matter to the Left).

              Well again, it would be easier to disregard that argument if so many of the people who are anti-Islam weren't racists. I do definitely see the problem with Islam though, which is that it simply cannot tolerate a government which is not under its control. It'

              • Well again, it would be easier to disregard that argument if so many of the people who are anti-Islam weren't racists.

                That is completely false. Most of the opponents of the *ideology* of Islam are not racist in any way. The are proponents of liberty for all men. The problem is that Islamists slander these liberty defenders as racist (which is completely counter-factual), the mainstream media repeat this slander, and unfortunately moral people (which probably includes yourself) believe the slander rather than independently checking what the counter-jihadis have to say. Counter-jihadis like Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer

    • by Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) on Saturday February 09, 2013 @11:41PM (#42847817)

      Both Secretary of State Clinton and President Obama were opposed to the video to cover up their arming of Al Qaeda elements in Libya through the embassy in Benghazi

      Wait, what? Did I read that right? Did you just claim that the US funnelled weapons to an Al Qaeda franchaise through the US consulate in Benghazi? Really? And you got a +5 for that bullshit? Man.

      • This is Slashdot. Sometimes the crazies are out in force. I guess this month's supply of aluminum foil finally arrived.

        • Your counter facts, please. Otherwise you could look at some of the references I supplied and get a clue at what I was trying to say :) That link, http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/index.html#Attacks [thereligionofpeace.com] ought to clue you in to the reality of Islam a fair bit. The Obama Administration is deluded by the Leftist "narrative" of cultural equivalence and that "moderate" Islamists can be supported and "extremists" sidelined.

          The *facts* are that the mainstream of Islam approves and supports jihad and global Sha

          • The *facts* are that the mainstream of Islam approves and supports jihad and global Sharia (Google for the surveys).

            Like this one [bbc.co.uk]
            "Muslims want self-determination, but not an American-imposed and defined democracy. They don't want secularism or theocracy," said the professor of Islamic Studies at Georgetown University in Washington.

            "What the majority wants is democracy with religious values."

            http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/index.html#Attacks

            Ah, one of the great dhimmi-wannabe sites. You know you are dealing with a loon when they whip out web sites like thereligionofpeace.com or jihadwatch.org as sources for reliable "facts."

            • Ah, one of the great dhimmi-wannabe sites.

              Actually quite the opposite. What I pointed to is a daily list of fatal attacks. These are *facts*. It must be nice for you to live in a cocoon where you don't to examine *facts* and statistics and instead throw around perjoratives like 'loon' with no basis in fact. You sir, are the enemy for Freedom. Look at the facts/statistics goddamit !

              "Muslims want self-determination, but not an American-imposed and defined democracy. They don't want secularism or theocracy," said the professor of Islamic Studies at Georgetown University in Washington.

              More Leftists bollocks. Remember, the BBC has fallen greatly and is no longer an impartial source. How about you cross-check multiple independent sources as a proper re

              • Actually quite the opposite. What I pointed to is a daily list of fatal attacks.

                The problem with that list is that it is basically any attack that a muslim has any sort of involvement in. You could make a similar list of attacks by christians around the world, doesn't mean they are doing it because they are christian.

                Remember, the BBC has fallen greatly and is no longer an impartial source.

                That's not a BBC poll, that's a gallup poll. It is sad how loons like you are so absolutely convinced of your correctness that you are happy to pick and choose your evidence. Furthermore, the Telegraph/ICM poll you cited was mostly about shariah being used for civil dis

                • You are living in the bubble of dhimmi-wannabees.

                  The way you use that word shows you don't really understand it at all.

                  The problem with that list is that it is basically any attack that a muslim has any sort of involvement in. You could make a similar list of attacks by christians around the world, doesn't mean they are doing it because they are christian.

                  Could you? you really think that? what a load of bullshit. Plus, there is a fundamental difference. Islam specifically comments all able bodied men to wage jihad on unbelievers. Of course, since you have read the Qur'an you will realise verses like Sura 9:5 abrogate all the peaceful verses and command this. This is *mainstream* Muslim doctrine. Perhaps you haven't ever read the Qur'an and hadiths and don't realise just how evil they a

                  • The way you use that word shows you don't really understand it at all.

                    I know exactly what it means. People who constantly fear-monger about teh evil mooslims obviously can't wait for the all-powerful global caliphate to put them in bondage and subject them to all kinds of indignities. It makes them cream their jeans to fantasize about it. This chicken-little schtick isn't a warning to anyone, it is a freaking fantasy, practically an act of public masturbation.

                    So just quit it with the dhimmi-wannabe stuff, it's gross.

                    • You really have no rebuttal do you. You have no proof, dismiss factual data and cannot rationally counter the points I made and data I linked. So you come up with the dhimmi-esque statements. You are the dhimmi but are too ignorant to see this. If you have verifiable counter points I'm all ears - but you don't, you lack any sophistry so resort to idiotic pop-psychology arguments. There is no point debating you - you simply won't consider facts presented to you - and instead come up with a bullshit deflectio
                    • If you have verifiable counter points I'm all ears - but you don't,

                      You dismissed the gallup poll as "leftist bollocks" - you aren't interested in counter points - you only want to continue jizzing yourself in public because it makes you feel so good to have someone to hate.

      • What facts do you have to oppose this? What is known about Benghazi is that Ambassador Stevens was closely working with groups against (monstrous) Gaddafi who had given up his WMD programme, was still a brute, but was fighting Al Qaeda in the Maghreb. The US organized for weapons to go to the rebels in Libya. Note that Benghazi as a city has supplied Al Qaeda with more homicide bombers than any other city in the World. The Benghazi embassy was organizing to ship ex-Libyan weapons to the Syrian Sunni

        • What facts do you have to oppose this?

          You want me to prove a negative? Extraodrdinary claims require extraordinary proof. You made that crazy-ass claim, but you haven't provided even a shred of proof.

      • Wait, what? Did I read that right? Did you just claim that the US funnelled weapons to an Al Qaeda franchaise through the US consulate in Benghazi? Really? And you got a +5 for that bullshit? Man.

        You really are a muppet that is completely ignorant of what is going on in the World. Then, despite your ignorance, you insult those that do know more than you. Here is General William G Boykin who has a strong supposition that Ambassador Stevens was running guns through Benghazi. Here's an interview with Boykins:
        http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article33698.htm [informatio...house.info]
        Note that Boykins was *commander* of U.S. Special Forces Command, the deputy under secretary of defense for intelligence and a CIA staf

        • > Here is General William G Boykin
          The former general who is a christian fundamentalist well known for the bug he keeps up his ass about muslims.

          > The interview was conducted by a reputable agency, CNS News.
          Reputable only by the standards of World Net Daily and Rush Limbaugh.

          The one thing I know about you is that you don't know any muslims. I see or at least talk to muslims from India, Pakistan and Saudi practically on a daily basis because they are all friends of mine, some going back over 20 years

          • Shows how much you don't know. I have Shia Muslim friends. You see, you lack understanding again and misattribute a caricature of some right wing guy to me. Both false. I have zero problem with Muslims (and hate no-one, so stop making shit up). I have a problem with an evil ideology called Islam (whose main victims are, in fact, Muslims). Most Muslims are cool precisely because they are not pious and do not follow the dictates of Islam. I hope you can comprehend that. The Muslims that are devout and stric
            • I have Shia Muslim friends

              I'm not racist, some of my best friends are black.

              I have zero problem with Muslims (and hate no-one, so stop making shit up).

              Same old hate the sin, love the sinner bullshit. The only good muslim is one who isn't muslim. You loons are all the same.

              • Man, you're the loon. No matter how one tries to explain oneself you will stick with your initial deluded and inaccurate position.

                I'm not racist, some of my best friends are black.

                Don't be an idiot. There is nothing wrong with *respectfully* calling someone of African descent a "black" if they do it themselves. Why deny reality - and all races certainly refer to other races with such terms. Do you feel that statements are only racist when Europeans make them? then who is the racist? who sees the World through racist lenses? you do, because you are racist

                • I'm not racist, some of my best friends are black.

                  There is nothing wrong with *respectfully* calling someone of African descent a "black"

                  Holy crap! You think THAT is what I was talking about? I am the one who said "black" - not you. You are so ignorant of the world you live in that you don't even recognize the oldest bigotry-denial trope in the book.

                  If you can't even maintain mental coherency while reading just one sentence, why would you expect people to believe even a single word you say? If numbnuts like you are the best we have to fight this evil mooslim conspiracy, then the war is already over.

                  I have no problem with 'cultural' Muslims

                  Yeah, yeah, yeah. More only good mus

                  • Whatevz. You keep creating and knocking down false strawmen of your own making. Hopefully one day you'll wake up to the fact you are defending totalitarian tyrrany - since no one was worried about your nice cultural Muslim friends the defence of Islamists is the only result of your apologistics.
                    • You keep creating and knocking down false strawmen of your own making.

                      Yeah? What strawmen are those? You are the one telling muslims that their religion is evil.

                    • You are the one telling muslims that their religion is evil.

                      Because it is evil! you haven't even read the Qur'an and hadiths. If you had then we wouldn't be having this conversation. The only reason you are defending the ideology of Islam is because you don't know anything about its core doctrines or the actions of the major players to subvert the liberties of the Free World, eg. OIC

                      So if you want to learn something how about you read a non-apologetic analysis of the Qur'an. eg. see the following objective analysis of the Qur'an that points out the scientific fal

  • Without countless hours of crude amateur porn, what will Egyptians masturbate to now?

    Pssst. Hey Egyptians... you're welcome! [xtube.com]

  • There are two things Islamists are allergic to:
    YouTube and
    Polio vaccination

  • ... just block all of Egypt for a month. That will get it all overwith and done.

  • if you are so high strung about it? I mean, shit, why get so butthurt over a video trailer?

    Guess what stupid religious people, there are people who do NOT believe the same thing as you, who might, *gasp* do something you consider offensive. Get over it. I find your actions regarding your religious beliefs to be extremely offensive, but you know what I do? Nothing. Be a bunch of stupid people, like it makes your religion look any better.

    You can't hide your head in the sand from truth, so accept it. Yo

  • This sort of shit goes on all the time in Egypt (at least since Sadat was assassinated). Across a border or two (or 6 if your name is GHWB), the Saudis are practically open in their funding of Islamic terrorist groups, and their abuse of women is just short of unbelievable.
    And yet the US gov't supports these countries and sells them tons of top-notch state of the art military surveillance and tactical gear. I shudder every time my corporate overlords deliver epistles to us peons about ethics and respons

  • all these tin-star dictatorships that don't like information... let them just turn back their top-level domains and block the world. let them sink beneath the waves. the rest of us will be happier.

No amount of genius can overcome a preoccupation with detail.

Working...