London bombed

Posted 7 Jul 2005 at 17:05 UTC by wspace Share This

Strength to the London people, or how do you say that well in English.
I think the terrorists miscalculate the effect of it, Londoners have proven very resilient before, in WWII.

    Muslim terrorists
Who are these muslim terrorists?
Yesterday I read in the newspaper that they call people like me a "kufar".
And that they do not wish me dead, they wish me moslim.
It's nearly a thousand years since the crusades, for God's sake!

Should I use their open source software? Or contribute to it? Make my software available to them?

in real life, posted 8 Jul 2005 at 10:04 UTC by yeupou » (Master)

« Should I use their open source software? Or contribute to it? Make my software available to them? Questions. »

Not really practical. In real life, these persons do not claim they are terrorists when they are in touch with normal persons. So you wont know that your are dealing with terrorists.

You are not proposing to discriminate against all muslims, just in case one of them is an islamist, are you? Because that's indeed what these terrorists are trying to do, getting the muslims support by committing horribles crimes in the name of Islam in hope that we start bashing all muslims. Just take a look at the history of Algeria and the FLN, it gives a good pictures of things to avoid.

Answer to your Questions, posted 8 Jul 2005 at 10:25 UTC by shlomif » (Master)

"Who are these Muslim terrorists"

Simply activists who take Islam too seriously, and believe it gives them permission to kill innocent people. Islam is a religion, and as a religion it is by definition mystical and harmful.

"Yesterday I read in the newspaper that they call people like me a "kufar".
And that they do not wish me dead, they wish me Muslim.

Well, I'm not sure if it's a "kufar" or a "kafir" in Arabic, but yes, that's true. A "Kufar" is someone who doesn't believe in the "one true religion". As for what to do with such people, killing them is also perfectly OK according to the Qur'an. (it appears there many times). That's called "Jihad" in Arabic. The purpose of Islam is to make sure everyone are Muslim, whether by converting them to Islam, or eliminating those who aren't.

Should I use their open source software? Or contribute to it? Make my software available to them?

Well, I don't take the beliefs of the originator of an open-source program (or any program for that matter) into consideration when using it. It's largely irrelevant to the value of the software as a tool and as a foundation for further development. I'm not aware of any developer of FOSS who is a terrorist, but some may share certain views by them.

The use of FOSS cannot be restricted to certain segments of the population. Otherwise it won't be free, much less GPL-compatible. Distributing software under such restrictions will bring a lot of flames, will divide the community, and will fragment the available code pool. Not to mention that villains have no qualms about using software they are not legally allowed to use.

So I suggest you continue to contribute to FOSS, which helps anyone, but mostly powers the good, benevolent people. You can denounce and combat Islam and all other forms of mysticism and irrationality by other more effective means.

PFf, posted 8 Jul 2005 at 11:24 UTC by yeupou » (Master)

"The purpose of Islam is to make sure everyone are Muslim, whether by converting them to Islam, or eliminating those who aren't."

That's the claim of Islamists (Islam != islamism) but that's plainly false. For instance, while Spain was a muslim area, Jews and Christian were tolerated as "Dhimmis" (people of the book, since Jews Christian and Muslim share all the same roots) .

"That's called "Jihad" in Arabic"

And jihad is many (different) things. The jihad is usually for most muslim just about fighting his own devils, what christians calls sins.

Hopes and wishes, posted 19 Jul 2005 at 10:57 UTC by lkcl » (Master)

that the lessons learned from baghdad, beirut and belfast, which have in their time been bombed daily not just once, will be learned.

that people will refrain from equating skin colour and widely held and world-wide-respected beliefs with "sadly deranged, deluded and brainwashed killers".

note to schlomif: your dangerous and twisted logic, schlomif, is a very good example of the sort of thing that is used. your statement is very well thought out, very rational, intellectually justifiable, founded on misinterpretations and misunderstandings and as such is extremely dangerous. i trust that your statement which implies that you believe that the whole of islam is logically twisted and therefore must be eradicated and fought was an oversight on your part.

that governments will not make the mistake of equating "terrorism" with "take away everybody's freedom and rights": ID cards, tagging and databases are ripe for abuse and are the beginnings of apartheid and fascism when they fall into the wrong hands (which doesn't, as we know from the experience of two recent world wars, take very much)

that bush junior, bush senior and their cronies both had never used the word "crusade" in connection with the invasions of iraq.

that people and governments begin to realise that there is no "physical" defense against these kinds of attacks - there never has been, not for hundreds of years - and that "intellectual" - psychological and spiritual - defenses and attacks are required (hence, the bushes using the word "crusade" was ... how-to-understate... a step in the wrong direction).

that the press, in reporting these things, show restraint and offer guidance instead of inciting and encouraging violence and hatred (it's worth noting that terrorist attacks and suicide bombings have been around for centuries, but that global and real-time news reporting has not).

i note that some of these things that i hope and wish for _are_ actually being attempted. i heard on the news recently a call for the UK muslim community to step forward if they hear anything or know anything: to confront these insane people who have twisted religion as an excuse to cause death.

For the archives: an apology., posted 19 Jul 2005 at 11:08 UTC by lkcl » (Master)

for the benefit of people reading this in the future who have come here seeking information on free software, or who have come here via web search engines, I apologise on behalf of schlomif for his comments here.

This site is dedicated to free software development. In the aftermath of the london bombings, someone thought it a good idea to post an article with quite a leading question attached to it (in what i believe is, at least it looks like to me), an attempt to make it relevant to this forum.

unfortunately, one of the people who has responded - schlomif - appears to hold the kinds of beliefs that help justify the spiralling levels of insane and irrational behaviour that have scoured this planet with craters and pock-marks both physical and emotional.

please: if you are upset by his remarks, bear in mind that he is only human, as we all are, and please: refrain from perpetuating the anguish in your soul, and pray for him and his enlightenment.

thank you., posted 20 Jul 2005 at 13:46 UTC by lkcl » (Master)

For example, in Iraq "insurgents" have lately shocked the world by decapitating hostages, turning the most taboo of acts into a military tactic. But a thousand years ago, Latin crusaders used the severed heads of Muslim fighters as missiles, catapulting them over the fortified walls of cities under siege. Taboos fall in total war, whether crusade or jihad.

schomif: you are a fucking idiot. i say that with the greatest of respect.

re-reading, posted 6 Oct 2005 at 22:47 UTC by lkcl » (Master)

in re-reading this article some time later (oct2005) i find that there appears to be a puzzling mismatch between what is said and what i commented on: in other words, right now, if i saw schlomif's comments i would write quite different things, and they would be very different from what i actually wrote a few months back: significantly so. either one of two things has occurred: 1) i didn't read schlomif's comments very carefully 2) sclomif's original comments have been edited and replaced with alternative content. given that i myself have asked or been asked to provide alternative content for the XML database that underlies advogato's articles, i know that 2) is possible. i also know that 1) is definitely possible. i mention these things for completeness, for the benefit of google-searchers.

New Advogato Features

New HTML Parser: The long-awaited libxml2 based HTML parser code is live. It needs further work but already handles most markup better than the original parser.

Keep up with the latest Advogato features by reading the Advogato status blog.

If you're a C programmer with some spare time, take a look at the mod_virgule project page and help us with one of the tasks on the ToDo list!

Share this page