Blubb has obviously been chugging Breitbart/Stormie fundie shit lately, Sal. I see you, homie. Indifference is a motherfuckin disease.
Blubb has obviously been chugging Breitbart/Stormie fundie shit lately, Sal. I see you, homie. Indifference is a motherfuckin disease.
Wait. What's the matter with the term Islamophobia? It's totally accurate considering it literally means a fear of Islam.
A phobia is an irrational fear. Most bigots aren't experiencing fear (it's more like hatred), and other people who are wary of Islam aren't being irrational. More broadly, Islamophobia is the cry of the regressive left who will rush to the aid of the downtrodden Muslim at the drop of a hat.
Also how in the hell did this go to Islamaphobia to begin with? Unless you make some huge assumption that all the reasons given were lies it clearly states that the banning occurred due a name match which was supposedly an error at that not because his name sounded Islamic.
Like seriously pain and trauma because you were denied a beta test is kind of wtf to begin with. But then blaming the company because you have the same name as a terrorist and that raised red flags is kind of idiotic. If you should blame anyone blame the terrorist with your name (hell piss on his grave if they bothered giving him one) or the government which pushes companies to do checks like this.
No, I'm saying if he was actually an informed, rational person, he would've been outraged about this 2 years ago or more. He's exactly the problem with this country. The apathy with regards to what the government is doing until it directly affects their personal time.
In academic terms, he got the right answer for the wrong reason, and is therefore awarded no credit.
Those issues have been raised for awhile. Think this is just another bullet under that.
However they are completely different issues than what that prof brought up. He tried to make it sound like some attempt by the company to destroy his freedom for having a muslim sounding name which isn't even the case let alone the actual issue here. The real issue is just the ever growing overreach of our government particularly in fields of data gathering
So it's an issue, but his problem isn't important enough to waste your time with the news article he made you read.
Ok, I'm glad not every one is as dense as those other two.
Basically, people are mad because this isn't big enough of a problem in some ones life to waste your time with the news article. If you weren't in the news years ago talking about these issues then you complaining now about it is stupid. Its a stupid position to take, but I at least see what you're saying now.
would you guys consider me an islamophobe
You strike me more as an equal opportunity Middle Eastern brown people hater.
You weren't the only one responding to me.
True but that is the part that was directly after a quote from me with the rest of what you said after a quote from somone eles. So kind of assumed each part was a response to the part quoted right before it
[British]Judge says government definition of 'terrorism' breaches human rights
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2016...n_9016698.html
FBI wants a version of iOS built that subverts security and encryption (apparently so they can get into the San Bernardino couple's iPhone(s)). Apple has posted a letter stating they have no intent to do so.
http://www.apple.com/customer-letter/
Yeah. The second Apple says "Yeah, we've made it so governments can backdoor your privacy at will", the companies that won't will devour their market share.
Because why the heck would they stop with a few phones when it'd mean open access to every foreign and domestic of interest who owns an Apple product?
Well since this is now going to court, if the court decides in the favor of the FBI this doesn't stop at apple because then Google, Microsoft, and any other phone producers would legally be required to create a special form of their OS where the FBI can brute force their way into it in the name of anti-terrorism.