Відповіді

• 2005.08.16 | Sych

  Рідкісний брєд.(-)

  згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

  • 2005.08.16 | Сергій Кабуд

    поясніть чому і поцікавтесь ось цим:

    http://911.gnu-designs.com/TOC.html

  • 2005.08.19 | Михайло Свистович

    І дійсно брєд.(-)

    згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

    • 2005.08.21 | Сергій Кабуд

      Алькайда постійно бредить і це відомо

      і відображене в її документах і дослідах про неї
      
      давай круглий стіл проведемо з арабістами київськими
      
      бо коли один з них на Свободі виступав, то він інакшої думки був ніж ти тут про них казав.
      
      Може Брехатинегарно?
      
      Чи це лише для решти дрібних українців правило?
      
      круглий стіл хоч і віртуальний все висвітлить.
      
      також потрібен круглий стіл і по низці інших питань в яких відчувається та сама брехатинегарно присутність.
      згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

      • 2005.08.22 | Михайло Свистович

        Алькайда постійно бредить, а ти це серйозно сприймаєш

        Сергій Кабуд пише:
        > і відображене в її документах і дослідах про неї
        
        ті досліди і документи також є маренням
        
        >
        > давай круглий стіл проведемо з арабістами київськими
        
        проведи
        
        >
        > бо коли один з них на Свободі виступав, то він інакшої думки був ніж ти тут про них казав.
        
        А в нас є арабісти (не арабські філологи, а саме арабісти) у Києві, окрім відомих тут сходознавців?
        
        >
        > Може Брехатинегарно?
        
        То не бреши.
        згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

        • 2005.08.22 | Сергій Кабуд

          це твої друзі арабісти, давай їх запросимо

          якщо
          Михайло Свистович пише:
          > Сергій Кабуд пише:
          > > і відображене в її документах і дослідах про неї
          >
          > ті досліди і документи також є маренням
          
          і тероризму не було. Забрехався Свистович.
          Чи може це Чорна Пора, га?
          
          
          
          > > давай круглий стіл проведемо з арабістами київськими
          >
          > проведи
          
          А я провожу. Це і є круглий стіл. Запроси будьласка сюди по своїх таємних каналах своіх східнознавців-друзів прямо сюди. Хай вискажуться.
          
          Таємні ці канали мені не доступні і імена я їхні не знаю. Але круглий стіл- ось він. Тута.
          
          
          >
          > > бо коли один з них на Свободі виступав, то він інакшої думки був ніж ти тут про них казав.
          > А в нас є арабісти (не арабські філологи, а саме арабісти) у Києві, окрім відомих тут сходознавців?
          
          
          Я думаю що на Свободі був один з тих східнознавців.
          
          Повторюю прохання:
          запроси їх через свої таємні канали.
          
          
          >
          > >
          > > Може Брехатинегарно?
          >
          > То не бреши.
          
          Ага, ну добре, будемо продовжувати зясовувати ВСЮ правду. В мене ще є нагальні питання. Потроху розвернемо всю калоду.
          згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

          • 2005.08.22 | Михайло Свистович

            запрошуй, вони всі тут

            Сергій Кабуд пише:
            >
            > і тероризму не було. Забрехався Свистович.
            
            Забрехався Кабуд, бо я не писав, що тероризму не було.
            
            >
            > А я провожу. Це і є круглий стіл. Запроси будьласка сюди по своїх таємних каналах своіх східнознавців-друзів прямо сюди. Хай вискажуться.
            >
            > Таємні ці канали мені не доступні і імена я їхні не знаю.
            
            Імена є в новинах, таємних каналів немає, вони всі регулярно читають цей форум.
            
            >
            > Я думаю що на Свободі був один з тих східнознавців.
            
            А я не думаю, що він міг говорити щось подібне до тебе.
            згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

            • 2005.08.22 | Сергій Кабуд

              він казав все саме так як це і є і відомо в світі

              просто політкоректно і іншими словами
              
              і наскільки я чув з приватних джерел-
              наші оцінки цілком співпадають
              
              на 'свободі' є копія передачі в розділі Вечірня свобода, в архіві- десь незабаром після розбійницького нападу сбушників на Центр досліджень.
              згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

              • 2005.08.22 | Михайло Свистович

                або то був не один з трьох, або ти не так його розумів (-)

                згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

                • 2005.08.22 | Сергій Кабуд

                  а хай самі спеціалісти і роскажуть шо і як

                  на затишному круглому столі Майдану. Прямоі тут.
                  Цікаво дивитися як ти відбрехуєшся
                  як кіно
                  згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

                  • 2005.08.22 | Михайло Свистович

                    хай розкажуть, якщо схочуть, я що, проти?

                    Сергій Кабуд пише:
                    >
                    > Цікаво дивитися як ти відбрехуєшся
                    
                    на відміну від тебе, ніколи цього не роблю.
                    згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

                    • 2005.08.22 | Сергій Кабуд

                      нажаль

                      постійно робиш і не соромишся може вважаєш шо інколи це доцільно- не знаю
                      згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

                      • 2005.08.22 | Михайло Свистович

                        Re: нажаль

                        Сергій Кабуд пише:
                        > постійно робиш і не соромишся може вважаєш шо інколи це доцільно- не знаю
                        
                        ніколи не роблю

                • 2005.08.22 | Сергій Кабуд

                  ні. це не або-або, це ти мене не розумієш я вказував вже чому(-)

• 2005.08.22 | Steve Seitz

  Аль Кайда і демократія: Al-Qaeda vs. the Iraqi Constitution.

  Дуже цікаві деталізовані огляди на http://jamestown.org/terrorism/
  
  З вчорашнього видання:
  
  Al-Qaeda vs. the Iraqi Constitution
  
  Al-Qaeda in Iraq has been active in a campaign to warn off Iraqis from voting on the constitution. The jihadi forums have carried the latest visual offerings from the Media Division of [Abu Mus'ab al-Zarqawi's] Organization of al-Qaeda in the Land of the Two Rivers.
  
  The most striking images are a ‘no entry' sign and a crosshairs aimed at an election center, with the inscription, "Brother Muslim, be aware that the infidel election centers are a legitimate target for mujahideen operations; keep safe and stay away from them." Another image is that of an opened Qur'an with the rubric "Our Constitution: for us there is no alternative to it. Who will protect us from the wrath of God if we choose the infidel constitution in place of the praiseworthy Law of God?" A third effective image is the view of a desolate road marked with the words "the Constitution; Democracy, Elections, Infidelity" leading inexorably to a destination marked with a Christian cross under the blood red sky of the U.S. Stars and Stripes.
  
  The al-Farouq jihadi forum, which specializes in discussions on Iraq, takes up the challenge further. A posting on August 18 from ‘A New Mujahid' underlined that the mujahideen in Iraq "are not fighting to expel America just to leave Iraq to set up what ever type of state it likes" but to ensure an Islamic state. He proposes that the armchair mujahideen make use of their talents in order to prevent the establishment of a constitution. This is to be done by maximizing traffic on the constitution issue — posting fatwas and monographs denouncing the concept, audio tapes of scholars, opening daily discussion strings and initiating opinion polls "even though the result is known beforehand," designing banners and signature calling-cards for distribution over other forums and importing discussions on the issue from other forums. "The Islamic forums will have an important role and an influential voice, if the number of opponents [to the constitution] is sufficient" [www.al-farouq.com/vb/].
  
  However, an illustration of just how dangerous a threat the constitutional issue is perceived to be for the mujahideen comes from the French language al-Mourabitoun jihadi forum [www.ribaat.org/services/forum]. The discussion, accompanying the above Media Division images, takes the form of an impromptu debate on the constitutional issue. Interestingly, it includes a discussion on an Islamic state that might nonetheless be achieved even if the despised constitution passes.
  
  "Before taking up a position on [the constitution]" one participant advises, "one should perhaps wait for its final text and the reaction of the United States. The constitution may in fact call for the base of all law being the Qur'an … this can only serve Islam and the Muslims." But the member also asks whether the mujahideen "will carry on killing everyone all the same [including] those who ensured that the constitution be based on the Shari'ah? If so, this would indicate that they are not guided by a deep understanding of the situation." The participant's pragmatic argument is that even federalism could benefit the mujahideen, since that could become a state where Shari'ah is applied. "Maybe [here] the United States will be helping us without realizing it" he concludes, noting that it is within God's power "to make use of the infidel for the benefit of Islam and spread Islam through contrasting means."
  
  Against the dismissal of his comments by subsequent participants, the pragmatist writer adduces the all-important precedent: "Several different methods [of rule] have been adopted by the Prophet and his Companions," arguing that in many cases the successor Caliphs disputed among themselves. "One can utilize the election technique by giving Islamic conditions for the candidates," he maintains, "and yet at the same time remain against the ensemble of the democratic model." It is all a matter of vetting, "to verify if the voters and candidates are sincere believers in order for them to have the right to vote… There is no infidelity in that if it is the best way to achieve an Islamic government."
  
  Opponents of this position focused on the misplaced liberalism of his argument: "How is it that the Shi'ites would be a benefit for Muslims?" The innate contradiction of a man-made constitution with the Shari'ah, and the track record of Arab states, "where according to the constitution the reigning law is Islam, but the articles which follow contradict these first articles." The proponent of the pragmatic argument fails for a simple reason: "God's law, in your view, is compatible with democracy. But do you have a fatwa or any hadiths or scholars to support you? … If a constitution is not the Book of God and the Sunnah of his Prophet, then it is a constitution of a Taghout [anti-Islamic tyrant]." But the pragmatist himself perhaps best underlined the nub of the argument, in that "there is no Islamic archetype for the selection of a head of the [Muslim] Nation."
  згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

  • 2005.08.22 | Сергій Кабуд

    дякую, дуже цікаво, може пане Зайцю ви коротко тезово напишете

    шо там викладається,
    бо не всі розуміють англійську.
    
    Я б і сам написав, але Свистович створив навколо себе атмосферу недовіри і брехні, і я думаю шо нейтральну фігуру як Ви тут сприймуть краще.
    згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

    • 2005.08.22 | Роман ShaRP

      Знов брешеш, кабуде.

      Сергій Кабуд пише:
      > Я б і сам написав, але Свистович створив навколо себе атмосферу недовіри і брехні, і я думаю шо нейтральну фігуру як Ви тут сприймуть краще.
      
      Атмосферу недовіри та брехні створили навколо себе двоє інших активних відвідувачів форуму.
      
      Перший - Augusto AKA Nemesis, а другий - ти (так, навіть тут тобі не судилося бути першому. Не щастить прямо як яйцуковічу).

  • 2005.08.22 | Сергій Кабуд

    от що мусульмани думають про політику

    написано не дуже класно, але цифри цікаві:
    
    washingtonpost.com
    Support for Bin Laden, Violence Down Among Muslims, Poll Says
    
    
    By Robin Wright
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Friday, July 15, 2005; A13
    
    Osama bin Laden's standing has dropped significantly in some pivotal Muslim countries, while support for suicide bombings and other acts of violence has "declined dramatically," according to a new survey released yesterday.
    
    Predominantly Muslim populations in a sampling of six North African, Middle Eastern and Asian countries share to a "considerable degree" Western concerns about Islamic extremism, according to the poll by the Pew Global Attitudes Project, conducted by the Pew Research Center, a nonpartisan and nonprofit organization.
    
    "Most Muslim publics are expressing less support for terrorism than in the past. Confidence in Osama bin Laden has declined markedly in some countries, and fewer believe suicide bombings that target civilians are justified in the defense of Islam," the poll concluded.
    
    The one exception is attitudes toward suicide bombings of U.S and Western targets in Iraq, a subject on which Muslims were divided. Roughly half of Muslims in Lebanon, Jordan and Morocco said such attacks are justifiable, while sizable majorities in Turkey, Pakistan and Indonesia disagreed. Yet, support for suicide bombings in Iraq still declined by as much as 20 percent compared with a poll taken last year.
    
    The results, which also reveal widespread support for democracy, show how profoundly opinions have changed in parts of the Muslim world since Pew took similar surveys in recent years. The poll attributed the difference in attitudes toward extremism to both the terrorist attacks in Muslim nations and the passage of time since the U.S. invasion of Iraq.
    
    In May 2003, many Muslims "saw a worldwide threat to Islam and [bin Laden] represented opposition to the West and the United States," said Andrew Kohut, president of the Pew Research Center and project director. "Tempers have since cooled."
    
    The poll results are a rare piece of good news for the Bush administration, which has faced difficulties seeing gains in its two top foreign policy goals -- combating terrorism and promoting democracy in the Islamic world.
    
    "These are eye-catching results, but not surprising," said Augustus Richard Norton, a Middle East specialist at Boston University. "Muslims, like non-Muslims, are plugged into the world. . . . It is one thing to be caught up in the supposed glamour of attacking the superpower or global bully, but it is quite another to have to pay the consequences economically, politically -- not to mention personally. This is what has happened in places like Indonesia, Morocco, Pakistan and Turkey, where many people now see extremist Islam as a threat to their lives, not a fantasy game of kick Uncle Sam."
    
    The survey, conducted from April through mid-June, before the London bombings, polled 17,000 people in the six Muslim-dominated countries and in 11 major Western and Asian nations, including the United States. They were asked about their attitudes toward Islam, Muslim nations and extremist violence. More than 6,200 interviews in Muslim countries were conducted in person, while interviews in the West and in Asia were done by telephone and in person.
    
    The new poll also found that growing majorities or pluralities of Muslims now say that democracy can work in their countries and is not just a Western ideology. Support for democracy was in the 80 percent range in Indonesia, Jordan, Lebanon and Morocco. It was selected by 43 percent in Pakistan and 48 percent in Turkey -- the largest blocks of respondents in both countries because significant numbers were unsure.
    
    "They are not just paying lip service. They are saying they specifically want a fair judiciary, freedom of expression and more than one party in elections. It wasn't just a vague concept," Kohut said. "U.S. and Western ideas about democracy have been globalized and are in the Muslim world."
    
    At the same time, most Muslims surveyed said they think Islam is playing an increasing role in their politics, a development they view as a positive shift in response to economic problems, growing immorality and concern about Western influence. Jordan was the only exception.
    
    The survey results indicate that growing numbers of Muslims differentiate between what they consider the peaceful influence of Islamic values in politics and the use of religion to justify attacks. "The people who see Islam playing an important role in political life are the ones most worried about extremism," Kohut said.
    
    !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Yet solid majorities in five of the six Muslim countries surveyed -- Indonesia, Jordan, Lebanon, Pakistan and Turkey -- also now have unfavorable views of the United States. In the sixth, Morocco, views are divided. The governments in all six countries are U.S. allies and receive U.S. aid.
    !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    
    The survey found only 2 percent of the people polled in Lebanon and 7 percent in Turkey expressing confidence that bin Laden would "do the right thing regarding world affairs." The proportion that expressed confidence in the al Qaeda leader dropped from almost half to about a quarter in Morocco, and from 58 percent to 37 percent in Indonesia. Bin Laden's standing went up slightly in Pakistan, to 51 percent, and in Jordan, to 60 percent.
    
    Three factors, Kohut said, contributed to the notable shift in views on bin Laden and suicide bombings: incidents of terrorism in Muslim countries, an increase in positive feelings about events at home, and the passage of time since the 2003 survey conducted after the U.S. invasion of Iraq.
    
    
    The decline in support for suicide bombings was largest in Indonesia, which has witnessed deadly bombings at a Marriott hotel in Jakarta and at a Bali tourist hotel -- attacks that seriously affected tourism and foreign investment. Jordan was the only country where the majority surveyed -- 57 percent -- still support terrorist acts in defense of Islam, possibly because the majority Palestinian population is tied to the conflict with Israel, Kohut said.
    
    !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    But Norton also noted: "As the events in London show, it does not take too many people to cause big problems. If only 1/10,000 of 1 percent [of the Muslim world] is inclined to terrorism, that is still 1,200 potential mass killers."
    !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    
    One of the starkest findings was the divide in views on religion. Most of those surveyed in nine Western countries -- including the United States, Britain, Canada, France and Russia -- said they have favorable views of Muslims, although the non-Muslims surveyed were more likely to say Islam is more violent than Christianity, Judaism or Hinduism.
    
    The Muslims surveyed had mixed views on Christians, and anti-Jewish sentiment was "endemic," the survey reported.
    згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

    • 2005.08.22 | Михайло Свистович

      окремі мусульмани (-)

• 2005.08.22 | Сергій Кабуд

  можливо новину поставив східнознавець- прошу до круглого столу!

  цікаво почути від автора новини
  а також від спеціалістів арабістів-схоіднознавців
  згорнути/розгорнути гілку відповідей

  • 2005.08.22 | Михайло Свистович

    ні, її поставив не східнознавець (-)