text:
The War Against Islamic Totalitarianism: How We Got Here
(Originally published 8/17/04 in Frontpage Magazine. Edited and expanded.)
One of the more debilitating cognitive blind spots of progressives is their belief that pathological behavior is always the result of privation: If only people were rescued from poverty, or ignorance, or hopelessness, the progressive mind reasons, they would cease doing terrible things. But in the case of Islamic terrorism, which is a pathological behavior, such an analysis is off the mark. On the contrary, the psychic justifications for Islamic terrorism can be found in an intellectually accessible and, in its own way, profoundly moving philosophy that stands in direct opposition to the liberal democratic institutions and Enlightenment values of the West.
The key figure, according to many scholars of recent Islamic history, is the Egyptian fundamentalist thinker Sayyid Qutb (1906-1966), whose writings form the basis for radical Islam's struggle against Western ascendancy. Qutb's signature contribution to Muslim thought was to update the concept of jahiliyya. For centuries, jahiliyya had signified the state of ignorance in the world prior to the advent of Islam; according to Qutb, however, jahiliyya should also be understood as the underlying spirit of decadence and corruption which exists in all times and all places--and which true Muslims are duty-bound to fight against. There can be no compromise with jahiliyya. "The mixing and co-existence of truth and falsehood is impossible," Qutb wrote. "Command belongs to Allah or else to jahiliyya." What was required, for Muslims, was to live under the strict Islamic code of laws called the sharia. It was the only way to ensure that they were living the way Allah intended.
Despite the sharia's rigidity, Qutb argued that it was the sole source of genuine liberation since the sharia came from God. Either human beings were ruled by God, or else they were ruled by other human beings; there was no distinction, on this level, between an absolute dictatorship or a representative democracy. Both amounted to the rule of men over men--which, according to Qutb, was always a form of oppression. (It's worth noting that Qutb reserved many of his most virulent criticisms for secular-minded Muslims.) Only the rule of God provided people with freedom. Thus, Qutb rejected out of hand the entire Enlightenment project which sought to separate church from state.
Whatever else might be said of Qutb's worldview, it represents a straightforward, coherent, easily understood system of beliefs--a system which has been vastly influential among Islamic radicals, including Osama bin Laden. (Osama's mentor and co-jihadist, Ayman Zawahiri, was a student and follower of Qutb; while studying at King Abdulaziz University, Osama attended weekly lectures by Qutb's brother, and fellow students recall Osama as deeply drawn to Qutb's thought.) Jihad is legitimized, in the radicals' eyes, as the struggle against jahiliyya. The only question is how far jihad is aimed. The short-term project would consist of casting out the infidel Jews and Christians from Islamic holy lands and recapturing the holy cities of Mecca and Medina from the jahiliyya-tainted Saudi regime; the long-term project would consist of subjugating the non-Islamic West, which means defeating the United States, in order, first, to keep its corrupting influences out of Islam, and, ultimately, to liberate the West itself from the suffocating darkness of Enlightenment secularism.
It is a totalitarian movement in the truest sense.
The war against Islamic totalitarianism, on a fundamental level, is therefore a struggle between Enlightenment and anti-Enlightenment forces. To overlook this first truth--as progressives are wont to do--is to misapprehend the nature of the entire conflict. To be sure, there are other element involved. Ethnic rivalries. Nationalist movements. Regional and tribal loyalties. Religious schisms. Historical grievances. Natural resources. Global economics. The war is a witches' brew of divided allegiances and score-settling. But at its bottom, beneath the claims and counter-claims, the war is between two irreconcilable visions for the future of mankind. The forces of liberal Enlightenment, committed to rational inquiry and religious tolerance, manifest in democratic rule, versus the forces of anti-Enlightenment, committed to faithful obedience to a divine will, manifest in sharia rule.
It is Thomas Jefferson versus Sayyid Qutb.
From our perspective, to be sure, it seems fantastic, even absurd, to talk about the defeat of the United States by the terrorists--which is the only path to the realization of their totalitarian goal. But our perspective is not the perspective of Osama and his ilk, who take a much longer view of history, a view in which even the most devastating setback is merely temporary and in which compromise is, literally, worse than death. Their hearts and minds are fixed against us, their struggle for our destruction is what gives their lives meaning, and they're not going to be won over to our view . . . any more than you could be won over, say, to abandoning the welfare of your children. Muslim radicals ask nothing of us save our submission to Islam or our extinction. If we take them at their words (and what reason do we have to doubt them?) then they despise America as much for our traditions as for our policies, as much for who we are as for what we do--since we are, in effect, the cultural, intellectual and military vanguard of jahiliyya. Osama himself spelled this out in his November 2002 letter to the American people. After a pro forma rant about alleged wrongs perpetrated by the United States on Muslims worldwide, Osama outlined his demands: ". . . we call on you [Americans] to stop your oppression, lies, immorality and debauchery . . . we call on you to be a people of manners, principles, honor and purity; to reject the immoral acts of fornication, homosexuality, intoxicants, gambling, and trading with interest."
Osama's bullet points follow. They're worth quoting at length:
*You are the nation who, rather than ruling by the Sharia of Allah in its Constitution and Laws, choose to invent your own laws as you will and desire. You separate religion from your policies, contradicting the pure nature which affirms Absolute Authority to the Lord and your Creator. You flee from the embarrassing question posed to you: How is it possible for Allah the Almighty to create His creation, grant them power over all the creatures and land, grant them all the amenities of life, and then deny them that which they are most in need of: knowledge of the laws which govern their lives?
*You are the nation that permits Usury, which has been forbidden by all the religions. Yet you build your economy and investments on Usury. As a result of this, in all its different forms and guises, the Jews have taken control of your economy, through which they have then taken control of your media, and now control all aspects of your life making you their servants and achieving their aims at your expense; precisely what Benjamin Franklin warned you against.
*You are a nation that permits the production, trading and usage of intoxicants. You also permit drugs, and only forbid the trade of them, even though your nation is the largest consumer of them.
*You are a nation that permits acts of immorality, and you consider them to be pillars of personal freedom. You have continued to sink down this abyss from level to level until incest has spread amongst you, in the face of which neither your sense of honor nor your laws object.
*Who can forget your President Clinton's immoral acts committed in the official Oval office? After that, you did not even bring him to account, other than that he "made a mistake," after which everything passed with no punishment. Is there a worse kind of event for which your name will go down in history and be remembered by nations?
*You are a nation that permits gambling in its all forms. The companies practice this as well, resulting in the investments becoming active and the criminals becoming rich.
*You are a nation that exploits women like consumer products or advertising tools calling upon customers to purchase them. You use women to serve passengers, visitors, and strangers to increase your profit margins. You then rant that you support the liberation of women.
*You are a nation that practices the trade of sex in all its forms, directly and indirectly. Giant corporations and establishments are established on this, under the name of art, entertainment, tourism and freedom, and other deceptive names you attribute to it.
*And because of all this, you have been described in history as a nation that spreads diseases that were unknown to man in the past. Go ahead and boast to the nations of man that you brought them AIDS as a Satanic American Invention.
Such were Osama's grievances. The sum of them is what makes us, in Osama's words, "the worst civilization witnessed by the history of mankind." Or, in other words, satanic. But Satan, as conservative commentator Dinesh D'Souza has noted, does not conquer. He seduces. America, in the minds of Muslim radicals, is not merely the worst civilization in history but the most seductive because we are jahiliyya, unveiled. And we are up in their faces. In a worse way than the ancient giant statues of Buddha in Bamyan, Afghanistan were up in their faces when radicals dynamited them in March 2001; in a worse way than Paddy's Pub nightclub in Bali, Indonesia was up in their faces when radicals detonated a suicide bomb inside, and then a car bomb outside, killing 202 civilians and wounding another 200 in October 2002; in a worse way than the Miss World Pageant in Nigeria was up in their faces when radicals rioted to protest the contestants' immodesty, killing 100 and injuring over 500 in November 2003 . . . on television, radio and the internet, in glossy magazines, news journals and paperback books, on movie screens, home videos and CDs, Americans are absolutely everywhere, defying the sharia, acting out in every conceivable manner to seduce the next generation of Muslims away from the path of righteousness. We are bombarding them with the flotsam and jetsam of our pop media, from Eminem's potty mouth to Britney Spears's gyrating pelvis, from the Rock's arched eyebrow to Brandi Chastain's sports bra, from the brawling on the Jerry Springer Show to the mincing on Queer Eye for the Straight Guy. Such ephemera are tolerated by us, the lowbrow excretions of our dedication to highbrow ideals like individual liberty, artistic expression and free enterprise. For Muslim radicals, they are the toxic images of a steady spiritual genocide being wrought upon them.
The radicals were striking back at us, albeit with mosquito-like forays, since the era of disco music and leg warmers; on September 11th, 2001, they finally got our attention.
From that morning on, our task in the war against Islamic totalitarianism became axiomatic: Kill or imprison-for-life every Muslim radical in the world. It's a different kind of war since it cannot end with the surrender of a collective entity; no white flag will ever be respected by our enemies. Prosecuting the war on terror is more like prosecuting hundreds of thousands of miniature wars in which our enemies are individual persons, determined to fight to the death. This is crucial. Even if every Islamic regime in Asia and Africa were to embrace liberal democracy and Enlightenment values, the United States would remain at war with Ahmed, Samir, Abdul, et al.
The radicals must be neutralized, one by one.
The difficult question is how to neutralize them without creating more radicals to take their place.
The name that has yet to arise in our discussion of the war against Islamic totalitarianism is Saddam Hussein. It is altogether legitimate, given the foregoing, to ask whether George W. Bush's decision to end Saddam's regime in Iraq was justified as a response to the September 11th attacks on the United States--attacks in which Saddam, as any rational observer must now concede, had no part.
The answer is a roundabout yes: President Bush's decision to oust Saddam was justifiable. But to make sense of it, we have to set aside the strong emotions that decision conjures up even now. For progressives, this means letting go, for a moment or two, their visceral distrust of the Bush Administration. For traditional conservatives, this means letting go their reflexive desire to support the prerogatives of the Commander in Chief during a time of war. Rational inquiry, rather than political passion, is required to draw the connection between the attacks of September 11th and the decision to oust Saddam. Step one in such an inquiry returns us that miserable Tuesday morning in 2001, that miserable Tuesday morning of warm sunshine and perfect blue skies when the world changed.
From the radicals' standpoint, the sight of the Twin Towers crumbling to dust, the sight of their ashes rising up to blot out the sun over Manhattan, must surely have seemed like an act of God--an unforgettable, historic blow against jahiliyya. Beyond what the moment meant to the radicals, however, a perilous message went out to the rest of the world. Since the end of World War Two, America's national security had rested, to a substantial degree, on the belief that a sudden, concerted attack on the United States would be answered by retaliation on a biblical scale. That belief, it turned out, was false. Osama called our bluff. He hit us in a horrific way, and we didn't lash out in vengeance. We investigated, determined who was behind the attack . . . and even once we knew it was Osama, and that he was operating out of Afghanistan, even then we did not incinerate the Kabul. Rather, we only demanded that the Taliban government hand over Osama "dead or alive." In doing so, we inadvertently, and unavoidably, provided our international enemies with an easy-to-follow formula for making war against America: Just work your mayhem through non-state surrogates and, after the next 9/11, if America again connects the dots, hand over a few corpses to satisfy Washington's demand for justice.
Saddam Hussein seemed the most likely candidate to capitalize on that formula.
It's important to recall that regime change in Iraq had been an official policy of the United States since the Clinton Administration--which was empowered by Congress in 1998 to use any means short of a military invasion to remove Saddam. (Which is the reason President Bush sought and received Congressional authorization to use military force prior to the invasion of Iraq.) The attacks of September 11th, and our measured response to them in Afghanistan, shifted Saddam from back-burner annoyance to front-burner threat--notwithstanding the fact that his pan-Arabism was hard to square with the radical Islam of Osama's crowd. Still, Saddam and Osama were both consumed by totalizing visions of the future of Islamic peoples, and both saw the United States as the chief impediment to the realization of their visions. More ominously, if a freelance thug like Osama managed to kill 3,000 Americans, what might a resolute sociopath like Saddam, with the financial resources of an oil-drenched country, accomplish?
Now put yourself in President Bush's position. Here are the facts as you know them in the immediate aftermath of September 11th:
1) You've got the head of the C.I.A., a holdover from the Clinton Administration, telling you emphatically that Saddam possesses weapons of mass destruction.
2) You've got an overwhelming consensus of foreign intelligence agencies concurring that Saddam possesses WMDs.
3) You've got documented evidence of Saddam's willingness to use WMDs on his enemies, both domestic and abroad.
4) You've got a decade of Saddam jerking around weapons inspectors, thwarting their inquiries, and intermittently kicking them out--thereby incurring further United Nations sanctions--which makes little sense unless he's hiding WMDs.
5) You've got a British intelligence report that Saddam recently sought to buy uranium from Niger.
6) You've got a history of Saddam supporting international terrorism, including, as his own foreign minister has acknowledged, doling out $25,000 "grants" to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers who kill Israeli civilians (and, occasionally, American tourists).
7) You've got a possible Saddam-Osama connection cited in a 1998 sealed indictment of Osama from the Clinton Justice Department, which reads in part: "al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the government of Iraq." (The charge, you're informed, was later dropped from the final version of the indictment for lack of corroborating evidence... but of course you're aware of it. It's another piece of the puzzle.)
8) You've got a personal warning from Russian President Vladimir Putin, who is in a position to know, and who himself opposes an invasion of Iraq, that Saddam is planning terrorist strikes against the United States. As reported by CNN on June 18, 2004, here are Putin's own words: "I can confirm that after the events of September 11, 2001, and up to the military operation in Iraq, Russian special services and Russian intelligence several times received . . . information that official organs of Saddam's regime were preparing terrorist acts on the territory of the United States and beyond its borders, at U.S. military and civilian locations."
9) You've got a 1996 report from the World Health Organization of the United Nations claiming that 4,500 Iraqi children under the age of five are dying each month as a consequence of the U.N. sanctions. You know the number is a grotesque exaggeration, based on data provided to the W.H.O. by the oxymoronic Iraqi Ministry of Heath (which hasn't stopped the W.H.O. from putting out the statistic as gospel truth). But even if the actual figure is one tenth of the W.H.O. number, that's still 450 children perishing each month under the status quo.
10) You've got a theory, espoused by several prominent members of your administration, that standing up a liberal democracy in the heart of the Islamic world will encourage Enlightenment values among Muslims and thus blunt the homicidal/suicidal edge of radical Islam; it's just a theory, and will be devilishly hard to execute, but it represents a hopeful alternative to an endless cycle of Islamic terrorism and ad hoc measures culminating, seemingly inevitably, in a massive WMD attack on the United States and a necessarily disproportionate response.
Are there dissenting voices? Yes, to be sure. Hans Blix, Chief U.N. Weapons Inspector, is telling whoever will listen that Iraq has no WMDs. But his history of evaluating Iraq's WMD capacity is checkered; as head of the International Atomic Energy Agency during the 1980s, he praised Iraqi cooperation with inspections--at the very moment Saddam was building up his WMD arsenal to its highest levels. Blix's assessment of Iraq's WMD capacity is echoed by another U.N. weapons inspector, Scott Ritter. But there are questions of Ritter's reliability as well. On August 31, 1998, for example, just after he resigned his position as weapons inspector due to what he perceived as lack of support from the U.N. Security Council, he said:
Iraq still has proscribed weapons capability. There needs to be a careful distinction here. Iraq today is challenging the special commission to come up with a weapon and say where is the weapon in Iraq, and yet part of their efforts to conceal their capabilities, I believe, have (sic) been to disassemble weapons into various components and to hide these components throughout Iraq. I think the danger right now is that without effective inspections, without effective monitoring, Iraq can in a very short period of time measured in months, reconstitute chemical biological weapons, long-range ballistic missiles to deliver these weapons, and even certain aspects of their nuclear weaponization program.
Yet almost a year after he had left Iraq, in June of 1999, Ritter told an interviewer:
When you ask the question, "Does Iraq possess militarily viable biological or chemical weapons?" the answer is no! It is a resounding NO. Can Iraq produce today chemical weapons on a meaningful scale? No! Can Iraq produce biological weapons on a meaningful scale? No! Ballistic missiles? No! It is "no" across the board. So from a qualitative standpoint, Iraq has been disarmed. Iraq today possesses no meaningful weapons of mass destruction capability.
So you're George W. Bush: Are you willing to gamble the collective security of the American people on the erratic track records of Blix and Ritter? Setting aside their dissents, however, you've also got more pragmatic concerns. Secretary of State Colin Powell is sounding alarms over the potential hardships of a postwar occupation of Iraq; "You break it, you bought it," he is saying.
On the other hand, you've got a copy of the Presidential Daily Briefing from August 6, 2001 sitting on your desk titled "Bin Laden determined to strike in U.S." The intelligence it contains is sketchy--sketchier by far than the intelligence you now possess about Saddam's capabilities and intentions--but the title haunts you nevertheless. If only you had acted preemptively in August 2001, if only you had taken out bin Laden. . .
Again, you're George W. Bush. What do you do about Iraq?
We know, of course, what the real George W. Bush decided: Saddam had to go. Given the strategic reality that we could no longer depend on the threat of a cataclysmic response to deter him, the decision seems altogether reasonable. Not necessarily right. But, at minimum, reasonable. Ousting Saddam, moreover, would present hostile regimes elsewhere with a show of American force, a signal that they might be next if they provoked us--as deterrents go, not exactly on par with the prospect of sudden annihilation, but in reality the best we could do. The fact that Saddam was in violation of the surrender terms which kept him in power in 1991 provided either a legitimate casus belli or a useful fig leaf, depending on your point of view, acquitting America of the charge of disregarding international law.
If the decision itself was altogether reasonable, and it was, Bush must nevertheless be severely faulted for resting the entire public case for invading Iraq on Saddam's WMDs. In so doing, Bush retroactively undermined the rationale of the invasion when no stockpiles of WMDs turned up. His error in judgment here is especially egregious when we recall that the more compelling reason to go after Iraq was always the opportunity to stand up a liberal democratic government in the heart of Islam. The fact that Bush shifted emphasis only belatedly, after not finding WMDs, was an unforgivable blunder. From the outset, he needed to make the public case that overthrowing Saddam's regime was a phase in the greater struggle to spread Enlightenment values throughout the Islamic world.
It's a transformation which, in the long run, might even point towards an endgame for the war against Islamic totalitarianism.
There is no doubt, none whatsoever, about the final outcome of the war against Islamic totalitarianism. The Islamic world will embrace the Enlightenment values of rational inquiry and religious tolerance. Such values are no longer optional, not in the twenty-first century. One hundred years ago, this wasn't the case. One hundred years ago, a dozen fanatics, armed with a death wish and the latest technology available, could perhaps have razed a village. But in the twenty-first century, a dozen fanatics, armed with a death wish and the latest technology available, could slaughter millions and set off an economic panic that might bring down the governments of powerful nations.
Enlightenment values, again, are no longer optional. Rational inquiry and religious tolerance are the glue of modernity. The Islamic world will either embrace them or perish. Their predicament is sketched, with dire poetic flair, by the essayist and philosopher Lee Harris in book Civilization and Its Enemies:
There is a sense of Greek tragedy, with its dialectic of hubris and nemesis, to what has been unfolding in the Islamic world. If Muslim extremists continue to use terror against the West, their very success will destroy them. If they succeed in terrorizing the West, they will discover that they have in fact only ended by brutalizing it. And if subjected to enough stress, the liberal system [of the West] will be set aside and the Hobbesian world will return, and with its return, the Islamic world will be crushed. Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.
Properly understood, the war on terror is less like a war than like a race. On the one hand, it's certain, even as you read these words, that Islamic radicals are conspiring to stage another assault on the United States to equal, or perhaps surpass, the carnage of September 11th. On the other hand, it's certain, even as you read these words, that American intelligence agencies and military services are working to kill or capture as many Islamic radicals as they can get their hands on. The race boils down to this: Can America effectively dismantle al Qaeda and its allied organizations before the terrorists manage to strike again, in a major way, on American soil?
The answer is likely no. Tragically no. The difficulty is that it's not a fair race. As former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld once pointed out, al Qaeda is actively recruiting Muslims to their cause at least as rapidly as the American military is thinning their leadership ranks. Notwithstanding the heroic efforts of Homeland Security officials and intelligence agencies to thwart another attack, it's virtually certain--as our elected leaders keep reminding us--that the terrorists will eventually succeed.
We will take another hit.
Harris's insight is that each al Qaeda success hastens the demise of Islamic terrorism. Not because the United States will eradicate it; that will never happen. The United States will never eradicate Islamic terrorism. Islamic terrorism will end only when the overwhelming majority of Muslims--who currently serve as its psychic enablers, fellow travelers and tacit sympathizers--turn against it. But in several prominent Islamic countries, this will entail their turning against their own governments, which continue to sponsor terrorism. And people do not engage in civil wars just because foreigners, especially despised foreigners, think they should.
There are, in fact, only two conceivable scenarios by which the requisite pan-Islamic upheaval will happen. The more humane scenario is the one initiated by President Bush. That scenario is to establish a liberal democracy in Iraq, in the heart of Islam, and hope that it inspires moderate Muslims in the vicinity to embrace Enlightenment values and reject the radical elements among them. The cost of this more humane scenario, if it eventually succeeds, will surely be hundreds of thousands of Muslim lives.
But what if democracy in Iraq fails outright? Or what if it survives but fails to inspire the overwhelming majority of Muslims to reject the radicals? In that case, Islamic terrorism continues unabated. What follows then is the "Hobbesian" scenario Harris sketches: Sooner or later, the United States will take one hit too many, or one hit too catastrophic, and the American people will set aside their natural aversion to promiscuous bloodshed and demand a disproportionate response. They'll elect a government which promises to end the threat, permanently, whatever the cost--and the cost will likely be millions, perhaps scores of millions, of Muslim lives. Like the German and Japanese civilians in 1945, Muslim civilians from North Africa through the Persian Gulf and down into Southeast Asia will at last feel their absolute defeat. They'll accept that the fundamentalist struggle against the West has been lost. They'll dig out from the ruins of their cities and recognize that they cannot allow the radicals to make martyrs of them all. Then, with our assistance, both military and financial, they'll set out to purge themselves of the terrorist cancer.
Tragically, the Hobbesian scenario is the more probable of the two. Muslims, collectively, have spent the last five centuries making one disastrous decision after another. That's the unvarnished truth. The idea that liberal democracy in Iraq, if indeed it takes hold, will inspire Muslims throughout the region to do what needs to be done ranks as a long shot. Still, it's worth a try.
Again: the outcome of the war against Islamic totalitarianism is not in doubt. The forces of Enlightenment will, one way or another, eradicate the forces opposed to Enlightenment. It may take years, or even decades, but Islamic totalitarianism is doomed. Keeping in mind that geopolitical truth, as well as the self-evident truth that all persons are created equal--and that the killing of any person therefore represents an equally irreparable tear in the human fabric--we must ask ourselves one basic question about the war against Islamic totalitarianism: How can we hasten its end with the lowest body count? It's a gruesome question, but a moral one, haunted by the likelihood that more deaths sooner might mean fewer deaths in the long run. The deadlier the weapons the radicals acquire and use, the more viciously and indiscriminately the war against them will eventually be waged. The scalpel, if necessary, will surely give way to the terrible swift sword. But there is no evidence, none whatsoever, that the blood-drenched currents of history can be managed, any more than they could be managed in the twentieth century, or nineteenth or eighteenth or seventeenth centuries, no evidence that the mass bloodletting by which history baptizes generation after generation, against the wills of even the most powerful leaders, is a thing of the past.
For that reason, it's crucial not to misunderstand how we wound up here. The war against Islamic totalitarianism is not the result of George Bush's response to September 11th, 2001. It's not the result of Bill Clinton's decision not to assassinate Osama bin Laden, or his decision to pull out of Somalia after the Mogadishu massacre. It's not the result of George H. W. Bush's decision to leave Saddam in power following the first Gulf War. Or Ronald Reagan's withdrawal of marines from Lebanon when their barracks were bombed. Or Jimmy Carter's dithering during the Iranian hostage crisis. It's not even the result of America's steadfast support for a Jewish state in the heart of the Islamic Middle East.
The war against Islamic totalitarianism, on the contrary, is the culmination of a chain of events set in motion centuries ago, back when the social evolution of humanity hit a fork in the road. Down one path lay the Enlightenment . . . and beyond it the goods and, yes, even the excesses of modernity. That path was taken by predominantly Judeo-Christian peoples. Down the other path lay a return to the Middle Ages, to stagnant theocracies and cultural wastelands in which the only relevant question became Who did this to us? That path was taken by predominantly Islamic peoples. They are history's abject losers. And they're not happy about it.
But abject losers are the deadliest enemies to engage since they have so little left to lose. They can face down a much greater military power with the most terrifying of all demands: Either submit to us, or kill us. The war against Islamic totalitarianism, as it's currently being waged, amounts to an effort by America and its allies to stave off the lunacy of terrorist jihad long enough for moderate Muslims to disassociate themselves from it . . . and then to kill off the terrorists themselves.
There's still time. But the clock is ticking.
The War Against Islamic Totalitarianism: How We Go...


Real Lumberjacks. Real Competition. Real Family Fun.
Authentic outdoor show that operates daily – rain or shine, snow or sleet – all year long. Our Jacks can handle any weather but you don't have to with our climate-controlled grandstand, keeping you comfortable any time of year.
Looking for a dinner show? You mean those shows where they bring you food that you didn't get to choose and they don't give you utensils? We have a better option: Lumberjack Square offers 3 great restaurants – Smoky Mountain Brewery, Five Guys, and Calhoun's. Eat, then watch the show. Watch the show, then eat. Or grab it to-go and eat while you watch the show. Outside food and drink is encouraged.
WANT DINNER AND A SHOW?
Lumberjack Square offers 3 great restaurants for a perfect dinner and show experience. We leave the food to those food experts we like to call "restaurants".
*Food or reservations with these restaurants not included in our ticket price.
Our facilities are fully accessible for individuals with special needs. If any members of your party have a wheelchair or other special needs, please make note of this when making your reservation so we may accommodate you.
You can find us at Traffic Light #2B at Lumberjack Square — 2530 Parkway, Pigeon Forge, TN 37863.
Paula Deen's Lumberjack Feud is designed to entertain audiences of all ages. Children ages 0-3 may sit on the lap of an adult during the performance. A limit of 1 lap child per paid adult applies.
Audience members may meet the lumberjacks and get pictures/autographs after the show.
The show is approximately 90 minutes.
Families, bragging rights await. Come compete in your very own lumberjack competition on our High Woodsman Challenge, a lumberjack-themed adventure park, our Loggersports competition where you get to compete on the Boom Run and Log Roll events (don't worry you're in a harness so you won't get wet), and our Timber Towers, featuring two unique 80-foot free fall jumps.
Get notified of updates, specials, and more.
Items from this website may not be used in whole or in part without the express written consent of an officer of Paula Deen's Lumberjack Feud. Website maintained by Make Me Modern.


text:
Artist views of the STEREO experiment. By Loris Scola - CEA
Grenoble, 11 January 2023 | Stereo, the collaboration between the CEA, CNRS, the Université Grenoble-Alpes (UGA), the Université Savoie Mont Blanc (USMB), the Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL), and the Max Planck Institut für Kernphysik (MPIK), has found no proof that the sterile neutrino exists after six years of experimentation. Their conclusion will impact numerous branches of physics, with their study to be published on 11 January in Nature.
The physicists involved in the Stereo collaboration are unequivocal: the sterile neutrino is not responsible for the anomaly in neutrinos emitted by nuclear reactors.
The Stereo team, which includes scientists from the CEA, CNRS, UGA, USMB, ILL and MPIK, has been relentless in its search for this particle for the past six years, without having found anything to prove its existence during the neutrino oscillation experiment using the Stereo detector designed to study neutrinos produced in the ILL research reactor.
This experiment brings years of questioning to an end. The existence of the sterile neutrino is a potential natural extension of the standard model, developed by particle physicists in the second half of the 20th century. This particle would provide an explanation to some still poorly understood physical phenomena, such as dark matter. Physicists believed they they had seen traces of the sterile neutrino in several past experiments in nuclear reactors when they realised that fewer neutrinos had been produced during fission than predicted by their models.
To test the assumption whether sterile neutrinos exist and determine their properties, researchers in the Stereo team decided to use a very strong source of neutrinos, those produced in the high-flux reactor at the ILL in Grenoble. A series of six identical detectors were installed only ten metres from the reactor core to collect data, with the team already benefiting from a wealth of knowledge accumulated over several decades of experiments. Protected from any unwanted signals in the surrounding environment, these detectors were ideally positioned to detect the signature of sterile neutrinos with unparalleled sensitivity: much more than a simple deficit in standard neutrinos, a conversion in their energy distribution was expected to be found.
"This deficit in reactor neutrinos exacerbated other anomalies observed in previous experiments. The sterile neutrino was considered a potential breakthrough in particle physics and we believed it was within our reach; we were wholly invested in this adventure," explained David Lhuillier, a CEA physicist and representative of the collaboration.
Over a period of 4 years between 2017 and 2020, followed by another 2 years of data analysis, a total of 107,558 neutrinos were observed without a single trace of a sterile neutrino.
Researchers had to find another way to explain this deficit in the number of neutrinos emitted during the radioactive decay of fission products. The accuracy of the Stereo measurements is so precise that the team began to look in another direction: it seems it is not the experiments that detect the neutrinos that would be biased, but rather the nuclear data used to predict radioactive decay.
The energy distribution of neutrinos resulting from the fission of uranium-235 measured by Stereo has therefore become the reference data, which is driving a vast programme to reassess the beta emissions of fission products described in the nuclear databases. For instance, this programme will allow us to more accurately understand the phenomena coming into play during the shutdown of either a current or future nuclear reactor. The results of the Stereo collaboration also provide a solid foundation on which to base the next series of experiments in reactor environments, whether for reactor monitoring by measuring the neutrinos emitted, for studying the neutrino mass hierarchy, or for further testing the standard model at low-energy.
Photo galery of the STEREO setup
(jpg - 815 Ki)
Inside of the STEREO target, before installation of the walls separating the 6 cells. The reflective walls are meant to collect efficiently the light produced by the interaction of the neutrinos with the liquid scintillator.
Top view of the inner detector being mounted. One can see the 6 central cells defining the target volume. The first and last cells have the same geometry but they are not used as target cells. Their role is to mitigate edge effects so that all central cells have the same environment.
Inner detector volume almost fully equipped. Only one of the target cell is missing its photomultipliers, allowing the see the reflective walls.
Top view the detector cells with all photomultipliers and associated electronics (red disks) installed.
(jpg - 1.07 Mi)
The STEREO inner detector hermetically closed and inserted inside the shielding structure.
The full [detector + shielding] assembly is covered with black sheets of neutron absorber to reduce the external background. On this picture the 93 tonns of STEREO are lifted with air cushions so that the structure can be pushed underneath the water channel, visible in the background (with the green balcony).
Previously published in the ILL scientific news
March 2018 - Stereo puts pressure on a 4th neutrino
March 2019 - STEREO is moving up a gear
Stereo is a joint French-German experiment developed and carried out by a team of scientists from the CEA-IRFU in Saclay, the ILL Institute in Grenoble, the CNRS-USMB LAPP laboratory in Annecy, the CNRS-UGA LPSC laboratory in Grenoble, and the MPIK Institute in Heidelberg, Germany.
Re: STEREO neutrino spectrum of 235U fission rejects sterile neutrino hypothesis. Nature613, 257–261 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05568-2
Nature's News & Views :Nuclear reaction rules out sterile-neutrino hypothesis
ILL contact: Torsten Soldner
STEREO collaboration:www.stereo-experiment.org

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
GA-ASI Flies Advanced Communications System Aboard Predator B
Supports RPA Airworthiness Certification Requirements for European Customers
SAN DIEGO – 13 October 2015 – General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA ASI), a leading manufacturer of Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA) systems, radars, and electro-optic and related mission systems solutions, today announced the successful flight of a company-owned Predator® B integrated with a certified Rohde & Schwarz R&S MR6000A air traffic control radio. The flight lasted 48 minutes, launching from the company's Gray Butte Flight Operations Facility in Palmdale, Calif.
"Integrating Rohde & Schwarz's R&S MR6000A aboard Predator B is a big step forward in meeting the airworthiness type-certification requirements of our current and future European customers," said Linden P. Blue, CEO, GA-ASI. "We are excited to leverage R&S MR6000A's capabilities to enhance Predator B's safe flight in domestic and international airspace further."
The R&S MR6000A is a key component in supporting GA-ASI's effort to deliver its Certifiable Predator B (CPB) RPA to European customers and to add additional German and European payload capability into its Predator-series aircraft. The R&S MR6000A radio was certified on the A400M as RTCA/DO 178B (level C) and RTCA/DO 254 (DAL C) by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). It is already in service on the Airbus A400M Atlas, making it a proven asset. The radio supports both VHF and UHF air-to-air and air-to-ground communications.
During the company-funded test, Predator B demonstrated its ability to integrate the R&S MR6000A airborne radio, delivering VHF radio communication to and from dismounted ground users equipped with a standard VHF aviation radio.
GA-ASI next plans to integrate the R&S MR6000A into CPB's design. Furthermore, it will include both hardware and software upgrades and a state-of-the-art Detect and Avoid (DAA) system featuring an airborne Due Regard Radar (DRR) for operation in non-cooperative airspace. Additionally, the aircraft will be designed to survive bird and lightning strikes and will be equipped with a de-icing system. CPB initially will target NATO type-certification standards with completion of the first-article production aircraft in late 2017.
High-resolution photos of Predator B and Certifiable Predator B are available to qualified media outlets from the GA-ASI media contact listed below.
General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc., an affiliate of General Atomics, delivers situational awareness by providing remotely piloted aircraft systems, radar, and electro-optic and related mission systems solutions for military and commercial applications worldwide. The company's Aircraft Systems business unit is a leading designer and manufacturer of proven, reliable RPA systems, including Predator A, Predator B/MQ-9 Reaper, Gray Eagle, the new Predator C Avenger®, and Predator XP. It also manufactures a variety of state-of-the-art digital Ground Control Stations (GCS), including the next-generation Advanced Cockpit GCS, and provides pilot training and support services for RPA field operations. The Mission Systems business unit designs, manufactures, and integrates the Lynx® Multi-mode Radar and sophisticated Claw® sensor control and image analysis software into both manned and remotely piloted aircraft. It also focuses on providing integrated sensor payloads and software for Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) aircraft platforms and develops high energy lasers, electro-optic sensors, and meta-material antennas. For more information, please visit www.ga-asi.com.
Posted on Oct 13, 2015 by randyshamoun


text:
Александър дел Вал () е френски политолог, геополитолог, журналист, автор на множество книги, статии и научни доклади в областта на международните отношения и геополитика.

Биография
Дел Вал е роден на 6 септември 1969 година в Марсилия.

Учи военна история, история на политическите институции и националната отбрана в Монпелие Пол-Валери университет, Институт за политически науки в Екс-ан-Прованс и Института за политически науки в Милано.

Защитава докторска дисертация в Университета на Монпелие 3 на тема "Западът и втората деколонизация: индихенизмъм и ислямизъм от Студената война до наши дни" .

Професионална кариера
В началото на кариерата си, той е работил като държавен служител във Франция. След това той е работил в Европейския парламент в Брюксел, където той основава консултантска фирма.

Александър дел Вал е преподавател по геополитика и международните отношения в бизнес школата ESC La Rochelle (Франция).

Книги
В първата си книга "Ислямизъм и САЩ: един съюз срещу Европа" (1997), той анализира муджахидините подкрепяни от американското разузнаване по време на войната в Афганистан (1979 – 1989). Дел Вал анализира ролята на Съединените щати да използват ислямистите да се справят със Съветския съюз и предвижда "зразширяването на НАТО на Изток да обхване и Украйна, и Прибалтика", че тази стратегията "предполага всестранно засилване на Турция, въоръжаването є със свръхмодерно оръжие, което може да се сравнява единствено с оръжието, доставяно от САЩ на Израел". Дел Вал пише: "Опасвайки Русия с този пояс, американците нямат никакво намерение да допуснат създаването на чисто европейска отбрана, тъй като разбират, че това незабавно ще доведе до съюз между Европа на 15-те и Русия и до придвижването на Турция на юг, въпреки наличието на американския хегемонизъм."

Общо дел Вал публикува седем книги с публицистика, в което той анализира възхода на ислямизма, който той нарича нов вид тоталитаризъм; Западната цивилизация и кризата на Западна идентичност; геополитиката на Турция и кандидатурата на страната за Европейския съюз; както и конфликта в Сирия.

В книгата "Защо убиват християните в света днес: новата християнофобия" Дел Вал пише, че "постхристиянският" Запад нито веднъж "не се опита да защити угнетяваните от сунитите християни в Египет, Пакистан, Нигерия или Судан... Нещо повече, натовските държави, които и досега виждат в Русия съветския враг от времето на "студената война", след 1990 г. неведнъж изпращаха свои войски срещу проруски режими (Сърбия на Милошевич, Ирак на Саддам Хюсейн, Либия на Кадафи и т.н.)... Всичко това отново в знак на "солидарност" със "съюзниците" от Персийския залив и организацията "Ислямска конференция", които изискваха да се защити Босна и Херцеговина, Косово, Кувейт, либийските, а сега и сирийските ислямисти".

Дел Вал обясня в книгата "Западният комплекс": "Подобно на всички останали народи, западните хора са жертва на своите собствени идеологически и цивилизационни представи или "форматираност"... Западът сам се вкара в капан, като прие идеологично-утопичните съвременни ценности, основаващи се на скъсване на връзките с миналото и отказ от каквито и да било корени... Днес вината е най-голямата заплаха, която тегне над западните народи; заплаха, задействана от нашите елити с космополитическа коректност, които знаят, че идентичностите са основната пречка пред прогреса на универсалистката империя на Мак-света". Дел Вал смята, че "този западен комплекс е много опасен, тъй като изпитва ненавист към себе си, култура на малоуважаване, настояща социална патология, от която трябва да се излекува спешно."

Публикации
 La Maronité politique, Le système confessionnel libanais et la guerre civile, IEP d'Aix-en-Provence, 1992 (mémoire).
 Statut légal des minorités religieuses en terres d'Islam, Faculté de droit d'Aix-en-Provence, 1993 (mémoire).
 La Théorie des élites, Faculté de Sciences politiques de Milan, 1993 (mémoire de DEA en histoire des doctrines politiques et des institutions politiques).
 Islamisme et États-Unis, une alliance contre l'Europe ("Ислямизъм и САЩ: един съюз срещу Европа"), L'Âge d'Homme, 1997 (ISBN 2-8251-1060-4). versions italienne et serbo-croate.
 Une idée certaine de la France (ouvr coll), Sous la direction d'Alain Griotteray, 1999, France-Empire, 1998.
 Guerres contre l'Europe : Bosnie, Kosovo, Tchétchénie ("Войни срещу Европа: Босна, Косово, Чечня"), Les Syrtes, 2001 (ISBN 2-84545-045-1). (versions espagnoles, brésilienne, portugaise, italienne et serbo-croate).
 Quel avenir pour les Balkans après la guerre du Kosovo, Paneuropa/L'Age d'Homme, 2000.
 Le Totalitarisme islamiste à l'assaut des démocraties ("Ислямистки тоталитаризма атакува демокрации"), Les Syrtes, 2002.
 La Turquie dans l'Europe : un cheval de Troie islamiste? ("Турция в Европа: ислямистки троянски кон?"), Les Syrtes, 2004 (ISBN 2-84545-093-1).
 Le Dilemme turc, ou les vrais enjeux de la candidature d'Ankara avec Emmanuel Razavi, Les Syrtes (ISBN 2-84545-116-4).
 Frères musulmans. Dans l'ombre d'Al Qaeda, Jean-Cyrille Godefroy, 2005 (ISBN 2-86553-179-1), préface d'Emmanuel Razavi.
 Perché la Turchia non può entrare nell'Unione europea, Guerini ed Associati, Milan, 2009 (préface de Roberto de Mattei).
 I Rossi, Neri, Verdi: la convergenza degli Estremi opposti, Lindau, 2009, Turin (préface Magdi Allam).
 Pourquoi on tue des chrétiens dans le monde aujourd'hui? : La nouvelle christianophobie ("Защо убиват християните в света днес: новата християнофобия"), Maxima Laurent du Mesnil 2011 (préface Denis Tillinac)
 Le complexe occidental : Petit traité de déculpabilisation ("Западният комплекс"), L'artilleur, Toucan Essais, 2014.
 Le Chaos syrien, printemps arabes et minorités face à l'islamisme ("Сирийски хаос: Арабската пролет и малцинства под заплаха от ислямизъм"), Dhow, 2014.

Източници

Френски писатели
Френски журналисти
Френски политолози
Родени в Марсилия

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


A good number of numeric domains at auction today. Both 5N and also 6N's with multiple 8's. I usually include all 5N's in my list, plus today I've added a couple of the best 6N's. I'd have to say I really disagree with a lot of domainers who say it's good to buy liquid domains because they hold value. The fact of the matter is that if you buy a good hidden gem at $20-30, then the only possible downside is that $20 you paid. $20 are better than liquid because there's only an upside.
So sure a 4L (4 letter domain. ex: lmno.com) or 4N/5N (4/5 number domain. ex: 7654.com) will always have liquid value .. but if you bought them at $3000, and the current liquid value is $1000 .. then you lost $2000. UNLESS there is actual end usage value to the specific name that gives you a fair chance of selling it at a reasonable multiple (enough to cover the potential losses on the other liquid domains in your portfolio).
What's a bigger issue about these domains is that they also tie up a lot of capital to acquire them. At $500-5000 each they eat up a lot of your capital. If you have deep pockets then by all means go ahead and grab a bunch. Or even if you don't, it's likely better to get one of those at $2000 as opposed to a new domainer coming in and buying 2000 hand-registrations in one shot. Although in this case both will likely be bad investments.
At the end of the day, whether a domain is liquid or not should be almost irrelevant .. as vastly more important is the chances of an end user wanting to use any domain you want to invest in. Unless of course you're a short-term domain flipper .. in which case most of the time the liquidity of liquid domains isn't usually a factor on a scale of a few days or weeks.
Today I've marked 138 domains with an asterisk (*) at NameCult.com. Some are the better names, but included are also more solid names with no or few bids that I think can be gotten for cheap because most people will miss them because they do not go through the expiration lists as thoroughly as I do! Just go to today's list and click the * in the table header!
13:51 | 00 bids - findgrail.com (4y | $12 / $1513) - For you Monty Python fans!
Click here to "Watch" this thread and get notified the moment I post tomorrow's list!
Let me know if you find these lists useful by either contacting me directly, or simply liking/thanking this post.
No comments other than late for work ... lol .. have a good one!
Oh yeah .. I corrected yesterday's list on NameCult. I initially made a mistake and put the list from 2 days before.
Today I've marked 98 domains with an asterisk (*) at NameCult.com. Some are the better names, but included are also more solid names with no or few bids that I think can be gotten for cheap because most people will miss them because they do not go through the expiration lists as thoroughly as I do! Just go to today's list and click the * in the table header!
Pretty big day for names again today. Another one of those days where there's no one trend in particular, but just a whole bunch of variety. I went a bit deeper into the lists than usual and found a few good ones that otherwise likely would have never been found by anyone. So I really suggest looking at the full list today! Have a good (whatever day of the week today is .. lol)!
Today I've marked 132 domains with an asterisk (*) at NameCult.com. Some are the better names, but included are also more solid names with no or few bids that I think can be gotten for cheap because most people will miss them because they do not go through the expiration lists as thoroughly as I do! Just go to today's list and click the * in the table header!
13:31 | 11 bids - giantbatfarts.com (9y | $70 / $454) - lmao .. 11 bids ???
where did you pull this data from? Massive? Far from it.
Have a lot on my plate these days so cutting it close in terms of time.
For those interested. If you want to know more details on the traffic details and where they are from, click the link that says "Click here for stats". I would have thought that would have been obvious .. but apparently not.
When I use the terms BIG and Massive remember that it is relative to other expiring domains, and not existing domains like Google.com! It's very rare to see expiring domains with 100k monthly traffic and over $100 in monthly revenue.
Seriously @domain hacks .. You quote one line that includes "Click here for stats" and then you ask where I got the stats from? The domain you quoted, according to the stats (that you were too lazy to even bother checking), had about 100k traffic per month and a monthly revenue of $167. You only see numbers like that a couple of times a month (not sure I ever saw a revenue that high), although admittedly I don't buy domains myself based on those stats (nobody should based on those stats alone). Given the 50k domains per day that go through auction that makes it literally about one in a MILLION (or maybe quarter/half a million in rare months) .. which in my mind grants the terms being marked as "massive". As I post at the bottom of every post .. I always suggest you double check EVERY data point listed. If you need certified information then DO NOT use my lists. My lists are intended as a tool and starting point to bring awareness to notable and interesting domains at auction (even I certainly would say a fair number of them should not be registered as a domainer) .. from there it is up to you to do your own research to make sure everything is accurate and that the domain has resale value.
In the future might I suggest a constructive comment or a private message if you think there's an error as opposed to a pointless sarcastic comment. I think it would be more appropriate given what you're paying for all this information I'm providing.
Everyone .. If you ever find what appears to be an error, then please contact my via private message ASAP so that I can fix it as soon as possible. I have private messages connected to my email, which doesn't guarantee a quick response, but it will be much faster than posting here. Remember that I do have a real world non-domain related full time job, that I walk little Steamie upwards of 100km a week, that I'm currently dealing with flooding in my condo with no hot water or floor of half my small condo for 2 months now .. and you're getting all this free .. heck .. fewer than 5% of people even bother to click thanks or like at the bottom of each post!
Anyhow .. auction day has already started .. get to it ... Have a good one everyone!
Today I've marked 84 domains with an asterisk (*) at NameCult.com. Some are the better names, but included are also more solid names with no or few bids that I think can be gotten for cheap because most people will miss them because they do not go through the expiration lists as thoroughly as I do! Just go to today's list and click the * in the table header!


Sega Ikebukuro GiGO (セガ 池袋GiGO), previously just Ikebukuro GiGO (池袋GiGO) is an indoor Japanese arcade owned by Sega.
Ikebukuro GiGO is one of Sega's flagship indoor arcades, being one of several housed in the Akirabara district of Tokyo. While it used to identify itself with other GiGO venues as large, inner-city arcades, in recent years the GiGO branding has been dropped in favour of the generic "Sega" look seen across many converted Sega Worlds and Club Segas. For the time being, however, the site still officially calls itself Ikebukuro GiGO.
Numerous Sega arcade games are thought to have been location tested at the site, with many going so far as to credit the venue's staff in-game. During its lifespan it has also changed colour - originally red, the building became a unique shade of yellow at some point during the early 2000s, before reverting back to a similar red colour scheme in 2013.


text:
// Copyright 2020 The Chromium Authors
// Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
// found in the LICENSE file.

#include "ash/services/secure_channel/nearby_connection_manager_impl.h"

#include <memory>

#include "ash/components/multidevice/remote_device_test_util.h"
#include "ash/services/secure_channel/authenticated_channel_impl.h"
#include "ash/services/secure_channel/fake_authenticated_channel.h"
#include "ash/services/secure_channel/fake_ble_scanner.h"
#include "ash/services/secure_channel/fake_connection.h"
#include "ash/services/secure_channel/fake_secure_channel_connection.h"
#include "ash/services/secure_channel/fake_secure_channel_disconnector.h"
#include "ash/services/secure_channel/nearby_connection.h"
#include "ash/services/secure_channel/public/cpp/client/fake_nearby_connector.h"
#include "ash/services/secure_channel/secure_channel.h"
#include "base/test/task_environment.h"
#include "testing/gtest/include/gtest/gtest.h"

namespace ash::secure_channel {

namespace {

const size_t kNumTestDevices = 3;

class FakeNearbyConnectionFactory : public NearbyConnection::Factory {
 public:
  FakeNearbyConnectionFactory() = default;
  FakeNearbyConnectionFactory(const FakeNearbyConnectionFactory&) = delete;
  FakeNearbyConnectionFactory& operator=(const FakeNearbyConnectionFactory&) =
      delete;
  ~FakeNearbyConnectionFactory() override = default;

  FakeConnection* last_created_instance() { return last_created_instance_; }

 private:
  // cryptauth::NearbyConnection::Factory:
  std::unique_ptr<Connection> CreateInstance(
      multidevice::RemoteDeviceRef remote_device,
      const std::vector<uint8_t>& eid,
      mojom::NearbyConnector* nearby_connector) override {
    auto instance = std::make_unique<FakeConnection>(remote_device);
    last_created_instance_ = instance.get();
    return instance;
  }

  FakeConnection* last_created_instance_ = nullptr;
};

class FakeSecureChannelFactory : public SecureChannel::Factory {
 public:
  FakeSecureChannelFactory() = default;
  FakeSecureChannelFactory(const FakeSecureChannelFactory&) = delete;
  FakeSecureChannelFactory& operator=(const FakeSecureChannelFactory&) = delete;
  virtual ~FakeSecureChannelFactory() = default;

  FakeSecureChannelConnection* last_created_instance() {
    return last_created_instance_;
  }

 private:
  // SecureChannel::Factory:
  std::unique_ptr<SecureChannel> CreateInstance(
      std::unique_ptr<Connection> connection) override {
    auto instance =
        std::make_unique<FakeSecureChannelConnection>(std::move(connection));
    last_created_instance_ = instance.get();
    return instance;
  }

  FakeSecureChannelConnection* last_created_instance_ = nullptr;
};

class FakeAuthenticatedChannelFactory
    : public AuthenticatedChannelImpl::Factory {
 public:
  FakeAuthenticatedChannelFactory() = default;
  FakeAuthenticatedChannelFactory(const FakeAuthenticatedChannelFactory&) =
      delete;
  FakeAuthenticatedChannelFactory& operator=(
      const FakeAuthenticatedChannelFactory&) = delete;
  ~FakeAuthenticatedChannelFactory() override = default;

  void SetExpectationsForNextCall(
      FakeSecureChannelConnection* expected_fake_secure_channel) {
    expected_fake_secure_channel_ = expected_fake_secure_channel;
  }

  FakeAuthenticatedChannel* last_created_instance() {
    return last_created_instance_;
  }

 private:
  // AuthenticatedChannelImpl::Factory:
  std::unique_ptr<AuthenticatedChannel> CreateInstance(
      const std::vector<mojom::ConnectionCreationDetail>&
          connection_creation_details,
      std::unique_ptr<SecureChannel> secure_channel) override {
    EXPECT_EQ(expected_fake_secure_channel_, secure_channel.get());

    auto instance = std::make_unique<FakeAuthenticatedChannel>();
    last_created_instance_ = instance.get();
    return instance;
  }

  FakeSecureChannelConnection* expected_fake_secure_channel_ = nullptr;
  FakeAuthenticatedChannel* last_created_instance_ = nullptr;
};

}  // namespace

class SecureChannelNearbyConnectionManagerImplTest : public testing::Test {
 protected:
  SecureChannelNearbyConnectionManagerImplTest()
      : task_environment_(
            base::test::TaskEnvironment::MainThreadType::DEFAULT,
            base::test::TaskEnvironment::ThreadPoolExecutionMode::QUEUED),
        test_devices_(
            multidevice::CreateRemoteDeviceRefListForTest(kNumTestDevices)) {}
  SecureChannelNearbyConnectionManagerImplTest(
      const SecureChannelNearbyConnectionManagerImplTest&) = delete;
  SecureChannelNearbyConnectionManagerImplTest& operator=(
      const SecureChannelNearbyConnectionManagerImplTest&) = delete;
  ~SecureChannelNearbyConnectionManagerImplTest() override = default;

  // testing::Test:
  void SetUp() override {
    fake_nearby_connection_factory_ =
        std::make_unique<FakeNearbyConnectionFactory>();
    NearbyConnection::Factory::SetFactoryForTesting(
        fake_nearby_connection_factory_.get());

    fake_secure_channel_factory_ = std::make_unique<FakeSecureChannelFactory>();
    SecureChannel::Factory::SetFactoryForTesting(
        fake_secure_channel_factory_.get());

    fake_authenticated_channel_factory_ =
        std::make_unique<FakeAuthenticatedChannelFactory>();
    AuthenticatedChannelImpl::Factory::SetFactoryForTesting(
        fake_authenticated_channel_factory_.get());

    fake_ble_scanner_ = std::make_unique<FakeBleScanner>();
    fake_secure_channel_disconnector_ =
        std::make_unique<FakeSecureChannelDisconnector>();

    manager_ = NearbyConnectionManagerImpl::Factory::Create(
        fake_ble_scanner_.get(), fake_secure_channel_disconnector_.get());

    EXPECT_FALSE(manager_->IsNearbyConnectorSet());
    fake_nearby_connector_ = std::make_unique<FakeNearbyConnector>();
    manager_->SetNearbyConnector(
        fake_nearby_connector_->GeneratePendingRemote());
    EXPECT_TRUE(manager_->IsNearbyConnectorSet());
  }

  void TearDown() override {
    NearbyConnection::Factory::SetFactoryForTesting(nullptr);
    SecureChannel::Factory::SetFactoryForTesting(nullptr);
    AuthenticatedChannelImpl::Factory::SetFactoryForTesting(nullptr);
  }

  void AttemptNearbyInitiatorConnection(const DeviceIdPair& device_id_pair,
                                        bool expected_to_add_request,
                                        bool should_cancel_attempt_on_failure) {
    SetInRemoteDeviceIdToMetadataMap(device_id_pair);

    manager_->AttemptNearbyInitiatorConnection(
        device_id_pair,
        base::BindOnce(
            &SecureChannelNearbyConnectionManagerImplTest::OnConnectionSuccess,
            base::Unretained(this), device_id_pair),
        base::BindRepeating(&SecureChannelNearbyConnectionManagerImplTest::
                                OnNearbyInitiatorFailure,
                            base::Unretained(this), device_id_pair,
                            should_cancel_attempt_on_failure));

    bool has_request =
        fake_ble_scanner_->HasScanRequest(ConnectionAttemptDetails(
            device_id_pair, ConnectionMedium::kNearbyConnections,
            ConnectionRole::kInitiatorRole));
    EXPECT_EQ(expected_to_add_request, has_request);
  }

  void CancelNearbyInitiatorConnectionAttempt(
      const DeviceIdPair& device_id_pair) {
    RemoveFromRemoteDeviceIdToMetadataMap(device_id_pair);
    manager_->CancelNearbyInitiatorConnectionAttempt(device_id_pair);
    EXPECT_FALSE(fake_ble_scanner_->HasScanRequest(ConnectionAttemptDetails(
        device_id_pair, ConnectionMedium::kNearbyConnections,
        ConnectionRole::kInitiatorRole)));
  }

  // Returns the SecureChannel created by this call.
  FakeSecureChannelConnection* SimulateConnectionEstablished(
      multidevice::RemoteDeviceRef remote_device) {
    fake_ble_scanner_->NotifyReceivedAdvertisementFromDevice(
        remote_device, /*bluetooth_device=*/nullptr,
        ConnectionMedium::kNearbyConnections, ConnectionRole::kInitiatorRole,
        {0, 0} /* eid */);

    // As a result of the connection, all ongoing connection attmepts should
    // have been canceled, since a connection is in progress.
    EXPECT_TRUE(
        fake_ble_scanner_
            ->GetAllScanRequestsForRemoteDevice(remote_device.GetDeviceId())
            .empty());

    FakeSecureChannelConnection* last_created_secure_channel =
        fake_secure_channel_factory_->last_created_instance();
    EXPECT_TRUE(last_created_secure_channel->was_initialized());
    return last_created_secure_channel;
  }

  void SimulateSecureChannelDisconnection(
      const std::string& remote_device_id,
      bool fail_during_authentication,
      FakeSecureChannelConnection* fake_secure_channel,
      size_t num_initiator_attempts_canceled_from_disconnection = 0u) {
    size_t num_nearby_initiator_failures_before_call =
        nearby_initiator_failures_.size();

    // Connect, then disconnect. If needed, start authenticating before
    // disconnecting.
    fake_secure_channel->ChangeStatus(SecureChannel::Status::CONNECTED);
    if (fail_during_authentication) {
      fake_secure_channel->ChangeStatus(SecureChannel::Status::AUTHENTICATING);
    }
    fake_secure_channel->ChangeStatus(SecureChannel::Status::DISCONNECTED);

    // Iterate through all pending requests to |remote_device_id|, ensuring that
    // all expected failures have been communicated back to the client.
    size_t initiator_failures_index =
        num_nearby_initiator_failures_before_call +
        num_initiator_attempts_canceled_from_disconnection;
    for (const auto& pair :
         remote_device_id_to_id_pairs_map_[remote_device_id]) {
      EXPECT_EQ(pair,
                nearby_initiator_failures_[initiator_failures_index].first);
      EXPECT_EQ(fail_during_authentication
                    ? NearbyInitiatorFailureType::kAuthenticationError
                    : NearbyInitiatorFailureType::kConnectivityError,
                nearby_initiator_failures_[initiator_failures_index].second);
      ++initiator_failures_index;
    }
    EXPECT_EQ(initiator_failures_index, nearby_initiator_failures_.size());

    // All requests which were paused during the connection should have started
    // back up again, since the connection became disconnected.
    for (const auto& pair :
         remote_device_id_to_id_pairs_map_[remote_device_id]) {
      EXPECT_TRUE(fake_ble_scanner_->HasScanRequest(
          ConnectionAttemptDetails(pair, ConnectionMedium::kNearbyConnections,
                                   ConnectionRole::kInitiatorRole)));
    }
  }

  void SimulateSecureChannelAuthentication(
      const std::string& remote_device_id,
      FakeSecureChannelConnection* fake_secure_channel) {
    fake_authenticated_channel_factory_->SetExpectationsForNextCall(
        fake_secure_channel);

    size_t num_success_callbacks_before_call = successful_connections_.size();

    fake_secure_channel->ChangeStatus(SecureChannel::Status::CONNECTED);
    fake_secure_channel->ChangeStatus(SecureChannel::Status::AUTHENTICATING);
    fake_secure_channel->ChangeStatus(SecureChannel::Status::AUTHENTICATED);

    // Verify that the callback was made. Verification that the provided
    // DeviceIdPair was correct occurs in OnConnectionSuccess().
    EXPECT_EQ(num_success_callbacks_before_call + 1u,
              successful_connections_.size());

    // For all remaining requests, verify that they were added back.
    for (const auto& pair :
         remote_device_id_to_id_pairs_map_[remote_device_id]) {
      EXPECT_TRUE(fake_ble_scanner_->HasScanRequest(
          ConnectionAttemptDetails(pair, ConnectionMedium::kNearbyConnections,
                                   ConnectionRole::kInitiatorRole)));
    }
  }

  bool WasChannelHandledByDisconnector(
      FakeSecureChannelConnection* fake_secure_channel) {
    return fake_secure_channel_disconnector_->WasChannelHandled(
        fake_secure_channel);
  }

  base::test::TaskEnvironment task_environment_;
  const multidevice::RemoteDeviceRefList& test_devices() {
    return test_devices_;
  }

 private:
  void OnConnectionSuccess(
      const DeviceIdPair& device_id_pair,
      std::unique_ptr<AuthenticatedChannel> authenticated_channel) {
    successful_connections_.push_back(
        std::make_pair(device_id_pair, std::move(authenticated_channel)));

    // The request which received the success callback is automatically removed
    // by NearbyConnectionManager, so it no longer needs to be tracked.
    remote_device_id_to_id_pairs_map_[device_id_pair.remote_device_id()].erase(
        device_id_pair);

    // Make a copy of the entries which should be canceled. This is required
    // because the Cancel*() calls above end up removing entries from
    // |remote_device_id_to_id_pairs_map_|, which can cause access to deleted
    // memory.
    base::flat_set<DeviceIdPair> to_cancel =
        remote_device_id_to_id_pairs_map_[device_id_pair.remote_device_id()];

    for (const auto& pair : to_cancel)
      CancelNearbyInitiatorConnectionAttempt(pair);
  }

  void OnNearbyInitiatorFailure(const DeviceIdPair& device_id_pair,
                                bool should_cancel_attempt_on_failure,
                                NearbyInitiatorFailureType failure_type) {
    nearby_initiator_failures_.push_back(
        std::make_pair(device_id_pair, failure_type));
    if (!should_cancel_attempt_on_failure)
      return;

    // Make a copy of the pair before canceling the attempt, since the reference
    // points to memory owned by |manager_| which will be deleted.
    DeviceIdPair device_id_pair_copy = device_id_pair;
    CancelNearbyInitiatorConnectionAttempt(device_id_pair_copy);
  }

  void SetInRemoteDeviceIdToMetadataMap(const DeviceIdPair& device_id_pair) {
    remote_device_id_to_id_pairs_map_[device_id_pair.remote_device_id()].insert(
        device_id_pair);
  }

  void RemoveFromRemoteDeviceIdToMetadataMap(
      const DeviceIdPair& device_id_pair) {
    base::flat_set<DeviceIdPair>& set_for_remote_device =
        remote_device_id_to_id_pairs_map_[device_id_pair.remote_device_id()];

    for (auto it = set_for_remote_device.begin();
         it != set_for_remote_device.end(); ++it) {
      if (*it == device_id_pair) {
        set_for_remote_device.erase(it);
        return;
      }
    }

    NOTREACHED();
  }

  const multidevice::RemoteDeviceRefList test_devices_;

  base::flat_map<std::string, base::flat_set<DeviceIdPair>>
      remote_device_id_to_id_pairs_map_;

  std::vector<std::pair<DeviceIdPair, std::unique_ptr<AuthenticatedChannel>>>
      successful_connections_;
  std::vector<std::pair<DeviceIdPair, NearbyInitiatorFailureType>>
      nearby_initiator_failures_;

  std::unique_ptr<FakeNearbyConnectionFactory> fake_nearby_connection_factory_;
  std::unique_ptr<FakeSecureChannelFactory> fake_secure_channel_factory_;
  std::unique_ptr<FakeAuthenticatedChannelFactory>
      fake_authenticated_channel_factory_;

  std::unique_ptr<FakeBleScanner> fake_ble_scanner_;
  std::unique_ptr<FakeSecureChannelDisconnector>
      fake_secure_channel_disconnector_;
  std::unique_ptr<FakeNearbyConnector> fake_nearby_connector_;

  std::unique_ptr<NearbyConnectionManager> manager_;
};

TEST_F(SecureChannelNearbyConnectionManagerImplTest,
       AttemptAndCancelWithoutConnection) {
  DeviceIdPair pair(test_devices()[1].GetDeviceId(),
                    test_devices()[0].GetDeviceId());

  AttemptNearbyInitiatorConnection(pair,
                                   /*expected_to_add_request=*/true,
                                   /*should_cancel_attempt_on_failure=*/false);
  CancelNearbyInitiatorConnectionAttempt(pair);
}

TEST_F(SecureChannelNearbyConnectionManagerImplTest,
       StartConnectionThenDisconnect_CancelAfter) {
  DeviceIdPair pair(test_devices()[1].GetDeviceId(),
                    test_devices()[0].GetDeviceId());

  AttemptNearbyInitiatorConnection(pair,
                                   /*expected_to_add_request=*/true,
                                   /*should_cancel_attempt_on_failure=*/false);

  FakeSecureChannelConnection* fake_secure_channel =
      SimulateConnectionEstablished(test_devices()[1]);
  SimulateSecureChannelDisconnection(pair.remote_device_id(),
                                     /*fail_during_authentication=*/true,
                                     fake_secure_channel);

  CancelNearbyInitiatorConnectionAttempt(pair);
}

TEST_F(SecureChannelNearbyConnectionManagerImplTest,
       StartConnectionThenDisconnect_CancelInCallback) {
  DeviceIdPair pair(test_devices()[1].GetDeviceId(),
                    test_devices()[0].GetDeviceId());

  AttemptNearbyInitiatorConnection(pair,
                                   /*expected_to_add_request=*/true,
                                   /*should_cancel_attempt_on_failure=*/true);

  FakeSecureChannelConnection* fake_secure_channel =
      SimulateConnectionEstablished(test_devices()[1]);
  SimulateSecureChannelDisconnection(
      pair.remote_device_id(),
      /*fail_during_authentication=*/true, fake_secure_channel,
      /*num_initiator_attempts_canceled_from_disconnection=*/1u);
}

TEST_F(SecureChannelNearbyConnectionManagerImplTest, SuccessfulConnection) {
  DeviceIdPair pair(test_devices()[1].GetDeviceId(),
                    test_devices()[0].GetDeviceId());

  AttemptNearbyInitiatorConnection(pair,
                                   /*expected_to_add_request=*/true,
                                   /*should_cancel_attempt_on_failure=*/true);

  FakeSecureChannelConnection* fake_secure_channel =
      SimulateConnectionEstablished(test_devices()[1]);
  SimulateSecureChannelAuthentication(pair.remote_device_id(),
                                      fake_secure_channel);
}

TEST_F(SecureChannelNearbyConnectionManagerImplTest, TwoSimultaneousAttempts) {
  DeviceIdPair pair_1(test_devices()[1].GetDeviceId(),
                      test_devices()[0].GetDeviceId());
  DeviceIdPair pair_2(test_devices()[2].GetDeviceId(),
                      test_devices()[0].GetDeviceId());

  AttemptNearbyInitiatorConnection(pair_1,
                                   /*expected_to_add_request=*/true,
                                   /*should_cancel_attempt_on_failure=*/true);
  AttemptNearbyInitiatorConnection(pair_2,
                                   /*expected_to_add_request=*/true,
                                   /*should_cancel_attempt_on_failure=*/true);

  FakeSecureChannelConnection* fake_secure_channel_1 =
      SimulateConnectionEstablished(test_devices()[1]);
  SimulateSecureChannelAuthentication(pair_1.remote_device_id(),
                                      fake_secure_channel_1);
  FakeSecureChannelConnection* fake_secure_channel_2 =
      SimulateConnectionEstablished(test_devices()[2]);
  SimulateSecureChannelAuthentication(pair_2.remote_device_id(),
                                      fake_secure_channel_2);
}

TEST_F(SecureChannelNearbyConnectionManagerImplTest,
       CancelWhileAuthenticating) {
  DeviceIdPair pair(test_devices()[1].GetDeviceId(),
                    test_devices()[0].GetDeviceId());

  AttemptNearbyInitiatorConnection(pair,
                                   /*expected_to_add_request=*/true,
                                   /*should_cancel_attempt_on_failure=*/true);

  FakeSecureChannelConnection* fake_secure_channel =
      SimulateConnectionEstablished(test_devices()[1]);
  CancelNearbyInitiatorConnectionAttempt(pair);
  EXPECT_TRUE(WasChannelHandledByDisconnector(fake_secure_channel));
}

}  // namespace ash::secure_channel

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Uber researchers propose AI language model that emphasizes positive and polite responses
January 5, 2021 Big Data
.article-content .membership-link { background-color: #000E31; color: white; padding: 10px 30px; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; text-decoration: none; font-weight: 700; font-size: 18px; display: inline-block; }
.article-content .membership-link:hover { color: white; background-color: #0B1A42; }
.article-content .boilerplate-after h3 { margin-top: 0; font-weight: 700; }
.article-content .boilerplate-after ul li { margin-bottom: 10px; }
@media (max-width: 500px) { .article-content .boilerplate-after { padding: 20px; } }
AI-powered assistants like Siri, Cortana, Alexa, and Google Assistant are pervasive. But for these assistants to engage users and help them to achieve their goals, they need to exhibit appropriate social behavior and provide informative replies. Studies show that users respond better to social language in the sense that they're more responsive and likelier to complete tasks. Inspired by this, researchers affiliated with Uber and Carnegie Mellon developed a machine learning model that injects social language into an assistant's responses while preserving their integrity.
The researchers focused on the customer service domain, specifically a use case where customer service personnel helped drivers sign up with a ride-sharing provider like Uber or Lyft. They first conducted a study to suss out the relationship between customer service representatives' use of friendly language to drivers' responsiveness and the completion of their first ride-sharing trip. Then, they developed a machine learning model for an assistant that includes a social language understanding and language generation component.
In their study, the researchers found that that the "politeness level" of customer service representative messages correlated with driver responsiveness and completion of their first trip. Building on this, they trained their model on a dataset of over 233,000 messages from drivers and corresponding responses from customer service representatives. The responses had labels indicating how generally polite and positive they were, chiefly as judged by human evaluators.
Post-training, the researchers used automated and human-driven techniques to evaluate the politeness and positivity of their model's messages. They found it could vary the politeness of its responses while preserving the meaning of its messages, but that it was less successful in maintaining overall positivity. They attribute this to a potential mismatch between what they thought they were measuring and manipulating and what they actually measured and manipulated.
"A common explanation for the negative association of positivity with driver responsiveness in … and the lack of an effect of positivity enhancement on generated agent responses … might be a discrepancy between the concept of language positivity and its operationalization as positive sentiment," the researchers wrote in a paper detailing their work. "[Despite this, we believe] the customer support services can be improved by utilizing the model to provide suggested replies to customer service representatives so that they can (1) respond quicker and (2) adhere to the best practices (e.g. using more polite and positive language) while still achieving the goal that the drivers and the ride-sharing providers share, i.e., getting drivers on the road."
The work comes as Gartner predicts that by the year 2020, only 10% of customer-company interactions will be conducted via voice. According to the 2016 Aspect Consumer Experience Index research, 71% of consumers want the ability to solve most customer service issues on their own, up 7 points from the 2015 index. And according to that same Aspect report, 44% said that they would prefer to use a chatbot for all customer service interactions compared with a human.
VentureBeat's mission is to be a digital townsquare for technical decision makers to gain knowledge about transformative technology and transact.
Our site delivers essential information on data technologies and strategies to guide you as you lead your organizations. We invite you to become a member of our community, to access:
up-to-date information on the subjects of interest to you,
networking features, and more.
Big Data – VentureBeat
emphasizes, language, model, polite., positive, Propose, researchers, responses, Uber


text:
Qutub Minar New Delhi
Compare Best Tours & Tickets Prices around Qutub Minar New Delhi
Visiting Qutub Minar New Delhi
The Qutub Minar: The Minaret to the Sky
1. Quwat-ul-Islam Mosque
Also referred to as the Great Mosque of Delhi or the Qutub Mosque was constructed by the founder of the Slave Dynasty or the Mamluk, Qutab-Ud-Din-Aibak. It is one of the earliest built mosques in the city and also the oldest extant mosques in India. The mosque comprises of grey colonnades which are entirely made of grey stone. The arch in the cener of the mosque is in ogee shape whereas the arches on the side are much smaller. The screen in the mosque has sculpted texts and patterns of flowers. It is built on a raised courtyard. The screen of stone in front of the prayer hall has motifs and inscriptions in Arabic.
2. The Iron Pillar of Delhi
Dedicated to the Hindu Lord Vishnu, the pillar is almost 23-feet long and stands in the Qutab complex in New Delhi. The main reason for the pillar being attractive is that it has high resistance capacity towards corrosion. No amount of water, moisture or air has been able to corrode the pillar. This has attracted a lot of scientists and archaeologists towards it. The reason that this pillar is intact and has not been touched by corrosion is the evenly spread layer comprising of crystalline iron hydrogen phosphate hydrate which forms on iron with a high phosphorus content. This layer protects the pillar from all sorts of climatic conditions. The weight of the pillar is about 13,000 lbs. There are numerous inscriptions on the pillar and graffiti from multiple dates. Two of the prominent and well-recognized inscriptions are of King Chandra and Samvat 1109. The pillar is believed to be hit by a cannonball as well.
3. Alai Darwaza
Alai Darwaza is the major gateway from the south of the mosque. It was built by Alauddin Khilji who further made an addition of a court to the east of the pillar. The domed gate is equipped with red sandstone and white marble. It was worked upon by the Turkish artisans. The gate also has Naksh script inscriptions. The Slave dynasty did not involve Islamic architectural style. Instead, they used false arches and domes. It is one of the most significant buildings in the city.
4. Tomb of Iltutmish
The Tomb of Iltutmish is also a part of the complex of Qutab near Qutub Minar. Iltutmish was the second Sultan of the city. The chamber in the center of the tomb has squinches. The major cenotaph has white marble and is placed on a raised area right in the chamber's center. The ornate carving of the facade makes it famous. The carvings are present on the interior walls as well as the entrance.
5. Alai Minar of Khalji
Alai Minar of Khalji was started after Khalji doubled the size of the mosque and thought of making this tower twice the size of Qutub Minar. The construction, however, could not be completed due to the death of Khalji, followed by no successors of the Khalji dynasty. The first floor of the Minar is a huge masonry core full of rubble which stands till today and has been covered in dressed stone afterward.
6. Other Attractions
The other attractions include the Tomb of Adham Khan, Agra Fort, Balban's Tomb, the Zafar Mahal, the Hauz-i-Shamsi lake and the Jahaz Mahal. Some statues from the Jain temples which have been destroyed are also present.
Qutub Minar New Delhi Tips and Tricks
You can book tickets easily from this website for New Delhi and make payments as well in a safe and secure manner.
Metro is the most prominent means of getting around as it will save you the traffic problems and also will get a lot cheaper to travel. You can also rent a car for the entire trip.
Do wear comfortable walking footwear. It's usually hot so if you're not okay with the sweat on your feet, wearing sandals can be a good option. But if you're afraid to get suntanned with your sandals pattern, you should wear sneakers or other covered shoes. Short-sleeved tops and trousers is a good pair.
Qutub Minar New Delhi Facts
The months starting from October till November are the best. The weather is not extremely hot or cold. This will lessen your luggage as now you do not have to pack warm clothes.
No, you don't need a guide, strolling around on your own is not a problem.
You can get there via Metro and then take a three-wheeler or a taxi to reach to the exact location.
Cameras are allowed in this site. Do drink a lot of water, apply your sunscreen, and wear a hat since it's usually hot. Keep an eye on your belongings at all time.
Popular Attractions in New Delhi
Lotus Temple


Sunday was an amazing day!
I participated in Yoga on the Mall for the first time. I even had the honor of practicing on stage with a few of my favorite teachers like Nina Stanger and Andrew McAuley! Over 1,600 yogis joined in the wonderful event and my goodness was it wonderful! The day started off cool and cloudy but by the time practice started the sun was shining and it had warmed up considerably.
If you missed it this year, hopefully you can join me in 2014. One thing is for sure, whether you practice yoga or not, you shouldn't miss it. Thank you to the organizers of DC Yoga Week for all of their hard work!
Sharing the light series: Meet NINA STANGER!
Nina's class was the first Vinyasa Flow class I had ever taken and truthfully it blew my mind. It was a beautiful experience – I was challenged and tired but it felt a lot like poetry in motion. The sequence of poses just made sense. It was where my body naturally wanted to go (aside from Savasana which is where my body ALWAYS wants to go). Her gentle way of teaching has an undercurrent of strength and support guiding you through the practice rather than leading you to it. There is a lightheartedness to her tone and style – you'll still notice that your body is being taken to its edge – you just won't mind. Nina is one of my favorite yoga teachers and I am really glad I can share a little bit of her with you.
You can find Nina's classes at extendYoga on Tuesdays at 9:30 AM, Fridays at 5:30 PM and Sundays at 4:00 PM and at Allay Yoga on Tuesdays at Noon. If you're lucky, you can catch her teaching at Lululemon in Bethesda Row. She is one of their ambassadors. Online you can get to know her on her blog on food addiction and recovery: Prana Rising. When you are ready to take the next step in yoga and you want to learn more about Nina's teaching style, she is also a core faculty member at the Sky House Yoga – Yoga Teacher Training.
1.How did you find your way to yoga?
I think yoga found me, actually. I took my first class in high school as a way to get out of gym class. We had the option to do yoga for a semester, so I chose that since I hated gym. After that, I took random classes at different studios in the area. Then, in college, I again had the option to take it at school for a semester, and the teacher was absolutely wonderful. She was the first Vinyasa teacher I had, and her classes inspired me greatly. I continued to dabble with other classes on and off, but didn't have a dedicated practice. Then, the summer before my last year of college, I decided I'd really like to be a yoga teacher, but I thought I wasn't flexible enough, good enough, etc. One of my teacher friends heard me say this, and he said, "If you want to teach yoga, all you have to do is LOVE yoga." That was all it took; I got over myself and became a diehard Vinyasa student, and a year later, a yoga teacher.
FLOW. I guide students through sequences linking breath and body, building flexibility and strength. In my classes the poses are important, but the breath comes first. I like to have fun and teach challenging asanas with gentle spirit.
Closing my eyes, taking a deep breath, and remembering that I am alive. Laughing and getting outside helps, too.
SLEEP IN. Wake up when my body is ready to wake up, not because an alarm is buzzing! Eat a delicious breakfast (my favorite meal, especially when chocolate chip pancakes are involved), go to a yoga class, hang out with friends/my boyfriend, spend some time in the sun… I'm pretty content as long as yoga and the people I love are involved!
Picture yourself in the shadow of the Washington Monument, eyes closed, sitting cross-legged on the grass, palms pressed together in your heart's center, calmly breathing with hundreds of other yogis. Is it a dream? No way! On Sunday, May 15th yogis from all over the area will be descending on the grounds of the National Mall to participate in Yoga on the Mall (YOTM). This event kicks off DC Yoga Week! Their mission is to promote yoga, share the wonderful benefits of a yoga practice, and encourage everyone to give it a try.
Participating studios will offer free and $5 classes all week-long! This is your chance to check out your local yoga studio or the one around the corner from your job and find a new place to call your zen home.
What? You've NEVER tried yoga? Excuse me?! What are you waiting for? Participating studios like Tranquil Space in Washington, DC will open their doors and offer various classes at an unbeatable price. Joining a yoga studio is a huge financial commitment for most of us. DC Yoga Week will allow you to try out different studios with zero obligations. Talk to instructors and seasoned yogis and ask them any questions you may have about yoga then try a beginner's class or a class on meditation.
I have said it before and I will say it again: There are only two types of people in the word – those who can't live without yoga and those who have never tried it. Participate in Washington, DC's vibrant yoga community starting with Yoga on the Mall and open yourself up to a whole new way of looking at life.
When: May 15 – May 22, 2011 | Mall Event May 15th 1:30 p.m. – 4:30 p.m.


Offenburg, city, Baden-Württemberg Land (state), southwestern Germany. It is situated in the Kinzig River valley, at the western edge of the Black Forest (Schwarzwald), southeast of Strasbourg, France. First mentioned in 1101, it was founded by the Zähringen margraves on the site of a Roman settlement and was a free imperial city from 1289 to 1802. In 1846–49 it was a centre of the revolutionary movement in Baden. The economic centre of the Ortenau wine- and fruit-growing district, Offenburg is a road and rail junction with printing, structural-steel, machinery, electrical, and textile industries. Tourism is also important. Gothic and Baroque buildings and remains of the old fortifications are preserved in the city. From nearby Staufenberg Castle, atop the Durbach (1,257 feet [383 metres]), one can see the cathedral at Strasbourg, 10 miles (16 km) northwest. Pop. (2003 est.) 58,888.


The gay pride parade will be on June 3 2016 and will start at 12.00!
Every Year Tel Aviv Celebrates the gay pride during Spring. For the 18th Pride parade the slogan "Women for a Change" and will support the end of discrimination and honor women's important contribution to the LGBT community and Tel Aviv!
180,000 people are expected to take part of the pride parade this year, them are 30,000 gay tourists from all over the world.