sedachv

Because that is what the book is about. Specifically, about the history of the Islamic Center of Munich, regularly attended by Mahmoud Abouhalima, the 1993 WTC bomber, and Al Qaeda co-founder and bin Laden mentor Mamdouh Mahmud Salim. I don't know what you are trying to imply. As suggested previously, read the book.

I recommend reading the book (Ian Johnson's A Mosque In Munich: Nazis, The CIA, And The Rise Of The Muslim Brotherhood In The West) because it is the first (and, AFAIK, so far only) study where all the "tangentially related links" are explained in context. Johnson did an excellent job of perusing West German and newly declassified CIA documents, as well as tracking down and interviewing surviving participants of the events. It is not something you can credibly explain in one post.

It started much earlier than that, when the CIA took over Nazi Muslim terrorist networks after WWII, and from that started working with the Muslim Brotherhood in the 1950s. Ian Johnson's _A Mosque In Munich_ is a must-read if you are at all interested in why 9/11 happened:

  Privately, President Eisenhower seemed concerned about how to reach the Muslim world. He wrote to his confidant, the Presbyterian church leader Edward Elson, that Islam and the Middle East were always on his mind. “I assure you that I never fail in any communication with Arab leaders, oral or written, to stress the importance of the spiritual factor in our relationships. I have argued that belief in God should create between them and us the common purpose of opposing atheistic communism.” In White House meetings he was more blunt. Speaking with the CIA covert operations czar Frank Wisner and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Eisenhower said that Arabs should dip into their own religion for inspiration in fighting communism. “The President said he thought we should do everything possible to stress the ‘holy war’ aspect,’ according to a memo outlining the conversation. “Mr. Dulles commented that if the Arabs have a ‘holy war they would want it to be against Israel. The President recalled, however, that [King Ibn] Saud, after his visit here, had called on all Arabs to oppose Communism.” The Operations Coordinating Board — the body set up to imple- ment covert plans by the CIA and other agencies — took up Islam. It had already produced a detailed study of Buddhism and how that religion could be used to further U.S. interests. In 1957, the board established an Ad Hoc Working Group on Islam that included offi- cials from the U.S. Information Agency, the State Department, and the CIA. According to a memo on the groups first meeting, its goal was to take stock of what public and private U.S. organizations were doing in the field of Islam and come up with an “Outline Plan of Operations.’ The plan had two main components, both of which were echoed in CIA actions in Munich. First, the United States would shun traditional Muslims in favor of “reform” groups, like the Muslim Brotherhood. Then, as today, the Brotherhood’s radi- cal political agenda of a return to a mythic state of pure Islam was obfuscated by its members’ use of modern symbols, such as West- ern clothing and rhetoric. “Both the Chairman and the CIA mem- ber felt that with the Islamic world being divided as it is between reactionary and reformist groups, it might be found profitable to place emphasis on programs which would strengthen the reformist groups.” In May, the coordination board passed the inventory and plan of action. Its statements were clear and simple: Islam is a natural ally, communists are exploiting Islam, and Islam affects the balance of power. The paper listed a dozen recommendations for strengthen- ing ties with Islamic organizations, especially those with a strong anticommunist bent. As always, the operations were to be covert. “Programs which are indirect and unattributable are more likely to be effective and will avoid the charge that we are trying to use reli- gion for political purposes,’ the report concluded. “Overt use of Is- lamic organizations for the inculcation of hard-line propaganda is to be avoided”

_Test Driven Development: By Example_ certainly had the highest ratio of dumb unnecessary jokes to contrived unconvincing examples of any programming book I have read. My copy of TAOCP volume 3 doesn't even begin to compare. Clearly Knuth was doing something wrong.

You just copy-and-paste the relevant input-output and there is your test. There isn't a need for any extra tools when using the REPL to come up with regression tests (obviously a REPL cannot be used to do TDD).

TDD use would be a lot different if people actually bothered to read the entirety of Kent Beck's _Test Driven Development: By Example_. It's a lot to ask, because it is such a terribly written book, but there is one particular sentence where Beck gives it away:

> This has happened to me several times while writing this book. I would get the code a bit twisted. “But I have to finish the book. The children are starving, and the bill collectors are pounding on the door.”

Instead of realizing that Kent Beck stretched out an article-sized idea into an entire book, because he makes his money writing vague books on vague "methodology" that are really advertising brochures for his corporate training seminars, people actually took the thing seriously and legitimately believed that you (yes, you) should write all code that way.

So a technique that is sometimes useful for refactoring and sometimes useful for writing new code got cargo-culted into a no-exceptions-this-is-how-you-must-do-all-your-work Law by people that don't really understand what they are doing anymore or why. Don't let the TDD zealots ruin TDD.

There are much better tools for doing that, such as Guix profiles and nix-shell, which also happen to be better tools for making container images. Linux container images are a distribution mechanism that does not do anything to address package and dependency management other than shifting the problem somewhere else.

Languages where blocks are indicated by indentation are not context-free (you have to keep the current and previous line indentation level as state). Everything about them is more tedious because you can't do structured editing.

From the article: "It has been over a decade since a student was enrolled in a botany degree in the UK."

Botany is a very different specialty than genetics.

The paradox is this is at a time when the population has never been more numerous and the economy more prosperous. There should be more specialists in all kinds of areas, not fewer. Instead capitalism is reducing people's horizons and impoverishing their choices of vocation and lifestyle, destroying the landbase while simultaneously driving the people that try to maintain the landbase and natural systems out of work, and in many cases into prison slave labor. It is a self-destructive cycle steering us into civilizational collapse.

> where you would walk out of your apartment and be able to visit your local coffee bar, diner, park, grocery store, etc

You mean, like, a normal city?

> If there was a very simple IF on my prescription

This was supposed to be solved by rule-based/expert systems in the 1980s AI bubble.

This is a bad idea from the 1960s: IBM TPF, MUMPS, Pick. As soon as the hardware changes it becomes slower and more complicated.