["[Dialogue between User and Assistant on 2024-01-01 00:00]\n<User>Here's some valuable information I collected:\nTraditionally the annelids have been divided into two major groups, the polychaetes and clitellates. In turn the clitellates were divided into oligochaetes, which include earthworms, and hirudinomorphs, whose best-known members are leeches. For many years there was no clear arrangement of the approximately 80 polychaete families into higher-level groups. In 1997 Greg Rouse and Kristian Fauchald attempted a \"first heuristic step in terms of bringing polychaete systematics to an acceptable level of rigour\", based on anatomical structures, and divided polychaetes into:\n\nIn 2007 Torsten Struck and colleagues compared 3 genes in 81 taxa, of which 9 were outgroups, in other words not considered closely related to annelids but included to give an indication of where the organisms under study are placed on the larger tree of life. For a cross-check the study used an analysis of 11 genes (including the original 3) in 10 taxa. This analysis agreed that clitellates, pogonophorans and echiurans were on various branches of the polychaete family tree. It also concluded that the classification of polychaetes into Scolecida, Canalipalpata and Aciculata was useless, as the members of these alleged groups were scattered all over the family tree derived from comparing the 81 taxa. In addition, it also placed sipunculans, generally regarded at the time as a separate phylum, on another branch of the polychaete tree, and concluded that leeches were a sub-group of oligochaetes rather than their sister-group among the clitellates. Rouse accepted the analyses based on molecular phylogenetics, and their main conclusions are now the scientific consensus, although the details of the annelid family tree remain uncertain.\n\nIn addition to re-writing the classification of annelids and 3 previously independent phyla, the molecular phylogenetics analyses undermine the emphasis that decades of previous writings placed on the importance of segmentation in the classification of invertebrates. Polychaetes, which these analyses found to be the parent group, have completely segmented bodies, while polychaetes' echiurans and sipunculan offshoots are not segmented and pogonophores are segmented only in the rear parts of their bodies. It now seems that segmentation can appear and disappear much more easily in the course of evolution than was previously thought. The 2007 study also noted that the ladder-like nervous system, which is associated with segmentation, is less universal previously thought in both annelids and arthropods.[n 2]\n\nAnnelids are members of the protostomes, one of the two major superphyla of bilaterian animals \u2013 the other is the deuterostomes, which includes vertebrates. Within the protostomes, annelids used to be grouped with arthropods under the super-group Articulata (\"jointed animals\"), as segmentation is obvious in most members of both phyla. However, the genes that drive segmentation in arthropods do not appear to do the same in annelids. Arthropods and annelids both have close relatives that are unsegmented. It is at least as easy to assume that they evolved segmented bodies independently as it is to assume that the ancestral protostome or bilaterian was segmented and that segmentation disappeared in many descendant phyla. The current view is that annelids are grouped with molluscs, brachiopods and several other phyla that have lophophores (fan-like feeding structures) and/or trochophore larvae as members of Lophotrochozoa. Bryzoa may be the most basal phylum (the one that first became distinctive) within the Lophotrochozoa, and the relationships between the other members are not yet known. Arthropods are now regarded as members of the Ecdysozoa (\"animals that molt\"), along with some phyla that are unsegmented.\n\nThe \"Lophotrochozoa\" hypothesis is also supported by the fact that many phyla within this group, including annelids, molluscs, nemerteans and flatworms, follow a similar pattern in the fertilized egg's development. When their cells divide after the 4-cell stage, descendants of these 4 cells form a spiral pattern. In these phyla the \"fates\" of the embryo's cells, in other words the roles their descendants will play in the adult animal, are the same and can be predicted from a very early stage. Hence this development pattern is often described as \"spiral determinate cleavage\".\n\nIn monotheism and henotheism, God is conceived of as the Supreme Being and principal object of faith. The concept of God as described by theologians commonly includes the attributes of omniscience (infinite knowledge), omnipotence (unlimited power), omnipresence (present everywhere), omnibenevolence (perfect goodness), divine simplicity, and eternal and necessary existence. God is also usually defined as a non-corporeal being without any human biological gender, but the concept of God actively (as opposed to receptively) creating the universe has caused some religions to give \"Him\" the metaphorical name of \"Father\". Because God is conceived as not being a corporeal being, God cannot(some say should not) be portrayed in a literal visual image; some religious groups use a man (sometimes old and bearded) to symbolize God because of His deed of creating man's mind in the image of His own.\n\nIn theism, God is the creator and sustainer of the universe, while in deism, God is the creator, but not the sustainer, of the universe. Monotheism is the belief in the existence of one God or in the oneness of God. In pantheism, God is the universe itself. In atheism, God is not believed to exist, while God is deemed unknown or unknowable within the context of agnosticism. God has also been conceived as being incorporeal (immaterial), a personal being, the source of all moral obligation, and the \"greatest conceivable existent\". Many notable philosophers have developed arguments for and against the existence of God.\n<Assistant>I understand. I'll keep this in mind.", "[Dialogue between User and Assistant on 2024-01-02 00:00]\n<User>The following are some new knowledge:\nThere are many names for God, and different names are attached to different cultural ideas about God's identity and attributes. In the ancient Egyptian era of Atenism, possibly the earliest recorded monotheistic religion, this deity was called Aten, premised on being the one \"true\" Supreme Being and Creator of the Universe. In the Hebrew Bible and Judaism, \"He Who Is\", \"I Am that I Am\", and the tetragrammaton YHWH are used as names of God, while Yahweh and Jehovah are sometimes used in Christianity as vocalizations of YHWH. In the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, God, consubstantial in three persons, is called the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. In Judaism, it is common to refer to God by the titular names Elohim or Adonai, the latter of which is believed by some scholars to descend from the Egyptian Aten. In Islam, the name Allah, \"Al-El\", or \"Al-Elah\" (\"the God\") is used, while Muslims also have a multitude of titular names for God. In Hinduism, Brahman is often considered a monistic deity. Other religions have names for God, for instance, Baha in the Bah\u00e1'\u00ed Faith, Waheguru in Sikhism, and Ahura Mazda in Zoroastrianism.\n\nThe earliest written form of the Germanic word God (always, in this usage, capitalized) comes from the 6th-century Christian Codex Argenteus. The English word itself is derived from the Proto-Germanic * \u01e5u\u0111an. The reconstructed Proto-Indo-European form * \u01f5hu-t\u00f3-m was likely based on the root * \u01f5hau(\u0259)-, which meant either \"to call\" or \"to invoke\". The Germanic words for God were originally neuter\u2014applying to both genders\u2014but during the process of the Christianization of the Germanic peoples from their indigenous Germanic paganism, the words became a masculine syntactic form.\n\nIn the English language, the capitalized form of God continues to represent a distinction between monotheistic \"God\" and \"gods\" in polytheism. The English word God and its counterparts in other languages are normally used for any and all conceptions and, in spite of significant differences between religions, the term remains an English translation common to all. The same holds for Hebrew El, but in Judaism, God is also given a proper name, the tetragrammaton YHWH, in origin possibly the name of an Edomite or Midianite deity, Yahweh. In many translations of the Bible, when the word LORD is in all capitals, it signifies that the word represents the tetragrammaton.\n\nThere is no clear consensus on the nature or even the existence of God. The Abrahamic conceptions of God include the monotheistic definition of God in Judaism, the trinitarian view of Christians, and the Islamic concept of God. The dharmic religions differ in their view of the divine: views of God in Hinduism vary by region, sect, and caste, ranging from monotheistic to polytheistic to atheistic. Divinity was recognized by the historical Buddha, particularly \u015aakra and Brahma. However, other sentient beings, including gods, can at best only play a supportive role in one's personal path to salvation. Conceptions of God in the latter developments of the Mahayana tradition give a more prominent place to notions of the divine.[citation needed]\n\nMonotheists hold that there is only one god, and may claim that the one true god is worshiped in different religions under different names. The view that all theists actually worship the same god, whether they know it or not, is especially emphasized in Hinduism and Sikhism. In Christianity, the doctrine of the Trinity describes God as one God in three persons. The Trinity comprises God the Father, God the Son (Jesus), and God the Holy Spirit. Islam's most fundamental concept is tawhid (meaning \"oneness\" or \"uniqueness\"). God is described in the Quran as: \"Say: He is Allah, the One and Only; Allah, the Eternal, Absolute; He begetteth not, nor is He begotten; And there is none like unto Him.\" Muslims repudiate the Christian doctrine of the Trinity and divinity of Jesus, comparing it to polytheism. In Islam, God is beyond all comprehension or equal and does not resemble any of his creations in any way. Thus, Muslims are not iconodules, and are not expected to visualize God.\n\nTheism generally holds that God exists realistically, objectively, and independently of human thought; that God created and sustains everything; that God is omnipotent and eternal; and that God is personal and interacting with the universe through, for example, religious experience and the prayers of humans. Theism holds that God is both transcendent and immanent; thus, God is simultaneously infinite and in some way present in the affairs of the world. Not all theists subscribe to all of these propositions, but each usually subscribes to some of them (see, by way of comparison, family resemblance). Catholic theology holds that God is infinitely simple and is not involuntarily subject to time. Most theists hold that God is omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent, although this belief raises questions about God's responsibility for evil and suffering in the world. Some theists ascribe to God a self-conscious or purposeful limiting of omnipotence, omniscience, or benevolence. Open Theism, by contrast, asserts that, due to the nature of time, God's omniscience does not mean the deity can predict the future. Theism is sometimes used to refer in general to any belief in a god or gods, i.e., monotheism or polytheism.\n\nDeism holds that God is wholly transcendent: God exists, but does not intervene in the world beyond what was necessary to create it. In this view, God is not anthropomorphic, and neither answers prayers nor produces miracles. Common in Deism is a belief that God has no interest in humanity and may not even be aware of humanity. Pandeism and Panendeism, respectively, combine Deism with the Pantheistic or Panentheistic beliefs. Pandeism is proposed to explain as to Deism why God would create a universe and then abandon it, and as to Pantheism, the origin and purpose of the universe.\n\nPantheism holds that God is the universe and the universe is God, whereas Panentheism holds that God contains, but is not identical to, the Universe. It is also the view of the Liberal Catholic Church; Theosophy; some views of Hinduism except Vaishnavism, which believes in panentheism; Sikhism; some divisions of Neopaganism and Taoism, along with many varying denominations and individuals within denominations. Kabbalah, Jewish mysticism, paints a pantheistic/panentheistic view of God\u2014which has wide acceptance in Hasidic Judaism, particularly from their founder The Baal Shem Tov\u2014but only as an addition to the Jewish view of a personal god, not in the original pantheistic sense that denies or limits persona to God.[citation needed]\n<Assistant>Perfect. I've stored this information in my memory.", "[Dialogue between User and Assistant on 2024-01-03 00:00]\n<User>I just discovered some interesting information:\nEven non-theist views about gods vary. Some non-theists avoid the concept of God, whilst accepting that it is significant to many; other non-theists understand God as a symbol of human values and aspirations. The nineteenth-century English atheist Charles Bradlaugh declared that he refused to say \"There is no God\", because \"the word 'God' is to me a sound conveying no clear or distinct affirmation\"; he said more specifically that he disbelieved in the Christian god. Stephen Jay Gould proposed an approach dividing the world of philosophy into what he called \"non-overlapping magisteria\" (NOMA). In this view, questions of the supernatural, such as those relating to the existence and nature of God, are non-empirical and are the proper domain of theology. The methods of science should then be used to answer any empirical question about the natural world, and theology should be used to answer questions about ultimate meaning and moral value. In this view, the perceived lack of any empirical footprint from the magisterium of the supernatural onto natural events makes science the sole player in the natural world.\n\nAnother view, advanced by Richard Dawkins, is that the existence of God is an empirical question, on the grounds that \"a universe with a god would be a completely different kind of universe from one without, and it would be a scientific difference.\" Carl Sagan argued that the doctrine of a Creator of the Universe was difficult to prove or disprove and that the only conceivable scientific discovery that could disprove the existence of a Creator would be the discovery that the universe is infinitely old.\n\nStephen Hawking and co-author Leonard Mlodinow state in their book, The Grand Design, that it is reasonable to ask who or what created the universe, but if the answer is God, then the question has merely been deflected to that of who created God. Both authors claim however, that it is possible to answer these questions purely within the realm of science, and without invoking any divine beings. Neuroscientist Michael Nikoletseas has proposed that questions of the existence of God are no different from questions of natural sciences. Following a biological comparative approach, he concludes that it is highly probable that God exists, and, although not visible, it is possible that we know some of his attributes.\n\nPascal Boyer argues that while there is a wide array of supernatural concepts found around the world, in general, supernatural beings tend to behave much like people. The construction of gods and spirits like persons is one of the best known traits of religion. He cites examples from Greek mythology, which is, in his opinion, more like a modern soap opera than other religious systems. Bertrand du Castel and Timothy Jurgensen demonstrate through formalization that Boyer's explanatory model matches physics' epistemology in positing not directly observable entities as intermediaries. Anthropologist Stewart Guthrie contends that people project human features onto non-human aspects of the world because it makes those aspects more familiar. Sigmund Freud also suggested that god concepts are projections of one's father.\n<Assistant>Perfect. I've stored this information in my memory.", "[Dialogue between User and Assistant on 2024-01-04 00:00]\n<User>Let me tell you about some new developments:\nLikewise, \u00c9mile Durkheim was one of the earliest to suggest that gods represent an extension of human social life to include supernatural beings. In line with this reasoning, psychologist Matt Rossano contends that when humans began living in larger groups, they may have created gods as a means of enforcing morality. In small groups, morality can be enforced by social forces such as gossip or reputation. However, it is much harder to enforce morality using social forces in much larger groups. Rossano indicates that by including ever-watchful gods and spirits, humans discovered an effective strategy for restraining selfishness and building more cooperative groups.\n\nSt. Anselm's approach was to define God as, \"that than which nothing greater can be conceived\". Famed pantheist philosopher Baruch Spinoza would later carry this idea to its extreme: \"By God I understand a being absolutely infinite, i.e., a substance consisting of infinite attributes, of which each one expresses an eternal and infinite essence.\" For Spinoza, the whole of the natural universe is made of one substance, God, or its equivalent, Nature. His proof for the existence of God was a variation of the Ontological argument.\n\nSome findings in the fields of cosmology, evolutionary biology and neuroscience are interpreted by atheists (including Lawrence M. Krauss and Sam Harris) as evidence that God is an imaginary entity only, with no basis in reality. A single, omniscient God who is imagined to have created the universe and is particularly attentive to the lives of humans has been imagined, embellished and promulgated in a trans-generational manner. Richard Dawkins interprets various findings not only as a lack of evidence for the material existence of such a God but extensive evidence to the contrary.\n\nAccording to the Omnipotence paradox or 'Paradox of the Stone', can God create a stone so heavy that he cannot lift it? Either he can or he can\u2019t. If he can\u2019t, the argument goes, then there is something that he cannot do, namely create the stone, and therefore he is not omnipotent. If he can, it continues, then there is also something that he cannot do, namely lift the stone, and therefore he is not omnipotent. Either way, then, God is not omnipotent. A being that is not omnipotent, though, is not God, according to many theological models. Such a God, therefore, does not exist. Several answers to this paradox have been proposed.\n\nDifferent religious traditions assign differing (though often similar) attributes and characteristics to God, including expansive powers and abilities, psychological characteristics, gender characteristics, and preferred nomenclature. The assignment of these attributes often differs according to the conceptions of God in the culture from which they arise. For example, attributes of God in Christianity, attributes of God in Islam, and the Thirteen Attributes of Mercy in Judaism share certain similarities arising from their common roots.\n\nThe gender of God may be viewed as either a literal or an allegorical aspect of a deity who, in classical western philosophy, transcends bodily form. Polytheistic religions commonly attribute to each of the gods a gender, allowing each to interact with any of the others, and perhaps with humans, sexually. In most monotheistic religions, God has no counterpart with which to relate sexually. Thus, in classical western philosophy the gender of this one-and-only deity is most likely to be an analogical statement of how humans and God address, and relate to, each other. Namely, God is seen as begetter of the world and revelation which corresponds to the active (as opposed to the receptive) role in sexual intercourse.\n\nPrayer plays a significant role among many believers. Muslims believe that the purpose of existence is to worship God. He is viewed as a personal God and there are no intermediaries, such as clergy, to contact God. Prayer often also includes supplication and asking forgiveness. God is often believed to be forgiving. For example, a hadith states God would replace a sinless people with one who sinned but still asked repentance. Christian theologian Alister McGrath writes that there are good reasons to suggest that a \"personal god\" is integral to the Christian outlook, but that one has to understand it is an analogy. \"To say that God is like a person is to affirm the divine ability and willingness to relate to others. This does not imply that God is human, or located at a specific point in the universe.\"\n<Assistant>Noted. I'll remember these details.", "[Dialogue between User and Assistant on 2024-01-05 00:00]\n<User>I just discovered some interesting information:\nAdherents of different religions generally disagree as to how to best worship God and what is God's plan for mankind, if there is one. There are different approaches to reconciling the contradictory claims of monotheistic religions. One view is taken by exclusivists, who believe they are the chosen people or have exclusive access to absolute truth, generally through revelation or encounter with the Divine, which adherents of other religions do not. Another view is religious pluralism. A pluralist typically believes that his religion is the right one, but does not deny the partial truth of other religions. An example of a pluralist view in Christianity is supersessionism, i.e., the belief that one's religion is the fulfillment of previous religions. A third approach is relativistic inclusivism, where everybody is seen as equally right; an example being universalism: the doctrine that salvation is eventually available for everyone. A fourth approach is syncretism, mixing different elements from different religions. An example of syncretism is the New Age movement.\n\nMany medieval philosophers developed arguments for the existence of God, while attempting to comprehend the precise implications of God's attributes. Reconciling some of those attributes generated important philosophical problems and debates. For example, God's omniscience may seem to imply that God knows how free agents will choose to act. If God does know this, their ostensible free will might be illusory, or foreknowledge does not imply predestination, and if God does not know it, God may not be omniscient.\n\nThe last centuries of philosophy have seen vigorous questions regarding the arguments for God's existence raised by such philosophers as Immanuel Kant, David Hume and Antony Flew, although Kant held that the argument from morality was valid. The theist response has been either to contend, as does Alvin Plantinga, that faith is \"properly basic\", or to take, as does Richard Swinburne, the evidentialist position. Some theists agree that none of the arguments for God's existence are compelling, but argue that faith is not a product of reason, but requires risk. There would be no risk, they say, if the arguments for God's existence were as solid as the laws of logic, a position summed up by Pascal as \"the heart has reasons of which reason does not know.\" A recent theory using concepts from physics and neurophysiology proposes that God can be conceptualized within the theory of integrative level.\n\nOn 16 September 2001, at Camp David, President George W. Bush used the phrase war on terrorism in an unscripted and controversial comment when he said, \"This crusade \u2013 this war on terrorism \u2013 is going to take a while, ... \" Bush later apologized for this remark due to the negative connotations the term crusade has to people, e.g. of Muslim faith. The word crusade was not used again. On 20 September 2001, during a televised address to a joint session of congress, Bush stated that, \"(o)ur 'war on terror' begins with al-Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped, and defeated.\"\n\nU.S. President Barack Obama has rarely used the term, but in his inaugural address on 20 January 2009, he stated \"Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred.\" In March 2009 the Defense Department officially changed the name of operations from \"Global War on Terror\" to \"Overseas Contingency Operation\" (OCO). In March 2009, the Obama administration requested that Pentagon staff members avoid use of the term, instead using \"Overseas Contingency Operation\". Basic objectives of the Bush administration \"war on terror\", such as targeting al Qaeda and building international counterterrorism alliances, remain in place. In December 2012, Jeh Johnson, the General Counsel of the Department of Defense, stated that the military fight will be replaced by a law enforcement operation when speaking at Oxford University, predicting that al Qaeda will be so weakened to be ineffective, and has been \"effectively destroyed\", and thus the conflict will not be an armed conflict under international law. In May 2013, Obama stated that the goal is \"to dismantle specific networks of violent extremists that threaten America\"; which coincided with the U.S. Office of Management and Budget having changed the wording from \"Overseas Contingency Operations\" to \"Countering Violent Extremism\" in 2010.\n\nBecause the actions involved in the \"war on terrorism\" are diffuse, and the criteria for inclusion are unclear, political theorist Richard Jackson has argued that \"the 'war on terrorism' therefore, is simultaneously a set of actual practices\u2014wars, covert operations, agencies, and institutions\u2014and an accompanying series of assumptions, beliefs, justifications, and narratives\u2014it is an entire language or discourse.\" Jackson cites among many examples a statement by John Ashcroft that \"the attacks of September 11 drew a bright line of demarcation between the civil and the savage\". Administration officials also described \"terrorists\" as hateful, treacherous, barbarous, mad, twisted, perverted, without faith, parasitical, inhuman, and, most commonly, evil. Americans, in contrast, were described as brave, loving, generous, strong, resourceful, heroic, and respectful of human rights.\n\nThe origins of al-Qaeda can be traced to the Soviet war in Afghanistan (December 1979 \u2013 February 1989). The United States, United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the People's Republic of China supported the Islamist Afghan mujahadeen guerillas against the military forces of the Soviet Union and the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. A small number of \"Afghan Arab\" volunteers joined the fight against the Soviets, including Osama bin Laden, but there is no evidence they received any external assistance. In May 1996 the group World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders (WIFJAJC), sponsored by bin Laden (and later re-formed as al-Qaeda), started forming a large base of operations in Afghanistan, where the Islamist extremist regime of the Taliban had seized power earlier in the year. In February 1998, Osama bin Laden signed a fatw\u0101, as head of al-Qaeda, declaring war on the West and Israel, later in May of that same year al-Qaeda released a video declaring war on the U.S. and the West.\n\nOn 7 August 1998, al-Qaeda struck the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224 people, including 12 Americans. In retaliation, U.S. President Bill Clinton launched Operation Infinite Reach, a bombing campaign in Sudan and Afghanistan against targets the U.S. asserted were associated with WIFJAJC, although others have questioned whether a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan was used as a chemical warfare plant. The plant produced much of the region's antimalarial drugs and around 50% of Sudan's pharmaceutical needs. The strikes failed to kill any leaders of WIFJAJC or the Taliban.\n\nOn the morning of 11 September 2001, 19 men affiliated with al-Qaeda hijacked four airliners all bound for California. Once the hijackers assumed control of the airliners, they told the passengers that they had the bomb on board and would spare the lives of passengers and crew once their demands were met \u2013 no passenger and crew actually suspected that they would use the airliners as suicide weapons since it had never happened before in history. The hijackers \u2013 members of al-Qaeda's Hamburg cell \u2013 intentionally crashed two airliners into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City. Both buildings collapsed within two hours from fire damage related to the crashes, destroying nearby buildings and damaging others. The hijackers crashed a third airliner into the Pentagon in Arlington County, Virginia, just outside Washington D.C. The fourth plane crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, after some of its passengers and flight crew attempted to retake control of the plane, which the hijackers had redirected toward Washington D.C., to target the White House, or the U.S. Capitol. No flights had survivors. A total of 2,977 victims and the 19 hijackers perished in the attacks.\n<Assistant>Perfect. I've stored this information in my memory.", "[Dialogue between User and Assistant on 2024-01-06 00:00]\n<User>I want to tell you about some new discoveries:\nThe Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists or \"AUMF\" was made law on 14 September 2001, to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the attacks on 11 September 2001. It authorized the President to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on 11 September 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons. Congress declares this is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution of 1973.\n\nSubsequently, in October 2001, U.S. forces (with UK and coalition allies) invaded Afghanistan to oust the Taliban regime. On 7 October 2001, the official invasion began with British and U.S. forces conducting airstrike campaigns over enemy targets. Kabul, the capital city of Afghanistan, fell by mid-November. The remaining al-Qaeda and Taliban remnants fell back to the rugged mountains of eastern Afghanistan, mainly Tora Bora. In December, Coalition forces (the U.S. and its allies) fought within that region. It is believed that Osama bin Laden escaped into Pakistan during the battle.\n\nThe Taliban regrouped in western Pakistan and began to unleash an insurgent-style offensive against Coalition forces in late 2002. Throughout southern and eastern Afghanistan, firefights broke out between the surging Taliban and Coalition forces. Coalition forces responded with a series of military offensives and an increase in the amount of troops in Afghanistan. In February 2010, Coalition forces launched Operation Moshtarak in southern Afghanistan along with other military offensives in the hopes that they would destroy the Taliban insurgency once and for all. Peace talks are also underway between Taliban affiliated fighters and Coalition forces. In September 2014, Afghanistan and the United States signed a security agreement, which permits United States and NATO forces to remain in Afghanistan until at least 2024. The United States and other NATO and non-NATO forces are planning to withdraw; with the Taliban claiming it has defeated the United States and NATO, and the Obama Administration viewing it as a victory. In December 2014, ISAF encasing its colors, and Resolute Support began as the NATO operation in Afghanistan. Continued United States operations within Afghanistan will continue under the name \"Operation Freedom's Sentinel\".\n\nIn January 2002, the United States Special Operations Command, Pacific deployed to the Philippines to advise and assist the Armed Forces of the Philippines in combating Filipino Islamist groups. The operations were mainly focused on removing the Abu Sayyaf group and Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) from their stronghold on the island of Basilan. The second portion of the operation was conducted as a humanitarian program called \"Operation Smiles\". The goal of the program was to provide medical care and services to the region of Basilan as part of a \"Hearts and Minds\" program. Joint Special Operations Task Force \u2013 Philippines disbanded in June 2014, ending a 14-year mission. After JSOTF-P disbanded, as late as November 2014, American forces continued to operate in the Philippines under the name \"PACOM Augmentation Team\".\n\nOn 14 September 2009, U.S. Special Forces killed two men and wounded and captured two others near the Somali village of Baarawe. Witnesses claim that helicopters used for the operation launched from French-flagged warships, but that could not be confirmed. A Somali-based al-Qaida affiliated group, the Al-Shabaab, has confirmed the death of \"sheik commander\" Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan along with an unspecified number of militants. Nabhan, a Kenyan, was wanted in connection with the 2002 Mombasa attacks.\n\nThe conflict in northern Mali began in January 2012 with radical Islamists (affiliated to al-Qaeda) advancing into northern Mali. The Malian government had a hard time maintaining full control over their country. The fledgling government requested support from the international community on combating the Islamic militants. In January 2013, France intervened on behalf of the Malian government's request and deployed troops into the region. They launched Operation Serval on 11 January 2013, with the hopes of dislodging the al-Qaeda affiliated groups from northern Mali.\n\nFollowing the ceasefire agreement that suspended hostilities (but not officially ended) in the 1991 Gulf War, the United States and its allies instituted and began patrolling Iraqi no-fly zones, to protect Iraq's Kurdish and Shi'a Arab population\u2014both of which suffered attacks from the Hussein regime before and after the Gulf War\u2014in Iraq's northern and southern regions, respectively. U.S. forces continued in combat zone deployments through November 1995 and launched Operation Desert Fox against Iraq in 1998 after it failed to meet U.S. demands of \"unconditional cooperation\" in weapons inspections.\n<Assistant>Great! I've added this to my knowledge base.", "[Dialogue between User and Assistant on 2024-01-07 00:00]\n<User>The following are some new knowledge:\nThe first ground attack came at the Battle of Umm Qasr on 21 March 2003 when a combined force of British, American and Polish forces seized control of the port city of Umm Qasr. Baghdad, Iraq's capital city, fell to American forces in April 2003 and Saddam Hussein's government quickly dissolved. On 1 May 2003, Bush announced that major combat operations in Iraq had ended. However, an insurgency arose against the U.S.-led coalition and the newly developing Iraqi military and post-Saddam government. The insurgency, which included al-Qaeda affiliated groups, led to far more coalition casualties than the invasion. Other elements of the insurgency were led by fugitive members of President Hussein's Ba'ath regime, which included Iraqi nationalists and pan-Arabists. Many insurgency leaders are Islamists and claim to be fighting a religious war to reestablish the Islamic Caliphate of centuries past. Iraq's former president, Saddam Hussein was captured by U.S. forces in December 2003. He was executed in 2006.\n<Assistant>Received. I'll store this information.", "[Dialogue between User and Assistant on 2024-01-08 00:00]\n<User>Here's some more information I came across:\nIn a major split in the ranks of Al Qaeda's organization, the Iraqi franchise, known as Al Qaeda in Iraq covertly invaded Syria and the Levant and began participating in the ongoing Syrian Civil War, gaining enough support and strength to re-invade Iraq's western provinces under the name of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS/ISIL), taking over much of the country in a blitzkrieg-like action and combining the Iraq insurgency and Syrian Civil War into a single conflict. Due to their extreme brutality and a complete change in their overall ideology, Al Qaeda's core organization in Central Asia eventually denounced ISIS and directed their affiliates to cut off all ties with this organization. Many analysts[who?] believe that because of this schism, Al Qaeda and ISIL are now in a competition to retain the title of the world's most powerful terrorist organization.\n\nThe Obama administration began to reengage in Iraq with a series of airstrikes aimed at ISIS beginning on 10 August 2014. On 9 September 2014 President Obama said that he had the authority he needed to take action to destroy the militant group known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, citing the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists, and thus did not require additional approval from Congress. The following day on 10 September 2014 President Barack Obama made a televised speech about ISIL, which he stated \"Our objective is clear: We will degrade, and ultimately destroy, ISIL through a comprehensive and sustained counter-terrorism strategy\". Obama has authorized the deployment of additional U.S. Forces into Iraq, as well as authorizing direct military operations against ISIL within Syria. On the night of 21/22 September the United States, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the UAE, Jordan and Qatar started air attacks against ISIS in Syria.[citation needed]\n<Assistant>Thanks for the update. I've recorded these facts.", "[Dialogue between User and Assistant on 2024-01-09 00:00]\n<User>I have some interesting updates for you:\nFollowing the 11 September 2001 attacks, former President of Pakistan Pervez Musharraf sided with the U.S. against the Taliban government in Afghanistan after an ultimatum by then U.S. President George W. Bush. Musharraf agreed to give the U.S. the use of three airbases for Operation Enduring Freedom. United States Secretary of State Colin Powell and other U.S. administration officials met with Musharraf. On 19 September 2001, Musharraf addressed the people of Pakistan and stated that, while he opposed military tactics against the Taliban, Pakistan risked being endangered by an alliance of India and the U.S. if it did not cooperate. In 2006, Musharraf testified that this stance was pressured by threats from the U.S., and revealed in his memoirs that he had \"war-gamed\" the United States as an adversary and decided that it would end in a loss for Pakistan.\n\nOn 12 January 2002, Musharraf gave a speech against Islamic extremism. He unequivocally condemned all acts of terrorism and pledged to combat Islamic extremism and lawlessness within Pakistan itself. He stated that his government was committed to rooting out extremism and made it clear that the banned militant organizations would not be allowed to resurface under any new name. He said, \"the recent decision to ban extremist groups promoting militancy was taken in the national interest after thorough consultations. It was not taken under any foreign influence\".\n<Assistant>Thanks for sharing. I've committed this to memory.", "[Dialogue between User and Assistant on 2024-01-10 00:00]\n<User>Let me update you with some new information:\nIn 2002, the Musharraf-led government took a firm stand against the jihadi organizations and groups promoting extremism, and arrested Maulana Masood Azhar, head of the Jaish-e-Mohammed, and Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, chief of the Lashkar-e-Taiba, and took dozens of activists into custody. An official ban was imposed on the groups on 12 January. Later that year, the Saudi born Zayn al-Abidn Muhammed Hasayn Abu Zubaydah was arrested by Pakistani officials during a series of joint U.S.-Pakistan raids. Zubaydah is said to have been a high-ranking al-Qaeda official with the title of operations chief and in charge of running al-Qaeda training camps. Other prominent al-Qaeda members were arrested in the following two years, namely Ramzi bin al-Shibh, who is known to have been a financial backer of al-Qaeda operations, and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who at the time of his capture was the third highest-ranking official in al-Qaeda and had been directly in charge of the planning for the 11 September attacks.\n\nThe use of drones by the Central Intelligence Agency in Pakistan to carry out operations associated with the Global War on Terror sparks debate over sovereignty and the laws of war. The U.S. Government uses the CIA rather than the U.S. Air Force for strikes in Pakistan in order to avoid breaching sovereignty through military invasion. The United States was criticized by[according to whom?] a report on drone warfare and aerial sovereignty for abusing the term 'Global War on Terror' to carry out military operations through government agencies without formally declaring war.\n\nIn a 'Letter to American People' written by Osama bin Laden in 2002, he stated that one of the reasons he was fighting America is because of its support of India on the Kashmir issue. While on a trip to Delhi in 2002, U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld suggested that Al-Qaeda was active in Kashmir, though he did not have any hard evidence. An investigation in 2002 unearthed evidence that Al-Qaeda and its affiliates were prospering in Pakistan-administered Kashmir with tacit approval of Pakistan's National Intelligence agency Inter-Services Intelligence. A team of Special Air Service and Delta Force was sent into Indian-administered Kashmir in 2002 to hunt for Osama bin Laden after reports that he was being sheltered by the Kashmiri militant group Harkat-ul-Mujahideen. U.S. officials believed that Al-Qaeda was helping organize a campaign of terror in Kashmir in order to provoke conflict between India and Pakistan. Fazlur Rehman Khalil, the leader of the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen, signed al-Qaeda's 1998 declaration of holy war, which called on Muslims to attack all Americans and their allies. Indian sources claimed that In 2006, Al-Qaeda claimed they had established a wing in Kashmir; this worried the Indian government. India also claimed that Al-Qaeda has strong ties with the Kashmir militant groups Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed in Pakistan. While on a visit to Pakistan in January 2010, U.S. Defense secretary Robert Gates stated that Al-Qaeda was seeking to destabilize the region and planning to provoke a nuclear war between India and Pakistan.\n\nIn September 2009, a U.S. Drone strike reportedly killed Ilyas Kashmiri, who was the chief of Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami, a Kashmiri militant group associated with Al-Qaeda. Kashmiri was described by Bruce Riedel as a 'prominent' Al-Qaeda member, while others described him as the head of military operations for Al-Qaeda. Waziristan had now become the new battlefield for Kashmiri militants, who were now fighting NATO in support of Al-Qaeda. On 8 July 2012, Al-Badar Mujahideen, a breakaway faction of Kashmir centric terror group Hizbul Mujahideen, on conclusion of their two-day Shuhada Conference called for mobilisation of resources for continuation of jihad in Kashmir.\n\nIn the following months, NATO took a wide range of measures to respond to the threat of terrorism. On 22 November 2002, the member states of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC) decided on a Partnership Action Plan against Terrorism, which explicitly states, \"EAPC States are committed to the protection and promotion of fundamental freedoms and human rights, as well as the rule of law, in combating terrorism.\" NATO started naval operations in the Mediterranean Sea designed to prevent the movement of terrorists or weapons of mass destruction as well as to enhance the security of shipping in general called Operation Active Endeavour.\n\nSupport for the U.S. cooled when America made clear its determination to invade Iraq in late 2002. Even so, many of the \"coalition of the willing\" countries that unconditionally supported the U.S.-led military action have sent troops to Afghanistan, particular neighboring Pakistan, which has disowned its earlier support for the Taliban and contributed tens of thousands of soldiers to the conflict. Pakistan was also engaged in the War in North-West Pakistan (Waziristan War). Supported by U.S. intelligence, Pakistan was attempting to remove the Taliban insurgency and al-Qaeda element from the northern tribal areas.\n\nThe British 16th Air Assault Brigade (later reinforced by Royal Marines) formed the core of the force in southern Afghanistan, along with troops and helicopters from Australia, Canada and the Netherlands. The initial force consisted of roughly 3,300 British, 2,000 Canadian, 1,400 from the Netherlands and 240 from Australia, along with special forces from Denmark and Estonia and small contingents from other nations. The monthly supply of cargo containers through Pakistani route to ISAF in Afghanistan is over 4,000 costing around 12 billion in Pakistani Rupees.\n\nIn addition to military efforts abroad, in the aftermath of 9/11 the Bush Administration increased domestic efforts to prevent future attacks. Various government bureaucracies that handled security and military functions were reorganized. A new cabinet-level agency called the United States Department of Homeland Security was created in November 2002 to lead and coordinate the largest reorganization of the U.S. federal government since the consolidation of the armed forces into the Department of Defense.[citation needed]\n\nThe USA PATRIOT Act of October 2001 dramatically reduces restrictions on law enforcement agencies' ability to search telephone, e-mail communications, medical, financial, and other records; eases restrictions on foreign intelligence gathering within the United States; expands the Secretary of the Treasury's authority to regulate financial transactions, particularly those involving foreign individuals and entities; and broadens the discretion of law enforcement and immigration authorities in detaining and deporting immigrants suspected of terrorism-related acts. The act also expanded the definition of terrorism to include domestic terrorism, thus enlarging the number of activities to which the USA PATRIOT Act's expanded law enforcement powers could be applied. A new Terrorist Finance Tracking Program monitored the movements of terrorists' financial resources (discontinued after being revealed by The New York Times). Global telecommunication usage, including those with no links to terrorism, is being collected and monitored through the NSA electronic surveillance program. The Patriot Act is still in effect.\n\nPolitical interest groups have stated that these laws remove important restrictions on governmental authority, and are a dangerous encroachment on civil liberties, possible unconstitutional violations of the Fourth Amendment. On 30 July 2003, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed the first legal challenge against Section 215 of the Patriot Act, claiming that it allows the FBI to violate a citizen's First Amendment rights, Fourth Amendment rights, and right to due process, by granting the government the right to search a person's business, bookstore, and library records in a terrorist investigation, without disclosing to the individual that records were being searched. Also, governing bodies in a number of communities have passed symbolic resolutions against the act.\n\nIn 2005, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1624 concerning incitement to commit acts of terrorism and the obligations of countries to comply with international human rights laws. Although both resolutions require mandatory annual reports on counter-terrorism activities by adopting nations, the United States and Israel have both declined to submit reports. In the same year, the United States Department of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff issued a planning document, by the name \"National Military Strategic Plan for the War on Terrorism\", which stated that it constituted the \"comprehensive military plan to prosecute the Global War on Terror for the Armed Forces of the United States...including the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 Commission and a rigorous examination with the Department of Defense\".\n\nCriticism of the War on Terror addresses the issues, morality, efficiency, economics, and other questions surrounding the War on Terror and made against the phrase itself, calling it a misnomer. The notion of a \"war\" against \"terrorism\" has proven highly contentious, with critics charging that it has been exploited by participating governments to pursue long-standing policy/military objectives, reduce civil liberties, and infringe upon human rights. It is argued that the term war is not appropriate in this context (as in War on Drugs), since there is no identifiable enemy, and that it is unlikely international terrorism can be brought to an end by military means.\n<Assistant>Thanks for sharing. I've committed this to memory."]
[{"question": "Who argued that the existence of God is an empirical question?", "answer": "Richard Dawkins"}, {"question": "How many Attributes of Mercy are in Judaism?", "answer": "Thirteen"}, {"question": "What type of view do Christians take on God?", "answer": "trinitarian"}, {"question": "What type of religion is Christianity?", "answer": "trinitarian"}, {"question": "What phrase has been called a misnomer?", "answer": "War on Terror"}, {"question": "When was the Patriot Act passed?", "answer": "October 2001"}, {"question": "Which religion does Boyer equate with a modern soap opera?", "answer": "Greek mythology"}, {"question": "What category does NOMA fall under?", "answer": "theology"}, {"question": "Who did Osama bin Laden volunteer to help fight in the 80s?", "answer": "Soviets"}, {"question": "What is pantheism?", "answer": "God is the universe itself"}, {"question": "What does prayer usually include in Islam?", "answer": "forgiveness"}, {"question": "Which word did George W. Bush apologize for using when talking about the war?", "answer": "crusade"}, {"question": "Which group did Rumsfeld think was active in Kashmir?", "answer": "Al-Qaeda"}, {"question": "What should be used to answer ultimate questions on morality and meaning?", "answer": "theology"}, {"question": "What are ways that small social groups can force morality?", "answer": "gossip or reputation"}, {"question": "What is a religion that believes that all religions are correct?", "answer": "universalism"}, {"question": "Who said that 9/11 drew a line between 'the civil and the savage'?", "answer": "John Ashcroft"}, {"question": "What type of God is the Muslim God?", "answer": "a personal God"}, {"question": "What gender where the original Germanic words meaning God in?", "answer": "neuter"}, {"question": "What did Musharraf ban?", "answer": "militant organizations"}, {"question": "What religion believes that God is infinitely simple and not subject to time?", "answer": "Catholic"}, {"question": "Who helped the US invade Afghanistan?", "answer": "UK and coalition allies"}, {"question": "What nationality was Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan?", "answer": "Kenyan"}, {"question": "How many Pakistan airbases did Musharraf let the US use?", "answer": "three"}, {"question": "When did Afghanistan sign a security agreement with the US?", "answer": "September 2014"}, {"question": "Which belief system belives in some form of higher powwer, or something, but not organized religion?", "answer": "agnosticism"}, {"question": "How long has the thought of the existence of God been carried on?", "answer": "trans-generational"}, {"question": "What is a muslims life purpose?", "answer": "to worship God"}, {"question": "What is one called that believes he has the one religion, but that the others aren't necessarily wrong?", "answer": "pluralism"}, {"question": "Who said the 'war on terrorism' is 'an entire language of discourse'?", "answer": "Richard Jackson"}, {"question": "Which belief is expected to never try and visualize God?", "answer": "iconodules"}, {"question": "When was the DHS created?", "answer": "November 2002"}, {"question": "Where did the USSOC Pacific deploy to in Jan 2002?", "answer": "Philippines"}, {"question": "What do members of the Bah\u00e1'\u00ed Faith call God?", "answer": "Baha"}, {"question": "What kind of difference does Dawkins believe would come from the existence of God?", "answer": "a scientific difference"}, {"question": "Who believe that they are the only people that know the truth?", "answer": "exclusivists"}, {"question": "Where in Pakistan is Waziristan?", "answer": "North-West"}, {"question": "What did Musharraf say his ban wasn't influenced by?", "answer": "foreign influence"}, {"question": "What term did Obama want the government to stop using?", "answer": "war on terror"}, {"question": "How many polychaete families are there?", "answer": "approximately 80"}, {"question": "Although a proclaimed atheist, who was it that said \"the word 'God' is to me a sound conveying no clear or distinct affirmation\"?", "answer": "Charles Bradlaugh"}, {"question": "Where did Bush say the 'war on terror' begins?", "answer": "with al-Qaeda"}, {"question": "What was NATO's operation in the Mediterranean called?", "answer": "Operation Active Endeavour"}, {"question": "What regime were Hussein loyalists part of?", "answer": "Ba'ath"}, {"question": "Who posited the existence of God?", "answer": "medieval philosophers"}, {"question": "What operation began in Feb 2010?", "answer": "Operation Moshtarak"}, {"question": "What did Rouse decide leeches were a subgroup of?", "answer": "oligochaetes"}, {"question": "Where did Operation Moshtarak take place?", "answer": "southern Afghanistan"}, {"question": "What controversial technology did the US use in Pakistan?", "answer": "drones"}, {"question": "Where did NATO begin naval operations after 2002?", "answer": "the Mediterranean Sea"}, {"question": "How many Americans were killed when al-Qaeda attacked US embassies in 1998?", "answer": "12"}, {"question": "Who argues that there are lots of supernatural things in the world?", "answer": "Pascal Boyer"}, {"question": "What is it called when someone belives that their own religion is an advancement of older religions?", "answer": "supersessionism"}, {"question": "How much of Sudan's medicines were produced by a pharmaceutical plant Clinton's operation bombed?", "answer": "around 50%"}, {"question": "What did the 2007 study decide was the parent group for annelids?", "answer": "Polychaetes"}, {"question": "How many troops did Canada send initially?", "answer": "2,000"}, {"question": "Who said he had 'war-gamed' the US?", "answer": "Musharraf"}, {"question": "What offshoots of polychaetes are only segmented in the rear?", "answer": "pogonophores"}, {"question": "Which civil war did the Iraq branch of Al Qaeda begin fighting in?", "answer": "Syrian"}, {"question": "What do polytheistic religions assign to their gods?", "answer": "gender"}, {"question": "Who posited that humans created gods to create morality in social groups?", "answer": "Matt Rossano"}, {"question": "How soon after planes crashed into them did the WTC towers collapse?", "answer": "within two hours"}, {"question": "What is pantheism?", "answer": "God is the universe"}, {"question": "Which al-Qaeda cell were the 9/11 hijackers members of?", "answer": "Hamburg"}, {"question": "Omnipresent gods are a way to watch large groups and enforce what?", "answer": "morality"}, {"question": "Abuse of what term allowed a lack of a formal war declaration?", "answer": "Global War on Terror"}, {"question": "Who believe they are the one and only chosen few?", "answer": "exclusivists"}, {"question": "What does it mean if a God is not omnipotent?", "answer": "is not God"}, {"question": "What relationship do Al Qaeda and ISIS now have?", "answer": "competition"}, {"question": "Which newspaper revealed the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program?", "answer": "The New York Times"}, {"question": "What did the Bush administration describe as heroic?", "answer": "Americans"}, {"question": "What did Resolution 1624 try to protect?", "answer": "international human rights laws"}, {"question": "Where did Pakistan try to remove the Taliban and Al-Qaeda?", "answer": "northern tribal areas"}, {"question": "What subtype of clitellates contains earthworms?", "answer": "oligochaetes"}, {"question": "What humanitarian effort followed the 2002 military operation in the Philippines?", "answer": "Operation Smiles"}, {"question": "When did Greg Rouse begin trying to categorize polychaetes?", "answer": "1997"}, {"question": "When did the US capture Baghdad?", "answer": "April 2003"}, {"question": "How does Pascal Boyer believe that gods and other supernatural beings behave?", "answer": "much like people"}, {"question": "How many previously-separate phyla did the 2007 study reclassify?", "answer": "3"}, {"question": "What other massive agency's creation was the DHS compared to?", "answer": "the Department of Defense"}, {"question": "How was the definition of terrorism expanded by the Patriot Act?", "answer": "to include domestic terrorism"}, {"question": "What is the name of Stephen Hawking's book?", "answer": "The Grand Design"}, {"question": "Who said in 2012 that the fight would change from military to law enforcement?", "answer": "Jeh Johnson"}, {"question": "Are there any answers to the Pradox of the Stone?", "answer": "Several"}, {"question": "What do atheists believe of God?", "answer": "an imaginary entity only"}, {"question": "What type of God is the Muslim God?", "answer": "forgiving"}, {"question": "When did the Soviets leave Afghanistan?", "answer": "February 1989"}, {"question": "What is the extent of God's knowledge?", "answer": "infinite knowledge"}, {"question": "How many annelid genes did Torsten Struck first compare?", "answer": "3"}, {"question": "Where do scholars believe the name Adonai came from?", "answer": "Aten"}, {"question": "What is Michael Nikoletseas profession?", "answer": "Neuroscientist"}, {"question": "What did the Bush administration describe as parasitical?", "answer": "terrorists"}, {"question": "What superphylum are annelids in?", "answer": "protostomes"}, {"question": "What view does the Jewish community take on God?", "answer": "monotheistic"}, {"question": "How many people were killed by US Special Forces on Sep 14, 2009?", "answer": "two"}, {"question": "What kind of religion is Hinduism considered?", "answer": "dharmic"}, {"question": "In deism, does God answer prayers?", "answer": "neither answers prayers"}, {"question": "When did France provide troops in Mali?", "answer": "January 2013"}, {"question": "What is pantheism?", "answer": "God is the universe"}, {"question": "How many troops did Australia send initially?", "answer": "240"}]