Slashdot Mirror

Or how about using AHEAD? It actually works, is available now, and is evolutionary technology rather than some pie in the sky project.

This freaking laser beams on freaking trucks sounds a lot like Northrop's Nautilus project which ended in abject failure.

Or how about using AHEAD? It actually works, is available now, and is evolutionary technology rather than some pie in the sky project.

This freaking laser beams on freaking trucks sounds a lot like Northrop's Nautilus project which ended in abject failure.

BTW, we apparently have to remove Hillary Clinton from office, too. She just said we might have to use the military option in Iran and that all avenues must be explored (== Cheney's "all options open").

But Kucinich won't call for her removal because she's in his party.

So the current score: Cheney and Clinton go due to violating treaty, and Reid goes up for treason. Or can we just leave all this politicking behind?

Professor Liviu Librescu, holocaust survivor and hero. I suspect his background long ago taught him the importance of facing evil directly.

Edit your hosts file to point to 208.65.153.253 or 208.65.153.251. Here are the instructions for each OS:

# Unix/Linux/OS X

1. 'su'
2. 'echo "208.65.153.253 www.youtube.com" >> /etc/hosts'

# Windows

1. Start > Run > 'cmd'
2. 'echo 208.65.153.253 www.youtube.com >> c:\Windows\System32\Drivers\etc\hosts'

You may need to edit your hosts file with a text editor to ensure that it was properly edited. On Windows in particular, there may not be a line break added in. Just open the file, find the "208.", position the cursor in front of the "208." and press enter. Save the file.

There. All done.

As you can see, the Turkish government's solution is incredibly sophiticated and difficult to circumvent. :-/

Here's an actual story on the issue.

The long and short of it is that Turkey found the video "insulting" and hasn't even decided yet if the video is legally "wrong". So much for being a "democratic, secular, unitary, constitutional republic". (Taken from Wikipedia.)

An assassination attempt was made on Cheney, and you're all worried about some Christians with sticks in their asses about a WII?!

link

>> This Holocaust Will Be Different: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?apage=1&cid =1167467762531&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFu ll

Blah blah blah, those Arabs don't respect human life like we do blah blah probably not even circumsized.

>> 1) You talk about "the best interest" of the Iranian government as if they held the same value system as we do.

Governments don't necessarily believe their own propaganda.

>> Was it any different when the allies were trying to appease Nazi Germany?

Well, for one thing, the Nazis were Germans. Who lived in Germany, and drove German cars.

Oh, and they also had a military that posed a very real threat to the rest of the world. All Iran has is oil, and the potential to maybe get nuclear weapons in the near future. Not to minimize the threat posed by nuclear weapons, but only the threat of using the weapons can actually accomplish their goals. Actually using them? Mutually Assurred Destruction still works.

Your assumption is that Iran wants to "wipe Israel off the map" with nuclear weapons, regardless of the price they'll pay to do so. I don't buy that.

>> Do you honestly believe that there was any way to appease Nazi Germany to stop its hostilities?

Probably not, but the Nazis never would have come to power had the Treaty of Versailles not been so brutally punitive. Peacenikkery works from time to time.

>> Iran, by their own admission, is an Islamic nation. They believe (again, see national TV broadcasts) that every Muslim who dies "fighting the infidels" goes to heaven with 72 virgins and they preach this to no end.

Do you always take government propaganda at face value?

>> Why is it that you think they would care how many of their people potentially die in the name of wiping out Israel and the USA?

See the previous question. The Iranian government wants its people to believe that their nation is engaged in a historic struggle with the West, to distract them from their own heavy-handed incompetence. The parallels to U.S. policies are pretty uncanny.

>> Just take a look at Iraq, they are slaughtering their own people without a care in the world.

"Their own people?" You're assuming that the Iraqis see themselves as a united nation, rather than three separate and mutually hostile ethnicities. In short, you're analyzing the situation based on the same stupid mistake that made Bush think this war was a good idea in the first place. Just because the Brits drew some borders on a map back in the '20s, it didn't help the Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds set aside their differences. If anything, it exacerbated them.

>> It doesn't take a genius to figure out what happens if you blow up a truck bomb in a market full of civilians.

No, it doesn't. So I'm curious as to why you brought it up.

>> I'm not saying all Shia muslims think this way, but the extremists among them certainly do.

>> 2) This has absolutely nothing to do with "insulting their sovereignty". Every single time the UN or Europe has politely requested that Iran allow more supervision of its nuclear development (as required by treaties they have signed) and/or negotiation to temporarily cease such development they got a threat back from their government.

Yes, hence the sanctions.

>> The EU has repeatedly offered to supply Iran with energy to its heart's content (generated abroad, shipped to Iran) and also allowing Iran to have nuclear power plants but they'd have to ship the resulting biproduct back to Europe and they have refused on both counts.

The first offer misses the point. It basically says, "In exchange for giving up your nuclear program, we'll make your country reliant on a power source that the West can turn off with the flip of a switch." I'm less clear on their objections to the s

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?apage=1&cid =1167467762531&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFu ll

This Holocaust Will Be Different: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?apage=1&cid =1167467762531&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFu ll 1) You talk about "the best interest" of the Iranian government as if they held the same value system as we do. Was it any different when the allies were trying to appease Nazi Germany? Do you honestly believe that there was any way to appease Nazi Germany to stop its hostilities? Iran, by their own admission, is an Islamic nation. They believe (again, see national TV broadcasts) that every Muslim who dies "fighting the infidels" goes to heaven with 72 virgins and they preach this to no end. Why is it that you think they would care how many of their people potentially die in the name of wiping out Israel and the USA? Just take a look at Iraq, they are slaughtering their own people without a care in the world. It doesn't take a genius to figure out what happens if you blow up a truck bomb in a market full of civilians. I'm not saying all Shia muslims think this way, but the extremists among them certainly do. 2) This has absolutely nothing to do with "insulting their sovereignty". Every single time the UN or Europe has politely requested that Iran allow more supervision of its nuclear development (as required by treaties they have signed) and/or negotiation to temporarily cease such development they got a threat back from their government. The EU has repeatedly offered to supply Iran with energy to its heart's content (generated abroad, shipped to Iran) and also allowing Iran to have nuclear power plants but they'd have to ship the resulting biproduct back to Europe and they have refused on both counts. They replied with something along the lines of "if you don't shut up, we'll accelerate our nuclear development and deport whatever inspectors are left in the country". And then they did exactly that. You also seem to forget that Iran's nuclear development has been ongoing for decades now; most of the world only became aware of this once the media picked up the story. In parallel to all of this, they have also developed a continental missile that is able to hit any country in the middle east as well as part of Europe. Again, why would they need such a system unless they planned on using it vis-a-vis nuclear weapons? Please tell me, what is the politically correct way to stop a hostile Iran or Nazi Germany from developing nuclear weapons? I'd really love to know :)

There are many statistics available, but they are not really what I'm basing my views on. But then, neither are you.

Diamond, whether natural or synthetic, is not the hardest known material. Aggregated diamond nanorods are 1.11 times harder than diamond, as discussed here in 2005. And Acetylene polyyne is 40 times harder than diamond. See here

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/11/24/061124134 543.qth288nm.html
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1162378 474759&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
http://www.iii.co.uk/news/?type=afxnews&articleid= 5870183&subject=economic&action=article

Today's victims, the lame excuse and the predictable response. Collective punishment is an abhorent war crime, it does not matter if the punishment was delivered via suicide belts or hellfire missles. No single group started this conflict but at this moment in time Israel has by far the best opportunity to stop it, they have chosen to escalate it instead.

Um... Notice how very few Israelis are actually disagreeing with that assesment? Victory isn't making piles of rubble. If you look at the larger picture, this was a victory for Hezbollah without a doubt.

There was no way Hezbollah, some rag-tag little militia, was supposed to be able to stand up the IDF.

What happened is that Israel got hit very hard. They lost a lot of soldiers, and worse a lot of tanks.

Hezbollah was able to fight the ground forces of Israel to a standstill,

Sure, Israel destroyed a lot of infrastructure with a little "shock and awe" air power. Doesn't really do much other than harm the citizenry and piss them off. In the end, Israel couldn't do what mattered, and that's occupy the land that was and still is controlled by Hezbollah.

Make no bones about it. Hezbollah lured Israel into a fight at the time and place of their choosing,

...handed Israel an unexpected spanking, and sent them packing without giving up much of anything.

At the strategic level, this was a stunning victory for Hezbollah and all the nations/groups that oppose Israel. It would be very foolish to view it otherwise.

Um... Notice how very few Israelis are actually disagreeing with that assesment? Victory isn't making piles of rubble. If you look at the larger picture, this was a victory for Hezbollah without a doubt.

There was no way Hezbollah, some rag-tag little militia, was supposed to be able to stand up the IDF.

What happened is that Israel got hit very hard. They lost a lot of soldiers, and worse a lot of tanks.

Hezbollah was able to fight the ground forces of Israel to a standstill,

Sure, Israel destroyed a lot of infrastructure with a little "shock and awe" air power. Doesn't really do much other than harm the citizenry and piss them off. In the end, Israel couldn't do what mattered, and that's occupy the land that was and still is controlled by Hezbollah.

Make no bones about it. Hezbollah lured Israel into a fight at the time and place of their choosing,

...handed Israel an unexpected spanking, and sent them packing without giving up much of anything.

At the strategic level, this was a stunning victory for Hezbollah and all the nations/groups that oppose Israel. It would be very foolish to view it otherwise.

Um... Notice how very few Israelis are actually disagreeing with that assesment? Victory isn't making piles of rubble. If you look at the larger picture, this was a victory for Hezbollah without a doubt.

There was no way Hezbollah, some rag-tag little militia, was supposed to be able to stand up the IDF.

What happened is that Israel got hit very hard. They lost a lot of soldiers, and worse a lot of tanks.

Hezbollah was able to fight the ground forces of Israel to a standstill,

Sure, Israel destroyed a lot of infrastructure with a little "shock and awe" air power. Doesn't really do much other than harm the citizenry and piss them off. In the end, Israel couldn't do what mattered, and that's occupy the land that was and still is controlled by Hezbollah.

Make no bones about it. Hezbollah lured Israel into a fight at the time and place of their choosing,

...handed Israel an unexpected spanking, and sent them packing without giving up much of anything.

At the strategic level, this was a stunning victory for Hezbollah and all the nations/groups that oppose Israel. It would be very foolish to view it otherwise.

"sounds like wishful thinking."

They even condemned Israel for using cluster bombs outside their agreed use.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1154526 028767&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

"While international bodies are looking into the use of cluster bombs by Israel during the Lebanon war, an effort in the US Senate to curb the use of these munitions was defeated Wednesday by a 70 to 30 vote.

The initiative to prohibit the use and sale of cluster bombs by the US was put forward by Democratic Senators Dianne Feinstein of California and Patrick Leahy from Vermont. They attempted to attach a provision to the Pentagon budget, which would require the US, and the countries that it sells arms to, including Israel, to avoid using cluster bombs "in or near" civilian areas. According to the suggestion, the Pentagon would have to freeze all use or sale of cluster bombs until new rules are put in place regarding the use of these munitions in civilian areas. "

This was US Jewish people who would not support the genocide the IDF had planned.

And I'm sure we helped Germany plenty before Hitler rose to power too. How can I put ths so even YOU can uderstand: crazy people with nuclear weapons is bad.

NGOs that take sides ... Enjoying what is know as the "halo effect," few if any journalists or diplomats bother to check the details, biases or credibility of NGO claims.

The perversity of today's international outcry lies in the fact that there is indeed a disproportion in this war, a radical moral asymmetry between Hezbollah and Israel: Hezbollah is deliberately trying to create civilian casualties on both sides while Israel is deliberately trying to minimize civilian casualties, also on both sides. ... Lebanese innocents must also die in order for Israel to be demonized, which is why Hezbollah hides its fighters, its rockets, its launchers, its entire infrastructure among civilians.

'Civilian Casualty'? It Depends

The children are under the care of their parents, and if their parents had any brains, then they should've gotten out of there as soon as they noticed Hezbollah activity, knowing that it will draw Israeli fire. If they were forced to stay by Hezbollah, then I guess they aren't the freedom fighters that so many ignorant fools believe they are.

Also, as long as we are talking about children, I might as well mention the use of teenaged sucide bombers by Palestinian factions, just to show you that on the one hand they cry and lament about children dying due to announced Israeli bombings, while at the same time they brainwash some children to go and blow themselves on busses and in malls, where, chances are, that they will kill some children as well.

Another poster in this thread mentioned that Israel would have had more luck in combating Hezbollah if they were not to announce strikes. I fully agree with the poster -- with the exception of using the word "efficient" instead of "luck" -- because if Israel were to simply bomb all the southern villages/cities in Lebanon with a slew of dumb bombs, they'll most likely destory more of the Katyusha stockpiles, as well as save some money on the more expensive guided munition. However, they are trying to reduce civilian casualties, and therefore they have to get a positive identification on a target, either through intelligence, or by waiting for Hezbollah to fire.

I honestly don't know what went through people's mind when they rated the parent post as insightful.

like civilian airports ? power stations ? sewage works ?

You must recognize that Hezbollah is like a geographical province, in addition to an ideological organization, with its own quasi-government and all. Those targets, and also notably, main roads and bridges, were indeed targets. That bombing was intentional. It was necessary to prevent Hezballah from being resupplied by Iran and Syria. Probably also to crush morale. That helps to make for a short[er] war.

And then killed them when they flee their homes in response to those warnings.

1) They waited too long to evacuate? 2) They were terrorists? 3) In any event, they voted for terrorists in the last election (Hamas, Fatah, Islamic Jihad, etc.); they supported terrorists.

And then attacked red cross ambulances evacuating the wounded.

Red Cross/UN ambulances are used as terrorist attack vehicles in the Gaza strip, and, therefore, are a legitimate target. Google for some of the videos. I just watched a new one today, but I don't have time to find the link. (Shabbat coming)

And attacked the UN convoys taking aid to those too frightened to move.

If you walk out onto a battlefield, you just might get shot. Shocking.

And the unarmed UN observers (in a bunker, apparently destroyed by precision guided weapon, after repeated requests from the UN not to hit those coordinates).

Those four UN observers were in a building that was adjacent to a Hezballah command post. The only question is whether they were intentionally being human shields for the terrorists or if they were just plain stupid. (Actually, the latter is a given, in any case.)

And then shelled the UN rescue effort for the observers.

I didn't hear about that. Accidents happen in war. Guaranteed. Hezballah accidentally killed two Israeli Arabs; they apologized and called them "shahids" (martyrs) in the war against Israel. Both sides kill people they didn't intend to kill.

The Israeli military's radio station in south Lebanon today warned that the army "will totally destroy any village from which missiles are fired toward Israel".

Meanwhile, Hezballah attacks Israeli cities that did not fire missiles toward Lebanon. Haifa? Ashkelon? Nazareth? The Arabs are even attacking the Galilee region, which is mostly Muslim! (since they drove out the Jews and Christians) They attack every Israeli city that their missiles can possibly reach. That is their only limitation on violence.

Fact is neither side cares about civilian lives.

Sheba Medical Center to treat Lebanese for free

"It is better for a Lebanese family to hear that Israelis saved their lives rather than for them to teach their children that they should kill Israelis. Our humanitarian care shows the difference between us and them. ... We treat Arab and Palestinian children all year round, especially those who need heart surgery and treatment for cancer; all the costs are paid by donors..."

America has sought to maintain the territorial integrity of Iraq, but that country was an artificial construct of post-World War I British diplomacy - a reality that can no longer be ignored. Iraq is a failed state, and in its agony it is dragging America down with it.

Al Jazeera is so unbiased... I mean, look at all the news coverage they dedicated to this story.

Oh wait... they never covered it. What a coincidence.... Al Jazeera is masterful at publishing one story in English and a totally different story in Arabic, not to mention choosing not to cover any stories which goes against their point of view. In short, Al Jazeera is very biased!

Britain's first bus bombing took place barely half a mile from the BBC's central London headquarters, and for a day or so after last Thursday's multiple bomb attacks the BBC, the influential leftist daily Guardian and even the British-based global news agency Reuters all seemed suddenly to discover the words "terrorism" and "terrorist." In Saturday's Guardian, for example, one or other of these words appeared on each of the first 11 pages.

In marked contrast to BBC reports about bombs on public transport in Israel - bombs which in some cases were even worse than those in London since some were specifically aimed at children and most were packed with nails, screws, glass and specially-sharpened metal shards in order to maximize injuries - terms like "guerrilla," "militant," "activist" or "fighter" were suddenly nowhere to be seen.

Nor - again in contrast to their coverage of Israel - did BBC correspondents, on either its domestic or international services, provide sympathetic accounts of the likely perpetrators, or explain to viewers that we must "understand" their "grievances." Instead they did what an objective news organization should do: just report on the attacks, and their atrocious nature, and on the sufferings of the victims....

But the hope of many of the British taxpayers forced to fund the BBC that it had finally come to its senses and would henceforth call terror by its proper name turned out to be short-lived. By Friday, the BBC's World Service was slowly reverting to its old habits, both on air and on line. (Its domestic news broadcasts have for the time being continued using the word "terrorist.")

Presumably hoping that no one would notice, the BBC subtly and retroactively altered its initial texts about the bombs on both its British and international Web sites. Unfortunately for the BBC, however, previous versions of its webpages remained easily accessible to all on Google, and enterprising British bloggers, long-fed up with the BBC's bias, recorded the changes.

"Harry's Place" noted, for example, that on Thursday evening a BBC News webpage headlined "Bus man may have seen terrorist," began "A bus passenger says he may have seen one of those responsible for the terrorist bomb attacks in London. Richard Jones, from Binfield, had got a bus just before it was blown up...."

But on Friday at 10:14 a.m. GMT, that webpage was suddenly changed. The headline now reads "Passenger believes he saw bomber," and the text begins "A bus passenger says he may have seen one of those responsible for the bomb attacks in London. Richard Jones, from Binfield, had got a bus just before it was blown up..."

George Orwell, who I believe worked for the BBC during WWII, predicted a Ministry of Propaganda that in 1984 would do just this--alter past news stories to fit propaganda purposes. He seems to have gotten only the date wrong.

During WWII the tuning signal for the BBC was the bold 'hammer blow" opening cords to Beethoven's Fifth Symptomy. Perhaps they need a new tuning signal. I suggest the clucking of a fussy hen. "Cluck Cluck, Cluck." Anyone who hears that will know beyond a doubt that they're reached the BBC.

--Mike Perry, Seattle, Editor, Eugenics and Other Evils

oh please, why is it always a conspiracy theory just because you don't know about it personally? I'll even give you some Newsmax sources,

"The Chinese air force is equipped with the Harpy medium-range anti-radar missile acquired from Israel, and its new Chengdu J-10 strike fighter uses technology obtained from the canceled Israeli Lavi program. link

Here we go from the Asian Times, " Israel has also been a long-standing supplier of advanced military technologies to China. According to the findings of a past US congressional committee chaired by Representative Christopher Cox (Republican-California), Israel has "offered significant technology cooperation to the People's Republic of China, especially in aircraft and missile development", including helping China build its current F-10 fighter jet." LINK

Here's a nice article from the Jerusalem Post about the u.s. suspending cooperative development on the arrow-2 missile defence system with Israel. quote, "A source quoted by MENL explained the rationale for the encroaching US boycott: "It's all about China." As the report explained, "The Pentagon, with full support of the administration, does not want to deal with Israeli products or technology that could be sent to China."

There's plenty more information available from all your favourite right-wing sources about the chinese-israeli love affair that's been going on for 20 years. You just have to look because FoxNews & CNN are not interested in telling you about it.

/.'s article here is the first I've heard of this Real ID plan...

Well, aside from the obvious fact that since the neo-con coup the network media hasn't covered anything except talking-dubya-points, the reason you haven't noticed this tidbit of legistlation (which apparently started back in Feburary) is because "liberal media" has painted it as an immagration issue - that is: the only people targeted by this legislation according to the to PTB and their media cheerleaders were illegal aliens - I heard it debated on Faux News as an immagration issue a least a month ago. I would have to say either a) you haven't been paying attention, or b) you are foolish enough to a ctually believe the that the motives these pseudo-news agencies put forward are the actual intent of the neo-con coup. Nothing could be further from the truth, of course...

Here is a list of articles about this legislation (trivially found using Google) from some touchy feely immagration rights outfit that no one will pay any attention to.

[ -- copied & pasted -- ]

The REAL ID Act in the Media

• "Jewish Groups Oppose US's Stricter Controls on Asylum," Jerusalem Post, March 9, 2005
• "Death Sentence?" Christianity Today, March 8, 2005
• "Republican Plan Would Tighten Laws for Asylum Cases," Hearst Newspapers, March 6, 2005
• "Keep the Doors Open," The Jewish Week editorial, February 25, 2005
• "Unwelcome Mat," The Boston Globe, February 25, 2005
• "Religious Asylum Assailed," Family News in Focus, February 22, 2005 (PDF - 51KB)
• "Proyecto de ley torpedea el derecho de asilo," El Nuevo Herald, February 22, 2005
• "Conservative camps split on tightening asylum," The Boston Globe, February 21, 2005
• "Not broke, don't fix," The Washington Times, February 20, 2005
• "National ID Party," The Wall Street Journal editorial, February 17, 2005 (subscription required)
• "On Guard, America," The New York Times editorial, February 15, 2005
• "Refugee Politics," The Baltimore Sun editorial, February 14, 2005
• "Real ID Act deserves defeat in the Senate," San Antonio Express-News editorial, February 18, 2005
• "Playing the terror card," Contra Costa Times, February 14, 2005
• "Ineffectual migrant policy," Milwaukee Journal Sentinel editorial

Free websites for the most part

Here are the sites in my News pull down
http://www.drudgereport.com/
http://www.slashdot.org/
http://www.jpost.com/
http://www.maarivintl.com/index.cfm
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/
http://www.arabnews.com/
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/
http://news.google.com/
http://www.kcna.co.jp/index-e.htm
feed://newsrss.bbc.co.uk/rss/newsonline_world_ed it ion/front_page/rss.xml
http://www.globalsecurity.org/

I also hit CNN.com, some of the other British papers on the web, occasionally the local news TV station's websites.

My focus is on the Middle East, so I hit alot of Israeli papers. I go to about 1 blog everyother day, other than Fark.

> Ha'aretz is a fairly centrist viewpoint, defining center in terms of Israeli politics.

Of the Israeli mainstream media, Ha'aretz is usually considered to be "left of centre" and Jerusalem post - "right of centre".

Oh yeah it was a total party all around! great job US! Hey, instead of skimming headlines and press releases, try reading (and comprehending) some actual reporting.

Doesn't sound so safe and peaceful, now does it?

Thanks for the lesson, but I do actually know how to speak English already. On the proliferation topic, from your own link:

Nuclear proliferation is the spread from nation to nation of nuclear technology, including nuclear power plants but especially nuclear weapons.

An Israeli nuclear installation is located about ten kilometers to the south of Dimona, the Negev Nuclear Research Center. Its construction commmenced in 1958, with French assistance. ... [t]he purpose of Dimona is widely assumed to be the manufacturing of nuclear weapons, and the majority of defence experts have concluded that it does in fact do that.

As for the 'threat' posed by non-Jewish voters in Israel, start here, for example, or here. Quoting the second article: "Even if Sharon wins the national referendum, a part of the Right won't accept its results, insisting that only a "Jewish majority" is legitimate, and that the presence of Arab voters among the Israeli majority invalidates the decision." You will find plenty more about this policy position if you just google for info.

the physical location of the criminal being the only important factor is absurd in many situations.

Consider the absurdity of bypassing traditional concepts of national jurisdiction. That person will be tried as an American, according to American law. Yet, he is not an American, never set foot in America(from what I've read), and did not commit the crime for which he is being prosecuted in America. It's bad precedent IMO. Bad and absurd, and could lead to legitimization of nonsense like this:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JP ost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1090294696522&p=1006688 055060

Now, I'm not a holocaust denier and as such, don't feel personally threatened by this in the slightest. But this is the most absurd example I know of with an authorative link available to demonstrate why I believe the way I do. We have to cling to the concepts of national borders and national jurisdictions with all our might, else, the rights we enjoy get trampled on by foreign powers thanks to the entangling alliances our politicians get our countries into.

Right now, America is doing the trampling, but tomorrow, it will be someone trampling on us.

That is nonsense, balderdash, baloney, bilge, bosh, bull, claptrap, fabrication, flimflam, garbage, hogwash, hooey, horsefeathers, poppycock, propaganda, rot, slander, slime, rubbish, trash, and tripe.

They're called prisons. They're not supposed to be Hiltons. You must be one of those people who thinks that putting a sack over someone's head is "torture." Never mind that Muslim men they make their own women wear burqas every day of their lives for the Islamic crime of being born women.

walling off citizens in their neighbourhoods

They're protecting Israeli citizens from Israel-occupying Arab terrorists. The anti-terror barrier is not to keep people inside an area; the purpose is to keep people out of an area. If Palestinists would stop shooting rockets into Israeli homes and murdering Jews on the street, this measure wouldn't be necessary.

and cleansing entire areas

The only cleansing Israel is doing is cleansing the land of Israel of Jews! Prime Minister Sharon is hell-bent on expelling 8,000 Israeli Jews from Gush Katif in the "Gaza Strip," and he wants to uproot and kick out the quarter million Israeli Jews of Judea and the Shomron (which comprise the "West Bank"). The IDF has destroyed synagogues multiple times. Yassir Arafat and the Palestinists should be cheering for Sharon. He's making large swaths of Israel Judenrein for them.

I don't know how you get off implying that the land is being cleansed of Arabs. The current government of Israel is adamant about destroying "illegal" Jewish homes and communities but doesn't do anything about the thousands of illegal Arab and Bedouin settlements and structures. The IDF is even reluctant to tear down many Arab structures used by terrorists to murder Israelis.

Who is cleansing whom? The Muslims have "cleansed" almost the whole Middle East of Jews, Christians, and other non-Muslims. Islamic intolerance and persecution is causing a mass exodus of Christians out of Iraq. There are virtually no Christians in Bethlehem and a relatively small percentage of Jews in Jerusalem, the first holiest city to Judaism. They cleaned out the Holy Land of non-Muslims, and they're committing genocide all over Africa and Asia. Countless Christian villages (mostly African) have been burned to the ground just in the last decade. (Where is Kofi Annan?? Jesse Jackson?? All the leftist "human rights" phonies? Dirty secret: They hate Christians more than they care about blacks.) This is the way Muslims are. They're imperialist, warmongering fanatics who don't tolerate diversity or freedom. They've "cleansed" a third of the world of non-Muslims. They're about to start taking over Europe again, too. Russia, France, and Britain know it, make no mistake.

Israel is the only country on Earth where Jews are a majority. They're an "endangered species" of peoples. Israel is a sanctuary of preservation, but it's surrounded by ravenous wolves who want Jews to go the way of the dodo bird. The anti-terror barrier is to protect the peaceful people from the bomb-throwing wolves.

It should be noted that the barrier is being built with great reluctance by even its strongest supporters. Three objections: 1) The wall gives the impression of a political boundary, but much of Israeli land is on the predominantly Arab-occupied side. 2) There are several Jewish communities on the predominantly Arab-occupied side of the barrier who are not protected by it. 3) The necessity of it is the result of Israel's failure to prosecute the war on the occupying, militant Arabs on its land. Israel has failed to respect its own sovereignty and boundaries; therefore, nobody else respects them either.

It's interesting that Arabs characterize the barrier as walling them into an area. Umm, excuse me, but the other side is open-ended, you dunderheads. Ir

The Jerusalem Post has a registration system, and for a while many stories there seemed to require registration. But they seem to have backed off on enforcement. Today, not being registered seems to have little, if any, effect.

Other news sites seem to be doing much the same thing. There's registration available, but you don't really need to use it. Even much of the New York Times' content is visible without registration. Apparently untargeted hits are better than no hits.

The Jerusalem Post has a registration system, and for a while many stories there seemed to require registration. But they seem to have backed off on enforcement. Today, not being registered seems to have little, if any, effect.

Other news sites seem to be doing much the same thing. There's registration available, but you don't really need to use it. Even much of the New York Times' content is visible without registration. Apparently untargeted hits are better than no hits.

One effect may be to encourage more readership of Government-funded news sites. That's fine, as long as they're not all from the same government. Google News frequently has links to Xinhua, the BBC, the Voice of America, and Al-Jazeera. None require registration.

It's worth reading all four of those. If all four have roughly the same take on some event, the info is probably correct. If they don't, news manipulation may be going on.

(It's also amusing to read the Jerusalem Post, which is Israel's equivalent of Fox News.)

Here is a link

I don't suppose the computer you used to write that message contained Intel chips? You may find Israel's contribution to that was pretty "nice". Don't get me started on pharmaceuticals and other research Israel has done of direct benefit to the US. They are hardly lying there accepting handouts like much of the Arab world whose last significant contribution to science was hundreds of years ago in the form of algebra (and on behalf of students everywhere, gee thanks a lot for that!)

And speaking of nice, have a read of this amongst other articles that suggest Israel has done PLENTY for the free world.

Care to rethink your comment?

Actually, I think the whole question of whether channels should be sold a la carte is secondary to the whether we'll need cable networks in the first place.

Someone brought up the CD analogy, which I think is apt, and we've all seen how well iTunes Music Store has done with single sales. But to get to that point with TV you'd be talking about selling individual episodes of individual shows. Which I think ultimately is the model that will prevail, either that or people subscribing to one season of a particular show.

This isn't some fantasy that needs Internet-video-stream-ready set-top boxes and complex electronic billing schemes. It's happening right now with TV shows on DVD, including HBO shows like the Sopranos and Six Feet under and cult shows that never would have found an audience otherwise.

When a better technical infrastructure does emerge, for selling shows through the set-top or aggregating them with commercials on DVRs, the role of cable networks is going to shift away from distributors and toll collectors and subsidizers and more toward branders of quality content and promoters, like a record company in the music business.

The effect will be to increase the market for paid TV programming by lowering the bar to consumer and vendor entry. How many people would start watching new episodes of the Sopranos if they didn't have to take all of HBO for $18/month, or check out Adult Swim or Stargate SGI if they didn't have to shell out $60/month for the whole digital cable package as we do in the SF Bay Area?

I'm sorry but this is entirely untrue. Ask any person who believes that Israel is in the right throughout the Israel-Displaced Jordanian struggle. It is very clear at many times that the BBC is very pro-liberal and anti-Israel (not anti-Semetic, but some of my friends would take the extra leap). I think that the above poster is taking one side of the reputation. I've never heard of the BBC being "unbiased" or more truthful than anyone else.

Just as a sidenote, anyone who gets news about current events/attacks in Israel from the BBC needs to reevaluate their sources. Might I suggest a few Israeli news sources? The most popular paper in Israel, the Jersualem Post, is available online here. There is also the Ha'aretz newspaper available online here. The Ha'aretz features more of a newswire design, but the JPost has more renouned journalism.

Amir Lieberman, the developer of the system, is also responsible for the previous rash of questionable truth detector software, which happens to be still available. It did recommend training, and it was widely sold for its ability to work over the phone. It even has a sequal. (warning, Not compatible with Opera. Probably not Mozilla.)

Namesysco doesn't claim very high accuracy for the Truster software. "The voice analyst achieved an overall accuracy rate of 78% for truthful subjects and 61% for deceptive subjects." In other words, only 10% more liars were caught than flipping a coin, while 22% of innocent subjects were considered lying.

The American Polygraph Society does not have a much rosier view of the situation. They have concluded that Computerized Voice Stress Analysis, and specifically the Truster software, has only a "chance-level detection of deception,"

And actually, the dead giveaway to the scam should be from the lion's mouth himself. "Our products were originally for law enforcement use ? we get all our technology from Nemesys-co ? but we need more development time [for that application]" In other words, "our products don't work and can't be sold unless you slap a 'for entertainment purposes only' label upon them. Our products are to 'entertain' airport security."

Good catch.

However, "firm commitments" by donor countries meeting in London this week was only in the range of US$700 million, said Nigel Roberts, World Bank's representative to the West Bank and Gaza.

He said US$1.1 billion would "maintain the very basic level of equilibrium in the economy."

Donors disbursed US$930 million in 2001, and just over a billion dollars in 2002, Roberts said. "Given the trends, this very high level of foreign assistance is roughly US$300 per capita, which on a sustained basis is the highest in any country in the world, in a developing country situation," he told a news conference.

Yeah, Sharon went to a site holy to Jewish people, a site which by the grace of a kind and considerate nation, was and continues to be under the supervision of an Arab body fiercely anti-Jewish in their views. The fact that Jews are barred from a holy place while Arabs are given control of it is a fact that's lost on your tunnel-visioned anti-Israel arse, isn't it?

What does the trip have to do with the intifada though? Absolutely nothing, it was planned long before the visit:

PA minister: Intifada planned since July

Wow, what propaganda rags you been reading?

Insufficiently Jewish? Like the 1 million Arab-Israeli citizens with full citizenship rights? Like the various Arab political parties in Israel? Like the Arab supreme court justice in Israel? Like the Druze community in Israel? The only difference is that Israeli-Arabs are exempt from having to serve in the army for obvious reasons. Not bad for a 55 year old country - run a quick comparison with any other country in the region or even in Europe and you'll see just how amazing it is.

If you mean land that was always intended to be returned for some true peace, then you can obviously see why turning it over to a terrorist thug would have to opposite effect. That is why, although they wanted to trade the land for peace with all her neighbors in 1967, Arab mentality prevented it and continues to prevent peace to this day:

"On June 19, 1967, scarcely ten days after the cease-fire, the Israeli government decided in a secret cabinet session to return all of the Sinai Peninsula, all of the Golan Heights, to Egypt and Syria respectively in return for full peace treaties. At the same time, the Israeli government launched a clandestine operation to canvass 80 Palestinian notables on the West Bank about the possibility of creating an autonomous Palestinian entity, leading potentially to an independent Palestinian state. The Egyptians and the Syrians rejected this overture. They convened at Khartoum at the end of the summer, and they passed the infamous Three No's: no negotiations, no peace, no recognition of Israel. The Palestinian notables in the West Bank, the protocols of the discussions, all said they'd be interested in having an autonomous entity. They certainly wanted independence. But they were afraid if they concluded any peace treaty at all with Israel, they'd be executed. A historic opportunity was lost that summer, and we've lived with the consequences ever since"

I hope you're as concerned with your tax dollars going to the direct indoctrination of Palestinian children or the funds going to corrupt NGOs or to support Palestinian apartheid.

You have a right to comment. In fact, you even have a right to that incredibly stupid and uninformed comment you just made, but repeating mindless lies just makes you look all the more incompetent.

The survey was done by "Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PSR) in Ramallah."

http://www.pcpsr.org/index.html

I would not call them a pro-jewish org.

For those that have trouble with complex computer operations, like cut and past and/or space removal

As to their not being a good side to this conflict, maybe so. But it isn't the Israel that is killing women and kids AS THEIR MAIN OBJECTIVE. If the PA wanted peace, they would stop the bombers and stop teaching that the state of Israel should be wiped off the face of the Earth.

IF they did, it would remove the reasons for Israel counter attacks.

Read this for starters. If it was utter lies, even the Jerusalem Post wouldn't let it be posted there.

Then read this one . Specifically Item #3, but alot of the info there will challenge the (Israel is all bad, Israel is only bad) mantra most of the "liberals" repeat. To quote it

Turning a blind eye to article 15, Great Britain also decided that no Jews could reside or buy land in the newly created Emirate. This policy was ratified -- after the emirate became a kingdom -- by Jordan's law no. 6, sect. 3, on April 3, 1954, and reactivated in law no. 7, sect. 2, on April 1, 1963. It states that any person may become a citizen of Jordan unless he is a Jew. King Hussein made peace with Israel in 1994, but the Judenrein legislation remains valid today.

The first quote is a column by Alan Dershowitz, if you hate pro-Israel folks then skip to the 2nd link, but I don't know who wrote it. But if either of these was pure propoganda or lies, then surely they would have been challenged by now.

Anyway, regarding the conflict, I'm not saying Israel is innocent. But to treat the situation like Israel is doing these things in a vacuum, instead of in reaction to decades of similar violence and hatred against it, is foolish and misleading.

Is it me or is the U.S. the ONLY country not "Beating Back" the abusiveness of it's own corporations and government. (This should get me tag as a terrorist by saying this, in a country were supposedly we have a 1st amendment right to freedom of speech!).

Yes I do live in the U.S., yes I do think it is corrupt from the top levels of our goverment down to the corporations.

It seems just about every other country in the world is smacking the U.S. corporations that are trying to screw everyone, but for some strange reason WE CAN'T!

Look what kind of crap we are having to fight:

1) SCO - 'nuff said!
2) MPAA/RIAA - take away our rights to fair use, and to mayn other things to list.
3) Our Goverment - Took away our 4th amendment with the Patiriot act and allow law enforcement agencies free reign in what they do. All in the name of "terrorism".

What they don't want you to know is that our damn goverment KNEW about 911 on August 20th. THe Israil (sp?) Massad warned our governemt about a terrorist threat and of massive amounts of terrorists (about 200 I belive) comming into this country. There was even an article about it in the Jeruselum Post's website not long after 911. (Any of our Israli brothers want to confirm this?)
That's right your own government let it happen, why you say??? Think about what they have been able to do with that "terrorist threat" that they are using to try and scare us with. The patriot act, now talk of the patriot act II. Patriot Act - that is a damn slap in the face to the TRUE patriots that gave their lives for this country to be what it is today! I being former military am ASHAMED of our government right now!

I'm sick of the news media ignoring Iran just because the government and their goons won't let any Western media take pictures. There were protests around the world and all the media report about Iran today is those unfortunate twins!

Here's the information on the satellite uplink jamming. The jammed TV stations include NITV and Azadi TV.

For information on today's protests in which 100,000 came out in Tehran, there is information from the BBC and the Jerusalem Post.

First-hand accounts of today's events have been posted on sympathetic websites like Iran va Jahan and SMCCDI.

Information on Internet censorship can be found here (parrotting the Iranian government line that it was all about sex) and more objective articles here and here.

c)Pro-American regimes are what we're fighting against in many cases (or the degredation of Americanistic countries).

A noble fight. But please don't lose sight of the rest of humanity's wish for even a smidgen of the developed world's freedom.

> Any particular timeframe or groups I whould look at to get a better idea of how poitics operate in the region besides the Palastinian/Israel conflict?

Due to the current politically correct climate, it is hard to get a feeling of how it is with Muslims and Jews short of having direct experience. In general the Muslim press and sites are all but useless, due to widespread censorship and brutal repression; but their point of view is widely defended in the European press and sites. The Israeli press, for example The Jerusalem Post and sites are better due to freedom and education, but right now they are more biased than usual, as they are reacting defensively to European bashing and siding with their enemies.

Some very informative books exist, the problem is finding them. One I remember well is _Oh, Jerusalem_, that gives some background from an Israeli point of view. Perhaps the more useful would be to read and compare good editions of the Old Testament of the Bible (Tanach) and the Koran, the difference is striking.

A Palestinian man from the West Bank city of Jenin was said to have been killed in the US missile strikes on Baghdad early Thursday morning.

The family of Ahmed Raed Elbaz received a phone call from relatives in the Iraqi capital to say that Elbaz had been killed in the bombardment that targeted Iraqi leaders.

The family set up a mourning tent and said that Elbaz was a bus driver in Baghdad.

Both Iraq and the International Red Cross said that one civilian had been killed and 14 wounded in the air strikes.

• General news
• • Drudge Report
  • Google News
  • Jerusalem Post
  • JCPA Daily Alert (a thorough digest of world terrorism-related news, with links)
• News/commentary/multimedia
• • Rush Limbaugh, includes about an hour of free audio clips, updated daily
  • Arutz Sheva (Channel Seven) news - on-demand video
  • Arutz Sheva talk shows - on-demand audio (most popular is "Mid-East at the Crossroads")
  • Foundation for the Defense of Democracy - news and views
• War for Peace
• • the brain terminal
  • the dissident frogman (required reading for the French)
• Tech
• • /.
  • MozillaZine
  • Win Informant
  • MozillaNews' Bonsai Watch (a better alternative to using Bugzilla to see the most recent checkins)
• Search
• • Google
  • Dictionary.com
  • Bible Gateway