Slashdot Mirror


A Cautionary Tale of Open Source Social Technologies

eweekhickins writes "The 'country' drop-down menu on one organization's donations pages omits Israel as a country and includes 'Palestine.' Among other things, this means that Israelis can't donate to the organization from these pages; it also presents the risk of a PR nightmare for the organization. This EWeek story cautions that while basic Web 2.0 technologies combined with open source can be incredibly powerful and productive, they can also lead to disastrous results for an organization that isn't paying close enough attention."

330 comments

  1. Interesting story... by Darundal · · Score: 1

    ...although not sure to classify it as FUD, but wondering if anyone else out there has similar stories?

    1. Re:Interesting story... by HiThere · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, there was this time the mainland Chinese government and the one on the island were in bitter competition as to whose flag would be displayed in Red Hat Linux. I forget who won, and why displaying both wasn't a valid compromise. (Probably neither side wanted to compromise.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    2. Re:Interesting story... by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I'm sure to classify it as FUD. They're just bawww bawing because someone forgot to add their country to some (noncomprehensive) list. If Madagascar or something were missing, nobody would bat an eye.. but just because it's Israel it's a huge issue. Come on, by shrieking foul over non-issues like this they muddy the waters of real problems with racism.

      I pointed out that this isn't just any omission and addition. When you omit Israel and add Palestine (which is not even recognized as a country by the United Nations) to a country drop-down menu, you seem to be making a very loaded political statement. Ugh, this is not a story.

      This isn't the case on the agency's own site, but it was the case on the pages for Causes, which puts widgets... Facepalm.
    3. Re:Interesting story... by Detritus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So you would be happy if they replaced "Israel" with "The Zionist Entity"? Whether or not you think it matters, it's important to many people. Maps are political statements, as are lists of countries and their names. Pretending that Israel does not exist is a common practice in the Middle-East.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    4. Re:Interesting story... by Bandman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      While I sympathize with the Israelis in this case, it's open source, right?

      Fork it and add your country. Then make it better software than it was originally. Hit them where it hurts.

    5. Re:Interesting story... by hedwards · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      That is true, but it strikes me as pretty anti-semitic to suggest that Jewish people are that easily manipulated by bigots as to automatically buy what a Pro-Israeli organization is saying without considering the organization's reputation.

      Jewish people really run the spectrum, for example one of my college roommates got the shit kicked out of him in Israel by border guards while protesting the Israeli government's treatment of the Palestinians, and yes he's Jewish.

      Some of those organizations differ very little from the Klan both in terms of bigotry as well as in terms of extremism. I'm guessing that this individual was either horribly informed or belongs to the bigoted type of outfit.

      Not unlike similar groups in the US that sometimes use patriotism to write off far less savory values.

      And at any rate, it would be largely a moot point to include the Palestinians anyways, because there are far more Palestinians with money in Israel than in the Palestinian authority. It would be a lot less obvious to just exclude both. Right now, they don't even have the cash to buy their own food in most cases.

    6. Re:Interesting story... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The CIA world factbook is one of the best places to get geographical data on countries.

    7. Re:Interesting story... by daeg · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There was also the use of the UN flag under the Gnome or Tango icon sets (forgot which one) as a "locale settings" icon. It angered non-UN countries/users. Despite it having nothing to do with the UN at all, they felt slighted.

    8. Re:Interesting story... by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 5, Interesting

      25+ years back, I somehow got "volunteered" into putting up the flags for the World Youth Baseball Tournament when it was held in the town where I lived at the time.
       
      There were about 15 or 20 countries involved and the organizers handed me a big box of flags, one for each country, and said "Here you go", and that was the extent of the direction that I received.
       
      Each flag had a little tag pinned to it saying what country it was for, so I just put them up in alphabetical order, more-or-less the way that they came out of the box.
       
      This almost caused an international diplomatic incident!
       
      Apparently you can't put country X's flag up next to country Y because they are fighting about something, or Y doesn't recognize X, or you-name-it. Phones started to ring, including mine, and I had to rush out again and re-arrange the flags to suit the diplomats.
       
      I ultimately put those flags up in four different orders over the course of the week or so that the baseball tournament was on, because the arrangements never suited everyone. I only had the "diplomatic incident" occur once, on that first day, but I spent hours on the phone with various mucky-mucks smoothing ruffled feathers. And re-arranged those damn flags almost every day afterward.

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
    9. Re:Interesting story... by McGiraf · · Score: 5, Funny

      "The CIA world factbook is one of the best places to get geographical data on countries."

      Yes, you are right. You can trust them because they are not controlled by any government.

    10. Re:Interesting story... by hairyfeet · · Score: 1, Interesting
      I have to agree it is FUD,and whiny FUD at that. You are using their Open Source software for free. It is THEIR software,they wrote it,they are entitled to their opinions. If they don't like Open source gives them a really nice remedy that they wouldn't have in proprietary land. It is called FORK IT!


      IMHO it is just the height of gall to take someone's free open source software and then bitch about his beliefs. Reminds me of those software companies that are like "We want all the software for our product for free but we don't want to follow your GPL license so we shouldn't have to!". That is what BSD is for people. You don't like the GPL choose software that has a license you like. If this bunch doesn't like this developers political views then fork it or use something else. But to whine about "The perils of Open Source" like developers are sitting around wasting their time trying to come up with landmines for lazy companies they've never heard of is just ridiculous.But as always that is my 02c on the subject,YMMV

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    11. Re:Interesting story... by dotancohen · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      ...although not sure to classify it as FUD, but wondering if anyone else out there has similar stories? Sure do:
      http://dotancohen.com/eng/unicef_israel.html
      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    12. Re:Interesting story... by h4rm0ny · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That is true, but it strikes me as pretty anti-semitic to suggest that Jewish people are that easily manipulated by bigots as to....

      Looks outside window at UK society. I don't see why you think jewish people should be any more immune than the rest of us... :(
      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
    13. Re:Interesting story... by rootpassbird · · Score: 1

      And re-arranged those damn flags almost every day afterward. I guess at least one of the flipflop decisions was due to elections or change of govt in one of those countries...

      --
      Hackers have long memories. It works both ways.
    14. Re:Interesting story... by phozz+bare · · Score: 4, Informative

      Dotan, You will find Israel, along with other "erased" countries such as France, Germany and the United States, all hidden under the "Industrial Countries" category. You will also notice that these other countries have a brief "at a glance" page not significantly different from Israel's.

      Do you really think Israel's children are in a situation where they require the assistance of UNICEF?

    15. Re:Interesting story... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      someone forgot to add their country to some (noncomprehensive) list

      no, it's worse than that; read the article comments. They themselves chose a payments system which doesn't work for Israel (and Russia e.g.) due to the "high level of fraud" in payments from those countries. The open source code they are compaining about has the standard ISO country codes including Israel and even has the name manipulated in way which is more likely than not to be pro-Israeli ("Occupied Palestinian Territory", the UN official name, is changed to Palestine).

    16. Re:Interesting story... by zach_d · · Score: 1

      seconded, come on, this is funny.

    17. Re:Interesting story... by zeptobyte · · Score: 0

      He said geographical data. I don't think even the US government is going to lie about WHERE a country is.

    18. Re:Interesting story... by V!NCENT · · Score: 1

      You meant discrimination. The people of Israel are not a different race.

      --
      Here be signatures
    19. Re:Interesting story... by KameronKilchrist · · Score: 1

      The only real problem is that the software included "Palestine" which isn't a country. Israel _had been_ present on the list, until it was removed for "fraud" with the likes of Nigeria and Indonesia. Basically, a number of errors tragically culminating in pissing off a small but powerful country.

    20. Re:Interesting story... by dotancohen · · Score: 1

      Thanks, Phozz. However, you will notice that one can click on the European part of the map and on the resulting page appear France and Germany. One could also click on the N.American part of the map and on the resulting page appears the United States. However, when clicking on the Middle Eastern part of the map, Israel does not appear on the resulting page.

      Maybe they should reconfigure the image map to have Israel point to the page on which she appears.

      Do you really think Israel's children are in a situation where they require the assistance of UNICEF? Are French, German, or United Statesian children in a situation where they require the assistance of UNICEF?
      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    21. Re:Interesting story... by pm_rat_poison · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They can (and have) alter the borders of countries. For example, they can place a "contested" territory according to their whim and not according to the UN.

    22. Re:Interesting story... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      You don't like that the store down the road discriminates against non-whites? Well then, you can just go and open your own store, and everybody's happy!

    23. Re:Interesting story... by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Interesting
      As a southern man let me say that there is a BIG difference between Jim Crow and this. With Jim Crow everywhere you went you were discriminated against...there was NO choices in many small towns. No place to eat,no hotels,etc. This is someone being given a gift and then complaining about the color when there are a thousand stores offering different versions of that gift,some even for free,while the gift giver has even gone to the trouble of giving them the plans so if it doesn't suit them they can make their own.


      And lets be honest about this: this is a company who has contributed NOTHING to the author for his time or effort and then has the gall to not only complain about his output,but smear all those like him who are nice enough to offer their software to us in a manner that allows to customize it to our tastes,with that "perils of open source" crap. I repeat this is just like those greedy lazy companies that sponge off the GPL for the software for their products while having a fit that they should Deity forbid have to give back. The only reason I am not nastier in my disgust towards them is I had the good fortune to see the positive side of open source this very night.


      A customer of mine for whom I have been doing a lot of work recently and have had the good fortune to strike up a friendship with is an amateur astronomer. He also does a little consulting work on the side with the local college and has struck up a friendship with the rocketry and astronomy clubs,who like to pick his brain since he is a retired NASA engineer(he used to help design the full scale mock ups and did a lot of TTL and CMOS work for them in Houston. It was way cool to hold some of the original plans for the shuttle in my hands.). As we all know college is expensive and since the astronomy club is considered a "hobbyist" club they don't get the really cheap software provided by the college. I try to keep an eye out for good free open source software I think my customers would like and recently came across Stellarium which compares in features to the over $500 software that the teacher that hosts the astronomy club uses. After David showed them the other day what Stellarium could do and told them that I would be out there with him tonight to check out his telescope....well it was kind of funny actually. I walk out there and there is a line of college kids with their laptops hoping I would give them "that really cool software that David uses". So under a starry sky we had a little Stellarium install fest with me setting up the machines(mostly Windows and one Mac and one EEE) while David set the positioning.


      You see IMHO it is moments like THAT that make Free Open Source software great,not some company whining that the software they got for free doesn't do exactly what they want. I read TFA BTW. Did you notice what they did when they had a problem? Did they donate some money to the developers? Maybe paid them a little money in return for customizing the software to their needs? Nope they just bitched and whined and smeared all open source with their little FUD article. At least the college kids who I helped out are grateful and are talking about donating a little money or time or at the very least writing them an email to thank them for their wonderful gift.


      But it never ceases to amaze me how these companies think because they get something for free they can act like it is shit. I repeat: fork it or use one of the myriad of other pieces of software out their that better suits your needs. But don't bother whining when you can't even send a couple of bucks to the developers to get it customized to your needs. They are NOT your free employees so don't expect them to jump through your hoops when you give absolutely nothing in return. And as always this is my 02c,YMMV

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    24. Re:Interesting story... by Haeleth · · Score: 3, Informative

      However, you will notice that one can click on the European part of the map and on the resulting page appear France and Germany.
      And also the United States, and Israel, and Japan, and South Korea. Japan and South Korea do not, however, appear when you click on the link marked "East Asia and the Pacific". OMG! UNICEF is claiming that Japan is in Europe, not East Asia! CONSPIRACY!

      Maybe they should reconfigure the image map to have Israel point to the page on which she appears.

      Oh, please. Look at the size of the map! There is no way they could make Israel clickable -- it would be, what, a single pixel wide at best?

      Seriously, get some perspective here. You are totally overreacting to a non-issue. Information on Israel is easy to find simply by using the alphabetical list of countries that is prominently located directly below the map, and is what most people are likely to use if they are looking for a specific country by name. And, back on UNICEF's front page, you will observe on the far right a block of flags showing countries involved with UNICEF. You will observe the flag of Israel among them, exactly the same size as all the others, in alphabetical order as you'd expect.

      There is no global anti-Semitic conspiracy at work in UNICEF.

    25. Re:Interesting story... by Haeleth · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hey, it gets better. Look at their map -- Cuba doesn't appear on it at all! What sinister motive is driving UNICEF to deny the existence of an entire island? I bet it's because that's where Guantanamo Bay is located! Yes, it all makes sense now...

    26. Re:Interesting story... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They consider themselves to be just that?

    27. Re:Interesting story... by MACC · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The inital list was "feature" complete.

      Israel, Egypt, Turkey, Russia and a couple of other countries were ommited via the credit card processor.
      ( professedly due to exessive fraud.)

      The person from israel who could not donate
      found instant and easy issue with Palestine
      being included.

      The author blew it up for clicks or a donation
      from Bill of Borg.

      End of story.

      G!
      MACC

    28. Re:Interesting story... by MACC · · Score: 2, Insightful


        Are French, German, or United Statesian children in a situation where they require the assistance of UNICEF?

      Well, for the US: the high underage pregnancy numbers would indicate so. ( about 20fold compared to OldEurope )

      G!
      MACC

    29. Re:Interesting story... by Cow+Jones · · Score: 1

      Anger is not a good reaction to geographical slips like that. There is no issue as long as major sites and news sources like CNN have their geography right. And they always do.

      --

      Ah, arrogance and stupidity, all in the same package. How efficient of you. -- Londo Mollari
    30. Re:Interesting story... by EsbenMoseHansen · · Score: 1

      I pointed out that this isn't just any omission and addition. When you omit Israel and add Palestine (which is not even recognized as a country by the United Nations) to a country drop-down menu, you seem to be making a very loaded political statement. Ugh, this is not a story. Not the least because the country list (iso 3166) includes "PALESTINIAN TERRITORY, OCCUPIED, PS". So it could very well simply be an error.
      --
      Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful.
    31. Re:Interesting story... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      When I was at university exactly that happened - they laid out the stalls of the clubs & soicieties at the freshers' day in alphabetical order. This was when the first gulf war was still ongoing...

      I suppose that's what happens when you let sociologists run things.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    32. Re:Interesting story... by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 1

      Who cares if they're pissed off? They're still going to attack the world with thought control and military aggression either way. Fuck em.

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    33. Re:Interesting story... by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      " ... not sure to classify it as FUD ... "
      The story claims that the problem is Open Source because some FOSS software was involved. It completely ignores the fact that this could have as easily happened with proprietary software, and fails to accurately place the blame where it belongs: on the Website designers.
      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    34. Re:Interesting story... by gbutler69 · · Score: 1

      It would've been better to insist on alphabetical order and anyone who protested would be free to boycot. That is the way things like this MUST be handled in a civilized world. Cowtowing like this is complete useless crap. People who complain about this should be told fo FUCK OFF!

      --
      Over-the-top Response Guy! Giving "Over-the-Top Responses" since 1970.
    35. Re:Interesting story... by dotancohen · · Score: 1

      However, you will notice that one can click on the European part of the map and on the resulting page appear France and Germany.
      And also the United States, and Israel, and Japan, and South Korea. Japan and South Korea do not, however, appear when you click on the link marked "East Asia and the Pacific". OMG! UNICEF is claiming that Japan is in Europe, not East Asia! CONSPIRACY! The fact that Japan and South Korea do not appear under East Asia is an obvious bug and should be corrected. At least when mousing over Japan and South Korea, the correct page is rendered.

      Maybe they should reconfigure the image map to have Israel point to the page on which she appears.

      Oh, please. Look at the size of the map! There is no way they could make Israel clickable -- it would be, what, a single pixel wide at best?

      Yes, that is all we have. It is very valuable to us, especially when all our neighbors are trying to wipe us off that pixel.

      Seriously, get some perspective here. You are totally overreacting to a non-issue. Information on Israel is easy to find simply by using the alphabetical list of countries that is prominently located directly below the map, and is what most people are likely to use if they are looking for a specific country by name.

      That might be what most people who's native language is the language in which the page is written. For me, it is easier to go to the map. It's right there above the fold, it is not in a foreign language for me, and it physically shows what I need. Why should I start scrolling and searching for a term in a foreign language? You will notice that my English is not _that_ bad, and still I find it easier to go for the map. What do you think people who really don't know English will do?

      And, back on UNICEF's front page, you will observe on the far right a block of flags showing countries involved with UNICEF. You will observe the flag of Israel among them, exactly the same size as all the others, in alphabetical order as you'd expect. There is no global anti-Semitic conspiracy at work in UNICEF. Actually, I didn't get that far on the UNICEF homepage. Thanks for pointing that out. I never though that there was an anti-Semitic consipiracy at work in UNICEF, I was pointing out what the /. article in question was pointing out. There are some rather sensitive subjects that [website||software||sporting event] designers often fail to consider.
      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    36. Re:Interesting story... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would have said why not just have used a globus icon, but I suppose that one is pretty overloaded.

    37. Re:Interesting story... by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      BOTH. It's a loaded political statement that only dumbasses and Israelis have cause to care about.

    38. Re:Interesting story... by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      Do you really think Israel's children are in a situation where they require the assistance of UNICEF? Those in the Negev and the Galili, far away from the rich major cities? YES, Israel in the extremely rural villages can be like a Third-World country. Bastard government.
    39. Re:Interesting story... by JohnVanVliet · · Score: 1

      next have the club install Celestia http://www.shatters.net/celestia/index.html

      --
      "I don't pitch OpenSUSE Linux to my friends, i let Microsoft do it for me
    40. Re:Interesting story... by dangitman · · Score: 1

      Pretending that Israel does not exist is a common practice in the Middle-East.

      Isn't pretending that Palestine doesn't exist also a common practice in the West? In this article, it's even included in scare quotes.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    41. Re:Interesting story... by hairyfeet · · Score: 1
      I want to personally thank you for the link to that wonderful piece of software. As I said in my post I am always on the lookout for free open source software that could make a customers day,and I know those kids in the astronomy club are going to love it. So thanks.


      And if anyone knows of anymore free open source software in the fields of astronomy,rocketry,or robotics,David is going to be introducing me to the guys in those clubs in the following weeks and I will be more than happy to pass any good free open source software along. As I said in my post the astronomy,along with the rocketry and robotics clubs to a lesser extent,are considered "hobbyist" clubs and are not given nearly as much support as the more mainstream clubs. As a bonus many of these guys are also just beginning programming and by showing them the benefits of free open source software I hope to help garner some future coders to help the community grow.


      I have a feeling I'll be having a nice Celestia install fest under a starry sky when they come back from their field trip in a week. So thanks again and I just wanted you to know on behalf of the kids I really appreciate it.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    42. Re:Interesting story... by hostyle · · Score: 1

      The main problem according to the article is that credit cards donations will not be accepted from Israel due to significant high rate of fraud from there. Forking your project won't do anything about that. The attitude in the article itself strikes me as a bit clueless and a little childish. They seem to be trying to attribute blame for this on coders of the projects in question. What it boils down to is some zealots getting all high and mighty, and making barely concealed threats, about something without checking some facts or asking nicely first. Nothing new there though.

      --
      Caesar si viveret, ad remum dareris.
    43. Re:Interesting story... by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      What all three of them?
      Really what percentage of the worlds population lives in none UN member nations?
      Last time I checked it was one or two?
      Vatican City and Taiwan if you count Taiwan as a nation.
      In other words I think this was just made up.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    44. Re:Interesting story... by JohnVanVliet · · Score: 1
      --
      "I don't pitch OpenSUSE Linux to my friends, i let Microsoft do it for me
  2. Not just Open Source by quanticle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't know why EWeek is specifically highlighting open source software. I don't see how closed source software is immune from this concern.

    If you're a nonprofit, you need to look at all the software you're, open-source or not. If you're using software you need to examine it to make sure its not sending a message at odds with your organization.

    --
    We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it
    1. Re:Not just Open Source by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 1

      Closed-source companies are less likely to take the controversial route.

    2. Re:Not just Open Source by HiThere · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It actually makes a bit of sense, as FOSS projects are more likely to make choices that a business might recoil from.

      More likely though, EWeek is just being afraid of the new and different.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    3. Re:Not just Open Source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A closed source company cares about money, not political statements. A closed source company would sit in the business meeting and say "hey! making a stand on this issue will cost us money, let's not do it." Wheras the open source developer doesn't care about the money and will instead decide to make a point.

    4. Re:Not just Open Source by masterzora · · Score: 4, Informative

      If you RTFA, you'll find that the reasoning behind the decision is one you're more likely to find from businesses than from FOSS projects. Israel was among the list of countries from which they were receiving overly many fraudulent donations.

      --
      Remember, open source is free as in speech, not free as in bear.
    5. Re:Not just Open Source by noidentity · · Score: 1

      Yes but everyone expects closed software to have problems, and to have restrictions. Open-source, on the other hand, is a panacea, without flaws, perfection itself! What, it has limitations, a license for God's sake?!? This seems to be the attitude of late by companies just discovering it.

    6. Re:Not just Open Source by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you RTFA, you'll find that the reasoning behind the decision is one you're more likely to find from businesses than from FOSS projects. Israel was among the list of countries from which they were receiving overly many fraudulent donations.

      So an organization that is developing a particular open source -- or even closed source -- software tool might make business decisions that are incompatible with your own?

      Shocking! Shocking, I tell you!

    7. Re:Not just Open Source by masterzora · · Score: 1

      How is he a "fanboi" by this post? He isn't claiming open source to be perfection by any means. He's merely mocking the viewpoint some people have that open source is the answer to everything.

      --
      Remember, open source is free as in speech, not free as in bear.
    8. Re:Not just Open Source by grcumb · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I don't know why EWeek is specifically highlighting open source software. I don't see how closed source software is immune from this concern.

      Indeed. One of the fringe benefits of introducing FOSS to the tiny Pacific Island nation of Vanuatu was when I showed local geeks that they could actually choose the 'Pacific/Efate' time zone setting. (Efate is the island where the capital of Vanuatu is located.)

      Windows and Mac OS X both display either Noumea (capital of New Caledonia to the South) or Honiara (capital of the Solomon Islands to the North). This creates a very real sense that, as far as the Big Boys are concerned, we don't exist. Worse still, Mac OS X thinks that Vanuatu uses Daylight Savings Time, like the adjacent time zone in Australia. My clock has been off by an hour for months now.

      That may not sound like much, but believe me, that tiny little bit of tzdata goodness has created the impression among many local geeks that this software is designed not just for office drones in some distant country, but with them in mind.

      --
      Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
    9. Re:Not just Open Source by rishistar · · Score: 1

      If you RTFA, you'll find that the reasoning behind the decision is one you're more likely to find from businesses than from FOSS projects. Israel was among the list of countries from which they were receiving overly many fraudulent donations.

      Fradulant donations?! Man - it was just someone trying hard to overturn the Shylock stereotype of Jews!

      --
      Professor Karmadillo Songs of Science
    10. Re:Not just Open Source by Quasimodem · · Score: 1

      As always, the devil is in the details.

    11. Re:Not just Open Source by Firehed · · Score: 1

      That may not sound like much, but believe me, that tiny little bit of tzdata goodness has created the impression among many local geeks that this software is designed not just for office drones in some distant country, but with them in mind.

      Let's be honest with ourselves here. It is.

      At least if by "office drones" you meant "basement lurkers" anyways ;)

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    12. Re:Not just Open Source by dwater · · Score: 1

      > If you're a nonprofit, you need to look at all the software you're, open-source or not.

      I am NOT software of ANY kind (including non-profit, open-source, or 'not').

      I'm a human being, dammit!

      "Get your hands off me, you filthy software!".

      --
      Max.
    13. Re:Not just Open Source by LingNoi · · Score: 1

      woosh!

      Only dumb shit here is you! lol

    14. Re:Not just Open Source by XNormal · · Score: 1

      Israel was among the list of countries from which they were receiving overly many fraudulent donations. Nowhere in the article does it say that they were actually getting "fraudulend donations". I

      If the "e-commerce experts" mentioned in the article claim that the rate of fraud in transactions from a certain country is higher for commerce applications I would tend to believe them. But how is thos relevant to donations? Donating with stolen credit cards is not exactly a common criminal activity, for obvious reasons.

      --
      Stop worrying about the risks of nuclear power and start worrying about the risks of not using nuclear power.
    15. Re:Not just Open Source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      My clock has been off by an hour for months now.

      You could always change it to a different time zone (which would show the right time). It's not an idea solution, but it's better than an incorrect clock.
    16. Re:Not just Open Source by Maxmin · · Score: 1

      FOSS projects are more likely to make choices that a business might recoil from.

      Such as?

      This appears to be a dimly expressed echo of that stupid FUD equation, FOSS == communism, and therefore is not compatible with business. I'll tell you now, each and every major corporation I've worked for, beginning in the mid 90s, have *knowingly* employed open source software, and reaped benefit from it.

      And even if the personal politics of individual FOSS project contributors were anti-corporate, anti-capitalism - so what? Give us an example of such a situation where a business's customers pulled a contract or something, based upon the use of FOSS.

      Stop repeating FUD, particularly when it's obvious you haven't thought about what you're repeating.

      --
      O lord, bless this thy holy hand grenade, that with it thou mayest blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy.
    17. Re:Not just Open Source by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but it's not FUD, it's truth.

      People who aren't business executives are more likely to make decisions that business executives find both incomprehensible and repellent. Witness how hard it is for many such to understand the GPL. *I* happen to think that the GPL is a marvelous license, but many business executives don't understand it, possibly because it isn't motivated by greed. Possibly because they don't understand the basic level of disorganization in FOSS. (I.e., projects are organized, or try to be. The community isn't and doesn't want to be.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    18. Re:Not just Open Source by Maxmin · · Score: 1

      People who aren't business executives are more likely to make decisions that business executives find both incomprehensible and repellent.

      Perhaps, but...

      Witness how hard it is for many such to understand the GPL... but many business executives don't understand it, possibly because it isn't motivated by greed.

      Most business executives don't need to understand the GPL, because their employees are simply end-users of FOSS, probably unbeknownst to them. Maybe they've run a datacenter, and are peripherally aware of the software it runs ("That's the Linux thing, isn't it? Supposed to be cheaper?")

      But what if you want a warranty with that? Contract for support with a support house or consulting group, which is what big corporations do when buying software-with-services, they tie it to an SLA.

      Possibly because they don't understand the basic level of disorganization in FOSS. (I.e., projects are organized, or try to be. The community isn't and doesn't want to be.)

      This I kind of agree with, although there are many loose affiliations and some professionalized associations within the community. In one sense, FOSS is just another market, defined by the "free and open" attributes, rather than "pay and proprietary." What executives are used to, and what FOSS provides, are sometimes mutually exclusive when it comes to support, but not always.

      That's where companies like Redhat try to bridge the gap, producing FOSSy products and offering support contracts, SLAs, etc.

      But I think this might miss your point - are you talking about software company executives?

      --
      O lord, bless this thy holy hand grenade, that with it thou mayest blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy.
    19. Re:Not just Open Source by dangitman · · Score: 1

      How do they decide? What's uncontroversial to one group, is highly controversial to another. In issues like this, how is it at all possible to take a non-controversial route?

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
  3. Reminds me of Cosovo/Kosovo by joocemann · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Seems like people will always look for reasons to hate each other. Can't just make a suggestion; this is something we can HATE over!

  4. So What? by Watson+Ladd · · Score: 1

    They see a huge number of bogus transactions from one country, so they ban it. It's perfectly fine if you want to avoid getting burned.

    --
    Inventions have long since reached their limit, and I see no hope for further development.-- Frontinus, 1st cent. AD
    1. Re:So What? by Vectronic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not really, its a decent immediate decision for a temporary duration (over the weekend maybe), but what they should have done is made the sign-up/donation system to better to weed out bogus donations.

      Just because Israel may not support them as much as a different country, it may not mean that the per-capita support wasn't equal.

      I'm sure they get a lot of bogus donations from the US, UK, etc, but they also get a lot of legitimate ones as well. So they were just willing to sacrifice Israel as a whole, and thus the bogus, as well as the legitimate donations.

      So yeah, I agree, "so what" but I don't think it was the right decision from either a profit, or a beneficial to the cause perspective.

    2. Re:So What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...but what they should have done is made the sign-up/donation system to better to weed out bogus donations.
      Assuming they have a benefit/profit motive, they should only have done this if it was cost-effective. Show me your data.

      ...it may not mean that the per-capita support wasn't equal. Weasel word.

      ...I don't think it was the right decision from ... a profit ... perspective. What is the basis for this conclusion? More to the point, how can you demonstrate ignorance of exactly how much support they can expect to receive from Israel (see weasel word above) and then reach this conclusion?
  5. You mean that clicking "Accept Defaults" is risky? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This particular anecdote is rather punchy, as stories of the "OMG if I say something about geography on te7 interwebs someone willz hate me!!!111" variety generally are; but the connection with open source software seems deeply tenuous and circumstantial.

    I, for one, am shocked, shocked that a program might not have sane defaults for every situation, particularly if "sane" is not terribly well defined.
    As for the payment processing thing, various sorts of black holing of countries based on their dubious reputations is not an "open source" thing, or a "closed source" thing or, for that matter, anything to do with code at all. It is wholly a matter of CYA and cost/benefit calculations, no matter what software the vendor doing the deciding is running. An interesting anecdote about the complexity of doing stuff that seems simple; but barely source related at all.

  6. Re:OMG! OSS means people can make a statement by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 1, Insightful

    OSS means people can make a statement The problem is that the developer made a statement that the non-profit didn't want to make, and the non-profit didn't notice beforehand.
  7. Nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    First of all:
    This is could not have happened by using closed source software...... mhhh why?

    2nd:
    Quote frem TFA: "anti-Semitism", "blablabla"
    ->
    You all know that israel is a !STATE! with inhabitants of all colours and creeds. Not limited to guys with semitic ancestry, right? Furthermore, what are most of the palestinians (since they speak Arabian) referred to?

    I get mad when I here bullshit of this kind.

    1. Re:Nonsense by mrbluze · · Score: 1

      Furthermore, what are most of the palestinians (since they speak Arabian) referred to? Mostly they're not referred to.

      I get mad when I here bullshit of this kind. I get mad when I read such terrible spelling. But apart from that you make some valid points.
      --
      Do it yourself, because no one else will do it yourself. [beta blockade 10-17 Feb]
    2. Re:Nonsense by dodecalogue · · Score: 1

      Furthermore, what are most of the palestinians (since they speak Arabian) referred to? People who speak any equestrian dialects are generally referred to as 'troubled'.
  8. Have to wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    According to Agape's developer, Chris Chan, Causes uses code from a Ruby on Rails API to build its country name drop-down. The form in RoR's API indeed includes "Palestinian Territory, Occupied," which was then shortened to "Palestine."
    One has to wonder why they included that, yet fail to include a bunch of equally valid "countries", such as Sealand, Hutt River, Tierra del Mar, and Ponderosa.
  9. Fuck em by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    My wife is in charge of online donations for a large international relief agency, and she recently received a strongly worded e-mail from the leader of a pro-Israeli group accusing her organization of anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism, and threatening to spread the word among potential Jewish contributors--not a good thing.

    I'd be tempted to tell them to go away on principle, until they can be a little more polite. This group should be ignored until they start to act rationally, why can't they politely ask for -- what is obviously a mistake -- to be rectified?

    If this is how pro-Israeli interests work. It tells us a lot about their occupation of Gaza and attitude to groups outside their own.

    Long story short: get back to the kids table, come back when you've got the maturity to treat other human beings as equals.

    1. Re:Fuck em by FishWithAHammer · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Is it a mistake?

      I doubt it was a mistake on the part of the developer. The consumer, yes--but not the developer.

      Their stance is reasonable.

      --
      "You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
    2. Re:Fuck em by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Is it a mistake?

      The courteous way to deal with people is to assume that they've made an honest mistake before throwing around conspiracy theories and wild accusations of rascism and religious hatred.

      Their stance is reasonable.

      What their stance: that a product should be boycotted and that an organisation must be anti-Semite and anti-Zionism, based on a country options drop-down box is reasonable?

      Someone who isn't acting like an arrogant, spoilt child would simply point-out the error and ask that it be fixed. Then if nothing happens, perhaps send a stronger letter. Sending a threatening flame-mail, right off the bat, makes this group look like a bunch of arseholes (in my opinion).

      They look even more antagonistic and stupid when the reason for the ommission of Israel is taken into account. It is due to being on an online fraud black list:

      Due to high rates of fraud, donations to U.S. non-profits are not accepted for cardholders from the following countries: Ukraine, Indonesia, Yugoslavia, Lithuania, Egypt, Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey, Russia, Pakistan, Malaysia, Israel, Nigeria and Ghana. We apologize for any inconvenience, and are working hard to support donations from more of these countries.
    3. Re:Fuck em by FishWithAHammer · · Score: 0, Troll

      I'm calling bullshit. Every e-commerce retailer I've ever gone to that sells outside the US has Israel listed. Every e-commerce retailer I've ever gone to don't have Palestine, which is not a country, on their list.

      This is politically motivated; the blame lies primarily upon whatever retard working on RoR put Palestine in the list of countries, but the blame lies as well on the people who didn't proof it.

      --
      "You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
    4. Re:Fuck em by vandan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This group should be ignored until they start to act rationally, why can't they politely ask for -- what is obviously a mistake -- to be rectified?

      That's not how the Zionist lobby operates. They don't rely on courteous behaviour and goodwill. They bully people into submission by crying 'anti-semite!' and threatening to 'go and tell the whole Jewish community'.
    5. Re:Fuck em by rootpassbird · · Score: 1

      +5, Insightful

      --
      Hackers have long memories. It works both ways.
    6. Re:Fuck em by Repossessed · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So basically, if I get you right, you're pissed because they left Israel out. But also because they are not denying the existence of Palestine?

      --
      Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite (TM)
    7. Re:Fuck em by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So... would these retailers all be exclusively based in the US? They are probably not adhering to the ISO 3166-1 standard.

    8. Re:Fuck em by pjt33 · · Score: 2, Informative

      They bully people into submission by crying 'anti-semite!' Neatly glossing over the fact that the Palestinians are also Semites. Isn't it ironic?
    9. Re:Fuck em by badran · · Score: 1, Informative

      Search for Palestine on this page:
      http://www.iso.org/iso/iso-3166-1_decoding_table

    10. Re:Fuck em by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      Palestine is a country, you dumbass. It's not a sovereign country, in that it is under the control of another country, but places don't stop being countries because of that. (Iraq, for example, continued to be a country during the invasion.)

      If Palestine isn't a country I have to wonder who the hell signed the Oslo accords along with Israel?

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    11. Re:Fuck em by dangitman · · Score: 1

      Not really ironic, just fucking depressing.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    12. Re:Fuck em by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the most part, in this whole debate, it seems like the people accusing others of being Zionist are more often than not, projecting at least the attitude of being an anti-Semite. It seems like a great way to use any language you want with "Zionist", because you can't with Jews.

  10. Re:Huh? by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 0, Troll

    I suppose you think Taiwan is a country too? I have never heard of a country called "Taiwan" before. The only Taiwan I know of is an island governed by the Republic of China
  11. Re:Huh? by mrbluze · · Score: 1

    Israel isn't a country. Palestine is. I suppose you think Taiwan is a country too? You obviously read too much and watch too little television.
    --
    Do it yourself, because no one else will do it yourself. [beta blockade 10-17 Feb]
  12. Err.... what? by Morkano · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Errr... what does this have to do with anything being open source? I don't think a country not being included in a drop down is really that dependent on developer methodologies.

    This whole thing is pure FUD.

    --
    Victory or awesome!
  13. Bullshit by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

    This has nothing to do with Open Source. It didn't occur to these doofuses that it just might be a good idea to systematically _test_ their Web site?

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    1. Re:Bullshit by rhinokitty · · Score: 1

      Mod up. This mistake has nothing to do with open source, and the story makes no logical attempt to link the problem to open source. Also, as said above, because it is open source, you can fix it without asking anyone, just do it yourself. Otherwise you would have had to do it yourself anyway, or get the company to fix it (good luck).

  14. Possibly. by khasim · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Closed-source companies are less likely to take the controversial route.
    It would depend upon how large the closed-source company was.

    If it was one guy selling the software he wrote, you'd probably see the same implementations of his political views (provided that there was a way to do so).

    With Open Source, the one guy can write his political opinions into his code ... which get grabbed and used in a different project ... which ends up in a third project ... etc.

    And unless you have a similar political bent, you'd never notice it. At least until someone who did have such a bent brought it to your attention.

    1. Re:Possibly. by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 1

      And unless you have a similar political bent... Or the opposite one.
    2. Re:Possibly. by drooling-dog · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And unless you have a similar political bent, you'd never notice it. At least until someone who did have such a bent brought it to your attention. Of course if it's FOSS you could fix the problem right away, with or without the cooperation of the original developer(s)...
    3. Re:Possibly. by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      One guy selling proprietary software won't impose political views, because he doesn't want angry former-customers and possible lawsuits. The open source contributor can be anonymous, and anonymity makes people more willing to do such things.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    4. Re:Possibly. by blincoln · · Score: 3, Informative

      It would depend upon how large the closed-source company was.

      What, like how Executive Software/Diskeeper refuses to sell their product or provide support to pharmaceutical companies because their CEO is a Scientologist?

      That's the Diskeeper which is included in Windows in a reduced form as the defragmentation utility, in case you're not familiar with how big its market is.

      --
      "...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
    5. Re:Possibly. by MACC · · Score: 1

      the original list was OK.
      The credit card processor "corrected" the list.
      about a dozen countries not accepted due to
      excessive fraud.

      G!
      MACC

  15. Re:You mean that clicking "Accept Defaults" is ris by Mesa+MIke · · Score: 1, Funny

    > I, for one, am shocked, shocked that a program
    > might not have sane defaults for every situation ...

    An I am shocked, shocked that open source software might come attached to a socio-political agenda...

  16. OSS not the real problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But who's the twit that approved the setup without checking that all countries that are important to them could place transactions? Sounds more like a case of poor planning and verification.

  17. so fix it already! by spikedvodka · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's Open Source... How hard can that be! I mean really. it might be 2 lines of code more, or (if done right) just another database entry.

    It isn't rocket surgery people. that's the strength of OSS, you *can* fix it without having to beg for a fix from your vendor!

    --
    I will not give in to the terrorists. I will not become fearful.
    1. Re:so fix it already! by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The lesson to be learned here isn't that FOSS is bad, but that people using FOSS should look at what they are using a little more closely before the public gets to interact with it.

    2. Re:so fix it already! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's nothing to be fixed. 'Palestine' is correct.

      Or are you, contrary to your sig, giving in and being fearful of Israeli terrorism?

    3. Re:so fix it already! by blhack · · Score: 1

      t isn't rocket surgery people. /me raises glass, toasts //me then uses glass to beat you over the head and steal your kickass phrase.
      --
      NewslilySocial News. No lolcats allowed.
    4. Re:so fix it already! by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Or if it's osCommerce, it'll require a total rebuild from the ground-up, taking millions of innocent lives in the process :)

    5. Re:so fix it already! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, possibly, that any perceived slight, however accidental, upon Israel or the Jewish people will be attacked from all sides by Zionist apologisers yelling the trigger phrase 'anti-Semitic'.
      If this *is* deliberate, more power to them for having the stones to refuse to accept anything from Israel. I refuse to buy anything that was made in Israel, not through some hatred of its people but distaste for their government and its actions, and I couldn't blame anyone else for reacting the same way.

    6. Re:so fix it already! by badran · · Score: 0

      So we are left with Brain Science.

    7. Re:so fix it already! by NNKK · · Score: 1

      "The lesson to be learned here isn't that FOSS is bad, but that people using software written by a third party should look at what they are using a little more closely before the public gets to interact with it."

      Fixed for you.

    8. Re:so fix it already! by eugene_roux · · Score: 1

      The lesson to be learned here isn't that FOSS is bad, but that people using FOSS should look at what they are using a little more closely before the public gets to interact with it.

      Close... But more like:

      ...but that people using any software should look at what they are using a little more closely before the public gets to interact with it.

      There... Fixed.

      --
      Part Time Philosopher, Oft Times Romantic, Full Time Unix Geek
  18. Re:You mean that clicking "Accept Defaults" is ris by masterzora · · Score: 2, Informative

    And I am shocked, shocked that you didn't RTFA, which made it pretty clear that this software came attached with a "we don't want fraudulent donations" agenda.

    --
    Remember, open source is free as in speech, not free as in bear.
  19. Overreacting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    If my reading of the article is right, it goes something like this:

    There's a Ruby API that lists countries and regions. One of these is "Palestinian Territory -- Occupied". Someone decided to shorten this to "Palestine".

    Meanwhile, someone at Facebook decided that a certain list of countries contains high risk of credit card fraud. One of those countries is Israel. So they won't take your credit card if you live there, probably because they've run into fraudsters operating in that country and they don't want to risk it. Just like they won't take a credit card from Nigeria, to name one.

    So, someone sees this and concludes the worst. The Facebook application is anti-semitic. Overreact much?

    Honestly, I think people are a bit too touchy about Israel/Palestine. Sure, it's a touchy subject, but a simple set of unrelated mistakes and people assume you're part of a vast conspiracy to destroy their nation? I think we as a society owe it to ourselves to be more careful about such accusations, and not simply react.

    1. Re:Overreacting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hanlon's razor:

      Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

      Version 2:
      Never assume malice when stupidity will suffice.

      Comment: sometimes a chain of reasonable decisions or actions results in an unreasonable result. In this situation it may be that people acting independently and unaware of others actions created the situation.

      How about:
      Never assume malice when complexity may be to blame. (My version).

    2. Re:Overreacting by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      My question is how the Palestinians are paying credit-card donations...

  20. Worst summary ever by Vexorian · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Quite substandard for slashdot (and that's quite an statement).

    Really, what article is the summary about? I was afraid that after reading all that gibberish it could lead me to a rick roll...

    However, it turned out that this was not intentional, but the result of a set of unrelated circumstances that are the direct result of using open source and Web 2.0 frameworks carelesslytools carelessly and do ZERO TESTING.
    So, even assuming the story is real, quite it could actually not be real, it has nothing to do with open source, I'll tag it FUD, thanks.
    --

    Copyright infringement is "piracy" in the same way DRM is "consumer rape"
  21. Competing mythologies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Israel, Palestine. A magic sea versus a flying horse? What happened to physics and math?

  22. Web 2.0 by kaos07 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Wtf does this have to do with the crap that is "Web 2.0"? When has giving a donation been considering "Web 2.0"? Online donations have been around since forever. Well I guess everything else that is labelled "Web 2.0" such as social networking and user generated content has been around forever as well, so from that stupid and pointless viewpoint I guess it would be "Web 2.0". Did Kdawson post this story?

  23. Re:You mean that clicking "Accept Defaults" is ris by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You must be new here. Nobody RTFAs ... like evAr [sic]. The articles are just conversation starters.

    p.s. First post.

  24. read the docs before using something by story645 · · Score: 1

    The drop down menu isn't even testing-it's something they should have done before they even considered using the software. (It's probably in some of the documentation-'specially if the reason for it is fraud.) Part of figuring out if it's the right tool for the job and all that. Though even if they did implement it, looking at the drop down menu isn't testing-it's just learning the damn software. You should know what options users have, just 'cause it may be important for a variety of things.

    --
    open source modern art: laser taggi
    1. Re:read the docs before using something by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 1

      I thought everyone knew open source projects didn't have documentation!

      (The above is a joke, albeit one with a grain of truth to it.)

    2. Re:read the docs before using something by story645 · · Score: 1

      Why does code need documentation? Of course any half decent programmer should be able to understand other peoples code or just use it as a black box-and then why should documentation matter? (And yes, I've actually encountered this attitude-though it came from a student working on a project, not a FOSS guy.)

      I've seen too many open source projects that try to pass off cleaned up (by a doc generating program) code as their documentation. I'm working on somethingb where the open source project we're using (playerstage) is so badly documented we're thrilled when a new wiki page gets added.

      --
      open source modern art: laser taggi
  25. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Yeah, that crap really cheeses me off. Taiwan? Geeze. It gets worse... I keep hearing these Americans talking about Germany, Greece, Japan and Spain, but I've never heard of one of these places. After some intensive research, I found out these fucking idiots were gibbering about Deutschland, Hellas, Nihon and España.

    Idiots. Idiots.

  26. Can't understand where is the problem by gmuslera · · Score: 3, Insightful

    neither why is open source per se or social networking potential culprits there.

    - Palestine appearing in the countries list because is a (valid?) short form of "Palestinian Territory, Occupied". If isnt valid is not Web 2.0 or open source fault, was a developer decision that could had been taken in any part of the chain (i agree that the chain in this particular case is pretty long).

    - Israel not listed because, as with other 14 countries, their IP space is very used by fraudsters. Maybe with spam is easier to understand... If Israel were responsible for 80% of world spam, and because of that becomes filtered from a lots of mail servers (lots of countries used to be widely filtered because of spam coming from them), that would be anti-semitism of those servers admins? Maybe a bit worse, if an israeli ISP a lot of spam is being sent, and it ends a rbl (if behaves badly that way, will end in most), would be antisemitism too?

    Is a nice spin to blame web 2.0 and open source for things that dont implies them to happen. Next big hurricane, if being tracked by web 2.0 sites and with open source software, will be blamed to them too.

    1. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by bsDaemon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, that would be anti-semitism by the new definition.

      An anti-semite used to be someone who hated Jews. Now an anti-semite is someone hated BY Jews. YOu don't need to look much farther past Jimmy Carter to see what I mean.

      Carter, who is hardly a skinhead, was recently lambasted for being an "anti-semite" for suggesting that maybe, just maybe, its not OK to use tanks to fight kids with rocks.

      Apparently, if you don't support the murder of palestinians, you must clearly support the murder of Jews. If you're not 100% pro-israel, then you'll hear the bloody curdling screams of "racist nazi holocaust 911" until you relent.

      There is really no way to win. Sucks, but there it is.

    2. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      An anti-semite used to be someone who hated Jews. Now an anti-semite is someone hated BY Jews. YOu don't need to look much farther past Jimmy Carter to see what I mean.

      Carter, who is hardly a skinhead, was recently lambasted for being an "anti-semite" for suggesting that maybe, just maybe, its not OK to use tanks to fight kids with rocks.

      Absolutely false. Israel doesn't use tanks to fight kids with rocks. Israel uses tanks against fighters well-armed with rifles, machine guns, mortars, rockets and RPGs.

      Carter was criticized by many for suggesting that Israel was akin to Apartheid South Africa. There is no apartheid in Israel.

      Arab & Muslim citizens of Israel can vote, run for office, say anything they want, print anything they want, follow any religion they choose, work in any profession they choose, serve on the supreme court, and sue the government (and sometimes win). Doesn't sound like apartheid to me.

      These are all things that are sadly lacking in most Arab & Muslim countries. Why are Arab & Muslim countries not accused of apartheid?

      In fact, refugees from Sudan try to get to Israel. Isn't that odd? Even more strange, Sudan is actually still at war with Israel. Why would someone voluntarily choose to live in an enemy foreign country under apartheid?

    3. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by vandan · · Score: 2, Informative

      Israel doesn't use tanks to fight kids with rocks.

      Israel uses tanks and bulldozers to demolish Palestinian houses, often with children inside who are too young to throw rocks.

      There is no apartheid in Israel.

      Don't be moronic. Israel is THE definition of an apartheid state. Are Palestinians allowed to vote? No. Are they allowed to travel? No ( sure, then can wait for days to go through 'checkpoints', but in effect, no, they can't travel ). Are Palestinian refugees allowed to return home? No. Are Palestinians treated as equals? Most certainly not.

      Arab & Muslim citizens of Israel can vote, run for office, say anything they want, print anything they want, follow any religion they choose, work in any profession they choose, serve on the supreme court, and sue the government (and sometimes win). Doesn't sound like apartheid to me.

      The problem is that all of that is a lie. I don't know why you Zionists bother spreading this BS - anyone actually interested in the conflict already knows the horrors that you are inflicting upon the Palestinians. The only thing you're doing is further entrenching anti-semitic views, by inflaming anger against you.
    4. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're being anti-semitic for pointing it out

    5. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by belmolis · · Score: 3, Informative

      Israel uses tanks and bulldozers to demolish Palestinian houses, often with children inside who are too young to throw rocks.

      Israel makes every effort to get the inhabitants out. The claim that Israel often demolishes houses with children inside is a lie.

      Arab & Muslim citizens of Israel can vote, run for office, say anything they want, print anything they want, follow any religion they choose, work in any profession they choose, serve on the supreme court, and sue the government (and sometimes win). Doesn't sound like apartheid to me.
      The problem is that all of that is a lie. I don't know why you Zionists bother spreading this BS

      Uh, that would be because it is true. To begin your research, here's the Wikipedia article on the United Arab List, an Israeli Arab political party that currently has three members in the Knesset. There are currently a total of 12 Arab Members of the Knesset. Supreme Court Justice Salim Joubran is an Arab. Elias Nakhleh, an Arab, served four terms in the Knesset, eventually becoming Deputy Speaker. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

    6. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by vandan · · Score: 1

      Israel makes every effort to get the inhabitants out. The claim that Israel often demolishes houses with children inside is a lie.

      Oh please! You 'make every effort to get the inhabitants out' before destroying their homes. And then you wonder why people want to wipe you off the face of the planet! How about NOT bulldozing their homes in the first place? Is that too much to ask?

      To begin your research ... blah ... blah ... blah

      What exactly does that have to do with the fact that I pointed out that you're claims were lies? Changing the topic won't make people forget.
    7. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by belmolis · · Score: 1

      First, note that you have conceded that Israel does not intentionally bulldoze children. Instead of replying to my refutation of your claim, you move to a different issue, namely the reason for demolishing some Palestinian homes in the first place. The homes that are demolished are buildings used by terrorists or buildings illegally constructed.

      Second, if you can't see the relevance of the sources I quoted, that's your problem, not anyone else's. It should be obvious. You claim that it is a lie that Arab citizens of Israel have the same rights as Jewish citizens.I give you examples of Arab political parties, Arab members of the Knesset, an Arab Supreme Court Justice. These show that Arabs do in fact have the political rights that you claim they do not.

    8. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by phozz+bare · · Score: 0

      Don't be moronic. Israel is THE definition of an apartheid state. Are Palestinians allowed to vote? No. Then who exactly voted for Muhammad Abbas? Who voted for the Hamas in Gaza? I'm sure those were the Jews. Yes, those sneaky, evil Jews...

      Are they allowed to travel? No ( sure, then can wait for days to go through 'checkpoints', but in effect, no, they can't travel ). If the Palestinians didn't use their right to travel to transport weapons, munitions and explosives, I can promise you the checkpoints would gradually disappear. Unfortunately each time a checkpoint is removed, yet another suicide belt or other weapon is discovered, proving the need for these checkpoints.

      Are Palestinian refugees allowed to return home? No. There are probably tens, maybe hundreds, of instances in history where a war created refugees which were never allowed home. Why should this conflict be special? You started the war, you lost the war, fucking deal with the consequences and stop whining.

      Are Palestinians treated as equals? Most certainly not. They have their own government, which is supposed to treat them as equals. When the Palestinian government decides it wants to coexist peacefully with Israel, Palestinians will be able to visit Israel or work in it. I'm not sure what else exactly you want. Do you want Palestinians to be able to vote for two Parliaments or what?

      Arab & Muslim citizens of Israel can vote, run for office, say anything they want, print anything they want, follow any religion they choose, work in any profession they choose, serve on the supreme court, and sue the government (and sometimes win). Doesn't sound like apartheid to me.
      The problem is that all of that is a lie. I don't know why you Zionists bother spreading this BS Sorry, all true. Arab citizens of Israel get all the perks of being an Israeli citizen - the right to vote, free world-class health services, generous welfare, etc - all without obligations such as having to serve in the Army. Arabs in Israel are arguably better off than anywhere else in the world, with the possible exception of countries rich in oil, yet they never cease to complain about their condition.

      anyone actually interested in the conflict already knows the horrors that you are inflicting upon the Palestinians. The only thing you're doing is further entrenching anti-semitic views, by inflaming anger against you. I think there is only one side here that is inflicting anything that could be called "horrors". Exploding buses, pizza parlors and discotheques filled with children are "horrors". Blowing up a Passover Seder meal in a hotel is a "horror". Checkpoints, closures and targeted killings of armed terrorist leaders are not my idea of a cup of tea, but they are not "horrors".
    9. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Tusaki · · Score: 1

      Not bulldozing such homes would mean the end of the Rule of Law in this country. /facepalm

      I would say that seeing israeli bulldozers destroying houses in your neighbourhood would make it all the more appealing to young palestinians to 'fight for the cause'. To them, it just confirms that israel is an evil which must be destroyed with whatever means neccessary.

      The only party in the conflict which has the ability to restrain itself is the israeli state. I don't condone the actions by radical palestinians, but I do understand why so many of them pick up their weapons to fight.

    10. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by dave420 · · Score: 1

      "Every effort"? Does making "every effort" to minimise the effects of a horrific act somehow mean said act is OK? There are many, many cases of the IDF killing innocent people, such as Rachel Corrie (the peace activist, sorry, vicious anti-semite terrorist). For not wanting to do it they seem to do it an awful lot.

      Being able to vote and run for office doesn't mean anything when you can't travel to the next town because the checkpoint, for no apparent reason, either never opens or turns you around at the border, regardless if your travel documents (for travelling in your own country) are valid or not. It kind of sucks when the checkpoint is between you and the hospital, or between you and your kids, or between your kids and school. Saying "they can vote so it's cool" is like giving a bunch of people without electricity plasma TVs. They don't have the power to run then, but "hey! they have plasma TVs so they're cool". First things first.

    11. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by LingNoi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, yes, it is. Israel bulldozes homes of suicide bombers (basically the only way to punish a dead man, and discourage imitators - put his family out into the street)
      That's the most disgusting thing I have ever heard. If you can't figure out what's wrong with punishing innocent people then you don't deserve to live on this planet.
    12. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The caveat to that, of course, is that the Palestinians in the occupied territories aren't Israeli citizens.

    13. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by vandan · · Score: 1

      Bulldozing houses is terrorism, and state-sponsored terrorism at that. Also, I have absolutely zero trust in Israelis that claim that they're bulldozing only terrorists. It seems to me that you bulldoze land that you want to build illegal settlements on.

    14. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by vandan · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      First, note that you have conceded that Israel does not intentionally bulldoze children.

      I conceded nothing of the sort. You're confusing me with someone else. I have already addressed this issue in another response.

      I give you examples of Arab political parties, Arab members of the Knesset, an Arab Supreme Court Justice. These show that Arabs do in fact have the political rights that you claim they do not.

      That's ridiculous. Palestinians outnumber Israelis. So why is the Israeli government so anti-Palestinian? The only answer, of course, is that there is no Palestinian representation.
      Also, Israel holds key members of the Palestinian government on gaol. In fact, Israel holds thousands of political prisoners from various neighboring countries. It even holds some Jews prisoner. Remember that brave man who blew the whistle on your weapons-of-mass-destruction program? He was thrown in gaol for telling the trust and branded a traitor. If MY country was building weapons of mass destruction, I would WANT someone to blow the whistle. You guys really are all brainwashed, aren't you? Fucking fundamentalists ...
    15. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      still, the way that the settlers beat up palestinian farmers so they can steal their land leaves a nasty taste in one's mouth.

    16. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because Wikipedia can't be edited by anyone at all, including pro- or anti-Zionist lobby groups...
      Sorry, but I'd just about trust Wikipedia enough to follow a recipe for cake; anything more contentious than that is edit-bombed frequently by apologists and crackpots.
      Israel have been shown to have a scummy, nasty approach to dealing with their neighbouring countries, and if you think it's OK to deny that problem exists, knock yourself out. Personally, I think the UN should enact sanctions against them for that blasted wall alone, much less the new occupations of Palestinian land that seem to occur every other week.

    17. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      I think there is only one side here that is inflicting anything that could be called "horrors". Exploding buses, pizza parlors and discotheques filled with children are "horrors". Blowing up a Passover Seder meal in a hotel is a "horror". Checkpoints, closures and targeted killings of armed terrorist leaders are not my idea of a cup of tea, but they are not "horrors". How about collective punishment by cutting off water and power supplies to entire populations?
    18. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by makomk · · Score: 1

      Then who exactly voted for Muhammad Abbas? Who voted for the Hamas in Gaza? I'm sure those were the Jews. Yes, those sneaky, evil Jews...

      Sure, technically they can vote - for a "government" that has little to no power, except what it can strong-arm for itself via the use of militias. In terms of the actual government that controls their country, no vote whatsoever. (Actually, one thing that really scares some of the the Israelis is that one day, the Palestinians will stop asking for independence and start asking for a vote; this is unlikely to happen.)

      If the Palestinians didn't use their right to travel to transport weapons, munitions and explosives, I can promise you the checkpoints would gradually disappear. Unfortunately each time a checkpoint is removed, yet another suicide belt or other weapon is discovered, proving the need for these checkpoints.

      I wouldn't bet on it. In any case, the way the Israeli government uses checkpoint closures isn't helping matters.

      There are probably tens, maybe hundreds, of instances in history where a war created refugees which were never allowed home. Why should this conflict be special? You started the war, you lost the war, fucking deal with the consequences and stop whining.

      I suggest you check your history. The war - the original one, at least - was started by the Zionist movement. They used mass immigration to try and turn Palestine into a Jewish state, followed by by terrorist tactics to kick out the British mandate. Then the war started. There's fairly widespread suspicion that the Zionist/Israeli side of the civil war deliberately tried to force out the Arabs in an attempt at ethnic cleansing; IIRC, it's even reasonably well-founded. This is why the refugees are so insistent on wanting to return home.

      They have their own government, which is supposed to treat them as equals. When the Palestinian government decides it wants to coexist peacefully with Israel, Palestinians will be able to visit Israel or work in it. I'm not sure what else exactly you want. Do you want Palestinians to be able to vote for two Parliaments or what?

      In practice, their government doesn't control Palestine (except for the minor things) - the Israeli government does. They have effective control over housing policy, policing, partially over power and water, a veto (via assasination or arrest) over the choice of politicians, etc.

      Sorry, all true. Arab citizens of Israel get all the perks of being an Israeli citizen - the right to vote, free world-class health services, generous welfare, etc - all without obligations such as having to serve in the Army. Arabs in Israel are arguably better off than anywhere else in the world, with the possible exception of countries rich in oil, yet they never cease to complain about their condition.

      ...and all they have to put up with is widespread racism and discrimination (particularly in housing, lots of which is Jewish-only) together with no political influence. Oh, and some particularly nasty government tactics to stop them setting up home in Jerusalem or even force them out of their existing homes there in order to make it as Jewish as possible.

      Exploding buses, pizza parlors and discotheques filled with children are "horrors". Blowing up a Passover Seder meal in a hotel is a "horror". Checkpoints, closures and targeted killings of armed terrorist leaders are not my idea of a cup of tea, but they are not "horrors".

      Admittedly, the Israeli side mostly gave up on terrorist tactics once they won and got an army, but that's not saying much. The checkpoint closures leave people without essential supplies or income and strand people on the wrong side. The targeted killings aren't and tend to kill random passers-by even when they do

    19. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Mauzl · · Score: 1

      Apparently, if you don't support the murder of palestinians, you must clearly support the murder of Jews. If you're not 100% pro-israel, then you'll hear the bloody curdling screams of "racist nazi holocaust 911" until you relent.

      There is really no way to win. Sucks, but there it is.

      Personally I think this attitude is the leading cause of anti-semitism in this day and age. People don't like to be pidgeonholed, and when they do some of them pidgeonhole back...
    20. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Israel uses tanks and bulldozers to demolish Palestinian houses, often with children inside who are too young to throw rocks.

      Israel makes every effort to get the inhabitants out. The claim that Israel often demolishes houses with children inside is a lie.

      Oh, well, that's OK then. How nice of them to "make every effort to get the inhabitants out" before demolishing someone's home. Obviously, any inhabitants who resist the effort to get them out, are utilizing the evil asymmetrical warfare technique of co-opting the occupier's victimhood status by refusing to leave, thereby forcing those poor occupiers to kill them in the process of demolishing their home.

      No wonder there's so much parania. With attitudes and behaviors like this, there surely will be people out to get you.

    21. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by phozz+bare · · Score: 1

      How about collective punishment by cutting off water and power supplies to entire populations? When your country becomes entangled in a situation in which it is supplying power and water to a hostile territory that uses your power and water to manufacture rockets that kill your brethren - you may speak.
    22. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      Actually, in a lot of cases neither of that is true - there are documented cases where Israeli troops have destroyed community irrigation and drinking water wells, and also in June 2006 Israel destroyed the Al Nusirat power station. Neither of which are 'yours'.

      But thats OK, when it comes to Israel and the Palestinian Occupied Territories, its perfectly acceptable to punish 1.5 million people in Gaza for the actions of a few.

    23. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Israel makes every effort to get the inhabitants out."

      Well, that's very big of them...

    24. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats not true. Why are they bulldozing the houses in the first place? And why are they using kids in playgrounds as target practice? Isreal will be destroyed.

    25. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are over 1 million of Israeli citizens who are muslim arabs and have full rights (ie, vote). If you are talking about the Palestinians who live in the West Bank. No they are not allowed to vote, because they are not citizens (nor do they want to be israeli citizens, duh). They have had their own autonomy in the west bank since 1993 and have their own government (Palestinian Authority and recently elected Hamas) that governs them. Maybe you should do your research before you spread your BS.

    26. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      The beatings will continue until morale improves!

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    27. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by nidarus · · Score: 1

      Don't be moronic. Israel is THE definition of an apartheid state. Are Palestinians allowed to vote? No. Are they allowed to travel? No ( sure, then can wait for days to go through 'checkpoints', but in effect, no, they can't travel ). Are Palestinian refugees allowed to return home? No. Are Palestinians treated as equals? Most certainly not.

      Iraqis don't get to vote in American (or British) elections either.

      Israeli Arab citizens (20% of Israelis) do get to vote, to travel, and are mostly treated as equals.

      Arab & Muslim citizens of Israel can vote, run for office, say anything they want, print anything they want, follow any religion they choose, work in any profession they choose, serve on the supreme court, and sue the government (and sometimes win). Doesn't sound like apartheid to me. The problem is that all of that is a lie.

      Do you have any proof for that outrageous claim? As far as I know, the GP is completely correct (with some minor reservations).

    28. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by nidarus · · Score: 1

      What exactly does that have to do with the fact that I pointed out that you're claims were lies? Changing the topic won't make people forget.

      Because it proves that your claim is false.

      You can try and defend your position, but instead you just dismiss the whole argument (apparently, we should just trust you).

      Not incredibly convincing.

    29. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by nidarus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's ridiculous. Palestinians outnumber Israelis. So why is the Israeli government so anti-Palestinian? The only answer, of course, is that there is no Palestinian representation.

      Israeli Palestinians (or Arab Israelis) do not outnumber Jewish Israelis. They are outnumbered 1:5. Palestinian who live in the PA don't get to vote in the Israeli elections because...

      Also, Israel holds key members of the Palestinian government on gaol. ... that's right, they have their own government.

      It even holds some Jews prisoner. You don't say.

      So... you object the ideas of jails in general, then?

      Remember that brave man who blew the whistle on your weapons-of-mass-destruction program? He was thrown in gaol for telling the trust and branded a traitor.

      He breached several government NDAs and revealed sensitive military secrets. There's no country in the world that wouldn't have thrown him in jail.

    30. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be moronic. Israel is THE definition of an apartheid state.

      Jesus fucking christ, you're an idiot. Apartheid South Africa is the definition of an apartheid state. They invented apartheid.

      Are Palestinians allowed to vote? No. Are they allowed to travel? No ( sure, then can wait for days to go through 'checkpoints', but in effect, no, they can't travel ). Are Palestinian refugees allowed to return home? No. Are Palestinians treated as equals? Most certainly not.

      You seem to be referring to Arab residents of Gaza & the West Bank. Lets start with Gaza first.

      There are no Israelis in Gaza. There are no Israeli checkpoints within Gaza. Israel does not control or restrict who votes in Gaza (Hamas does). Israel does not control who travels within Gaza. Israel does not control who enters/leaves Gaza (aside from crossing the Gaza-Israel border). Israel does not prevent Palestinian refugees from returning to Gaza.

      Now, on to the West Bank. Under the Oslo accords, signed by Israel and the PLO (the PLO was recognized as the "sole and legitimate representative" of the Palestinian people by the UN), the establishment of a Palestinian state was to be a gradual process. Among the milestones was the cessation of violent attacks by Palestinians, and the recognition of the existence of the state of Israel. In case you didn't know, these have not yet been met.

      So, Israel and the Palestinians are actually still at war. Checkpoints exist because large numbers of Palestinians get up every morning and say "How can I kill Israelis today?"

      Checkpoints exist because large numbers of Palestinians travel with guns & explosives.

      Unfortunately, Red Cross ambulances get stopped & searched at checkpoints. Why? It wasn't always that way. It used to be that ambulances didn't have to stop at checkpoints. However, Palestinians started to use ambulances to transport guns, explosives, and combatants. As a result, ambulances now have to be stopped & searched.

      Arab & Muslim citizens of Israel can vote, run for office, say anything they want, print anything they want, follow any religion they choose, work in any profession they choose, serve on the supreme court, and sue the government (and sometimes win). Doesn't sound like apartheid to me.

      The problem is that all of that is a lie.

      So, give me some proof. How about I give you some proof instead? Abdel Rahman Zuabi took his seat on March 3, 1999, as the first Arab to sit on the Israeli Supreme Court. In May 2004, Salim Jubran became an Israeli Supreme Court justice.

      Is this all a lie? Do these Supreme Court justices not exist? Or are you full of it?

      Show me that Arab & Muslim citizens of Israel are not allowed to vote.

      Show me that Arab & Muslim citizens of Israel are not allowed to run for office.

      Show me that Arab & Muslim citizens of Israel do not have freedom of speech.

      Show me that Arab & Muslim citizens of Israel do not have freedom of the press.

      Show me that Arab & Muslim citizens of Israel cannot chose their religion.

      Show me that Arab & Muslim citizens of Israel cannot work in any profession they choose.

      Show me that Arab & Muslim citizens of Israel cannot win a lawsuit against the Israeli government.

      But you can't, because it isn't true.

    31. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Actually, yes, it is. Israel bulldozes homes of suicide bombers (basically the only way to punish a dead man, and discourage imitators - put his family out into the street)
      That's the most disgusting thing I have ever heard. If you can't figure out what's wrong with punishing innocent people then you don't deserve to live on this planet. More disgusting than deliberately trying to kill as many random civilians as possible?

      (Not defending the bulldozing like GP, just pointing out that it is all relative.)

    32. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by nidarus · · Score: 1

      "Every effort"? Does making "every effort" to minimise the effects of a horrific act somehow mean said act is OK? "Horrific act"? You mean, killing known terrorist leaders?

      There is a war between Israeli and Palestine (or, to be precise, some Palestinian factions). There's nothing immoral in killing enemy generals. There is something deeply immoral in hiding within the civilian population, effectively using them as a human shield. The only moral duty Israel has in this situation is to minimize the damage to civilians as much as possible.

      If a bank robber hides behind a hostage, and a cop kills that hostage while trying to shoot the robber, then the bank robber is the one to blame.

      IDF killing innocent people, such as Rachel Corrie Rachel Corrie was killed in an accident. The bulldozer driver couldn't have killed her on purpose even if he wanted to. He simply couldn't see her. There was some negligence the IDF's part, but the fact is that Rachel Corrie intentionally put herself in a dangerous situation to make a point, while many safe options were available.

      Being able to vote and run for office doesn't mean anything when you can't travel to the next town because the checkpoint That statement unfortunately reveals your basic ignorance on the subject*. I would study a little about it before making inflammatory comments.

      * Arab Israelis (or Israeli Palestinians) don't suffer from checkpoints, and Palestinians from the occupied territories don't get to vote. Granted, it doesn't necessarily present Israel in a better light, but the difference between Arab Israelis and Palestinians is a very basic concept in the Israeli/Palestinian discourse.

    33. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by nidarus · · Score: 1

      Israeli troops have destroyed community irrigation and drinking water wells

      I've heard a lot about it (especially from Palestinian propagandists), but I've never heard concrete examples. Could you please point me to a reliable source that details those incidents?

    34. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by pchan- · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Israel uses tanks and bulldozers to demolish Palestinian houses, often with children inside who are too young to throw rocks. Bullshit. Israeli demolitions are announced in advance and are done by bulldozers which are fairly slow moving and need to come in from Israeli lands, which gives everyone involved considerable time to evacuate. If they wanted to destroy a house with everyone in it, they would have used missiles.

      The problem is that all of that is a lie. I don't know why you Zionists bother spreading this BS - anyone actually interested in the conflict already knows the horrors that you are inflicting upon the Palestinians. The only thing you're doing is further entrenching anti-semitic views, by inflaming anger against you. Obviously you've chosen what you want to believe, disregarding the facts. There are Arabs, Muslims serving in Israeli government. There are Arab citizens there that have all the rights of Jewish citizens. They are covered by the Israeli national health care. They vote. They pay taxes. You've made the mistake of comparing the rights of citizens (Arabs and others) with non-citizens (refugees that live in the Palestinian territories). The refugees have their own government (Palestinian national authority), their own courts, and their own war going on with the Israelis. And while they wage their war, they conduct a rather effective propaganda campaign which seems to have hooked many people such as yourself by using charged terms such as apartheid and genocide.
    35. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no palestine. Show me where the country of palestine is, or was.

    36. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Killer+Napkin · · Score: 1

      There is no apartheid in The United States. Don't be moronic. The United States is THE definition of an apartheid state. Are Mexicans allowed to vote? No. Are they allowed to travel? No ( sure, then can wait for YEARS to go through 'immigration', but in effect, no, they can't travel ). Are Mexican refugees allowed to return home? No. Are Mexicans treated as equals? Most certainly not.
    37. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Kids with rocks"? I once saw a kid throw a rock at another kid's head, which broke through his skull, landing him in the hospital. You can kill people with rocks. Not to mention with rockets.

      You're an anti-semite yourself, although you'd never admit it. Hitler once claimed he didn't hate Jews; he just had objective problems with the things they did. Lather, rinse, repeat.

    38. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, but how many years has it been since Israel last did that?

      The security barrier has basically ended the suicide bombs, which were the main motivation for the demolitions.

    39. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by acheron12 · · Score: 1

      Never mind that. I can show you where it will be: West Bank and Gaza.

      --
      there is no god but truth, and reality is its prophet
    40. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by acheron12 · · Score: 1

      Never mind that, I can show you where it will be: West Bank and Gaza.

      --
      there is no god but truth, and reality is its prophet
    41. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know why you Zionists bother spreading this BS - anyone actually interested in the conflict already knows the horrors that you are inflicting upon the Palestinians. The only thing you're doing is further entrenching anti-semitic views, by inflaming anger against you. I don't know why you Islamists bother justifying your antisemitism. All you're doing is further entrenching Islamophobic views.
    42. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Max+Littlemore · · Score: 1

      Carter was criticized by many for suggesting that Israel was akin to Apartheid South Africa. There is no apartheid in Israel.

      That's entirely true. Although, while it isn't apartheid, Israel does seem to be one step from forcing Palestinians to wear yellow crescents on their cloths. The already have them locked up in ghettos.

      --
      I don't therefore I'm not.
    43. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      Oh for God's sake can we just agree that TFA is fucking stupid and not go for another round of the Israel/Palestine/WhatIsAntisemitism Standing Flamewar!?

    44. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      Israel not listed because, as with other 14 countries, their IP space is very used by fraudsters. Given that they all use Windoze, I'm not at all surprised. I wouldn't like to get a look at the botnets that probably girdle the entire Israeli network...
    45. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      Rachel Corrie was killed in an accident. The bulldozer driver couldn't have killed her on purpose even if he wanted to. He simply couldn't see her. There was some negligence the IDF's part, but the fact is that Rachel Corrie intentionally put herself in a dangerous situation to make a point, while many safe options were available. OK, let's just admit that the IDF most likely covered it up deliberately. No military force on this Earth will openly admit to the accidental killing of a third-party civilian if they can help it.
    46. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by PowPanda · · Score: 1

      maybe, just maybe, its not OK to use tanks to fight kids with rocks. Then what should be used to fight these 'kids'? Other rocks? Water jets perhaps? Don't forget that once in a while one of these kids pulls out an AK or a bazooka and suddenly you're wishing you had your tank with you.
    47. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by vandan · · Score: 1

      If you have any better idea for a response to a suicide bombing, I'd like to hear it.

      Stop stealing their land.
      Stop killing them.
      Stop blocking their access to to energy and trade.
      Stop building Apartheid walls around them.
    48. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by vandan · · Score: 1

      Get a map and look for 'Israel'. This is actually Palestine, but unfortunately it's full of violent, fundamentalist Zionists, hence the name 'Israel'.

    49. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by dangitman · · Score: 1

      Israel makes every effort to get the inhabitants out.

      Uhhhh... why is Israel demolishing houses in the first place? And what's your definition of "every effort"?

      I don't get it. Why do houses need to be demolished? Those are people's houses.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    50. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by nidarus · · Score: 1

      OK, let's just admit that the IDF most likely covered it up deliberately. Hmm, let's not.

      Even if the bulldozer driver wanted to kill Rachel Corrie, he couldn't have done so intentionally, simply because it's impossible to see the place she was in from the giant bulldozer's cabin. That's why you need soldiers on the ground to guide the bulldozer. IDF fucked up, because the soldiers who were supposed to keep stuff like that from happening weren't there. If you want to assume it was a deliberate murder, you have to assume that there a soldier hiding somewhere, guiding the bulldozer to hit Rachel Corrie, and that's ridiculous.

      Simply put, there are much easier ways to kill a person. They could've shot her in the head, say it was a stray bullet and that would be it.

      There's no evidence that it wasn't an accident, and there's absolutely no evidence of a cover-up. The version provided by the IDF is completely plausible, and the claim that it was a deliberate murder is (at least with the information we have today) nothing more than conspiracy theory.

    51. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's funny how you have a problem with the bulldozers, but apparently no problem at all with the suicide bombers who's only goal is to murder as many innocent people as possible.

      When Jewish lives are less important then non-Jewish houses - that's anti-Semitism.

    52. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by phozz+bare · · Score: 1

      Stop stealing their land. Stop killing them. Stop blocking their access to to energy and trade. Stop building Apartheid walls around them. Well, you are reversing cause and effect. For example:

      Mar 17, 1954 - Terrorists ambushed a bus traveling from Eilat to Tel Aviv, and opened fire at short range when the bus reached the area of Maale Akrabim in the northern Negev. In the initial ambush, the terrorists killed the driver and wounded most of the passengers. The terrorists then boarded the bus, and shot each passenger, one by one. Eleven passengers were murdered. Survivors recounted how the murderers spat on the bodies and abused them. The terrorists could clearly be traced back to the Jordanian border, some 20 km from the site of the terrorist attack.

      This is just one of dozens of examples, all of which occurred before Israel was doing any of the activities you allege it is doing.
      Source: here.
    53. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by vandan · · Score: 1

      1954 is after 1947, or have you forgotten the ultra-violent creation of Israel?

    54. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by phozz+bare · · Score: 1

      I understand, therefore, that by "stop stealing their land" you mean "end the existence of Israel". I have no further argument with you regarding my country, because you do not believe in its right to exist. Fair enough. What about yours? I assume you live in the US - on the land of what native tribe is your home located, and who gave you the right to steal it from them?

    55. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by vandan · · Score: 1

      I understand, therefore, that by "stop stealing their land" you mean "end the existence of Israel"


      Correct. I have no problem with Jews who want to live peacefully with Palestinians remaining in Palestine, but the key point is that Palestinians have the 1st claim. Israel is a state based on murder, hate, fear and fundamentalism, and has no place in a civilized world.

      What about yours? I assume you live in the US - on the land of what native tribe is your home located, and who gave you the right to steal it from them?


      I'm Australian, and I recognize that I live on stolen land. I fight alongside Aboriginal activists to reclaim their land and control of their resources. A recent example of this is opposition to the 'NT Intervention', which is basically a small-scale version of exactly what Israel does - forces people off their traditional lands and into refugee camps etc. Our neo-conservative ex-prime-minister used this as a desperate final attempt to build support amongst his conservative base. We are now fighting to end the military occupation of northern Australia and allow Aboriginals to return back to their land without threat military intervention or 'welfare quarantining'.

      on the land of what native tribe is your home located, and who gave you the right to steal it from them?


      The Gattagal people of the great Eora nation are the traditional owners of this land. The Gattagal people inhabited the wider Sydney region. As for me stealing land, no, I didn't steal any land. You see, I was born here, and that gives me quite a powerful claim to be a valid resident. For better or worse, white Australians are here to stay, and the only solution looking forwards is to compensate the Aboriginal owners for past crimes, and strive for equality. In the case of Israel, there are still many Palestinians who were alive in '47 and are being prevented from the land that they were born on. This is a serious crime, and one that's at the heart of your racist nation. Only when you accept Palestinians in their own land will you have peace. And of course, accepting Palestinians in their own land basically means the destruction of Israel, as it's specifically founded on the basis of racist exclusion.

    56. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by phozz+bare · · Score: 1

      I have no problem with Jews who want to live peacefully with Palestinians remaining in Palestine, but the key point is that Palestinians have the 1st claim.

      People practicing the Jewish religion, speaking and praying in Hebrew, and identifying as Jews have been living in the Land of Israel, either as the ruling majority or a small minority, for well over 3,000 years. I think we win on the 1st claim issue.

      Israel is a state based on murder, hate, fear and fundamentalism

      You know nothing about Israel. Come visit sometime.

      I'm Australian, and I recognize that I live on stolen land. I fight alongside Aboriginal activists to reclaim their land and control of their resources.

      I fought alongside Palestinians, to reclaim their land and control their resources. Until they started blowing up buses full of people just like me. I wonder on whose side you'd be if the Aboriginals started doing the same.

      You see, I was born here, and that gives me quite a powerful claim to be a valid resident.

      I can't see what this means. My parents and I were all born here. My mother's side goes back seven generations in Jerusalem. Conversely, many of the Palestinians who departed Israel in 1948 immigrated to it and were not born here. Their descendants were also not born here, so by your logic have no right of return. There are millions of Israeli Jews who were expelled from the Arab countries in which they were born, but they have precisely zero right to return.

      In the case of Israel, there are still many Palestinians who were alive in '47 and are being prevented from the land that they were born on. This is a serious crime, and one that's at the heart of your racist nation.

      When the racist nations of Iraq, Iran, Jordan, Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, Poland, Germany, Austria and the Czech republic would declare that any Jew who fled or was expelled can return and gain full citizenship - then we can talk. Despite the fact that my grandmother fled Germany, we have no right to return. Germany is no less racist than Israel, but I don't hear of anyone contesting its right to exist. My point is that it's a rough world out there, and Israel doesn't need to be the golden angel of truth and justice.

      Only when you accept Palestinians in their own land will you have peace.

      Very funny.

      And of course, accepting Palestinians in their own land basically means the destruction of Israel, as it's specifically founded on the basis of racist exclusion.

      That's interesting. For 2,000 years of exile, wherever they went, the Jews could live with extremely limited rights at best, or persecuted, expelled, and/or systematically murdered at worst. Now that we finally have our own state, we are the ones being branded as the racists.
      Your comment is also untrue, because (1) any Arab who did not flee in 1948 is now a citizen of this "racist" state. (2) Any human on Earth, regardless of race and sex, can convert to Judaism, immigrate to Israel and enjoy full citizen's rights; Judaism is not a race.

    57. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by acheron12 · · Score: 1

      It's worth noting that the Israeli supreme court ordered an end to this practice in 2005

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_demolition_in_the_Israeli-Palestinian_conflict#History

      --
      there is no god but truth, and reality is its prophet
    58. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by LingNoi · · Score: 1

      No, I have a problem is punishing the innocent. That's exactly what I said above or are you just fucking retarded?

    59. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by LingNoi · · Score: 1

      Yes, more disgusting because the innocent have done nothing wrong.

      What part are you not understanding? Don't answer that was rhetorical and yes, I know your fucking stupid otherwise you wouldn't have replied to my post in the first place.

    60. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by vandan · · Score: 1

      I think we win on the 1st claim issue.

      I'm not talking about the alleged 'first' inhabitants. Of course the point in the past that you're using is arbitrary. There were people there before that. You're just not interested in them because they weren't Jewish. That's a fundamental problem with your outlook.
      When I say the Palestinians were there FIRST, I'm talking about people who are actually alive now, and were forcibly removed from their land, or who fled after witnessing violent fundamentalists butcher their families.
      Enough of the '3000 years ago' crap. Lets talk about people alive today - millions of refugees, for example.

      You know nothing about Israel. Come visit sometime.

      HA! The only reason I'd come would be to fight alongside the Palestinians. I'd consider making a documentary on the Apartheid Wall, or the bulldozing of Palestinians homes, etc. But to be completely frank, I'm not at all interested in living amongst Zionists - even for a short time.

      Their descendants were also not born here, so by your logic have no right of return.

      No. My logic includes a sliding scale of right to claim, that reduces with time and disconnection from the land. For 1st and 2nd generation descendants of Palestinians - particularly those living in refugee camps, they all have right of return. Fundamentalists who have no connection to the land other than fairy tales and bloodlust have no right of 'return'.

      I fought alongside Palestinians, to reclaim their land and control their resources. Until they started blowing up buses full of people just like me.

      You know what? I don't believe that. If you actually did, then you'd understand WHY this change in tactics has happened. The old 'until they started blowing things up' line has been warn out. History states that Israel is a state based on genocide, starting with Al Nakba. I could very well say that Palestinians treated Jews well, until the Jews murdered millions of them in horrific atrocities and drove them from their lands. You see, you have to keep everything in context. Simply crying about Palestinian tactics now without acknowledging the causes of these tactics will get you nowhere. You need to have a memory that goes back further than a couple of days. You've already demonstrated that you can refer to things that allegedly happened 3000 YEARS ago. So try 60 years.

      There are millions of Israeli Jews who were expelled from the Arab countries in which they were born, but they have precisely zero right to return.

      Oh come ON! Are you seriously telling me you don't know why this happened? If I was an Arab living in one of these countries, I'd probably have helped to chase the remaining Jews from my country too. Context please. Stop bitching about 'poor defenseless Jews who've done nothing wrong' and start critically appraising how you got yourself into this collective mess.

      When the racist nations of Iraq, Iran, Jordan, Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, Poland, Germany, Austria and the Czech republic would declare that any Jew who fled or was expelled can return and gain full citizenship - then we can talk.

      It doesn't work like that. Everyone knows the type of fundamentalist living in Israel now has no intention of living peacefully amongst anyone else.
      And also, where do you get off calling these nations racist? They all have rich multicultural societies ( something Israel will never ever have ). There are Muslims, Christians, Hindus and atheists living in Iraq ( one of the richest and most tolerant societies for 2,000 years ). Iran is a far more tolerant nation than Israel. Even today polls are saying that 75% of people worldwide think that Israel is the biggest threat to peace in the Middle East, behind Iran at about 15% ... and this is while the neo-cons beat the war d

    61. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by phozz+bare · · Score: 1

      Look. I think each and every one of the things you say are horribly, painfully false. I am not going to reply further because (A) there is really nothing I can say that will possibly change your mind, and (B) there's no one else listening to this discussion at this point. See you next time Israel's name crops up on Slashdot.

    62. Re:Can't understand where is the problem by phozz+bare · · Score: 1
      Can't sleep, so I'll just keep biting...

      There were people there before that. You're just not interested in them because they weren't Jewish.

      I'm not interested in them because they don't exist anymore.

      I'm talking about people who are actually alive now, and were forcibly removed from their land, or who fled after witnessing violent fundamentalists butcher their families.

      Citation needed.

      HA! The only reason I'd come would be to fight alongside the Palestinians. I'd consider making a documentary on the Apartheid Wall, or the bulldozing of Palestinians homes, etc. But to be completely frank, I'm not at all interested in living amongst Zionists - even for a short time.

      I don't really care what you call the wall, it has probably saved thousands of lives since its construction. Bulldozing of homes has largely stopped. Your comment about "living amongst Zionists" sounds pretty damn racist to me, btw.

      History states that Israel is a state based on genocide, starting with Al Nakba.

      Genocide? Citation needed.

      I could very well say that Palestinians treated Jews well, until the Jews murdered millions of them in horrific atrocities and drove them from their lands.

      When did the Palestinians "treat Jews well"? When did the Jews murder millions of anybody, and what horrific atrocities do you speak of? Out of whose ass are you pulling all these facts?

      Everyone knows the type of fundamentalist living in Israel now has no intention of living peacefully amongst anyone else. And also, where do you get off calling these nations racist? They all have rich multicultural societies ( something Israel will never ever have ). There are Muslims, Christians, Hindus and atheists living in Iraq ( one of the richest and most tolerant societies for 2,000 years ). Iran is a far more tolerant nation than Israel.

      Actually I've easily found plenty of accounts of persecutions of the Bahai and of Christians in Iran and in Iraq by a simple Google search. On the other hand, Israel has Muslims, Christians, Atheists, Bahai, Druze, all with full freedom of worship. The Bahai have their world center here. The Mormons have a university here. There are many churches and monasteries, and of course many mosques. The mosques are allowed to run their megaphones at high volumes, such that they are audible for miles - a right I doubt they have in any non-Muslim country. Where do you get your facts?

      You're getting it backwards. I think the persecution came as a result of your racist, fundamentalist outlook. Refusal to integrate with the society in which you live will provoke that kind of thing.

      Bullshit. With the exception of Nazi Germany, the Jews were persecuted throughout history for not accepting the host country's religion. In the case of Nazi Germany, every Jew was killed, regardless of level of integration with society. What "racist, fundamentalist outlook" are you talking about? Have you ever actually met a Jew and found him to be a racist?

      My aunt was in love with a Jew, and made substantial donations to Israel for many years, but in the end they refused to accept her into their religion, and refused to let her marry.

      Donating to Israel will not help you become a Jew. You have to reject your current religion, accept Judaism and agree to practice its laws. I obviously don't know the details of your aunt's story, but apparently there was some requirement she did not (or was unwilling to) meet.

  27. Free will and determination. by lightversusdark · · Score: 2, Insightful

    My company does exactly this, and it is a conscious decision.
    Anyone that tries to tell us that we "can't" do business like this needs to join the free world.
    And to be blunt, it is really only a PR nightmare for American companies.

    --
    "There is nothing nice about Steve Jobs and nothing evil about Bill Gates." - Chuck Peddle
  28. Case in point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting
    1. Re:Case in point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent up, it shows that this has nothing to do with open source and that it affects proprietary too (and it's wider than software, obviously).

  29. Palestinian Territories, Occupied...Iraq, Occupied by s-orbital · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I worked for the university webmaster back when I was in school. My boss noticed the option "Palestinian Territories, Occupied" appeared in the dropdown list of some web-form software we were using. Being kind of a joker, he then changed Iraq to "Iraq, Occupied". It remains like that to this day, years later.

    --
    Patent: from Latin patere, to be open
  30. No trolling in submissions please by martin-boundary · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Please don't bring the Israel/Palestine mudwrestling into slashdot. The walls have just been freshly painted, and it's not fundamentally a technology issue anyway, since those lobby groups will latch onto anything for publicity.

  31. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Deutschland"? Sounds like some kind of barbarian lingo.

    The proper name for this province is Germania.

  32. Meh by sentientbeing · · Score: 4, Insightful

    FUD. The pro-Israel activists are more annoyed that Palestine is recognized and is in the drop down menu more than Israel being omitted.

    They spend a lot of time discouraging recognition of Palestine as an independent state and at every opportunity. Re-read the article again with that in mind. Palestine certainly IS a country and is recognized by many others around the world. The UN reference is a red herring. Israel occupies Palestine with military force.
    Take note that it was a pro-Israel pressure group that started this 'controversy' with immediate threats to the developers.

    --

    ------
    beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his mind he dreams himself your master
    1. Re:Meh by rossz · · Score: 1

      Some moron modded you down as flamebait. I guess some people really hate the truth. The idiot is probably part of the Canadian Human Rights Commission, which has explicitly stated, "the truth is not a defense" when conducting one of their kangaroo trials because someone's feelings are hurt.

      --
      -- Will program for bandwidth
    2. Re:Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agree.

      Being Jewish, I run into the anti-semitism industry all the time, and I'm tired of their thuggery and intimidation. (There's a reason why I'm posting AC.) I think everybody else is finally getting tired of them too.

      Norman Finkelstein http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/content.php?pg=3 has enough energy to fight them and he says it better than me.

    3. Re:Meh by khallow · · Score: 1

      Palestine is most certainly NOT a country at the moment. Does it have a head of state? Currency? UN recognition as a country? Embassies? Diplomatic immunity? Recognized as a country by the US? UK? France? Russia? China? Brazil? India? Sweden? Japan? Canada? South Africa? Germany? Spain? Are the answers to any of those questions actually no? I can't see one.
    4. Re:Meh by vandan · · Score: 1

      There has never, ever, in the history of history, been a country called Palestine.

      That's a ridiculous lie.

      Does it have a head of state?

      It has a democracy, and one in far less disasterous state than Israel's ( or the US's for that matter ).

      Recognized as a country by the US? UK? France? Russia? China? Brazil? India? Sweden? Japan? Canada? South Africa? Germany? Spain?

      Yes that's because of the horrible corruption of our governments. If you ask ordinary people, they all consider Palestine a country under siege. It's only the mainstream press and governments that try to hide this fact.

      Now as to the claim of occupation, Gaza is most certainly NOT occupied by Israel. Israel completely withdrew from Gaza, and forcibly removed Israelis who wanted to stay.

      1) Bullshit
      2) Zionists occupy the WHOLE of Palestine; not just the West Bank & Gaza strip. ALL of it is theirs. Israel should not appear on a map at all.

      Parts of the West Bank are under Israeli control, as negotiated by the Oslo accords which established the Palestinian Authority.

      Yes, and this was a horrible betrayal on the part of Fatah, and one of the reasons Palestinians voted so overwhelmingly for Hamas.
    5. Re:Meh by fondacio · · Score: 1

      Without entering into any of the other aspects of this discussion, I'd just like to clarify what the criteria for statehood are according to international law: (a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.

      The borders actually do not need to be fixed, as long as the territory is defined, and the significance of the fourth criterion is subject to discussion, which depends on whether you follow the declaratory theory of statehood, which only looks at the objective criteria, or the constitutive theory of statehood, which holds that states only exist to the extent that they are recognised by other states.

      The declarative theory is slightly more dominant. According to this theory, Palestine is a state (and so is Taiwan). According to the constitutive theory, Palestine's statehood is severely restricted (and so is Taiwan's). In any case, all the questions about recognition by various countries and the UN are in category (d). Palestine has a head of state. Whether it has a currency is irrelevant, and embassies and diplomatic immunity are a result of recognition. Being occupied does not end statehood.

    6. Re:Meh by Flyers2391 · · Score: 0

      The reason this is the case is because there weren't many people that called themselves a "Palestinian" until Israel was declared a country by the UN

    7. Re:Meh by ChameleonDave · · Score: 0, Troll

      The reason this is the case is because there weren't many people that called themselves a "Palestinian" until Israel was declared a country by the UN

      And how many people called themselves "Israeli" before Israel was declared? Zero.

      "Palestinian", before that, was a national (like "British" or "American") rather than an ethnic term. Those Jews living in Palestine were happy to accept the official (from the British Mandate of Palestine) appellation of "Palestinian" for all citizens of that territory. The Jewish newspaper now called the Jerusalem Post was at that time called the Palestine Post.

      When Jewish Palestinians (in numbers swelled by massive immigration whose stated aim was to take over the country) started to claim that Palestine was actually a country called "Israel" and that they were citizens of it called "Israelis", that left Arab Palestinians (the vast majority of Palestinians) as the only ones still using the term. That had the consequence of making the term more ethnic than national, as there was now an ethnic group denied a nation, rather than a nation with many ethnic groups.

    8. Re:Meh by belmolis · · Score: 0

      That's pretty lame since Israel has been on the record as favoring the creation of a Palestinian state for years and such a state would have come into existence but for the refusal of the Palestinians to make peace.

    9. Re:Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There has never, ever, in the history of history, been a country called Palestine.

      That's a ridiculous lie.

      So, please tell me when this country of Palestine existed. I would love to hear it.

      It has a democracy, and one in far less disasterous state than Israel's ( or the US's for that matter ).

      Riight. When Israelis vote, are there roving squads of armed men to discourage candidates from running for office or voting for the wrong people?

      Recognized as a country by the US? UK? France? Russia? China? Brazil? India? Sweden? Japan? Canada? South Africa? Germany? Spain?

      Yes that's because of the horrible corruption of our governments. If you ask ordinary people, they all consider Palestine a country under siege. It's only the mainstream press and governments that try to hide this fact.

      So, Russia, China, Brazil, India, Sweden, Japan, South Africa, are all part of the mainstream press and corrupt western governments? Or are they all part of the great conspiracy? Or are you full of it? Did you know there isn't a Palestinian embassy in Saudi Arabia?

      Now as to the claim of occupation, Gaza is most certainly NOT occupied by Israel. Israel completely withdrew from Gaza, and forcibly removed Israelis who wanted to stay.

      1) Bullshit

      There is not one Israeli soldier in Gaza. Period. Gaza is not occupied by Israel.

      The border between Gaza & Israel is closed by Israel. The border between Egypt & Gaza is closed by Egypt - if you don't like that, talk to the Egyptians. Both Egypt & Israel are sovereign nations, they are entitled to control their borders and decide who & what gets across.

      2) Zionists occupy the WHOLE of Palestine; not just the West Bank & Gaza strip. ALL of it is theirs. Israel should not appear on a map at all.

      Finally! Here we get to the main point of your argument: Israel should not exist.

      Whole of Palestine? The whole of Palestine includes the state of Jordan. Should they be under Hamas control as well?

      Lets look back at history. The area commonly called Palestine today was part of the Turkish empire for centuries. After the end of the first world war, the Turkish empire collapsed, and the Brits ended up controlling a lot of the territory in the middle east. The Brits established the British Mandate of Palestine. This comprised most of modern-day Jordan, Israel, West Bank and Gaza (note that the Mandate of Palestine was not a country called Palestine).

      Later, the Brits split off the vast majority of the territory of the Mandate of Palestine, and created a new country, called Jordan (isn't that interesting? A Palestinian state already exists).

      Much later, after the second world war, the Brits decided to leave the Mandate. The Brits turned the question of what to do with the territory to the United Nations. The UN investigated and consulted with all parties. The UN determined that there were multiple legitimate claims to the territory. The UN decided the fairest thing to do was to split the territory, establish two states, one Arab and one Israeli, with international status for Jerusalem (hmmm, that sounds familiar, I heard it recently too).

      The UN proposal was accepted by the Israelis, and rejected by the Arabs. The Arabs declared war, and lost.

      Lets finish with the words of Palestine Liberation Organization executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview with him. Here's what he said:

      "The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to o

    10. Re:Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Palestine is most certainly NOT a country at the moment. Does it have a head of state? Currency? UN recognition as a country? Embassies? Diplomatic immunity? Recognized as a country by the US? UK? France? Russia? China? Brazil? India? Sweden? Japan? Canada? South Africa? Germany? Spain?

      Are the answers to any of those questions actually no? I can't see one.

      You aren't looking very hard.

      Is Palestine recognized as a country by the UN? No.
      Is Palestine recognized as a country by the USA? No.
      Is Palestine recognized as a country by the UK? No.
      Is Palestine recognized as a country by China? No.
      Is Palestine recognized as a country by Russia? No.
      Is Palestine recognized as a country by India? No.
      Is Palestine recognized as a country by Brazil? No.

      I could go on. There isn't even a Palestinian embassy in Saudi Arabia.

    11. Re:Meh by nidarus · · Score: 1

      "Palestinian", before that, was a national (like "British" or "American") rather than an ethnic term.

      A national term used by the British colonists since they captured the area from the Turks in WWI. Before that, the area was simply a part of the Ottoman empire. There was no independent Palestinian nation, ever.

      And by the way, Palestine was never supposed to become an independent nation under modern Arab rule either. It was first supposed to be a part of southern Syria, and later, a part of western Jordan. AFAIK, the Arabs who lived in British Palestine simply called themselves "Arabs" and didn't have any nationalistic Palestinian aspirations.

      When Jewish Palestinians (in numbers swelled by massive immigration whose stated aim was to take over the country) started to claim that Palestine was actually a country called "Israel" and that they were citizens of it called "Israelis"

      "Started to claim"? How about the UN partition plan, the 1948 war? You make the whole thing sound like a Jewish whim.

    12. Re:Meh by Dhalka226 · · Score: 1

      If what you posted is complete and accurate, the declarative theory seems pretty stupid. I can seemingly satisfy requirements A-C by declaring myself dictator of JonLand, the borders of which are my property lines and the population of which is myself and my family. Am I now a country? To whom do I need to declare this? Do I have a seat on the UN now?

      Without D, requiring other countries to recognize you, the only person who has to not giggle themselves stupid as they make this declaration is actually the person making it. My example may be extreme, but even applying it to present circumstances shows the problem. Ask the Palestinian government what their territory is. Then ask the Israelis what territory the Palestinian state owns. When they stop laughing, clarify by asking what territory they would own if it ever happened? Go back and try to reconcile that with the Palestinians. If you manage it, well, your Nobel peace prize is in the mail--you've just solved the major difficulty of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I suspect you'll have trouble though.

      "I'm a country even though nobody else agrees!" is nice from a feel-good philosophic sense, but I think these things are complicated enough without playing the definition games that entails. I'm not a huge fan of the UN, but they seem like the best institution (given our current world setup) to determine what is or is not a country. They're free to use the first three criteria to determine it; the fourth is implied at that point, and any questions surrounding the first three would be answered, at least in the democratic "we put it to a vote" sense of the word "answered."

    13. Re:Meh by sentientbeing · · Score: 1

      There isnt an Israeli embassy there either. Whats your point.

      Israel was only recognised by the Vatican in 1993. Fuck, even half the Palestinian occupied land Israel claims as its own isnt recognised by any other country except the US.

      I could go on with you, but I dont have the patience nor the time.

      --

      ------
      beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his mind he dreams himself your master
    14. Re:Meh by ChameleonDave · · Score: 1

      A national term used by the British colonists since they captured the area from the Turks in WWI. Before that, the area was simply a part of the Ottoman empire. There was no independent Palestinian nation, ever.

      What's your point?

      Again, there were no Israelis until Israel was declared. Palestinians officially existed before that.

      You want to de-legitimate them because they had that status by the leave of colonial powers? You do realise that you are contrasting them with Israel, right? You're trying to make their citizenship sound less legitimate than the citizenship that the colonial state of Israel conferred upon itself.

      Furthermore, you really have to realise that they, as the native inhabitants, had an inherent right to citizenship of that land or an empire including it. They therefore enjoyed citizenship despite British colonial interference, not because of it. Zionist settlers, on the other hand, have citizenship entirely due to colonial interference.

      And by the way, Palestine was never supposed to become an independent nation under modern Arab rule either. First you try to de-legitimate the native population's nationality by linking it with colonial whims, and now you try to limit their rights to a national based on lack of imperial permission for such a nation. You can't have it both ways.

      AFAIK, the Arabs who lived in British Palestine simply called themselves "Arabs" and didn't have any nationalistic Palestinian aspirations.

      You argue that Palestinians' real nationality is "Arab", rather than "Palestinian". Fine. That is an argument for all of Palestine, from the river to the sea, being part of a larger Arab nation, such as Syria, Saudi Arabia, or some sort of Caliphate comprising all Arab lands.

      You can argue for that if you like, but the Palestinians have humbler aspirations: independence and freedom in their land. In fact, they even generally accept that the Zionists can hang on to half the land they stole, call it Israel, and let the Palestinians govern themselves in the other half.

      "Started to claim"? How about the UN partition plan, the 1948 war? You make the whole thing sound like a Jewish whim.

      Not quite a whim. More the final objective of a long-term plan called Zionism. Surely you've heard of it.

      Again, you try to use the authority of Western imperial powers when it suits you. When you wanted them to sound bad, you said "British colonists". Now that you want them to sound legit, you said "UN partition plan". We're still talking about the same thing: world powers do not have the right to take someone's home and country from them.

      Mention of the 1948 war is utterly irrelevant unless you believe in the mediaeval right of conquest.

    15. Re:Meh by dangitman · · Score: 1

      And by the way, Palestine was never supposed to become an independent nation under modern Arab rule either.

      What do you mean by this "supposed to"? Since when has world politics, geography, or in fact, human reality been shaped by what was "supposed to" happen? Shit happens, despite what anybody thinks was supposed to happen. Once upon a time, the sun was supposed to revolve around the earth.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    16. Re:Meh by nidarus · · Score: 1

      What's your point? My point is that Palestinian nationhood is a new concept, because there was no Palestinian nation before the British mandate, and even then, the people that now call themselves "Palestinians" didn't claim to be part of the "Palestinian nation" either. In fact, they wanted to be southern Syrians or Western Jordanians.

      Therefore, it was never a "national term" as you claim.

      Furthermore, you really have to realise that they, as the native inhabitants, had an inherent right to citizenship of that land or an empire including it

      So they were "citizens of the Ottoman empire". How does that make them "Palestinians"?

      First you try to de-legitimate the native population's nationality by linking it with colonial whims, and now you try to limit their rights to a national based on lack of imperial permission for such a nation. You can't have it both ways.

      Uhm... what are you talking about? Jordan didn't have a "imperial permission" to annex Palestine. The partition plan did include an independent Arab Palestinian nation. It was the Arabs who rejected the idea of a separate Palestinian nationality.

      You can argue for that if you like, but the Palestinians have humbler aspirations: independence and freedom in their land. In fact, they even generally accept that the Zionists can hang on to half the land they stole, call it Israel, and let the Palestinians govern themselves in the other half.

      Wrong.

      The HAMAS, an organization that officially rejects such that idea, won the Palestinian elections by a landslide.

      When you wanted them to sound bad, you said "British colonists". Now that you want them to sound legit, you said "UN partition plan". You presented Palestinian nationality as an ancient concept, as opposed to the new, and supposedly artificial concept of Israeli nationality. I pointed out that Palestinian nationality is also new and even more artificial.

      I have no problem with the British colonists, btw. All they wanted (at least officially) was to create viable and independent countries for Arabs and Jews, as opposed to the Turks that were simply oppressive imperialists. My only problem is when people present the British mandate as anything but a brief and officially temporary period in the history of the region.

      world powers do not have the right to take someone's home and country from them.

      Before the British mandate, the Arabs lived under a foreign occupation. What the "world powers" did is to free them from that occupation, and give them their own nation. The only reservation was that they also wanted to give a tiny piece of the land to a small, persecuted nation.

      Mention of the 1948 war is utterly irrelevant unless you believe in the mediaeval right of conquest. I have no idea what you thought I meant, but I'm pretty sure you've misunderstood me. I only wanted to point out that you made the whole conflict sound like some frivolous whim.
    17. Re:Meh by nidarus · · Score: 1

      What do you mean by this "supposed to"?

      I meant that it was the original plan of the people we now call "Palestinians". I think it's a pretty important point.

    18. Re:Meh by dangitman · · Score: 1

      What's important about that point? Circumstances change, and people change their minds. And it's not as if the people living in the area today are all the same people, or the people living in the area all had the same opinion on the topic, anyway. Basically, your "important point" is totally irrelevant to the topic.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    19. Re:Meh by nidarus · · Score: 1

      What's important about that point? Circumstances change, and people change their minds. And it's not as if the people living in the area today are all the same people, or the people living in the area all had the same opinion on the topic, anyway. Basically, your "important point" is totally irrelevant to the topic. Uhm. I wonder what do you think the topic is?
    20. Re:Meh by ChameleonDave · · Score: 1

      What's your point? My point is... That was a rhetorical question.

      So they were "citizens of the Ottoman empire". How does that make them "Palestinians"? When their land was occupied by the Ottoman empire, they had a right to be Ottoman citizens. When that broke down, and they were managed by the British, they had a right to be citizens of the British Mandate of Palestine. Now a large chunk of that has been stolen, and most of them have been ejected from it. They have a right to be citizens of what is left. In fact, they have the right to actually go back to their homes and eject the American and European immigrants currently squatting them, but it would probably be best if they magnanimously let those people keep their ill-gotten gains.

      Uhm... what are you talking about? Jordan didn't have a "imperial permission" to annex Palestine. The partition plan did include an independent Arab Palestinian nation. It was the Arabs who rejected the idea of a separate Palestinian nationality. Your comment bears little relation to what I said. You complained about a lack of permission for an independent Arab (Arab, because the Palestinians are Arab) state, and I pointed out that permission is not a moral requirement.

      The HAMAS, an organization that officially rejects such that idea, won the Palestinian elections by a landslide. There are two main parties. One officially supports that idea, and the other is rhetorically against it (because it is indeed unjust) whilst realising that it's probably all they will get. Meanwhile, the League of Arab States (which includes Palestine) also supports this two-state solution.

      You presented Palestinian nationality as an ancient concept, as opposed to the new, and supposedly artificial concept of Israeli nationality. I pointed out that Palestinian nationality is also new and even more artificial. No, you tried to present Palestinian nationality and new and artificial (in contrast with Israel), and I pointed out that the supreme example of new and artificial nationality is in fact the State of Israel. Palestinians have one which is three decades older (if we look no further than the British Mandate), centuries older (if we look at the Ottoman empire) or ancient (if we look at inhabitation).

      What the "world powers" did... The only reservation was that they also wanted to give a tiny piece of the land to a small, persecuted nation. Better described as the only disaster rather than the only reservation. If only they had just gently dismantled the Ottoman empire and handed power over to local groupings in a sensitive and thoughtful fashion. But they decided to appease both Zionists ("We demand a homeland!") and anti-Semites ("Yeah, ship the Jews off to Palestine!") by creating a colonial state of Europeans and Americans in the middle of Arab lands. To this day, we suffer for that.

      Mention of the 1948 war is utterly irrelevant unless you believe in the mediaeval right of conquest. I have no idea what you thought I meant, but I'm pretty sure you've misunderstood me. I only wanted to point out that you made the whole conflict sound like some frivolous whim.

      Talk of a "whim" is a red herring. Zionism is a clear, long-term plan to seize Palestine for the Jewish people, and I've never said anything to imply otherwise.

      The war is often brought up by those trying to justify the theft of land. I repeat that the war is irrelevant to such questions unless you believe in a mediaeval-style right to land via conquest.

    21. Re:Meh by dangitman · · Score: 1

      The topic in this subthread is the current political landscape between the Israelis and Palestinians. What did you think it was about?

      Anyway, seeing as you seem intent on avoiding the issues, I'll ask again - what does the "original" intent of establishing either an Israeli or Palestinian state have to do with what is happening today?

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    22. Re:Meh by nidarus · · Score: 1

      That was a rhetorical question.

      Really? Since you've seem to misunderstand most of what I've said, I thought you wanted an explanation.

      Now a large chunk of that has been stolen, and most of them have been ejected from it.

      It was not "stolen" in any way. Before the British mandate, Arabs didn't own any of the land. The Western powers corrected that historical injustice, while correcting another - by allowing the Jews the right of self-determination in their ancestral homeland.

      Of course, Arab nationalists wouldn't accept any non-Arab state in Arabia, no matter how tiny it is. So they started a war, an attempted ethnic cleansing, which they've lost. As a result, many of the the Arabs who lived in the area fled or were expelled. This is unfortunate, but entirely the Arabs' fault. After all, the Jews couldn't have neighbors that were trying to kill them.

      In fact, they have the right to actually go back to their homes and eject the American and European immigrants currently squatting them

      The Jews have a moral and a historical right to that tiny piece of land. The Arabs who lived there have a right to that land as well, so the land was justly divided between the Jews and the Arabs who lived there. However, they do not have to right to deny Jews of theirs.

      You complained about a lack of permission for an independent Arab (Arab, because the Palestinians are Arab) state, and I pointed out that permission is not a moral requirement.

      The point is that I wasn't talking about permission at all. The whole "permission" argument exists only in your head.

      I was pointing out that the Arabs living under the British mandate didn't claim to have "Palestinian" nationality. Depending on their political affiliations, they claimed to have "Arab" or "Southern Syrian" nationality. The idea of Palestinian nationhood started only after they've lost the 1948 war, which is the time where Israeli nationhood was born as well.

      One officially supports that idea, and the other is rhetorically against it (because it is indeed unjust) whilst realising that it's probably all they will get.

      Like it or not, the HAMAS's opinions represent the will of the majority of Palestinians. The whole "realizing that it's probably all they will get" thing is nothing but your own naive idea.

      Calling the two-state solution "unjust" because it gives a tiny piece of Arab land to a persecuted people is both laughable and morally reprehensible.

      No, you tried to present Palestinian nationality and new and artificial (in contrast with Israel), and I pointed out that the supreme example of new and artificial nationality is in fact the State of Israel.

      First of all, it wasn't me, but another poster. Second, I'm not saying that Israeli nationality isn't new as well. I was just pointing out that "Palestinian" nationality was born at the same time as "Israeli" nationality, as opposed to what you've implied.

      Btw, I haven't heard Palestinians claim that Palestinian nationality isn't new. Palestinians usually talk about "Arab" and "Muslim" historical rights. After all, if the 1948 war was successful, there would be no "Palestinians" today.

      Palestinians have one which is three decades older (if we look no further than the British Mandate), centuries older (if we look at the Ottoman empire) or ancient (if we look at inhabitation).

      As I pointed out earlier, you're wrong when it comes to the British mandate. When it comes to Ottoman or "ancient" nationality, it just becomes weird. Why do I have to keep reminding you that we're (well, at least I am) talking about Palestinian nationality, and not Ottoman citizenship or the moral rights to the land?

      . But they decided to appease both Zionists ("We demand a homeland!") and anti-Semites ("Yeah, ship the Jews off to Palestine!") by creating a colonia

    23. Re:Meh by nidarus · · Score: 1

      The topic in this subthread is the current political landscape between the Israelis and Palestinians. What did you think it was about? My original comment was in response to a comment about the concept of Palestinian nationality (versus the concept of Israeli nationality). Read it again, if you don't believe me.

      You responded to my comment with a bizarre non-sequitur.

      Anyway, seeing as you seem intent on avoiding the issues What issues was I avoiding? The fact that "people change their minds" or that "shit happens"? You didn't make a single coherent point in the whole thread.

      I'll ask again - what does the "original" intent of establishing either an Israeli or Palestinian state have to do with what is happening today? It means that the concept of "Palestinian nationality" is as new as of "Israeli nationality", as opposed to what ChameleonDave claimed. It's a small issue, but it was the topic of the debate.
    24. Re:Meh by ChameleonDave · · Score: 1

      It was not "stolen" in any way. Before the British mandate, Arabs didn't own any of the land.

      Firstly, land was stolen in a direct, literal and legal sense from individuals who owned it. I've just been listening to an interview with a refugee now living in the UK who recalls her family fleeing their house in fear of approaching gunmen, and not being allowed back weeks later or decades later. When she did get later get a tourist visa, she was able to meet the white colonial Canadian family who were occupying the house where she grew up, which belonged to her.

      But I'm not even talking about individuals. The Arabs of Palestine were the native population of the land, and had the only claim to it. This idea of yours of the native population not really owning the land is one that comes up every time someone wants to justify white theft of land belonging to Native Americans, Australian Aborigines, and various African tribes. It's the twisting of language, and imposition of our laws on others, all with the intent to justify people turning up with guns from far away and forging a state on other people's land.

      while correcting another - by allowing the Jews the right of self-determination in their ancestral homeland.

      This is what it all comes down to. Any normal observer looks at the Nakba and sees an injustice. To see it as justice, it is necessary to subscribe to an idea according to which a specific religious group that has had virtually no connection to the land for a couple of millennia can turn up and take it from the natives.

      By that standard, hundreds of groups around the world could claim chunks of land that they have not inhabited in any numbers of centuries. I'm sure you would not appreciate losing New York that way.

      Of course, Arab nationalists wouldn't accept any non-Arab state in Arabia, no matter how tiny it is.

      And no one would accept an Arab state in, for example, the US or Japan, no matter how tiny it is.

      As a result, many of the the Arabs who lived in the area fled or were expelled. This is unfortunate, but entirely the Arabs' fault. After all, the Jews couldn't have neighbors that were trying to kill them.

      You accept without question the idea that Jewish colonists simply can't accept Arab natives trying to ethically cleanse them, so they have a right to ethnically cleanse the Arabs.

      You make no effort to explain why it could not be seen the opposite way: the Arab natives simply couldn't accept Jewish colonists ethnically cleansing them, so they had a right to ethnically cleanse the colonists.

      Again, it all comes down to the mistaken premise that it was OK to come to steal someone's country in the first place. All evil that comes from a colonisation is almost by definition the fault of the colonists.

      The Jews have a moral and a historical right to that tiny piece of land.

      No. Colonists have no such rights.

      The Arabs who lived there have a right to that land as well, so the land was justly divided between the Jews and the Arabs who lived there. However, they do not have to right to deny Jews of theirs.

      Glad to see you aren't totally in denial about the Arabs' right to the land.

      they claimed to have "Arab" or "Southern Syrian" nationality.

      I don't care if you call Palestine "Arabia" or "South Syria" or whatever. But European and American colonists didn't have the right to come and steal a big chunk of it. The should never have come, and Palestine should either be an independent Arab state or a semi-autonomous province of a neighbouring Arab state.

      Given that much of much of that theft is now a fait accompli, the most pragmatic solution is that of the League of Arab States.

      Like it or not, the HAMAS's opinions represent the will of the majority of Palestinians.

      That is part of Israeli dogma.

    25. Re:Meh by nidarus · · Score: 1

      I've just been listening to an interview with a refugee now living in the UK who recalls her family fleeing their house in fear of approaching gunmen, and not being allowed back weeks later or decades later.

      It's hard to be on the losing side of a war, especially if it's an attempt at ethnic cleansing. The best solution for the problem is not to start such a war.

      If the Arabs would've accepted the 2-state solution, instead of trying to wipe out Israel completely, nobody would've been evicted from his home at gunpoint, there would be no refugees, and the Palestinian state would celebrate its 60th birthday today.

      Any normal observer looks at the Nakba and sees an injustice.

      The Nakba was a tragedy. However, it was completely self-inflicted.

      To see it as justice, it is necessary to subscribe to an idea according to which a specific religious group that has had virtually no connection to the land for a couple of millennia can turn up and take it from the natives.

      The Jews are a nation with a unique religion, and not a religious group. The Land of Israel is a very important part of Jewish culture, throughout the ages. Any Jew who's not in Israel, is considered to be living in exile.

      I'm sure you would not appreciate losing New York that way.

      Are you denying that the original owners were defrauded, and have a moral right to the land? You mean that the Native Americans lost their right to it because they didn't "claim" it for a century or two? Or are you reversing your claim when it's rhetorically convenient?

      If we're on the subject, can you deny that the existence of the US (and Australia) is much more of an outrageous injustice than that of Israel?

      And no one would accept an Arab state in, for example, the US or Japan, no matter how tiny it is.

      The Arab ancestral home is not in the US, or Japan (it's in the Middle East), so no. If the Arabs were exiled from a part of the US/Japan, yearned to return to their homeland for centuries, persecuted all of that time because they refused to mingle with the other nations (and lose their nationhood), then yes, they would have a complete moral right to that tiny chunk of the US/Japan.

      It's funny you use the US and Japan as examples. Japan has parts (such as Okinawa) that were taken by an imperialist war, and the US... well, it a nation based on colonization, massive land theft, and disenfranchising/massacring the native population. The only reason that they "wouldn't allow" a foreign country to be created on their lands is because they have the military might to prevent it, and not because they have a moral right to the land.

      You make no effort to explain why it could not be seen the opposite way: the Arab natives simply couldn't accept Jewish colonists ethnically cleansing them, so they had a right to ethnically cleanse the colonists.

      Very simple. The Jews weren't trying to ethnically cleanse the Arabs. They accepted the partition plan.

      Again, it all comes down to the mistaken premise that it was OK to come to steal someone's country in the first place

      That land was the ancestral homeland of the Jews. They have a full moral right to it.

      But European and American colonists didn't have the right to come and steal a big chunk of it

      No, but the original inhabitants (the Jews) did have a right to it.

      For example, in Jan 2006 they removed their rhetorical call for the dissolution of Israel from their manifesto, and replaced it with a call for an "independent state whose capital is Jerusalem", which is fully compatible with Israel remaining almost entirely intact.

      They never changed their charter. That ambiguous claim comes from their election campaign. In any case, HAMAS officials had many opportunities to say that they accept Israel's existence. That declaration would've lifted the blockade and st

  33. What a dumb conclusion... by Viceroy+Potatohead · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It might as well read: "A Cautionary Tale of Closed Source Social Technology". Go check ten random sites with nationality registration. Chances are, "Israel" is on the list, but "Palestinian Territory" isn't. They are no more indicative of the failure of closed source than this is of a failure of open source.

    I wonder how many times they've bitched about the omission of Palestine... gee, none? What a surprise. Hypocrites.

    I'm a little bitchy, but one can't play the anti-semitic card every time Israel is omitted/criticised. It devalues everybody.

    1. Re:What a dumb conclusion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I wonder how many times they've bitched about the omission of Palestine... gee, none? What a surprise. Hypocrites.

      Hypocrites? Hardly. Palestine is not a country. Period. It might be in the future, but it isn't a country right now. On the other hand, Israel is a country, recognized by the UN, and all countries except most of the Arab/Muslim countries.

      Given that most of the Arab/Muslim world denies that Israel has a right to exist, they are sensitive to things which make it look like Israel does not exist.

    2. Re:What a dumb conclusion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      How is this flamebait?

      Palestine is not currently recognized as a country. Israel is currently recognized as a country.

      Those are objective facts. If you can't accept objective facts you really ought to get your head examined.

    3. Re:What a dumb conclusion... by daliman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Israel, like Palestine, is recognised by some countries and not by others. If Israel happens to be recognised by your country and Palestine not, that doesn't make it more a country than Palestine.

      The status of a country is hardly an objective fact. Consider Taiwan - country or not? As above, it depends who you ask.

    4. Re:What a dumb conclusion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hypocrites? Hardly. Palestine is not a country. Period.

      Dude, they tried that "terra nullis" crap in Australia and it didn't work. You can't just claim a place is empty because you don't want to deal with the native leadership, or can't be arsed finding them.

    5. Re:What a dumb conclusion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Hmm, so how should people logging on from Nablus, Gaza, Ramallah, etc, indicate their country?

      Palestine has its own telephone code (970), its own top level domain (.ps), and snail mail sent from anywhere in the world, addressed to "Palestine" arrives there.

      And don't start with the "right to exist" bullshit. Israel doesn't recognize Palestine's right to exist, now does it.

    6. Re:What a dumb conclusion... by LingNoi · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, Israel is a country, recognized by the UN,
      UN means nothing to anything.

      Burma for one is recognised as well under the name Myanmar and their leader is a corrupt mass murderer of his own people and lets not forget Mugabe.

    7. Re:What a dumb conclusion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm, so how should people logging on from Nablus, Gaza, Ramallah, etc, indicate their country?

      Good question without a good answer. Palestinians often complain that they are not citizens of any country.

      Palestine has its own telephone code (970), its own top level domain (.ps), and snail mail sent from anywhere in the world, addressed to "Palestine" arrives there.

      That is all true, but the fact remains that, there is no country called Palestine (at the moment).

      And don't start with the "right to exist" bullshit. Israel doesn't recognize Palestine's right to exist, now does it.

      Not true. With the signing of the Oslo accords, Israel recognized the rights of Palestinians to establish a state. However, that state has not yet been established.

    8. Re:What a dumb conclusion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, they tried that "terra nullis" crap in Australia and it didn't work. You can't just claim a place is empty because you don't want to deal with the native leadership, or can't be arsed finding them.

      There is a big difference between "terra nullis" and not a country. Puerto Rico is not a country, but isn't terra nullis.

      Israel never claimed the land was empty. The modern state of Israel came into being after the UN partition plan (in the 1940s) of the remainder of the British Mandate territory. The vast majority of the British Mandate territory had already been split off (in the 1920s) to create a new country, called Jordan.

      The UN investigated the situation and consulted all parties (Jews, Arabs, Christians, etc). The UN decided that there were multiple competing claims for the territory, all with some legitimacy. The UN decided to partition the land and create two new states, one Arab and one Israeli, with international status for Jerusalem (sound familiar?).

      This proposal was accepted by the Israelis, and rejected by the Arabs. The Arabs declared war, and lost.

    9. Re:What a dumb conclusion... by nidarus · · Score: 1

      Israel, like Palestine, is recognised by some countries and not by others. If Israel happens to be recognised by your country and Palestine not, that doesn't make it more a country than Palestine.

      Israel is recognized by the UN as an independent country. Nobody claims that Palestine is an independent country. Not even the Palestinians.

      Btw, I think that using the name "Palestine" instead of "Palestinian Authority - Occupied Territory" should bother Palestinians much more than Israelis. After all, if an independent Palestinian state already exists, then there's no "occupation", is there?

    10. Re:What a dumb conclusion... by nidarus · · Score: 1

      Israel doesn't recognize Palestine's right to exist, now does it.

      It does, and it (or, rather, its leaders) stated it many times. The problem is that HAMAS believes that "Palestine" includes Israel as well. Obviously, Israel cannot accept that claim.

      Palestine has its own telephone code (970), its own top level domain (.ps), and snail mail sent from anywhere in the world, addressed to "Palestine" arrives there.

      When people say "Palestine" they usually mean The Palestian Authority (that's when they don't mean "The land currently called Israel, occupied by the godless Jews").

      There's nothing particularly pro-Palestinian or anti-Israeli in calling the PA "Palestine" (in fact, it's mildly anti-Palestinian because it hides the occupation). It just isn't factually correct.

    11. Re:What a dumb conclusion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I wonder how many times they've bitched about the omission of Palestine... gee, none? What a surprise. Hypocrites."

      Actually, there's an infinite number of nonexistent, never-existed countries that tend to be omitted from most lists of countries. You idiot.

    12. Re:What a dumb conclusion... by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      A spot of land is a country if it governs itself without involuntary outside contact. It's pretty simple; all these things of "recognizing" or "not recognizing" some country or territory are just political games.

    13. Re:What a dumb conclusion... by daliman · · Score: 1

      I'm not convinced with the "involuntary" part. The US contact with Iraq has been, on the Iraqi side, involuntary, but I'm pretty certain that they're still a country.

      The recognition, or lack thereof, is a political game, but not just a political game.

    14. Re:What a dumb conclusion... by daliman · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what the addition of "independent" is for... It's not independent, but being invaded doesn't make it a non-country.

    15. Re:What a dumb conclusion... by nidarus · · Score: 1

      It's not independent, but being invaded doesn't make it a non-country. It was never invaded. In fact, that statement reveals how little you know about the whole thing.

      Btw, the fact that there never was a country called Palestine, and the fact that there is no sovereign state by that name today does make it a non-country.

    16. Re:What a dumb conclusion... by daliman · · Score: 1

      I haven't at any point in time claimed it is a country. Your interpretation shows how little you know of the English language :D

      The point is simply that the definition of a country is not simple. And being dependent has little to do with it.

      And it's indisputable that whatever the Palestinian territory is, country or otherwise, has been invaded by Israel.

    17. Re:What a dumb conclusion... by nidarus · · Score: 1

      I haven't at any point in time claimed it is a country. Your interpretation shows how little you know of the English language Uhm...

      it's not independent, but being invaded doesn't make it a non-country. (Emphasis mine)

      OK, I guess I'm a stupid foreigner, so please enlighten me, what's "not a non-country" then?

      And it's indisputable that whatever the Palestinian territory is, country or otherwise, has been invaded by Israel. You mean I can call it a non-country now?

      The claim that it's "indisputable" simply comes from your ignorance. First of all, Palestinians claim that "Palestinian territory" includes Israel. Second, the area now called "the occupied Palestinian territory" was part of Jordan and Egypt when it was taken. In fact, the original PLO charter relinquishes any claim for that area, acknowledging that it belongs to Jordan and Egypt (they wanted to take over Israel instead).

  34. Nothing new for Proprietary or FOSS by JoeCommodore · · Score: 2, Informative

    People leave things out, forget, or usually just plain didn't know better. Similar things were said for some commercial product a few years back (I think it was Windows or Office, but I could not recall). It was either a language or time zone setting that neglected the country.

    This is like all the software bug news articles - yes, there are bugs in software, but you know what, people actually FIX them, they don't STAY that way there are new versions, etc. It's all just some techno-political FUD mudslinging to influence the ignorant.

    --
    "Enjoy what you're doing! If it becomes drudgery, you're doing it wrong!" - Jim Butterfield
  35. A Cautionary Tale of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A Cautionary Tale of Open Source Social Technologies

    Open Source Social Technologies will cut you wide open!

    /obscure?
    //good karma to the first one to cite the ref

    1. Re:A Cautionary Tale of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  36. FUD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This is nothing but FUD and here's why.

    Any organization using FOSS and/or COTS has to understand its need to QA the combination of parts. This is also true when you write your own software.

    Don't be so gullible.

  37. Re:Palestinian Territories, Occupied...Iraq, Occup by bsDaemon · · Score: 5, Funny

    Being kind of a joker, he then changed Iraq to "Iraq, Occupied". It remains like that to this day, years later. The software, the country, or both?
  38. Re:OMG! OSS means people can make a statement by bky1701 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Actually, no statement was made. The inclusion of Palestine was a glitch, and Israel was not included due to fraud originating from the country. I know this is slashdot, but would it kill maybe 3 or 4 people to actually RTFA before going off on rants? Doing that makes us all look bad. Thank you.

  39. Article shows bias by nwetters · · Score: 5, Informative

    From TFA:

    I pointed out that this isn't just any omission and addition. When you omit Israel and add Palestine (which is not even recognized as a country by the United Nations) to a country drop-down menu, you seem to be making a very loaded political statement.

    Israel was omitted because of fraud from that country, which seems like a good reason. Palestine was probably included in the list because it is recognised by the UN, and is included in ISO 3166-1. If you were to delete Palestine from the list, it would certainly be a very loaded political statement, but its inclusion is not.

    1. Re:Article shows bias by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 1

      Well said.

      Most of us are willing to accept this hateful rhetoric, and there's always a few who do find the answers. Good Job.

      --
    2. Re:Article shows bias by Amitz+Sekali · · Score: 1

      The country list of a notable global US corporation, includes Israel but exclude Palestine. Hell, they even include "controversial" country such as taiwan, considering hongkong as one of a country (this is on 2007), includes country like Western Sahara, etc.

      They finally change it after I notify them of the omission. But to these days, I still can't rule out the possibility that the omission was intentional. I mean, if someone in the corporation is obsessed enough to compile a list of all countries, even the ones barely qualified as country, how can (s)he forget to include palestine?

      --
      If you delay pleasure infinitely, the pleasure will be infinite. (YM)
    3. Re:Article shows bias by jimicus · · Score: 1

      They finally change it after I notify them of the omission. But to these days, I still can't rule out the possibility that the omission was intentional. I mean, if someone in the corporation is obsessed enough to compile a list of all countries, even the ones barely qualified as country, how can (s)he forget to include palestine?

      Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.


      Or, to put it another way: The world is a very big place. It has over two hundred countries. In my opinion, it is far more likely that somewhere lost in the mists of time is one original list on which all of these were based - and this list may not even have originated on the Internet. It could just as easily be someone blindly typing in a list from a 50-year old encyclopaedia as some sort of anti-semitic conspiracy.


      I'd argue that the important issue is how it's dealt with when it's brought to someone's attention. If it's rectified quickly, it was probably an honest mistake. If you get a reply saying "We know. That's intentional" - well, then I'd say you probably have a point.


      (For the record, I'm well aware that the Jewish people have been thoroughly pissed on for a few thousand years and it does still go on. But that doesn't mean that everyone who makes a mistake is doing so because they're some sort of half-crazed Nazi).

    4. Re:Article shows bias by LingNoi · · Score: 1

      I mean, if someone in the corporation is obsessed enough to compile a list of all countries, even the ones barely qualified as country, how can (s)he forget to include palestine?
      Just shows how ignorant you are really, most lists are copy and pasted from somewhere else.
    5. Re:Article shows bias by enos · · Score: 1

      Because not everyone revises their country list every time something makes the news. They probably made the list once and didn't bother to update it because one doesn't expect countries to change. They do, and notice that they did change it after you notified them.

      All the countries you listed (including HK) are on the ISO3166-1 page the GP linked to. So is Puerto Rico, but everybody (rightly) just bunches them in with the US. Palestine is listed as a "Palestinian _Territory_", and if one looks at the news then it's pretty clear there is no statehood and hence it seems to be a part of Israel and not its own "country". If you're looking at cultural separations and not just political ones, should Kurdistan also be on the list? What about Australian Aboriginals?

      I think Palestine should be included, but it's also easy to make the mistake, so don't assume it's malicious. Some people just go by an official list because they don't want to be in the business of deciding what is a country and what isn't.

      --
      boldly going forward, 'cause we can't find reverse
    6. Re:Article shows bias by nzkoz · · Score: 1

      Exactly, we (rails) changed the list to match the UN's list for precisely this reason. At the time I assumed it would prevent controversy.

      Relevant changeset is available on github

      --
      Cheers Koz
    7. Re:Article shows bias by nidarus · · Score: 1

      Palestine was probably included in the list because it is recognised by the UN The Palestinian Authority is recognized by the UN. There is no independent country called "Palestine".

      and is included in ISO 3166-1. The link you provided calls it "Palestinian Territory, Occupied", and that's the whole point.
    8. Re:Article shows bias by Rob+Kaper · · Score: 1

      Israel was omitted because of fraud from that country, which seems like a good reason.

      But what a major user-interface flaw... Israel should simply have been an option, and only after selection an error message should have appeared (using Web 1.0, 2.0 or 3.14 for all I care) explaining why donations from Israel are not possible.

      That would bring clarity to end-users, remove all possible doubt on political motives (if you have those just display them prominently) and we wouldn't waste bandwidth on this discussion that could have been allocated to porn.

    9. Re:Article shows bias by Amitz+Sekali · · Score: 1

      Thanks all,

      Given their average response time, I'd say that their rectification is very quick. So you're likely to be right.

      --
      If you delay pleasure infinitely, the pleasure will be infinite. (YM)
    10. Re:Article shows bias by dbcad7 · · Score: 1
      The link you provided calls it "Palestinian Territory, Occupied", and that's the whole point.

      So then Israel was included ... what's everyone bitching about then ?

      --
      waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
  40. Re:Historical Factoid by arthurpaliden · · Score: 1

    Actually the Palestinian state as created by the UN existed until it was annexed Jordan after the 1948 war.

  41. A proposed edit. by bitspotter · · Score: 1

    "This means that if you're using open-source code, you have got to be very scrupulous and diligent to make sure that another developer hasn't surreptitiously slipped in a political message or a feature that could make your organization look bad or even lose it money.

    And always be mindful that once you let third parties touch your enterprise in any way, decisions they make will be broadcast around the Internet whether you like them or not. Basic Web 2.0 software technologies are proving to be both incredibly powerful and productive, but they can also lead to disastrous results for an organization that isn't paying close enough attention."

    There. That's better. Same point. Less FUD.

    I'll have to add this to my list of criticisms of things as if they don't apply to the things they're being contrasted with. Like blogging vs TV, radio, and newspapers, or Wikipedia vs Britannica.

    Q: Why is closed source/Britannica/TV/newspapers/radio better than open source/Wikipedia/bloggers?
    A: When closed source/Britannica/TV/newspapers/radio makes a mistake, almost no one finds out about it.
    Q: Ah. Wait... that's a feature?"
    A: It is to them. Get it?

  42. Fark Israel by frrrp · · Score: 1

    Australia isn't even on the map of anything I care about. Frrrp

    --
    smilies are for reetards
  43. Re:Huh? by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

    The fact that Taiwan is a Chinese word sort of kills the joke.

    --
    We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
  44. Yes Minister by rishistar · · Score: 1

    The first of the quote listed at this page from British comedy 'Yes Minister' always made me laugh (from the 80s).

    --
    Professor Karmadillo Songs of Science
    1. Re:Yes Minister by rishistar · · Score: 5, Funny

      Actually, here is the quote: Bernard Woolley (on the phone): "No, we can't have alphabetical seating in the Abbey: you would have Iraq and Iran next to each other. Plus Israel and Jordan, all sitting in the same pew. We would be in danger of starting World War III."

      --
      Professor Karmadillo Songs of Science
    2. Re:Yes Minister by gbutler69 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So, have WW III then and get is sorted out. Let the best survive.

      --
      Over-the-top Response Guy! Giving "Over-the-Top Responses" since 1970.
    3. Re:Yes Minister by Daimanta · · Score: 1

      Wow, Chamberlain much? I do not understand that any with a single brain cell would mod this up.

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
    4. Re:Yes Minister by a_real_bast... · · Score: 1

      Misanthropism. Observational evidence suggests i runs quite high around here. (",) And why Chamberlain? If you mean Neville Chamberlain, he tried, and tried, and tried to prevent WWII. His mistake was believing Hitler would do what he promised.

      --
      You're making me think. You won't like me when I'm thinking.
    5. Re:Yes Minister by Daimanta · · Score: 1

      I thought of Chamberlain because his appeasement-politics were probably one of the factors that led to WO2 and the disasters it brought.

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
    6. Re:Yes Minister by a_real_bast... · · Score: 1

      There are those that say appeasement bought time for Britain to start the process of tooling-up for war. Chamberlain's "peace in our time" speech was September 1938; the Spitfire production factory had opened that July. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just contesting your comparison. (",)

      --
      You're making me think. You won't like me when I'm thinking.
  45. Bwahaha by mapkinase · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I am really enjoying comments. Pathetic shitty little country pwned.

    --
    I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
  46. Bad, bad title by rootpassbird · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So, the next time we write code using FLOSS libraries, we must read every line of code?
    How productive is that?
    Where should I stop - 1000 lines, 10k, 100k, or all of the millions of the Linux kernel?

    From the Big Fucking Manual:
    http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/hacker-howto.html#believe2

    Note, however, that "No problem should ever have to be solved twice." does not imply that you have to consider all existing solutions sacred, or that there is only one right solution to any given problem. Often, we learn a lot about the problem that we didn't know before by studying the first cut at a solution. It's OK, and often necessary, to decide that we can do better. Bah! stop the discrimination, you lofty fscking overlords.
    Umm..... "You know who you are."
    --
    Hackers have long memories. It works both ways.
    1. Re:Bad, bad title by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 2, Informative

      Bah! stop the discrimination, you lofty fscking overlords.

      The discrimination will stop after the KH-55's make landfall
      across most of the modern world.

      But at that point it won't really matter will it ?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kh-55

      They are new and improved to with tech from the F117 shot
      down during the Bosnian-Serbian War during the Clinton Era.

      Makes me want to watch Dr. Strangelove, lol.

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
    2. Re:Bad, bad title by Thyrteen · · Score: 1

      Right. The people who use it should read the code, so they know its intention. Do they use every service that says "click here to scan your pc now!"? Or, if you don't read it, take it as it works :)

  47. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  48. Re:OMG! OSS means people can make a statement by mrbluze · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I know this is slashdot, but would it kill maybe 3 or 4 people to actually RTFA before going off on rants? If it would accidentally kill 3 or 4 people, I think it would happen much more often. But no, to RTFA means you will end up making an insightful comment somewhere far down a thread where chances of upward moderation dwindle.
    --
    Do it yourself, because no one else will do it yourself. [beta blockade 10-17 Feb]
  49. Beautiful bias by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Israel is not in quotes, but Palestine is. What's that supposed to mean? Israel is the country that is premised on pretending Palestinians don't exist.

  50. Zionists could win the Olympic gold for whining by ChameleonDave · · Score: 0, Troll

    this means that Israelis can't donate to the organization from these pages

    Well, no. The summary tries to make the inclusion of Palestine out to be extra bad, when in fact it is the opposite. Without the presence of Palestine on the list, Israelis couldn't donate to the organisation. With the presence of Palestine, Israelis can simply use that option. After all, all of the State of Israel is in Palestine, just as the Kingdom of Spain is in Iberia.

    Of course, the whining is nothing to do with donations. It's just to do with the chip Israel carries on its shoulder. They have quite some cheek in complaining about a country being denied to them on paper, when they deny a country to its native population in fact.

  51. and the problem would be... what? by speedtux · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I don't see any risk here that's particular to open source. Analogous issues have come up with proprietary vendors, including Microsoft. And often, there is no way to win, because no matter what you do, someone will be upset.

    As for Israel, personally, I think it is a country and it has a right to exist and I'm glad that the US supports Israel.

    But it is simply a fact that hundreds of millions of people do not share this view. Odd as that view may seem to you or me, it doesn't seem odd to them. And some of those people are open source developers as well.

    Self-important posturing or attempts at trying to control their minds through controlling language isn't going to work. What does work is dialog and compromise. For example, I think Israel should be on the list, as should be "Palestine (occupied territory)". There is also no requirement that these lists be mutually exclusive, so if there are different views of how the world should be divided up, put all of them on there.

    And if you don't like a software product or don't like to support the author because you disagree with his politics or ethics, then simply don't.

  52. A Cautionary Tale of Open Source Social Technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And Swords!

    Natures Hell sticks, they'll fuckin' slice a baby in half!

    Cautionary Tales of Swords

    Swords will fucking cut you wide open!

  53. face reality for once by speedtux · · Score: 1

    I can't just declare my selected land-mass a country and expect people to recognize it,

    No, you can't expect that. But Israel has been recognized. Therefore, it is a country.

    Of course the UN and its constituent Western imperialist powers decided

    That's the way decisions get made in the world, so get used to it.

    It's ironic for a Muslim to complain about "imperialist powers", given the history of the religion. Islam didn't take over the Middle East by gentle persuasion, it conquered, subjugated, oppressed, and killed. The Caliphate and its constituent Muslim imperialist powers were considerably more heavy-handed and vicious than the UN, and considerably less tolerant of other beliefs. The UN isn't perfect, but it is certainly better than the kind of rule and oppression Muslims visited on others for centuries.

    And as for the rabid frothing-at-the-mouth 'pro-Israeli' fools who make absolutely sure that the world knows of the plight of the poor, innocent, fun-loving Zionists, they can go fuck themselves.

    They aren't going to fuck themselves, they are going to fuck you until either (1) you manage to defeat them militarily (not bloody likely), or (2) you find an arrangement you can live with. The West isn't going to let you have exactly what you want, so you'll just have to get used to that. And the West certainly isn't going to let Muslims unite because we remember well what happened last time that happened.

    1. Re:face reality for once by vandan · · Score: 1

      That's the way decisions get made in the world, so get used to it.

      No. That's the way massive injustices are begun. The only way it will end is in conflict. You know about conflict, don't you? Did you ever stop to wonder why every one of your neighbors hates you?

      It's ironic for a Muslim to complain about "imperialist powers"

      I'm not a Muslim. I'm an Australian atheist and socialist. And yes, I criticize my own country's oppression of the Aboriginal owners of this land almost as much as I criticize Israel ( to be fair, Israel's occupation is far more brutal than Australia's ).

      Islam didn't take over the Middle East by gentle persuasion, it conquered, subjugated, oppressed, and killed.

      Religions don't do these things. People do. And at the moment, you're the ones under the spotlight, because you're doing it NOW.

      The UN isn't perfect, but it is certainly better than the kind of rule and oppression Muslims visited on others for centuries.

      What a stupid comparison! What an idiot you are! The UN is a tool of the big imperial powers. It's nothing more and nothing less. The Islamic world of old was a picnic compared to the horror than the UN is causing now. For example, they murdered millions of Iraqis through trade bans that prevented food and medicine getting into Iraq. And of course there's the fact that some countries have veto rights and continually support the Israeli terrorists to keep an nuclear-armed ally in the Middle East. They perpetuate massive crimes against humanity. The old Islamic empire couldn't have caused so much damage even if they wanted to, and they generally didn't.

      They aren't going to fuck themselves, they are going to fuck you until either (1) you manage to defeat them militarily

      The Zionists gave up on their plan of occupying Australia long ago. And your military is so pathetic that it was defeated by the grassroot Hezbollah movement. That was damned funny. As for Israel crushing Australia, um ... I don't think that's going to happen, but you can try if you like.

      The West isn't going to let you have exactly what you want, so you'll just have to get used to that.

      Here's some news for: I AM A PART OF THE WEST. And the tide of public opinion is rapidly changing against you - in particular after the recent Lebanon incursion ( which you were crushed in ) and the most recent round of violence in Palestine that began with the murder of a family on a beach in Gaza. That went down VERY badly around here. As for continued US support, the problem is that the US is faultering as a superpower, and is learning that their own military might ( and yours ) isn't what it used to be. You can't count on big daddy America to protect you forever. And the instant that they remove their support, you'll be attacked from every angle ... maybe even before this. And what can you do? Use 1 nuclear weapon, and I bet you ever possession that I have that the world will respond in kind. The world's patience is running out.

      And the West certainly isn't going to let Muslims unite because we remember well what happened last time that happened.

      What's that?
    2. Re:face reality for once by speedtux · · Score: 1

      And the tide of public opinion is rapidly changing against you - in particular after the recent Lebanon incursion ( which you were crushed in )

      I'm neither Jewish nor Israeli. I don't particularly like Israeli policies or Israel.

      I'm an Australian atheist and socialist.

      Then you have some gall, sitting comfortably on the other side of the globe telling people how to run the Middle East or Europe. I hope you are aware that in many Islamic nations, you'd be subject to the death penalty merely for stating that.

      Here's some news for: I AM A PART OF THE WEST.

      I'm sorry, I mistook you for someone with an actual cause, rather than a spoiled Australian kid with no idea of history.

      What's that?

      Perhaps you should read up on your European history.

      That's the way massive injustices are begun.

      Oh, get over it. The people of the Middle East have been screwing each other over for several millennia, and when they had power, they screwed over whoever else they could. They had an empire and pissed everybody off before pissing it away. Iraq was a regime that murdered its own citizens and its neighbors. For the US to invade it was stupid, but I don't see any "injustice".

      The UN is a tool of the big imperial powers.

      Good. I like empires. The Romans transformed Europe into a civilization, Europeans transformed America into a civilization, Americans reconstructed Europe, and I hope the West can do the same to the Middle East; it's about time.

  54. maybe just maybe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They did it to remind everybody that Palestine is currently being occupied by a bunch of murderous bastards who are being bankrolled by the U.S. taxpayer?

  55. Re:You mean that clicking "Accept Defaults" is ris by MrNaz · · Score: 1

    I am shocked, shocked at the shocking state of affairs when so many are shocked at the shockingly common shocking contents of this shocking article.

    --
    I hate printers.
  56. Why this is an issue with Open Source by qazwart · · Score: 1

    This is an issue, and it is an issue with Open Source.

    First, this isn't an Israel vs. Palestinian rights question. However, it did put this organization in the midst of the issue. His wife's organization trusted a commonly used Open Source widget and got pulled into an unfortunate debate.

    Why is this an Open Source issue? Because the way Open Source works: If I buy a program from Microsoft, I can completely hold Microsoft responsible for the results. However, many times, Open Source software depends upon multiple contributors who themselves might have other contributors. Finding the person responsible for a particular issue can be quite tough. The widget in question was Causes which was produced by Project Agape. Project Agape tried to fob off responsibility upon the Ruby or Rails module ActionView::Helpers::FormOptionsHelper.

    Then, the issue popped up that the real problem is that the payment processor Network for Good doesn't accept credit card payments from Israel. Network for Good claims that "e-commerce experts" list Israel as a high fraud country. But, the territories under Palestinian control is one of the worst places for credit card fraud because of the weakness of the governing structure and the many super legal organizations and militias that operate outside the rule of law. I've looked over the organizations that back Network for Good, but I doubt any of them would have any anti-Israel bias. It could be that Palestine wasn't black listed by Network for Good as a high credit card fraud country because it isn't a country and wasn't on the list given to them by their e-commerce experts. Yet, it is listed in the RoR module.

      So who is responsible? The original organization that used the Causes widget on their page not knowing that in a list of 140+ countries, laid a time bomb that was going to get them in the middle of a political debate they rather avoid, Network for Good that doesn't process payments from Israel, the Causes widget that lists Palestine but not Israel, or the ROR module that lists both Israel and Palestine?

    That's why it is an Open Source issue. It is the power of Open Source to be able to freely build new projects from prebuilt modules. Yet, it is also the curse: Because so many bits and pieces are involved, it becomes impossible to point the Finger o' Blame at the responsible party.

    1. Re:Why this is an issue with Open Source by joocemann · · Score: 1

      I believe the whole point of OPEN SOURCE is that you cannot point a finger. Why? Because if you want it your way, you just make it that way. It is kinda like Burger King, except instead they let YOU go behind the counter and put the pickles on yourself.

  57. Re:You mean that clicking "Accept Defaults" is ris by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am badly shocked too. But that's because my estim kit was faulty. It felt great though.

  58. And where IS most of that country? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Under Jordan. Syria.

    Palestine was NEVER a land. It was a land in as much as Gypsy land is a country: it was where you found them, but they weren't the "owners".

    Israel fucked up big time but with the arabs trying DESPERATELY to remove them from the earth (or at least the bits of earth they can reach) and using the palestinian "homeland" as the excuse, there was never going to be a good outcome.

    If things are to be SERIOUSLY fixed in that region, then ALL countries in the area that house palestinians should give up land and rights to these palestinians (you do know that palestinians have fewer rights in Jordan than they do in Israel, didn't you? Not that they have many rights in Israel, but it does show how this is all hate theatre from the arabs).

  59. Microsoft erased Poland entirely from their map by Nuklearwanze · · Score: 1

    things like a missing line in a file can happen easily. what i find much more disturbing, is that microsoft had their worldmap (the one, displayed in the time settings) wrong for years. from windows 95 up to (and including) windows xp this map had poland entirely erased! instead of the large country the map showed sea. here's a link to a screenshot of the map in question. http://www.depauw.edu/it/helpdesk/images/DST_screen.jpg

  60. WHINE to the ADL call us ANTISEMITES cuz who cares by gd23ka · · Score: 1

    So now I'm supposed to feel upset because somebody decided they didn't like oh HOLY
    HOLY! HOLY! IS! - RA! - EL!. Uuuuh uuuuhh uuuh IS! RA! EL! uuuh! uh! uh! uuuuuuh!

    Call me antisemite, call me a nazi and don't allow your daughter to date a goy. For the
    record I bear not one grudge against anyone decent no matter where they (have to) live
    be it Israel or elsewhere or whether they have semitic genes in them or not.

    Mod me up mod me down... your mod points I had my say.

  61. Re:Huh? by Haeleth · · Score: 1

    When they say "Taiwan", I think they're talking about Formosa.

  62. Killing vs. Re:Overreacting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'It's a touchy subject' doesn't really convey the sense that people are killing each other over this. It's not this specific instance of the issue, (facebook says isreal and palestine don't exist, die, die, DIE!) but yes, for this issue, in general, there is a long drawn out war where people are dying.

    So yeah, I think the emotional content of the reactions is pretty valid.

    Now as for attributing 'blame' and expecting responsibility, I agree with the others. The GPL makes very clear who is in charge of QA.

    Lastly something like a country list should be stored in a db and not hard coded in the software anyways. An app may have a default list, but that should be loaded into your db on installation and accessed from there.

    Irony: The captcha of the post is, "unified".

  63. Moe's Tavern by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    Hello, I'm looking for a Mrs Schluss, first name Anne.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  64. Re:WHINE to the ADL call us ANTISEMITES cuz who ca by dodecalogue · · Score: 1

    I always insist that I'm from my mother, when people ask my geographic background/ethnic blah-blah. That or from the internet. :D Because really, for better or worse (better+5), if we're going to measure "nurture" influence, the internet has had more of an impact on my psyche than many of my family members, and much more than where I happened to have popped out. Also too lazy to look up, but I think Arabs count as semitic, which is pretty funny. Also funny: goyim means "nations", like people who have a nation (like Israel).

  65. Contested territory by qbzzt · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Does the UN objectively determine what is contested territory? How do you determine something like that objectively? If England were to claim Normandy is English (as it has been in the past), would it make it contested territory?

    --
    -- Support a free market in the field of government
    1. Re:Contested territory by pm_rat_poison · · Score: 1

      To clarify: Judging whether a territory is contested is a political decision. In your example, the UN may say that Normandy is French, but the CIA maps might say otherwise.

    2. Re:Contested territory by qbzzt · · Score: 1

      Exactly. The US makes those as political decisions. So does the UN, or more accurately UN officials who are diplomats of particular countries, usually with loyalties to those countries.

      --
      -- Support a free market in the field of government
    3. Re:Contested territory by pm_rat_poison · · Score: 1

      The big difference is that the UN is an international organisation, while the US are (supposedly) just another country. Therefore the US' opinion on the borders of the countries shouldn't be different from the UN's. Otherwise, the US is just barging in on other countries affairs. But that's not a big surprise after all.

    4. Re:Contested territory by qbzzt · · Score: 1

      The UN is not an impartial judge of borders either.

      But yes, the US barges on other countries' affairs. So do other countries that are nearby or big and powerful. India did it by granting the Dalai Lama asylum. Pakistan did it by letting US forces pass through Pakistani soil on their way to Afghanistan. That's a normal part of diplomacy.

      (1) BTW, that doesn't invoke Godwin's law, even if it comes close.

      --
      -- Support a free market in the field of government
  66. Israelis as a different race by qbzzt · · Score: 1

    Hmm, no. You can't normally join races. You can convert to Judaism.

    Besides, "Israeli" isn't a proper subset of "Jewish". There are plenty of Israeli citizens who are Arabs.

    --
    -- Support a free market in the field of government
    1. Re:Israelis as a different race by V!NCENT · · Score: 2, Funny

      You can't normally join races. You'd have to undergo plastic surgery... Like Michael Jackson.
      --
      Here be signatures
    2. Re:Israelis as a different race by acheron12 · · Score: 1

      Besides, "Israeli" isn't a proper subset of "Jewish". There are plenty of Israeli citizens who are Arabs.

      On top of that, "Arab" isn't a proper subset of "non-Jewish". There are many Israelis who are both.
      --
      there is no god but truth, and reality is its prophet
    3. Re:Israelis as a different race by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      Since when would Arabs call Mizrachi Jews Arab?

    4. Re:Israelis as a different race by qbzzt · · Score: 1

      Israeli Arabs are not Mizrachi Jews, but they are Arabs.

      IIRC, Jews in Arab countries were called Arab Jews (in the same way the Christians are called Christian Arabs) until 1948. Today, of course nobody would say that.

      --
      -- Support a free market in the field of government
  67. whole lotta FUD by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    I don't see what it's got to do with web 2.0 either. It's more to do with dumbly copying things without understanding how they work.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  68. Pissy zionists don't get my sympathy by damburger · · Score: 2

    Most people wouldn't kick up such a stink if their country were excluded. They would be mildly annoyed, rather than accusing the person who made the list of being an outright racist. I think they are more pissed off that Palestine was included. Yeah, its a loaded political statement - but the problem is that it is a loaded political statement that recognizes the existence of people that Zionists would rather we all forgot about.

    --
    If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
    1. Re:Pissy zionists don't get my sympathy by nidarus · · Score: 1

      the problem is that it is a loaded political statement that recognizes the existence of people that Zionists would rather we all forgot about.

      Bullshit. Israel recognizes the Palestinian's right to their own state. The main obstacle to the creation of such a state is the HAMAS's demand that Palestine would include all of Israel as well.

      The problem with omitting Israel and putting Palestine, a country that does not yet exists (it's called the Palestinian Authority, or The Occupied Palestinian Territories, depending on your political opinions), is that it implies that the owners of the site embraced the "one big Arab state" (as opposed to the two-state) solution.

      Since this wasn't the case, the ensuing outrage is a bit moronic, but it's pretty obvious why the Israelis would be upset about it.

    2. Re:Pissy zionists don't get my sympathy by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      This isn't even a political issue. Israel was apparently found to have a lot of credit-card fraud, so they were taken off the list. Palestine was left on the list because, given the state of the place, I'm not quite sure there are enough people with credit cards for fraud to happen (so their donations are considered reliable). BIG FUCKING DEAL.

      Don't know how this made Slashdot. Editors must be trolling today.

  69. Private trade embargos. by qbzzt · · Score: 1

    Mr anonymous coward, you have a perfect right to make a bold stand and refuse to buy things manufactured in a country whose policies you disagree with. I hope you agree with the Saudi policies on freedom of religion.

    Since labor and land are both expensive in Israel, there isn't much manufacturing there for export. Unless you refuse to use services from Israel, or from companies that do product development in Israel (IBM and Intel spring to mind), this is a meaningless gesture.

    --
    -- Support a free market in the field of government
  70. Not just social networking..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A company I used to work for got bombarded with emails to all levels of the company in all departments because we followed ISO 3166-2 and listed Taiwan as a province of China instead of it's own independent nation on all of our sites and product pages. Coincidentally attacks on our servers shot up at the same time. The suits (against the advice of pretty much everyone in engineering several of whom were from China or Taiwan) decided not to offend any potential customers from Taiwan and listed them as an independent nation.

    One week later we were bombarded with e-mails to all levels of the company in all departments for listing Taiwan as an independent nation, several of the e-mails even referenced ISO_3166-2. The suits then decided following the standard was a good idea and went back to listing Taiwan as a province of China.

    Caving to pressure from groups of international disputes is a very bad idea, there are almost 7 billion people on this earth and any decision you make may upset some of those 7 billion.

    1. Re:Not just social networking..... by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      Well, yes, but people objecting to presence of Palestine on the list are just stupid. Those people exist, they live in, according the UN, 'Occupied Palestine Territories', which is shortened, just like every other name on the list. (Have you ever seen 'The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland' on a country list? (1)

      How exactly should they be referred to? This isn't like Taiwan, where there's a debate over who the legitimate government is...Israel does not assert that they legally own Palestine and wants people there to be called Israelis. (2) They have to be called something.

      And arguing about the technically sovereignty of a state, or the legitimate government, does not mean the state itself does not exist, for example, Iraq has been a 'State' this whole time, it just hasn't been a sovereign one for a short span.

      Statehood does not require sovereignty. Americans often do no quite grasp this because our Federal government ran roughshod over the assumptions of states during the Civil War, but the rest of the world understands this.

      Even the US makes a distinction between the government of a country, which may or may not be sovereign, and may or may not be recognized by us, and the existence of the country itself. We don't recognize the government of Cuba. We recognize the existence of the country of Cuba, though, or we could hardly ban business with that country.

      Even if a place doesn't recognize the government of Palestine, Palestine itself still exists, and is still a country.

      And the exclusion of Israel had nothing to do with politics and everything to do with a deliberate exclusion for fraudulent activities. Which was probably mentioned as default option in the documentation of the OSS project.

      1) Ironically, speaking of Northern Ireland and names, there's a country officially named, simply, as 'Ireland', which is the rest of that island, which is often listed as 'Republic of Ireland' on country lists.

      2) Also ironically, if Israel doesn't do something about Palestine soon, they will soon be risking the most hilarious solution to that whole mess...that Palestinians give up on their own state and demand the Israeli vote which, when combined with existing Arab Israelis, would make Jews a minority in the resulting country.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  71. How about OZ? by flyneye · · Score: 1

    I live in Kansas,perhaps Oz should go in drop down boxes if Israelis have to tolerate a Palestine drop down.
              Both places are imaginary yet refer to actual geographic locals.
            It's just a matter of improving public school educations,I'm sure.

    --
    *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
  72. Oh puh-leeeze. by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1

    It's open-source, right? This means that you can modify the source code, right? So if it's a such a big deal, well, you just add the proper code in the drop-down box.

    * * *

    Now, {$OCCUPIER_COUNTRY} (the one which occupies {$OCCUPIED_COUNTRY}) is no different than any other rabid religious state. Any attack or perceived attack on it will be perceived as anti{$RELIGION}ism. There is no escaping that.

    The fuckheads who rule any rabid religious state have had their brains thoroughly corrupted by the nonsense that is their religion, and are therefore immune both to clues and intelligent reasoning.

    So it is quite not suprising that they would fuckeadly hammer the poor website who's guilty of ignoring their particular brand of fuckheadness.

  73. Macedonia dispute.. by Mhtsos · · Score: 1

    Another example: every country list I've seen online except a few Greek ones lists the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia simply as "Macedonia". Political dispute aside, I bet every developer who types the term into the list thinks what a great job he's done of shortening that big long name that messes up the site's alignment, oblivious of the fact that he's taking part in a long and complex political problem.

  74. Block 'em by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Israel is right up there with Nigeria on the fraud front, not to mention smuggling, dope traffic and white slavery. No doubt Palestine would be too if it had the chance. For the past 3 yrs I've blocked all Russian, Israeli, Nigerian and Chinese sites. If you're like me you'll find you don't miss them at all.

  75. Re:WHINE to the ADL call us ANTISEMITES cuz who ca by gd23ka · · Score: 1

    Yes you bet Arabs are semites. Incidentally the ironic part about those calling people
    "uuuuh uuuhh ANTISEMITE! uuuh! uuuuuh! ANTISEMITE!" are not semites themselves
    nor do they care a whole lot for semites. There are two major kinds of jews, the
    sephardic jews who are as semite as the arabs and then there are the Azkhenazi
    jews from which the ruling elite in Israel recruits from. The Azkhenazi are not
    semite ... in fact they despise semites both jewish and non-jewish but they're the
    ones that will screem "UUUUuuuuh ANTISEMTIE!" at the top of their lungs to defend
    the very much in fact NAZI regime they have been _permitted_ to build in what was
    once Palestine and DARE call that Israel

    I hate your fence, zionist scum. I hate your bombing of children, tearing down house
    with people inside them just because someone fought back in that house,
    denying food, water aid and medicine to the arab population you're slowly killing.
    You are ZIONIST SCUM and even though I AM FAR FROM BEING ANTISEMITE...
    I AM ANTIZIONIST AND PROUD OF IT!

  76. Re:WHINE to the ADL call us ANTISEMITES cuz who ca by dodecalogue · · Score: 1

    oops, you fell into the us/them bullshit I retract my agreement

  77. Correction by Max+Littlemore · · Score: 1

    An anti-Semite used to be someone who hated Jews. Now an anti-Semite is someone hated BY Jews.

    A Semite used to be someone from one of the semitic language group, which includes ancient Hebrew and Arabic. An anti-Semite therefore is someone opposed to Semites, someone opposed to (now extinct) Isrealites, Arabs, Babylonians (Iraqi) and more.

    In the 19th and 20th centuries the word Semite was corrupted to refer specifically to Jews. Through this corruption anti-Semite became synonymous with anti Jew. In the later half of the twentieth century the term has been corrupted further by European Jews and their descendants who were in fact mostly descended from Khazars, a non Semitic Eurasian group, to mean someone who modern Israelis and Zionists hate.

    In reality, if we use the uncorrupted version of the word, most of the aggressive actions of Israel have been genuinely anti-Semitic. They seem quite happy to wipe out Palestine, go to war with Lebanon and Syria and they supported the war with Iraq. These are all anti-Semitic acts.

    --
    I don't therefore I'm not.
  78. The colonies by hadaso · · Score: 1

    Then English(UK) locale could list the USA as "The colonies"!

  79. Short shelf life by dugeen · · Score: 1

    This issue will shortly be rendered moot when the Israelis trigger off WW3 by attacking Iran, with the permission if not encouragement of their American military and financial backers.

  80. What does this have to do with open source? by argent · · Score: 1

    1. Why would it make a difference whether the payment processor is using open source software or not? If they won't take donations from certain countries they can implement that on a closed source platform just as easily.

    2. Only open source software can be misconfigured, or has problems with commas in unexpected places?

    This has nothing to do with open source, and everything to do with not looking under the hood before you buy a used car.