Slashdot Mirror


On Retirement, Israeli General Takes Credit for Stuxnet Attacks

dinscott writes "Last month, The New York Times ran a story about Stuxnet having been developed by the Americans and the Israelis as a part of a joint project, but it was based on claims by confidential sources. It now seems that the information from these sources was correct. The Haaretz — Israel's oldest daily newspaper — reports on a surprising video that was played at a party organized for General Gabi Ashkenazi's last day on the job."

334 comments

  1. the video claims Israeli involvement by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 2

    Did I miss something in the article, where does it confirm US involvement?

    --
    http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
    1. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't. Another non story posting.

    2. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Funny

      The Haaretz — Israel's oldest daily newspaper — reports

      However the Bible, the world's first and oldest printed book, fails to mention any aspect of this story, including the General's involvement.

      You obviously forgot to check the Apocrypha.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    3. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It never said it confirmed, it says clearly that the new york times had a story where they mentioned the US may be involved, based on some loose evidence.

      ___

      Use "SlashView" on WP7 to view Slashdot on the go.

    4. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The US taxpayer's money has paid for it all. What else is there really to say about US involvement?

    5. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by icebike · · Score: 1

      Says who.
      Israel has a lot more to lose with a nuclear Iran than does the US, and they have been doing deep projects like this since dirt.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    6. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      US military aid to Israel is almost entirely spent on arms from the United States and joint research programs into weapons.

      Israel already has an established software industry without aid from the US.

    7. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      Modern Israel loves their spies and doing stuff like this.

      They get their tradition for spying from Bible to the founding of Israel.

      "Send men that they may spy out the land of Canaan, which I give to the children of Israel; of every tribe of their fathers shall you send a man, everyone one a prince among them."(Numbers 13:1-2)

    8. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by pegdhcp · · Score: 2

      Israel already has an established software industry without aid from the US.

      Most people (in SW industry) I know from Israel have their background in Silicon Valley and most companies have their background on people who met while working in States. Again most (if not all) do not have USA governmental support, but US private sector had lost lots of brilliant people to Israel software industry. While this is true for some other countries as well, I guess Israel has a bigger percentage when normalized in population etc.

    9. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by bug1 · · Score: 1

      The first rule of slashvertizing is you DONT talk about slashvertising.

    10. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      The recently found Dead Sea stone slabs, however, describe these events in quite amazing detail:

      "..and behold! The Worm of God will hacketh the infidels' things and stop the things from spinning and on the last day [at the job] god's general will rejoice with Styx."

    11. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by Dracos · · Score: 1

      Iran, even if they ever did manage to create a nuclear bomb, would never drop it on Israel, because the entire Arab world would turn against them. Why? Wind. The prevailing winds in the region would blow the fallout from Israel to the northeast, over Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and maybe even Iran to the Caspian Sea. Otherwise, it would get blown over Saudi Arabia or Egypt.

      As backward or simple as some may perceive Iran to be, I'm sure they know that fallout doesn't stay in the immediate blast zone.

    12. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by icebike · · Score: 2

      The entire Arab World would be too busy dancing in the streets to blame anyone.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    13. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by Rakshasa+Taisab · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The Haaretz — Israel's oldest daily newspaper — reports

      However the Bible, the world's first and oldest printed book, fails to mention any aspect of this story, including the General's involvement.

      I didn't know they had translated the bible to Chinese thousand years ago...

      --
      - These characters were randomly selected.
    14. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by timeOday · · Score: 1

      One bad (and almost certain) outcome of Iran obtaining nukes - especially homegrown - would be an increase in nationalistic pride and therefore support for the current government (which appears to have significant internal opposition, although probably not majority opposition, at the moment). People love leaders who make them feel strong and secure.

    15. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by tsm_sf · · Score: 2

      Ask yourself this. What weights more, the Bible or the Haaretz?

      Well worldy scholars and scientists have known for quite some time that the Bible outweighs the Haaretz here by a pound to a pound and a half sometimes, outweighs the Talmud sometimes by three to four pounds, outweighs that mighty Koran sometimes by five to ten pounds. You think about that.

      --
      Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
    16. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by fractoid · · Score: 1, Insightful

      No, they only do that when there's TV cameras around. Notice that sometimes when you're seeing "jubilant arabs" on TV, most of them are just standing around wondering what's going on until they see the camera swing towards them, at which point they look around to see what the last people in front of the camera were doing, which is usually jumping up and down waving their arms in the air, and copy that.

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    17. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by smash · · Score: 0

      Well, given that the bible is fictional, you've got a better chance of getting the straight dope from the newspaper. Still not anywhere near reliable though.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    18. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Did I miss something in the article, where does it confirm US involvement?

      The P-1 uran-hexafluoride centrifuge set, which Libya gave up a few years ago after making friends with USA and France, was passed on to the zionist entity by usgovt. The full set, almost identical to Iran's, was assembled at the zionist A-bomb factory at Dimona and ran to experiment with the Stuxnet attack code on a live rig.

      BTW, if you wonder: type mark P-1 means Pakistan-1. A paki scientist developed the low-tech, low-cost UF6 centifgue cascade for the dutch in the late 1960s, then he eloped with the plans to his homeland and later on also sold the product to North Korea, Iran and Libya.

    19. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did I miss something in the article, where does it confirm US involvement?

      There's a lot of tinfoil-hat types who instantly change the word "Israel" to "USA" in their minds anytime they see it. To them, Israel is just a "Front" the US is using to cleverly hide our Drive for World Domination, so Israel==USA and nothing you can say will ever make them see it any differently.

    20. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by dbIII · · Score: 0

      US education isn't just failing with Ebonics instead of English yawl!

    21. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Why would they nuke Israel to help out Syria anyway for no possible gain to Iran?
      When Iran get nukes instead it will be "Bahrain - you've got a nice island there, shame if somebody nuked it. Want to buy some insurance?"

    22. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by gtall · · Score: 1

      You are forgetting the Shi'ite vs. Sunni civil war. The Iranian Regime doesn't give a flying rat's ass about the Israelis one way or another except that the Sunni Arabs hate the Israelis. The Iranians believe if they are the ones to knock off Israel, either with a nuke or their dogs Hezbollah, then the Shi'ites will be seen as the true branch of Islam. They aren't particular how they do it, and if a bunch of Sunni's die in the process, that's less opposition for the Shi'ites.

      Religion is here to save humanity, even if it has to kill them to do it.

    23. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by FourthAge · · Score: 1, Insightful

      This is absolutely true. Actually, the Arabs don't care about Israel very much at all, and have certainly never celebrated attacks on Israel or the US, its sole Western supporter. The guys with sign boards saying things like "Death to Israel!" and "Drive them into the Sea" are in fact Jewish actors hired by Mossad to justify Israeli aggression against the Middle East. What you think is "the streets of Iran" is in fact a blue-screen television studio in the basement of a government building in Tel Aviv. Why, even the so-called "Hamas" is actually a false flag operation operated by Mossad, which fires rockets into Israel on a regular basis to stir up hate. The Israelis want us to believe that they're fighting for their own survival against aggressive enemies on all sides, but we all know the truth: that they started it and then made it look like their enemy did it.

      Except (of course) all of the above is total bollocks. But it's amazing how mainstream those Zionist Conspiracies have become lately, isn't it? How people are willing to believe anything, no matter how retarded, if it justifies their hatred of Israel.

      --
      The tao of democracy: the government you can vote for is not the real government.
    24. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by Dunbal · · Score: 0

      Printed.... what part of printed and printing press and Guttenberg did you fail to understand?

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    25. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by FuckingNickName · · Score: 2

      There are governments and media corporations with pro-Israel interests. There are governments and media corporations with anti-Israel interests. Some of these groups represent extreme views, others more moderate. But each one has a bias and its output will reflect its interests.

      You, OTOH, are erecting a crazy straw man, harming Israel by painting such a ridiculously polarised picture that you overshadow reasoned argument from those moderates who try to defend Israel.

    26. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by Moraelin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What part about the movable-type printing press -- albeit with more expensive ceramic letters -- being invented by the 1040 AD by Bi Sheng in China, did you fail to understand? Basically before being snarky and condescending, do make sure that you're not the one who's the ignorant idiot.

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    27. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by mangu · · Score: 1

      The Haaretz â" Israel's oldest daily newspaper â" reports

      However the Bible, the world's first and oldest printed book, fails to mention any aspect of this story, including the General's involvement.

      I didn't know they had translated the bible to Chinese thousand years ago...

      I didn't know the Chinese had invented movable type thousand years ago.

      The devil is in the details. The Chinese and Koreans had a process of printing that used movable type as part of the process, but the task of making the plates needed for each page was so laborious that few books were printed that way.

      From wikipedia: During the reign of Chingli, [1041â"1048] Bi Sheng, a man of unofficial position, made movable type. His method was as follows: he took sticky clay and cut in it characters as thin as the edge of a coin. Each character formed, as it were, a single type. He baked them in the fire to make them hard. He had previously prepared an iron plate and he had covered his plate with a mixture of pine resin, wax, and paper ashes. When he wished to print, he took an iron frame and set it on the iron plate. In this he placed the types, set close together. When the frame was full, the whole made one solid block of type. He then placed it near the fire to warm it. When the paste [at the back] was slightly melted, he took a smooth board and pressed it over the surface, so that the block of type became as even as a whetstone."

      Gutenberg's process was much simpler and faster, it became a practical solution, instead of a curiosity, that's why he's regarded as the inventor of "printing".

    28. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by Moraelin · · Score: 2

      However, the claim he was answering to was "the Bible, the world's first and oldest printed book", which is clearly and provably false, not "the first that was printed cheaply enough for Europeans".

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    29. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by peragrin · · Score: 1

      The bible is about as fictional as listening to WWI stories from the son of a vet who served there.

      While accurate in a broad sense the details may or may not be so accurate. The bible's biggest problem is that it has been translated so many times that the original hebrew and greek versions differ from the modern day versions.

      And if you use the King James version you are specifically using a version dumbed down by a king to make it easier for the stupid people to understand.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    30. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by Muad'Dave · · Score: 1

      Hamas has always sounded to me like a Spanish verb that needs conjugation: hamo, hamas, hama, hamamos, hamais, haman.

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    31. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by lxs · · Score: 1

      Next you'll be claiming that the Chinese invented gunpowder, noodles and the compass as well.

    32. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      The Haaretz — Israel's oldest daily newspaper — reports

      However the Bible, the world's first and oldest printed book, fails to mention any aspect of this story, including the General's involvement.

      I didn't know they had translated the bible to Chinese thousand years ago...

      Translated? It was written in, and Jesus spoke fluent modern English!

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    33. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the fuck did that have to do with the post you replied to?

      Oh. Right. You were just replying to FP to get prime page placement. Nothing to see here, moving on.

    34. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      Iran is still trying to enrich uranium, and you are already assuming the fallout of big thermonuclear bombs? If they make nuclear bombs, they'll start with mono stage ones, and the fallout won't be a concern for anyone out of Israel or Palestine.

      And, if their target is Israel, they'll probably stop there, since the country is so small one just needs a few mono stage bombs to destroy it anyway.

    35. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      The best Chinese invention is the fork. Kind of puts chopsticks in perspective.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    36. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by siddesu · · Score: 1

      Doth it not maketh the things spinneth faster? Methinks thee scrolls are teh faketh.

    37. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by Nick+Number · · Score: 1

      Hamas has always sounded to me like a Spanish verb that needs conjugation: hamo, hamas, hama, hamamos, hamais, haman.

      To me it's a tasty chickpea spread.

      Mmm...terrorism.

      --
      Promote proofreading. Don't mod up sloppy posts.
    38. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't actually see that in the article, but it might be in the video.

      Either way I'd certainly *hope* so and it wouldn't surprise me a bit.

    39. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by alcmaeon · · Score: 1

      Good point. Mod this man up!

    40. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      He would have been okay if he'd just stuck with "the world's oldest printed book", instead of "first and oldest," since it is arguably the oldest book currently being printed. Sometimes being overly specific can really be problematic.

      Speaking of which, note the "arguably" part above. There are a few other works which _might_ be older, but it depends a lot on your definition of "book", whether you want to date the origin of the bits of text or the codification of the whole book, and a lot of archaeological debate.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    41. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by idontgno · · Score: 1

      Did somebody say "Jamón"?* Yummy! Too bad not halal, or kosher.

      *Hey! When the hell did Slashdot add support for accent and diacritical marked html entities? That never used to work!

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    42. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Stuxnet was designed to make the centrifuges rapidly change speeds which would cause them to fail quickly if not caught, which would make them stop spinning...

      from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet

      Stuxnet installs malware into memory block DB890 of the PLC that monitors the Profibus messaging bus of the system.[30] When certain criteria are met, it periodically modifies the frequency to 1410 Hz and then to 2 Hz and then to 1064 Hz, and thus affects the operation of the connected motors by changing their rotational speed.[35] It also installs a rootkit—the first such documented case on this platform—that hides the malware on the system and masks the changes in rotational speed from monitoring systems.

      This would make the motors burn out pretty quickly, as well as poison the enrichment process.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    43. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      citation please?

      http://www.trivia-library.com/b/story-behind-inventors-and-inventions-fork.htm

      Maybe I have a poor link, but it indicates Byzantine.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    44. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      I would say it even defeats their cause to attack Israel in such a way as it would destroy Jerusalem which is a holy city in all the religions of the area.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    45. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by thijsh · · Score: 1

      The bible is about as fictional as listening to WWI stories from the son of a vet who served there.

      I have yet to hear the WWI story of a soldier being killed who rises after lying lifeless in the trenches for three days...

    46. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by thijsh · · Score: 1

      The hatred is fueled from both sides, that fact is obvious for any casual observer... Both sides in this conflict are wrong and deserve each other so much it would almost be political poetry if it wasn't for all those people suffering and dying as 'collateral damage'. Israel has also historically demonstrated it's capable of some very dirty tricks too, so don't pretend it's all conspiracy theories when you can bet on it they are pulling some tricks right now...

    47. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by peragrin · · Score: 1

      No but I have heard of a couple that have begun to exaggerate their involvement. The worst offenders are usually great great grandkids of confederate soldiers. Seems like every single of them knew General Lee personally, and worked with him closely.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    48. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by tophermeyer · · Score: 1

      That's a very rational and objective point. Hopefully the Iranian military sees that as well.

    49. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by Will.Woodhull · · Score: 1

      My pet theory is that it was bankrolled by the Saudis, constructed in Bahrain, with the USA, possibly with help from China or Russia, developing the code and Israel's Mossad handing the initial distribution. I base this on the incredible care that was taken to avoid any collateral damage, especially to world financial systems, and the remarkably successful deployment.

      I still wonder what other malware may be at work in Iran. Whoever put together stuxnet, I doubt that they did it as a one-time thing. There are probably other arrows in their quiver, and I'm thinking that some of those may already be working their way through Iranian missile command / control systems, and so on.

      --
      Will
    50. Re:the video claims Israeli involvement by Smiths · · Score: 1

      They wouldnt drop it on Israel because unlike Israel, Iran has not in recent history attacked its neighbors. Unlike Israel, Iran is not expanding its territory. For goodness sakes, dont just believe what the government/media say...think for yourselves...what would Iran gain but killing millions of people...nothing.

      Iranians do not want to destory Israel or kill Jewish people...that is creation of war mongers in Israel/US. The Iranians want to see an end to the problem of the 4 million refugees that were created because of Israel...there is clear international law that refugees have a right to return to the land they come from...however Israel is not a regular democracy...its a democracy with a forced Jewish majority..so they refuse to allow the people who were forced from their homes to return. So Iranians and many other people want to see an end to this special type of democracy...to Zionism as it keeping 4 million Palestenians from having justice.

      mondoweiss dot net

  2. Re:Beautiful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    or are just the biggest jerks.

  3. Shock! by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 1

    and Awe!

  4. Cyber terrorisim by grapeape · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So did he get added to the "no fly" and terrorist watch lists?

    1. Re:Cyber terrorisim by bsDaemon · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but then he just hacked the no-fly list and its like it never even happened.

    2. Re:Cyber terrorisim by monkyyy · · Score: 0

      he probably was all ready on it as i dont think we want higher ups in other governments freely moving in and out of here

      --
      warning pointless sig
    3. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Draek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Of course not, he's a Freedom Fighter (tm).

      Remember, it's not terrorism if the US or its allies does it.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    4. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you like, we can allow Iran to test out their new toy on your house.

      . So I assume you wouldn't mind Israel treating your house like it were on the Gaza strip, your family like Palestinians, and in the end using their toys on your neighbourhood, just because Iran might be developing a similar toy to those Israel already has for years?

    5. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A uniformed soldier attacking a rival country's state owned weapons development program? That's not terrorism ( a non-state actor against civilian targets ) it's an act of war.

    6. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You're an idiot, Israel doing bad things to does not what Iran is doing/going to do any better.

      They are both (Iran and Israel) are equally bad.

    7. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Remember, it's not terrorism if the US or its allies does it.

      Actually, it's not terrorism if software targets the machines of a state's nuclear weapons program.
      My definition of terrorism has something to do with actual violence against civilians.

    8. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank God you didn't allow Iraq to test out their toys on my house. God bless you!

    9. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Kokuyo · · Score: 0

      Wooosh!

    10. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      My definition of terrorism has something to do with actual violence against civilians.

      What, like bulldozing people's homes, often without giving them the chance to retrieve any posessions? Attacking schools with helicopter gunships when the children are outside playing? Herding people into ghettos and forcing them into makeshift camps?

      Make the Israelis play nice first.

    11. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Riceballsan · · Score: 1

      Assuming he's not just some lunatic taking credit for it and whether the government funded/provided assistance in the project. For all we know it was one group of 15 people with no government oversight (not likely considering the value estimated of the exploits used but technically not impossible). Also in this case while no lives were lost or harmed, the worm certainly hit a ton of civilians. I personally agree with you 100% that in no way shape or form should a virus/attack be referred to as terrorism, I hate the term terrorism. I just disagree that someone in uniform who's main target is a military organization is automatically excluded from the possibility of being a rogue terrorist on those grounds. If a US general strapped a bomb to his chest and say went after say a top secrete military craft, target was the plane but 5 civilians died in the process, and there was no evidence that the guy wasn't working alone (or say was working with a non-military group), then that would be terrorism, the intended target and the persons rank are irrelevant, where the orders/funding comes from is what matters, and I still say the nature of the crime as I don't think non-violent crimes of any sort can be fairly called terrorism.

    12. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did Iran start extradition proceedings against this terrorist or not? Did Interpol issue arrest warrant or not? Oh, I forgot, Interpol doesn't get involved in such petty crimes, they focus on consensual sex.

    13. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You make it sound like it was a choice between either creating and releasing Stuxnet, or letting Iran cover the world with a-bombs.

      Isn't that a false dichotomy?

    14. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wish the "Oh, they are outsourcing this and that to third world hell holes" lunatics would realize the truth of this and start demanding that we stop outsourcing the QA of our weapons to the third world countries. But, hey, them being lunatics that is not going to happen.

    15. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too late... Iran and Israel are for all purposes already in a state of war and have been for decades
      Iran withdrew it's ambassador and refuses to recognize the state of Israel since about 1979. Since then it has repeatedly perpetrated numerous actions suitable as causus belli.

      Israel is also technically in a state of war with most arab countries like Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, etc. since they all sent soldiers who attempted to drive the Jews into to sea ever since 1948.

      Losers, LOL.

    16. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, he isn't allowed to fly to Iran!

    17. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well my friends,the term terrorism (or freedom fighting) is used when a non-goverment organization commits an act against the law of the country in which it is commited. Do you see now why it's wrong to reffer to it as terrorism?
      Also, if Israel is attacking Iran (which is still not certain) then it is an act which is a part of a war (silent as it may be) between the two states

    18. Re:Cyber terrorisim by h4rm0ny · · Score: 1

      well my friends,the term terrorism (or freedom fighting) is used when a non-goverment organization commits an act against the law of the country in which it is commited.

      That's complete bollocks. A company dodging taxes would be terrorism by that definition. Terrorism is the use of attacks against a population in order to coerce the government into accepting your demands.

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
    19. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, WTF? Assuming that they did it, if this is not a legit military operation, I don't know what is: Israel targets a hostile country that has repeatedly threatened to wipe it off the map, hitting *only* the installations that would enable Iran to do that, with no civilian casualties and very little collateral damage. Unless of course you buy the Iranian line that "it's just for energy generation, never mind that we're swimming in oil and making weapons-grade uranium, while reactors only need 5% enriched". So how is this not self-defense?

    20. Re:Cyber terrorisim by nosferatu1001 · · Score: 1

      Because attacking first is rarely considered to be "self defense"

    21. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Clsid · · Score: 1

      Yet I don't see anybody complaining that much about Israel, so what's your point?

    22. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Clsid · · Score: 0

      State's nuclear weapons program? You should really stop repeating what the media feeds you. The US govt and Israel are pushing that agenda but to this day there is no proof whatsoever to that claim. Terrorism, according to the UN: "Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them"

    23. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? So if a man threatens you with a gun and you somehow take his gun away, that's not self-defence?

    24. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So sabotaging the iranian nuclear program using a worm that had the effect to slightly change the speed at which centrifugers operate was done with the intent to strike terror inside the hearts of the iranians to effect internal political change in Iran.

    25. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Of course not, he's a Freedom Fighter (tm).

      Remember, it's not terrorism if the US or its allies does it.

      Anybody who agrees with the activity calls it "Freedom Fighting" and everybody who disagrees calls it "Terrorism". This isn't something specific to the US, or our allies, every country on the planet uses this kind of double-speak. Stop trying to pretend like the US is some bastion of Evil. I don't judge all the British based on the idiot actions of BP or their Parliment. I don't judge all Iranians based on the horrific human rights abuses of their Theocracy. I don't judge all Russians on the Politboro's Afghan war plans, and I don't judge people in China based on the actions of their Dictator.

      Maybe someday you'll be able to understand that what you see on the news is not an accurate reflection of reality. Until then, I'll continue to pity small-minded fools like yourself.

    26. Re:Cyber terrorisim by JSBiff · · Score: 1

      It's not murder if a cop shoots an armed person who draws a gun on them. It's not a felony for law enforcement officers to carry concealed weapons. It's not assault when a doctor cuts you open with a knife. It's not theft when a banker takes your money and puts it in the bank's vault.

      Is it really so hard to understand that every nation gives a few sanctioned individuals the legal right to do what needs to be done, but can still make it illegal for everyone else?

    27. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes... remind me, which countries in the region developed nuclear weapons against the non-proliferation treaties? Does this happen to include Israel? Bunch of fucking hypocrites - they should give up their nukes if they want their neighbors not to have them, a power imbalance like this clearly creates tensions.

    28. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut the fuck up and open your eyes then.

    29. Re:Cyber terrorisim by slackbheep · · Score: 1

      Not if you're pointing a grenade launcher at him and everyone he knows.

    30. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course not, he's a Freedom Fighter (tm).

      Remember, it's not terrorism if the US or its allies does it.

      Oh grow a brain, it was used to prevent someone from developing nuclear weapons - if it were implemented everywhere the world would only be a better place. There's no need for your liberal propaganda this time hippy, we're on the same side in wanting non-proliferation, its just while some of you sit around hugging trees and bitching over your sore vaginal outbreaks over not eating enough meat the rest of us smoke a strain of weed that doesn't make us fucking retarded.

    31. Re:Cyber terrorisim by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      1 - Iran is trying to make nuclear bombs. That is clear, for energy generation they'd work on different projects. So, Israel is threatened by it.

      2 - Calling Stuxnet an "attack", like the ones you have in a war is quite a spin.

    32. Re:Cyber terrorisim by suprcvic · · Score: 1

      It's not terrorism regardless because it wasn't intended to terrorize a population, it was intended to cause problems for their nuclear program.

    33. Re:Cyber terrorisim by cusco · · Score: 1

      Are under the misapprehension that Stux only targets nuclear centrifuges? It targets Siemens equipment, a lot of which is used in hospitals, chemical plants and power generation/distribution facilities. Mossad has never given a flying fuck if their actions took out civilians, as long as those civilians were not Israelis. If Stux didn't kill people in hospitals and factories all around the world it was more a matter of luck than anything else.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    34. Re:Cyber terrorisim by QuantumPion · · Score: 0

      When you say "bulldozing people's homes", by people you mean the family of suicide bombers whom encourage their children to carry out suicide attacks for large cash payments?

      And when you say "Attacking schools with helicopter gunships when the children are outside playing" by 'outside playing', did you perchance mean to say 'playing human shield for the Hezbollah terrorists with mortars and rocket launchers'?

      And when you mention"herding people into ghettos", I don't think it's very nice to bring Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan's abandonment of their citizens into this discussion, I mean we were talking about Israel right?

    35. Re:Cyber terrorisim by QuantumPion · · Score: 1

      Yes... remind me, which countries in the region developed nuclear weapons against the non-proliferation treaties?

      The country that is surrounded by 6 hostile neighboring nations whom have all vowed to annihilate said country down to the last child, have declared war against said country multiple times in the past few decades, and if had nuclear weapons would use them on aforementioned country in a heartbeat.

    36. Re:Cyber terrorisim by cusco · · Score: 1

      If Iran is trying to make nuclear weapons, why do they cooperate with the IAE? To date absolutely **NO ONE** has encountered any actual evidence that's the goal of Iran's nuclear program. The country's second-largest energy resource, after oil and before natural gas, is uranium. It makes complete sense that they'd want to use it to generate power. When asked in the 1970s why Iran wanted to build a nuclear power plant when they had all that oil the Shah responded, "Petroleum is too precious to burn."

      Amusing that Israel and the US had no problem with Iran building a nuclear power plant while the Shah was still in power. I guess if your secret police kill off 9 percent of your population that automatically makes you a good guy. Oh, and you buy that plant and its fuel from GE.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    37. Re:Cyber terrorisim by QuantumPion · · Score: 1

      Not if you're pointing a grenade launcher at him and everyone he knows.

      How does disproportionate use of force have anything to do with it? If a man threatens you with a knife, so you pull out your gun and shoot him, that is not self defense?

      Anyways this case with Israel is more like a man threatening you with a machine gun, and in "self defense" you yell some nasty insults about his mother at him. And then everyone calls you a terrorist. Oy.

    38. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Apuleius · · Score: 1

      Iran blew up a Jewish community center in Argentina, in 1994, killing dozens. That puts Israel's actions well within the purvieew of self-defense.

    39. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Ice+Tiger · · Score: 1

      Yeah but maybe if those 7 nations have nukes then maybe they might have to try real dialog rather than kinetic attacks which can escalate into nuclear warfare.

      Look at India and Pakistan.

      --
      "Because we are not employing at entry level, offshoring will kill our industry stone dead."
    40. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Ice+Tiger · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't that be down to Argentina to resolve?

      --
      "Because we are not employing at entry level, offshoring will kill our industry stone dead."
    41. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      When you say "bulldozing people's homes", by people you mean the family of suicide bombers whom encourage their children to carry out suicide attacks for large cash payments?

      Yep, those. They would have encouraged their children to go to the regular army (and get paid to risk their life killing other countries citizens) like any patriotic citizen of a free country but their country is forbidden to have a regular army.

      And when you say "Attacking schools with helicopter gunships when the children are outside playing" by 'outside playing', did you perchance mean to say 'playing human shield for the Hezbollah terrorists with mortars and rocket launchers'?

      Yep, those. Because children being used as human shields does not make them ethical targets to shoot at. It is considered bad practice to shoot hostages down to kill the terrorists.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    42. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Palestinians are not citizens of Egypten, Lebanon, Syria and Jordan. Denying the existence of Palestinians or their heritage, culture and right to land. Propagating ethnic cleansing and warzaw like ghettos with open prisons like st. petersburg with a starving population is not going to legitimize israel one bit.

      Hizbollah is not active in Gaza, nor WB. And I doubt these people would be defending/attacking (depending on perspective) israelis if not they were first occupied with a grizzly occupation by the same israelis. In the end it is the occupiers responsibility to make sure the occupied can live and get their most needed necessities something Israel believes are bombing them to the stone age, and starving them until they elect leaders that they think are going to help the israeli cause of occupation instead of helping the palestinians with their cause of liberation from israeli occupation.

      And if anyone puts anyone in harms way, it is the israelis who are using settlers as human shields and land stealers. Palestinian haven't really anywhere to go, except the sea.

    43. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Jonas+the+Bold · · Score: 1

      In this particular case it isn't terrorism at all regardless of who does it.

      --
      Everything seemed to be going so nice
      'till the end of all beings punched right through the ice
    44. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Ice+Tiger · · Score: 1

      When you say "bulldozing people's homes", by people you mean the family of suicide bombers whom encourage their children to carry out suicide attacks for large cash payments?

      And this was established by due process perhaps or are all families guilty by the fact they are Palestinians and all Arabs are wanna be suicide bombers?

      And when you say "Attacking schools with helicopter gunships when the children are outside playing" by 'outside playing', did you perchance mean to say 'playing human shield for the Hezbollah terrorists with mortars and rocket launchers'?

      White phosphorus is very discriminate for example?

      And when you mention"herding people into ghettos", I don't think it's very nice to bring Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan's abandonment of their citizens into this discussion, I mean we were talking about Israel right?

      Palestinians in the Gaza strip have nothing to do with these governments.

      --
      "Because we are not employing at entry level, offshoring will kill our industry stone dead."
    45. Re:Cyber terrorisim by James_Duncan8181 · · Score: 1

      "The country that is surrounded by 6 hostile neighboring nations whom have all vowed to annihilate said country down to the last child" You are aware there is a peace treaty with some of them, right?

      --
      "To any truly impartial person, it would be obvious that I am right."
    46. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Apuleius · · Score: 1

      It would, except Argentina doesn't give a damn about a few dozen dead Argentine Jews. Argentine Jews are Jews, not Argentines.

    47. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How could this be terrorism? It's an action performed by a representative of a State against another State. If anything it's an act of war. Just because something might be considered an attack doesn't mean it can be considered terrorism.

    48. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps your should read some of what Stuxnet is designed to do before spouting off. Here is a collection of information gathered from numerous sources:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet

      The equipment that is targeted is not used in hospitals unless those hospitals have uranium enrichment centrifuges.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    49. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      And I would add, to induce terror in the population.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    50. Re:Cyber terrorisim by tophermeyer · · Score: 1

      Yep, those. Because children being used as human shields does not make them ethical targets to shoot at. It is considered bad practice to shoot hostages down to kill the terrorists.

      Neither side comes out clean when you start talking about using kids as shields. Both sides have blood on their hands, but one side is clearly more responsible for putting those kids in harms way.

      We've all seen Speed. Shooting the hostage sucks, but sometimes completely necessary. The terrorists are the ones that put them there in the first place.

    51. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Doomdark · · Score: 1

      While it is true that underdogs typically use more of dirty tactics (since they have to, for the most part), how does this absolve either side? Two wrongs do not make right; so as wrong and deplorable as it is to use human shields, it is at least as bad to shoot those children. This is what I do not understand, except maybe as indication of mental maturity level of person arguing the case -- it is a kindergarten kid argument ("but he started it!").

      --
      I like paying taxes. With them I buy civilization -- Oliver Wendell Holmes
    52. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Kreplock · · Score: 1

      Yes... remind me, which countries in the region developed nuclear weapons against the non-proliferation treaties? Does this happen to include Israel? Bunch of fucking hypocrites - they should give up their nukes if they want their neighbors not to have them, a power imbalance like this clearly creates tensions.

      Israel hasn't violated the NPT because they never signed it.

      One could also say a power imbalance is what allowed Israel to survive the 20th century.

    53. Re:Cyber terrorisim by cusco · · Score: 1

      I think you misunderstood what the target is; it infects Siemens Programmable Logic Controllers (which I know are frequently installed in hospitals, since I've mounted them in the enclosures myself) and installs a root kit. It activates if it encounters a configuration that includes two different brands of variable-speed electric motors, both of which are fairly common in the Third World. It spreads along Siemens SCADA systems, which is one of the most-installed utility control networks in the world.

      So you have a PLC with a corrupted operating system, running very high-speed motors in a method specifically designed to wreck them, sucking up bandwidth that should be monitoring equipment rather than propagating worms. If that doesn't worry you then you don't understand how these systems work very well.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    54. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Draek · · Score: 1

      No, it's more like someone tells you your neighbor has a machine gun and may threaten you with it, so you go that night and wreck his house with a sledgehammer then try to claim it was 'self defense'.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    55. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Smiths · · Score: 1

      oh get off it. The IAEA found that Iran was developing a nuke weapons...same old story as Iraq...the US then stamps its feet and calls into question the inspectors...

      but lets play along, even if Iran were...developing weapons is NOT a justified cause for war.

      Heck Israel has nuclear weapons themselves...who are they to say that Iran shouldnt develop them.

      The US is occupying countries to the East and West of Iran...has thousands of nuclear weapons and is the only country to ever use...annilating nearly 150K+ civilians instantly...

      but yes tell me again, how do we have the moral high ground to claim that Iran cant have them? How?

      Come on. Be serious.

    56. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Smiths · · Score: 1

      How can Israel always be the victim?

      The form a nation by terrorism(david hotel)...destroy villages (1948) , create refugees, conspire with the colonial powers to attack Egypt (1956), commit terrorist attacks in Egypt (lavon affair), pre-emptively attacks its neighbors (1967), invade Lebannon (1982), annex Jersusalem, move 500K citizens into areas outside their borders (see 80 UN resolutions) , bomb Lebanon (2006), bomb gaza (2008) and on and on...

      yet some how its just poor Israel being picked on? groan...50 years from now people will look back in amazement that this little medeterrain nation was so rouge for so long...

    57. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed it's not, just as Churchill bombing German cities isn't terrorism.
      But look, they found a way to attack the nuclear program deliberately, with no civilian casualties whatsoever.
      Some applause for ingenuity and restraint would be in place.

    58. Re:Cyber terrorisim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know, there's a country around that region that actually HAS made nukes and seems very hostile towards all its neighbors, and it's not Iran. Perhaps it would be willing to cooperate with the IAEA and give up its nukes too then?

    59. Re:Cyber terrorisim by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      Thanks, you are the first one to not reply as anonymous.

      1 - I don't belive Iran is developping nuclear devices to protect against Israel, but against the US. I think that way based on the evidence that they started the development after the US threatened them. Currently, based on data published by Wikileaks, that translate to: I belive Iran is trying to protect them against Saudi Arabia that, despite being the biggest supporter of anti-US terorism, can make the US military to anything they want.

      2 - I don't have any moral hight ground to say who should have nuclear weapons. And I don't know if developping nuclear weapons is a justified cause for war. Was there any war ever with justified cause?

      3 - Nothing of that makes what I said false.

    60. Re:Cyber terrorisim by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Odd. Did I speak up for Israel?

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    61. Re:Cyber terrorisim by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      The real question is, what is your point? Mine was that Iran should not be allowed to get the bomb. They have already shown that they butchering their own ppl. Considering that the top leaders consider all else to be animals, I do not think that we should allow them have such a weapon.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  5. Re:Beautiful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its spelled sophisticated.... There is no f, unlike the word fail, which is what you did with your attempt to spell

  6. Re:Beautiful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Israel - Meddling in others' affairs in the name of rampant, segregationist nationalistic fervor since 1948.

  7. Everything you need to know by slashqwerty · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From the article:

    There is always the possibility that this was just a way of magnifying the General's achievements, but it is also possible it is true.

    In other words, it confirms nothing.

    1. Re:Everything you need to know by JoshuaZ · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, when I read the headline my first thought was "The Israelis can't possibly be so stupid as to do that. That's almost tantamount to admitting to an act of war. And doing it now will just make the faltering Iranian government look more like a valid object of sympathy." And then I read TFA. Yeah.

    2. Re:Everything you need to know by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Funny

      OK, everybody can calm down.

      According to Google translate it was the "Stoxnat" virus. Completely different critter entirely.

      Nothing to see here, move along.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    3. Re:Everything you need to know by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Act of war"? I suggest you read the maifesto of Hezb Allah or th Iranian Revolutionary Government. They have repeatedly stated their aim is to destroy the "Zionist entity" by any means possible - that is, effectively declared war. Go ahead, read their pronouncements (especially the ones originally not in English), I'll wait. You might stop being so naiively prissy about who declares or doesn't declare what on whom. The Middle East is the "Wild West" at the moment, yet many in the West seem to be pretty ignorant about the *real* positions of each party (nb. I've been to a lot of the countries in the region, non are saints, but some are far worse than others).

    4. Re:Everything you need to know by rts008 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, my first thought was:
      Ah, so the good general 'took one for the team' as he was stepping down, so everyone could STFU.

      He wouldn't be the first to put themselves at personal risk out of a sense of duty and/or honour(as they see it), precariously assuming the above is close, purely on speculation, and from a 'what if...' point of view.

      Not much from TFA or TFS to go on, so I see it as all speculation and guesswork at this stage.

      A general stepping down vaguely mentioned some statement that 'yeah, it was me, but I quit. HeHeheheh.'

      I will wait for more info before I give this much weight.

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    5. Re:Everything you need to know by hitmark · · Score: 1

      Have there actually been declared war on a nation since WW2? Only declarations of war i can think of are the war on drugs and, more recent, war on terrorism...

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    6. Re:Everything you need to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Act of war"? I suggest you read the maifesto of Hezb Allah or th Iranian Revolutionary Government. They have repeatedly stated their aim is to destroy the "Zionist entity" by any means possible - that is, effectively declared war. Go ahead, read their pronouncements (especially the ones originally not in English), I'll wait. You might stop being so naiively prissy about who declares or doesn't declare what on whom. The Middle East is the "Wild West" at the moment, yet many in the West seem to be pretty ignorant about the *real* positions of each party (nb. I've been to a lot of the countries in the region, non are saints, but some are far worse than others).

      Right, and the other countries are doing this for *no reason*, amirite? Maybe, just to be safe, the Israelis should start herding the Arabs in their country into "relocation camps" and tattoo ID numbers on their arms to make sure nobody gets lost.

    7. Re:Everything you need to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where are you getting your translations? MEMRI?

    8. Re:Everything you need to know by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, what would he know about what the military was up to? He was just one of its commanding generals.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    9. Re:Everything you need to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I think the point of the GP post is that while Hizbollah or the Iranian Revolutionary Guards have actually declared war, other entities like Israel and the US have not declared war but are doing things like fighting a war without admitting to it. Now this general is practically admitting to it. It is not naivete to suggest that Israel (for example) has a particular strategy (warring without declaring war) and that this guy may have just screwed up their strategy. In fact it is a far more subtle point than the point you're making, which appears to be in the "nyyah nyyah you Westerners are stupidheads" category.

    10. Re:Everything you need to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is Intel / counter-Intel games. Nothing more. If you want to know the truth. Ha Tough luck.

    11. Re:Everything you need to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me.
      Look at what they do, not what they say. A few missiles in the streets of Tel Aviv and an occasional suicide bomber is pretty small potatoes compared to the continued oppression of the West Bank & Gaza, periodic destruction of Lebanon, mass detention of democratic leaders, extra-legal assassinations, now cyber-terrorism.
      Compare Iran to the regimes we support. Saudi Arabia - closed society, no elections, repression, torture, home to the 911 terrorists. In return they receive billions in aid and walk hand-in-hand with American leaders. Iran is much more open and free than Saudi Arabia.
      Egypt - we support the oppressive leadership for 30+ years. Egypt is our friend, the other the axis of evil.
      The elections in Iran are flawed but they are much more representative of the people than Egypt or SA. Many Iranians support Ahmadinejad. Iran has had 6 presidents since '79, Egypt one since '81. Ahmadinejad is not Saddam, no matter how the propaganda machine wishes to portray him.

    12. Re:Everything you need to know by Smiths · · Score: 1

      Lets have some citations?

      no?

      Lets stop with this the Arabs want to destroy poor innocent Israel bs.

      Hizbolla exists for one reason...because Israel invaded and occupied Lebanon.

      Likewise Iran has never attacked or been at war with Israel.

      People in the region and the world for that matter rightfully do want to get rid of Zionism. An idealogy that by any definition is racist.

      You know the.... 'my imaginary friend gave me this land thousands of years ago and now I am going bulldoze your village so that my people can live here'

      The way you talk about the region...as if they were inferior (wild, wild west) they arent saints...makes me think you were a soldiger when you were there.

    13. Re:Everything you need to know by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 1

      Please read the following, with as open mind as you can and follow the citations therein (probably impossible for someone such as yourself who appears to have formed a fixed opinion based on selecting only the out-of-date statements that favour your pre-made opinion)
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideology_of_Hezbollah#Attitudes.2C_statements.2C_and_actions_concerning_Israel_and_Zionism

      And as for your weak ad-hominem attempt. No, I'm not a soldier (although once I trained as an Air Force pilot for a neutral country very far from the Middle East). In Lebanon I did met Hezbollah fighters overlooking the border (I had an open mind meeting them, but found in my personal opinion they were arseholes to my friend's wife). I also met many Israeli civilians, soldiers and security personal (who do it for a job, or national service - but it is not their reason for existence). There was a huge difference there between those who want themselves and others to live a good life (the Israelis) and those whose single purpose was to destroy others (Hezbullah). Pretty obvious if you think about it with regards to the facts and demonstrable history, but sadly you appear not to have analyzed this rationally.

  8. Redundant by masterz · · Score: 3, Informative

    "The Haaretz" is redundant since the Hebrew prefix 'ha' means 'the'.

    1. Re:Redundant by Spy+Handler · · Score: 1

      you mean every time I eat lunch at the El Pollo Loco across the street, I'm being redundant?

    2. Re:Redundant by sageres · · Score: 1

      err... learn Hebrew please. Haaretz means "Land".

    3. Re:Redundant by Big+Hairy+Goofy+Guy · · Score: 1

      you mean every time I eat lunch at the El Pollo Loco across the street, I'm being redundant?

      Only because you are one Crazy Chicken. :-)

    4. Re:Redundant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, It means "the land". As an Israeli, "the Haaretz" sounds very redundant to me.

    5. Re:Redundant by VortexCortex · · Score: 2

      err... learn Hebrew please.

      Meh, I tried... According to Google translate the Hebrew Haaretz translated into English is Haaretz, and Haaretz in English translated into Hebrew is something that looks like: Y7Xi7.

      This is clearly 1337 for "Why Transmit It" (Y TX iT), or possibly "Why, Transmit It!"; Both of which are, IMO, good names for a newspaper.

    6. Re:Redundant by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      No, he is the crazy chicken!

    7. Re:Redundant by energizer-bunny2 · · Score: 1

      No, I'm sorry but you are the one who is wrong. It means "The Land": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haaretz

    8. Re:Redundant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My wife used to attend The El Libro Book Club.

    9. Re:Redundant by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Not nearly as " The LaBrea Tar Pits" ... which when rendered in 100% English ends up being "the the tar tar pits".

      For those who don't know, LaBrea Tar Pits (redundant I know) is a archeological dig site of oil tar pools where prehistoric mammals like SaberTooth Tigers and Giant Sloths (not to be confused with Cowboy Neal), fell trapped to their deaths. You can see parts of it in the movie Volcano, which takes part near the site.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    10. Re:Redundant by stumblingblock · · Score: 1

      You mean when I visit the La Brea Tar Pits, I am saying "the the tar tar pits" ? Damn foreign languages. So confusing.

    11. Re:Redundant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That looks like a bunch of vi commands

    12. Re:Redundant by game0ver · · Score: 1

      or The Los Angeles Angels baseball team.

      --
      http://www.SachaWheeler.com
    13. Re:Redundant by syousef · · Score: 1

      "The Haaretz" is redundant since the Hebrew prefix 'ha' means 'the'.

      Just like pedantic slashdotter is redundant? ;-)

      Or is that Ha!slashdotter!

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    14. Re:Redundant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And Last Action Hero, don't forget. What else could possibly contain all that nerve gas from The Fart?

    15. Re:Redundant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's literally as redundant as that. The El Pollo Loco => El El Pollo Loco => The The crazy chicken.

    16. Re:Redundant by Muad'Dave · · Score: 1

      Y7Xi7....This is clearly 1337 for "Why Transmit It" (Y TX iT), or possibly "Why, Transmit It!"

      That's clearly a perl script.

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    17. Re:Redundant by sela · · Score: 1

      I'm a native Hebrew speaker. Haaretz is parsed "Ha-aretz", where "ha" means "the" and "aretz" means land.

      Anyway this doesn't really matter. You shouldn't add the article "the" in front of a newspaper name, anyway, unless the article is part of the name itself, because names are proper nouns. Just like you don't usually refer to a guy named Robert as "the Robert".

      The confusing part is that many newspapers' names begin with "The": for example, it's The New York Times, and not the New York Times. On the other hand, you do not refer to USA Today as "the USA Today".

    18. Re:Redundant by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Yes, you're saying "I eat lunch at the [the crazy chicken] across the street"

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    19. Re:Redundant by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      They should rename it to The El Club de Libros Book Club.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    20. Re:Redundant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, only after the first lunch.

    21. Re:Redundant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And indeed, if we were speaking in Hebrew, that would be a valid objection.

    22. Re:Redundant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if it was called "The El Pollo Loco" then yes, or depending on the frequency of your visits.

    23. Re:Redundant by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Yes. But redundancy is good, because one of those words might crash.

  9. Re:Beautiful by arcite · · Score: 1

    There are half a dozen middle east countries currently working on building nuclear reactors, the situation will be quite different in ten years. The USA isn't going to protect you guys forever, why not make peace?

  10. Now there's a surprise by hyades1 · · Score: 1

    So this general takes credit for a virus that could still be working silently away, screwing the Iranians at every turn, if it had been competently written.

    Quelle surprise!

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    1. Re:Now there's a surprise by amicusNYCL · · Score: 2

      So this general takes credit for a virus that could still be working silently away, screwing the Iranians at every turn, if it had been competently written.

      In the current issue of Internet Tough Guy Monthly:

      Stuxnet: why you can write better code than the Israeli/American military-industrial complex.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  11. serious for a moment by sageres · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Desperate times call for desperate measures. And Israel is indeed in a tough neighborhood where every single day, hour, second... Every single moment is a desperate time. Ever since her inception the neighbors tried to annihilate her. That is why there is a policy of ambiguity when it comes to the nuclear weapons. And assassinations of the nuclear scientists working for Israelis enemies. And bombings of the Iraqi and Syrian reactors and finally yes -- the virus. And for any of you who would point a finger at the "neighborhood bully" -- remember, that you do not live in that neighborhood.

    1. Re:serious for a moment by Fluffeh · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I would argue that all the points you make do in fact point to "Bully" and that is never a good thing.

      Not to pick bones, but "Her inception" to all the other countries there, basically meant that someone came and took the land away from them! Of course they are annoyed and angry about it!

      Does Israel get a pretty short straw? Absolutely, but I do have to say that I don't believe that they are making it easier for themselves. For the most part, that can be said about most nations in that region. The biggest player on a field should earn the respect of the other players and get them to follow suit rather than simply intimidating, running clandestine operations and in your words "assassinating nuclear scientists in other countries".

      There aren't many fundamentalists compared to moderates, but every time one of them is killed, all the moderates close to that person will feel just that little more tired, angry or plain out infuriated - giving a net result of more fundamentalists. On the other hand, each act of compassion, each charitable hand extended will keep the moderates calm and you might even find a few of the fundamentalists starting to question violence.*

      Stop the cycle of violence. BE the bigger man you claim you are.

      * This idea really works anywhere in the world, not just the middle east. When will people figure out that the carrot will always win over the stick.

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    2. Re:serious for a moment by tick-tock-atona · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Desperate times call for desperate measures. And Iran is indeed in a tough neighborhood where every single day, hour, second... Every single moment is a desperate time. Ever since her inception the US and Israel tried to annihilate her. That is why there is a policy of development when it comes to the nuclear weapons. And assassinations of the nuclear scientists by Iran's enemies shows that they are doing something right. And bombings of their reactors and finally yes -- the virus.

      FTFY. Remember, the major reason for Iran's military buildup is exterior threats (and the fact that it's working only reinforces that).

      And for any of you who would point a finger at the "neighborhood bully" -- remember, that you do not live in that neighborhood.

      Yeah, but if I did live in, say, the Gaza strip, and the neighbour used Collective Punishment (a war crime) on my society for democratically choosing, in an election described as "free, transparent and without violence", someone they didn't like, then I'd probably work damn hard to fight for my freedom and escape from beneath their boot heel too.

    3. Re:serious for a moment by Clandestine_Blaze · · Score: 1

      And apparently, all for nothing.

      In an underground chamber near the Iranian city of Natanz, a network of surveillance cameras offers the outside world a rare glimpse into Iran's largest nuclear facility. The cameras were installed by U.N. inspectors to keep tabs on Iran's nuclear progress, but last year they recorded something unexpected: workers hauling away crate after crate of broken equipment.

      In a six-month period between late 2009 and last spring, U.N. officials watched in amazement as Iran dismantled more than 10 percent of the Natanz plant's 9,000 centrifuge machines used to enrich uranium. Then, just as remarkably, hundreds of new machines arrived at the plant to replace the ones that were lost.

      Despite the disgusting assassination of scientists and cyberwarfare, Iran's still in business. If nothing else, it taught Iran how to cope with losing intelligence and resources.

    4. Re:serious for a moment by BZ · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > There aren't many fundamentalists compared to
      > moderates

      Is this gut feeling, or do you have data? If the latter, can you cite?

      Also, do note that "moderate" might mean different things in different places if you're simply defining it in terms of the population median. If that's the case, you may be interested in http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/02/egypt-vs-indonesia-in-attitudes/ and can of course not provide data to support the initial claim, since it becomes true by definition.

      > Stop the cycle of violence. BE the bigger man you
      > claim you are.

      This is a lot easier to do if you have strategic depth, for what it's worth. Or even tactical depth. Both commodities are unfortunately in short supply in the Middle East....

    5. Re:serious for a moment by BZ · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Punishing people as a group for the actions of their freely elected government does not in fact strike me as collective punishment. Israel has certainly engaged in collective punishment in the past, but the Gaza/Hamas example seems poorly chosen.

      If you allow that as an example of collective punishment, then would you consider economic sanctions collective punishment? What about imposing tariffs that lead to unemployment and hardship in the target country?

      What about a declaration of war against an a country that has a draft?

      Heck, is there any way you can think of to prosecute a war at all without effectively engaging on collective punishment?

      I agree that it would be really nice if wars weren't fought, of course. But I don't see how one can be fought with modern weapons between modern states or any semblance thereof without ending up in collective punishment territory, with the exception of blitzkrieg campaigns with limited objectives like the 1967 Arab-Israeli war (and even that arguably had collective punishment as part of the consequences)...

    6. Re:serious for a moment by mr100percent · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That may have been the case for decades, but look, it's 2011. The facts have changed since the 1960s.

      Egypt today has a peace treaty with Egypt and a separate one with Jordan. Israel and Turkey have a mutual defense treaty, and Turkey is a NATO member so attacking Israel will bring about massive retaliation from North American and European allies. Iraq, supposedly "Israel's greatest threat today" according to Ariel Sharon, is no longer a threat. I'd say that the neighborhood is far safer than it was 50 years ago; do you still see Israeli planes being hijacked?

      Israel is one of the richest countries, with a GDP per capita bigger than Spain or South Korea. The US gives it billions of dollars in military aid and Most Favored Nation free trade status. Does anyone seriously think Israel is under threat of no longer existing?

      Israel is generally safe from most of its neighbors. Maybe it would be even safer if it stops its policy of bashing all Arabs (as Israeli FM Avigdor Liberman does) or provoking its neighbors to anger by Israeli MKs referring to Arabs as "worms."

    7. Re:serious for a moment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Israel is one of the richest countries, with a GDP per capita bigger than Spain

      According to IMF 2009 GDP per capita:
      Based on PPP:
      Spain $29625
      Israel $28581

      Nominal:
      Spain $32030
      Israel $26874

    8. Re:serious for a moment by Ice+Tiger · · Score: 2, Informative

      Gaza Strip, illegal occupation of land, assassination of foreign nationals who are nuclear scientists, bombings of Iraqi and Syrian reactors, cyber warfare against Iran.

      Seriously, where does Israel think this aggression doctrine will end? Maybe the government needs to swap out of 'King David hotel' mode and build some bridges?

      --
      "Because we are not employing at entry level, offshoring will kill our industry stone dead."
    9. Re:serious for a moment by Compaqt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is a tangent, but it's funny to me how what are called the "moderate Arab states" have been the most repressive, either socio-religiously (Saudi Arabia), or politically (Jordan and the Persian Gulf states).

      Sadly, a lot of different factors combined to destroy the only multi-cultural democracy in the Middle East: Lebanon.

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
    10. Re:serious for a moment by Ice+Tiger · · Score: 2

      Every wonder what conditions have to be in place before extremists get elected to power like Hamas?

      Have a look at the history behind the Nazi parties rise to power for a good example.

      --
      "Because we are not employing at entry level, offshoring will kill our industry stone dead."
    11. Re:serious for a moment by tokul · · Score: 1

      bombings of Iraqi and Syrian reactors

      Last time I've checked Syrians themselves said that it was not a nuclear reactor.

    12. Re:serious for a moment by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      You couldn't possibly be referring to this terrorist group http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irgun. You know those huys that were murdering and blowing up British soldiers in Palestine, hmm, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Irgun_attacks, bloody long list of terrorist attacks.

      It would seem a terrorist territory, born of violence has simply continued down that path. Yes I know, it's all their fault for complaining and seeking assistance from neighbouring territories when they were being herded into reservation and camps, those Muslim Palestinians should have just gone quietly off to the camps like, hmm, it would seem that the abused became the abusers.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    13. Re:serious for a moment by giorgist · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately one match kind of does more damadge than a glass of water does good

    14. Re:serious for a moment by CycleMan · · Score: 1

      Yes. The Nazis also claimed it was the fault of the Jews, and the bicyclists.

      You may ask, "Why the bicyclists?"

      And one would answer, "Why the Jews?"

    15. Re:serious for a moment by bored_engineer · · Score: 1

      . . .basically meant that someone came and took the land away from them! Of course they are annoyed and angry about it!

      This is not accurate, though it's not entirely inaccurate, either. Some Palestinians left when fighting began, some were encouraged to leave and some were forced to leave.

      I don't care to minimize the losses that have been suffered by forcibly displaced Palestinians, but I don't care to hear this canard repeated, either. In 1948, several Arab nations offered refuge until their armies destroyed the nascent Jewish state.

      There is, by the way, one more thing worth noting: The land which Israel recognizes at it's own (their own?) is much, much smaller than that which the British administered as "the Jewish homeland" beginning about 1920. Further, it was the largely the Jews who revolted and ejected the occupying British in 1947-1948. The 20th century history of Israel is much more complicated, as you suggested with your "short straw" comment, than your implication that someone came along and took things away. (Holy crap! In rereading this, I've oversimplified, too. You just can't do any justice to even the 20th century history of the region in anything less than a tome.)

      One more note, then I'll shut up: Many of the Jews in Israel prior to 1948 had been there for centuries, or were themselves displaced (or the descendents thereof) from Arab states. I'm not trying to say that folks haven't been hurt or forced out from their homes, just that it's really much more complicated than you, me, the press, most Arabs, most Israelis and several historical commentaries allow for.

    16. Re:serious for a moment by CycleMan · · Score: 2

      And if anyone reads the articles you linked to, they will see that Irgun was officially categorized as a terrorist organization by the State of Israel upon its inception. One month later, Irgun forces and IDF (Israeli Defence Forces) clashed in military battles with casualties. Irgun has ceased to exist, and its ways have been denounced by the Israeli government. Implying otherwise requires more proof than you have given here.

    17. Re:serious for a moment by Ice+Tiger · · Score: 1

      But in Hamas's case they can point around them and say "It's the fault of the Jews' and they wouldn't be wrong would they.

      --
      "Because we are not employing at entry level, offshoring will kill our industry stone dead."
    18. Re:serious for a moment by Ice+Tiger · · Score: 1

      You're correct, it was an alleged nuclear research facility which I guess makes it all right then.

      --
      "Because we are not employing at entry level, offshoring will kill our industry stone dead."
    19. Re:serious for a moment by dropadrop · · Score: 1

      Sadly, a lot of different factors combined to destroy the only multi-cultural democracy in the Middle East: Lebanon.

      Haven't those factors been at play for quite some time now? Of course the current state can be traced down to the last 40 years, but I've understood Lebanon has been attacked countless times due to it's geographical location and water supplies in the last few thousand years.

    20. Re:serious for a moment by bored_engineer · · Score: 3, Informative

      You're an idiot.

      Not quite, actually

      First of all, USA does not provide Israel with any help. . .

      Yes, actually, it does. Israel currently receives more than $3 billion in (mostly military) aid from the US of A.

      Jews compose no more than 0.3% . . . 30% of Nobel prizes . . . this is why they flourish.

      You're wrong again. I won't dispute the statistics, but I will dispute the conclusion. They (oops, We) flourish because of a strong tradition of academic study, necessitated by the sheer volume that one needs to learn before Bar Mitzvah (and Bat Mitzvah for the more modern Jew). Further, in some areas of the world, Jews were forbidden from owning land (see the definition of "ghetto") so they were, by necessity, forced into academia, banking and other "service" occupations.

      There was a single attack on the USA, and it went to war with another country. There is a terrorist attack on Israel every day. . .

      Again, you grossly mis-charactarize, and ignore certain facts. The attack that brought down the World Trade Center (WTC) wasn't the first on that pair of buildings. Further, there was another (not of middle-east origin) terrorist attack in Oklahoma several years before the WTC was brought down. To make matters worse, we have more money than we deserve, and our president at the time was an authoritarian zealot.

      I don't care to suggest that Israel, and Jews more generally don't have a difficult time, but your posting shows an ignorance that can't go without some response.

    21. Re:serious for a moment by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Sadly, a lot of different factors combined to destroy the only multi-cultural democracy in the Middle East: Lebanon.

      You mean Iran, the muslim brotherhood(along with their splinter groups?) I really don't consider that a lot of different factors. I'd simply call it 'we hate the jews, and everyone will die for the cause!' "pushing the jews into the sea!!!!!111!"

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    22. Re:serious for a moment by bored_engineer · · Score: 1

      Gaza Strip, illegal occupation of land, assassination of foreign nationals who are nuclear scientists, bombings of Iraqi and Syrian reactors, cyber warfare against Iran.

      Is that a list, or a sentence? Are you ignoring 50, 500 or 5000 years of history in that list?

      Why do you assume that it's only Israeli aggression? I don't think that the middle east would look like it did (does?) if Israel were the only aggressor. You imply a simplicity that does not exist.

    23. Re:serious for a moment by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      My bad, I should have said "Comparable to Spain." It's still top 30 IIRC.

    24. Re:serious for a moment by Ice+Tiger · · Score: 1

      You're right the Israeli government is not alone in belligerency and oppression in the region but for some reason the western governments tend to hold them up as some kind of great example and ignore what they are doing to their neighbors.

      --
      "Because we are not employing at entry level, offshoring will kill our industry stone dead."
    25. Re:serious for a moment by danilius · · Score: 2

      Both references - the article on the Irgun and that of Deir Yassin - are sterling examples of the fallibility that Wikipdia engenders. Both articles are either carefully crafted to accuse without actually doing so outright ("the Irgun shot at an Arab", "Arabs were shot as well", "throwing explosives at an Arab bus" - who exactly these Arabs were is not mentioned, because if they turned out to be known troublemakers or murderers, the story would be far less interesting). Furthermore, the story of Deir Yassin is not the massacre you imagine it to be, as even a brief perusal of the fine article makes clear. Deir Yassin, like the non-killing of Muhammad AlDura and the purported deaths of 500 civilians in Jenin, is just one of those propaganda stories that Arabs tout to demonize Jews and Israelis in particular, in the full knowledge that the latent anti-Semitism that is rife in the West will rise to the occasion and cheerfully ignore the facts. "...terrorist territory, born of violence" - using this logic, the survivors of Sobibor were terrorists, too.

    26. Re:serious for a moment by the+entropy · · Score: 1

      The classification of "moderate" is a US pat on the back to states that play nice with Israel. However, due to the fact that most of the population doesn't usually want to play nice with Israel you'll only get despots who don't listen to their populations who do and are thus classified as "moderate".

    27. Re:serious for a moment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you really think what happened 4500 years ago has a tangible relationship with what Israel does today? Does Israel get license to claim the Sinai and Southern Lebanon for its own because God supposedly promised it to them that long ago?

    28. Re:serious for a moment by Ice+Tiger · · Score: 1

      Later Irgun's forces merged into the the IDF and there is a path from Irgun through Herut to todays Likud party.

      --
      "Because we are not employing at entry level, offshoring will kill our industry stone dead."
    29. Re:serious for a moment by the+entropy · · Score: 1

      Don't usually like to reply to myself, but seriously, "-1 overrated" for a score:1 post that hadn't been rated? Is that a "-1 I don't like this guy's opinion" or something or a "-1 censor" or something?

    30. Re:serious for a moment by gtall · · Score: 1

      Iraq seems mulit-culti to me. Kurds, Shia, Sunni, Turkmens...and well, there used to be Jews, Christians, and Ba'hai, but not any more. Even Saudi Arabia has a significant minority of Shi'ites, whom they piss on regularly with discriminatory laws.

    31. Re:serious for a moment by gtall · · Score: 1

      Bingo, and one just small epicycle to add: after WWII, the British were in no mood to stay in colonies that yielded no economic benefits, such as, Palestine. And they would have left much sooner such as before the war except for latent anti-Jewish sentiment in the British government and their Arab friends in Palestine.

      And one of those friends was the grand-mufti of Jerusalem who, much to the distaste of the Brits, spent time in Berlin licking Hitler's boots, thought Hitler had the right idea about how to solve their "Jewish Problem". That was mainly because he was trying to screw the Sabra out of Palestine that they had lived in for centuries. He was trying to do that because Zionism had been born in the late 1800's and parts of it were intent on creating a Jewish homeland. The grand mufti was against this for nationalistic and religious reasons. His nephew was....Yassir Arafat, who also had similar ideas about how to solve the Jewish problem.

    32. Re:serious for a moment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd find it funnier if Israel invaded Italy because of the original Roman Occupation. That would be both really fucked up AND more historically sound

    33. Re:serious for a moment by commodore6502 · · Score: 1

      >>>"Her inception" to all the other countries there, basically meant that someone came and took the land away

      Precisely.

      That's the point many people don't comprehend. In the early 1900s the British Empire started sending Jews to the land occupied by Arabs. That would be equivalent to sending them to Japan, or South Africa, or Brazil, and then suddenly carving-out half the country and declaring it Israel, while leaving the japs, africans, brazilians a small strip of land.

      The British Empire did an injustice, and we compound that injustice by acting as if the jews are entitled to take Palestine. They are not.

      --
      Information wants to be expensive AND wants to be free. So you have Value vs. Cheap distribution fighting each other.
    34. Re:serious for a moment by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 1

      Turkey is a NATO member...

      That means next to nothing. Iraq was not hindered when it attacked Turkey (actually the Kurds there, but as they were not recognized they attacked Turkey). And it did not stop the US from declaring war on the Netherlands (another NATO member) for housing the International Court of Justice

      --
      Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
    35. Re:serious for a moment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Carrot wins in the long term, but stick is mighty effective in the short or immediate term... and far too many people never look for results or consequences beyond a day or two. And those on the receiving end look at it and say "Carrot's nice... but I don't want to get hit with that stick again." The stick will be more immediate in their thinking, and they won't remember the carrot. It's only when the stick is over used, or used capriciously, that they'll be worked up enough to revolt against the stick. (Of course, watch out when that happens!)

      No need for revolt if you use carrots, but it's got to be the RIGHT carrot for the situation. Since the short-term situation is always changing, the short-term appeal of the carrot needs to change to stay relevant... and carrot handlers haven't proven very good at that. Long term carrot benefits can stay the same, but you have to package it correctly for the short term or nobody will pay attention when there's a stick threat around.

    36. Re:serious for a moment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What you're missing is that with a big enough stick, your problem is now dead. No need for a carrot, then.

    37. Re:serious for a moment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It probably stops when their neighbors stop having a publicly stated policy of completely destroying the Israeli state and people by any and all means necessary. The More You Know (tm).

    38. Re:serious for a moment by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      It is a precept of Islam that once land is under Muslim rule it must remain under Muslim rule forever. This is an even stronger precept than the one that calls for all of the earth to be under Muslim rule eventually. Israel was once under Muslim rule. It is now under the rule of non-Muslims. It is the duty of every faithful Muslim to do everything in their power to revert Israel to Muslim rule. This means that no faithful Muslim can enter into long term peace with a Jewish state in the land of Israel.
      As to the carrot winning over the stick, the carrot was very effective at stopping the Nazis pre-WWII wasn't it?

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    39. Re:serious for a moment by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      Israel didn't make a lot of effort trying to convince its neigbors to act peacefully. Sorry, I can't get a lot of compassion for a bully (from any side). I can understand why they are desperate, and everything, but just rationaly.

    40. Re:serious for a moment by dskoll · · Score: 1

      Seriously, where does Israel think this aggression doctrine will end? Maybe the government needs to swap out of 'King David hotel' mode and build some bridges?

      Tell that to the Palestinians. The worst period of terrorism in Israel occurred from 2001-2003 when the peace process seemed to be taking hold and Israel relaxed restrictions on the Palestinians. Look at the numbers.

      When Israel cracked down and built the security wall, attacks dropped dramatically. Again and again, we see that strong Israeli attacks are invariable successful and reducing terrorist attacks.

      GIven that history, if you were charged with Israeli security, which policy would you pick? It's time for other people in the region to demonstrate that friendly Israeli gestures will be rewarded, because up until now, they have not been.

    41. Re:serious for a moment by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      But in Hamas's case they can point around them and say "It's the fault of the Jews' and they wouldn't be wrong would they.

      Actually, they would be. There is an amazing comparison. Hamas controls Gaza. From Gaza, they have waged war against Israel. The West Bank is controlled by the Palestinian Authority (which is really the current version of the PLO). The West Bank has not been used for attacks on Israel for several years. As a result of this the West Bank is thriving economically relative to Gaza.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    42. Re:serious for a moment by Apuleius · · Score: 1

      "Not to pick bones, but "Her inception" to all the other countries there, basically meant that someone came and took the land away from them! Of course they are annoyed and angry about it"

      Not to pick too many bones, but those other countries responded to Israel's inception by drivng their Jewish minorities INTO Israel, thereby losing all bitching rights about it.

    43. Re:serious for a moment by Apuleius · · Score: 1

      I don't have to wonder. The people of Gaza wanted war. They voted for a party that offered war on its platform. And they got war.

    44. Re:serious for a moment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ever since her inception the neighbors tried to annihilate her.

      Even if this was true (ignoring the fact the their biggest neighbour, Egypt has done nothing but help them) you have to realise it is because their inception involved aggressive migration on a militaristic scale and a campaign of terrorist bombings and shootings. There's not a country, nation or group of people in the world that would put up with that.

      Your statement is the intellectual equivalent of saying that the Native Americans deserve to be living on reserves cause they 'tried to annihilate the new settlers'.

    45. Re:serious for a moment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does anyone seriously think Israel is under threat of no longer existing?

      Ahmedenijad has publicly threatened on several occasions to erase Israel off the map. Ahmadenijad is actively pursuing nuclear weapons.

      Israel is all of 250 miles long north-south and 65 miles wide east-west at its widest point (15 miles at its narrowest ), for a total geographic area of ~8500 square miles. *One* medium-sized nuclear explosion in Tel Aviv would kill 400,000 people (minimum), cut the country permanently in half, and destroy enough critical infrastructure to make Israel instantly cease functioning as a political and economic entity. Fallout alone could kill half the Israeli population within days; millions more would certainly die of cancer within a decade.

      Yes, lots of people seriously think Israel is under threat of no longer existing.

    46. Re:serious for a moment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The biggest player on a field should earn the respect of the other players and get them to follow suit rather than simply intimidating

      A lot of what goes on in the middle east was a mystery to me until I read some of the documents from cablegate. The US opinion, probably shared by Israel, which may or may not be true, is that arabs lack any notion of a moral debt due to previous goodwill actions. Helping them before does not warrant them to help you in the future. The only question is what will they get now for action now. Every year is a whole new set of negotiations.

    47. Re:serious for a moment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And if you read the article linked you will see that they cease to exist because they became part of the IDF - first paragraph "Irgun members were absorbed into the Israel Defence Forces at the start of the 1948 Arab-Israeli war."

      The seconds paragraph describes how their ideologies were taken on by the right-wing political movement that has held or shaped the government for the past 30 years.

      What the Gov says and what the Gov does are 2 different things - which do you think are more important?

    48. Re:serious for a moment by DaFallus · · Score: 1

      It might also help if the Israeli government would keep their damn settlers from expanding in to neighboring territories. That certainly hasn't changed since the 60's...

      --
      No one cares what your captcha was

      Houston TX, USA
    49. Re:serious for a moment by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      See my previous comment, he did not threaten to erase Israel off the map. Sure he doesn't like Israel and hopes it will one day go away, but he did not say he would do it.

      Second, he is not actively pursuing nuclear weapons. He has denied it and the IAEA has said there isn't proof that Iran is doing anything more than building nuclear power plants, which is legal under the NNPT. I think Iran is pursing a policy of nuclear latency, rather than an actual policy of weapons-building.

    50. Re:serious for a moment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This idea really works anywhere in the world...

      It's not as informative as people voted it without an example, care do provide one

    51. Re:serious for a moment by Ice+Tiger · · Score: 1

      But the West Bank and the Gaza Strip are territories occupied by Israel and there are still Israeli settlers in the West Bank.

      Taken in the context of illegal occupation by Israel then how would you view the actions of Hamas?

      --
      "Because we are not employing at entry level, offshoring will kill our industry stone dead."
    52. Re:serious for a moment by Ice+Tiger · · Score: 1

      GIven that history, if you were charged with Israeli security, which policy would you pick? It's time for other people in the region to demonstrate that friendly Israeli gestures will be rewarded, because up until now, they have not been.

      How about something like the Marshal plan, the alternative is to eventually go Roman on the Palestinians really.

      --
      "Because we are not employing at entry level, offshoring will kill our industry stone dead."
    53. Re:serious for a moment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Israel is also the most condemned country in the UN. although death toll wise it's a fairly small conflict in a world full with horrors, all the eyes of the world are still focusing on Israel for every tiny clash. The de-legitimization process that takes place for the last 15 years is slowly eroding Israel deterrence & ability to protect herself.

      Israel is rich because of hard work and a freer market than many western countries, not because of US aid, US aid is there to support US interest in the middle east and not Israel's. The money is not going to Israeli coffer, it is money for purchasing the US defence product that the US allows Israel to have. So in effect it is US government subsidies for the defence industry, while keeping it's interest in the middle east. This does not come free of cost to the Israelis who had to give up their own aircraft industry as well as are forced to purchase product that are less than desirable for them (for example the F35 plane deal).

      Israel is the only country in the world that is under threat of annihilation. It is a fact. Whether you choose to believe the countries/Organizations/Political parties the state it frequently is up to you. but suffice it to mention that 1 ABomb would be enough.

      I guess that Israel would be safe when minorities such as Christians will be safe in the middle east and not a minute before that.

    54. Re:serious for a moment by cruizin · · Score: 1

      What a great idea! Instead of jailing mafia members, the law should BE the bigger man! Get the mafia to RESPECT you and everything will be just fine! Don't intimidate them, don't run clandestine operations against them! * This idea really works! * If you remove mafia members from society, the lesser members will become infuriated, so go the loving route - be compassionate to their crimes, charitable to their "protection money" plans! BTW this approach worked with Hilter too! We appeased him before the war, and look how it made him question violence!

    55. Re:serious for a moment by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      I view the actions of Hamas to be counterproductive for any purpose other than Hamas' declared goal: the complete elimination of Israel.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    56. Re:serious for a moment by BZ · · Score: 1

      From what I've seen in elections in general, it doesn't take that much to elect "extremists" as long as you hate the other guy.

      The conditions for hating the other guy have been around since 1948 at least in this case; possibly somewhat earlier.

      The Nazi rise to power is interesting, since it depended strongly on electoral politics winning out over the old-style aristocracy. Once that sort of thing happens, you get mob rule; the only question is what will get the mob fired up.

      Which is why most functioning democracies have systems of checks and balances (both official and not) of various sorts to prevent elected leaders from effectively doing what the electorate wanted them to do, such that the only way to get things to happen is for the electorate to want them for a good long while (a generation or so).

    57. Re:serious for a moment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gaza Strip, illegal occupation of land, assassination of foreign nationals who are nuclear scientists, bombings of Iraqi and Syrian reactors, cyber warfare against Iran.

      Seriously, where does Israel think this aggression doctrine will end? Maybe the government needs to swap out of 'King David hotel' mode and build some bridges?

      Yeah, because a bleeding heart mentality ever really works in the middle east... Come on, pull your head out of the sand. The middle east is run by force, plain and simple. All your peaceful gestures have and will be stepped on by anyone powerful enough to do so. It's no coincidence that Arabs who sell property to Jews are executed publicly and all their countries are run by dictators.

      If Israel lived alongside Canada then I'd say maybe you had a point but as it stands you are applying your Western mentality into a Middle Eastern culture. It simply won't work. We don't share the same values (this doesn't mean we need to go to war, it just means your negotiation tactics won't work).

    58. Re:serious for a moment by Ice+Tiger · · Score: 1

      And yet if there had not been the occupation of the Palestinian territories in 1987 there would be no Hamas......

      --
      "Because we are not employing at entry level, offshoring will kill our industry stone dead."
    59. Re:serious for a moment by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      If there was no Hamas, there would be some other organization doing the same thing. If the International community would stop interfering, the Israelis would be able to once and for all defeat the Arabs (or vice versa, although the latter would be much more complete). General Sherman demonstrated the only way to win a war of the sort that Israel finds itself in.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    60. Re:serious for a moment by Ice+Tiger · · Score: 1

      And yet all those who have recently protested or are currently protesting for a more democratic form of government in their country would probably disagree with you.

      --
      "Because we are not employing at entry level, offshoring will kill our industry stone dead."
    61. Re:serious for a moment by bluefish321 · · Score: 2

      First off- I'm from Israel, and an avid slashdot reader for some time now (but that's besides the point) and this is the very first time I've felt so compelled about a comment to actually register an account :)

      So much of what you wrote indicates absolute ignorance in Mid east affairs and I just had to name a few of your "inaccuaricies":
      1. "Egypt today has a peace treaty with Egypt" - seriously? Israel does have one, as it has for over thirty years.
      2. Israel-Turkey relations have never been poorer, in Israel it's been attributed to Turkey's current PM (ErdoÄYan) policies- it's been so poor that in the past month Turkey called off a joint Israel-Turkey-US aerial exercise after Turkey recalled Israel's invitation at the last minute and the US wouldn't partke.
      3. Iraq, supposedly "Israel's greatest threat today" according to Ariel Sharon, is no longer a threat.
      Serously?? you may not know this but Ariel Sharon has been in a coma for the past 5 years so I would advise against taking any of his "current advice" ;)
      4. You made a comment about economic concerns, Israel's economic state really is good (though the GDP per capita isn't higher than Spain's, you can google it yourself) but for the most part people here really are afraid for Israel's existence, for example- Syria, Hizbollah backed Iran who constantly state in public that they want to destroy the "zionist entity", Hamas shooting rockets daily, Iran sending warships "to secure Syria"...
      It doesn't mean I agree with all the decisions the politicians make but this is a democratic nation (unlike most countries around us) and if the people feel it doesn't properly represent them they can actually voice their criticism and may even go for re-election...

      You clearly don't know enough about the situation to have an informed opinion...

    62. Re:serious for a moment by Ice+Tiger · · Score: 1

      Yes they could really deal with their 'Palestinian Problem'.

      --
      "Because we are not employing at entry level, offshoring will kill our industry stone dead."
    63. Re:serious for a moment by Ice+Tiger · · Score: 1

      You're right, the west has appeased Israel for too long, time for action!

      --
      "Because we are not employing at entry level, offshoring will kill our industry stone dead."
    64. Re:serious for a moment by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      Israel does not have a Palestinian Problem, there is no such ethnic group. Palestinians are merely Arabs who live in one particular geographic area.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    65. Re:serious for a moment by Ice+Tiger · · Score: 1

      Then they could deal with their "Arabs who live in one particular geographic area problem".

      --
      "Because we are not employing at entry level, offshoring will kill our industry stone dead."
    66. Re:serious for a moment by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Someone with a stick up their ass, and doesn't like your opinion. It's happened alot since the UID count started going past the 600k range, which is a shame. I like to go with the: If you don't like my ideas or opinion, refute me. I don't rate negatively because I don't like someones opinion.

      Best way to beat people with their own stupidity is meta-moderate.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    67. Re:serious for a moment by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      Well, it isn't really an Arab problem either. It is a Muslim problem.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    68. Re:serious for a moment by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      I did not mention Arabs, as a citizen of the commonwealth, my interest was the way Jewish insurgents that went on to form the apartheid State of Israel, treated British soldiers, especially after those British soldiers has fought a war, paying a huge price, that resulted in liberating those people who were now murdering them.

      Now what if the British empire had reacted to those terrorist insurgents as the apartheid state of Israel reacts to non-Jewish Palestinians in their own land.

      Your referral to Muslim Palestinians as Arabs obviously reflects a guilty conscience. It seems that you are stating that the British should have treated Jewish Palestinians and Jewish insurgents from Europe, in the same manner as the Apartheid State of Israel treats Muslim Palestinians and that it would have been justified to do so.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    69. Re:serious for a moment by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      I guess I should feel flattered.

      Your argument seems to be that Israel is under threats and its gloomier than I'm making it out to be. Yes I realize that Israeli-Turkish relations are poor (which I blame Israel for), but the agreements are still in place. Don't underestimate Israel's peace treaties and economic ties.

      My point is that today Israel is stronger than it ever was before and is at a lower state of risk than it was in the past. In 1967 it was Israel versus Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and helped out by Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Algeria, and the PLO. Today in 2011 you have a peace treaty with Egypt and Jordan, Iraq is no longer a threat, Syria is relatively neutralized as a threat, and the PA brought violence down to lower levels than the 60s. Heck, the Egyptian public is quite unhappy with Israel but they want to keep the peace treaty.

      Is Israel facing zero risk today? No, clearly Israel has to deal with the mess over the settlements and the worsening relationship with Iran, but if you want to be realistic you can't use outdated ideas as I was saying earlier. Try to realize how far it's come along.

    70. Re:serious for a moment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Listen to Dylan's 'Neighborhood Bully'.
      He'll make you understand.

    71. Re:serious for a moment by the+entropy · · Score: 1

      Heh, it just got to -1 with 100% overrated. They should make overrated an option only for comments which are at +2 or more, that way it actually makes sense to say it's "over rated"

    72. Re:serious for a moment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See my previous comment, he did not threaten to erase Israel off the map. Sure he doesn't like Israel and hopes it will one day go away, but he did not say he would do it.

      I can' t decide whether you're being willfully obtuse or not. To quote the New York Times, "Iran's conservative new president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said Wednesday that Israel must be 'wiped off the map.'"

      http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/26/world/africa/26iht-iran.html

      For a history of Ahmadenijad's almost countless threats again Israel, including calls for "Zionist exermination," see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel.

      He has denied it and the IAEA has said there isn't proof that Iran is doing anything more than building nuclear power plants, which is legal under the NNPT. I think Iran is pursing a policy of nuclear latency, rather than an actual policy of weapons-building.

      Demonstrably false. UN Security Council resolution 1929 passed in June 2010 bans Iran from involvement in "uranium mining and production or use of nuclear materials and technology."

      http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2010/sc9948.doc.htm

      You don't get one of those slapped on you for complying with the NNPT. You get on for repeatedly not complying with the NNPT in a serious way over an extended period; and there's no reason for Iran *not* to comply with the NNPT if they really are just trying to build nuclear power plants. So, right now, Iran's behavior suggests they're trying to develop nuclear weapons capability and so the UNSC--including Russia and China--has declared Iran's nuclear program de facto illegal.

    73. Re:serious for a moment by bstender · · Score: 1

      Ever since her inception the neighbors tried to annihilate her.

      seriously? trying that one here? get serious dude. if you really love her you better get real about this situation real soon.

      --
      look sig is kool
  12. Re:Beautiful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mars Attacks. Great movie. Highly recommended.

  13. Re:Beautiful by mr100percent · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How is Israel "keeping the Middle East nuclear-free" when it is widely regarded to have at least 100 nuclear weapons of its own? The Dimona Nuclear Complex is not exactly a secret.

  14. Someone's taking the piss.. by Sporkinum · · Score: 1

    General Ashke-NAZI?
    Urban Dictionary:"1. Ashke
    Word meaning "beloved" in the language of the Tayledra people. The Tayledras are a silver haired race of people from Mercedes Lackey's fiction novels."

    --
    "He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
    1. Re:Someone's taking the piss.. by blueg3 · · Score: 1
    2. Re:Someone's taking the piss.. by linumax · · Score: 1
    3. Re:Someone's taking the piss.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      General Ashke-NAZI?
      Urban Dictionary:"1. Ashke
      Word meaning "beloved" in the language of the Tayledra people. The Tayledras are a silver haired race of people from Mercedes Lackey's fiction novels."

      Israelis are the new Nazis,
      and Gaza is the new Warsaw Ghetto.

    4. Re:Someone's taking the piss.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    5. Re:Someone's taking the piss.. by lennier · · Score: 1

      This is why you should look up Wikipedia before Urban Dictionary.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
  15. Re:Beautiful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Say that same thing, but change the "jews" with "aryans".

    Yes, it sounds exactly like that.

  16. How was it delivered? by NetNinja · · Score: 1

    Why do I have this sneaky suspicion that someone dropped a USB stick near the toilet and some worker picked it up and inserted it into a computer.

  17. Re:Beautiful by sageres · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The problem is that there are no partners for peace at the moment. If you were to actually ask a real Gazan or Palestinian it is possible to make peace with Israel -- they will tell you that the best Qu'ran will allow them to do is "hudna" -- i.e. long term cease-fire. As for the nuclear technology becoming a common occurrence in the Middle East -- trust me Israel is keeping tabs on them. If you were to look at the history, in 1948 and 1967, the US did not always have Israel's back. Even in 1973 US has stopped Israel from marching onto Damascus and Cairo, just because Brezhnev threatened to send the Red Army into Sinai. And finally -- we just do not want a madman with the Supreme Council of Madmen who is openly hosting the Holocaust denial conferences while promising Jews another one by wiping Israel off the map to have a nuclear weapon.

  18. So.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is this like a confirmation of an actual attack from one nation to another? Isn't that considered an act of war?

  19. Now Microsoft closes the hole by whoever57 · · Score: 1

    Does anyone think it is a coincidence that, just a few months after all the information about Stuxnet has come out and presumably Iran has secured its critical computers against drive-by install from flash drives, Microsoft closes the autorun hole with an update?

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    1. Re:Now Microsoft closes the hole by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now you're thinking with Paranoia![tm]

      A few more weeks thinking like that, and you'll be ready to know that 9-11 was an inside job, the Holocaust was faked and that deregulation along with tax cuts for major corporations will cause a massive monetary trickle-down effect and end unemployment.

      You're in the right place to find out where they sell the deeply discounted tin foil haberdashery, too. Welcome to the club!

    2. Re:Now Microsoft closes the hole by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does anyone think it is a coincidence that, just a few months after all the information about Stuxnet has come out and presumably Iran has secured its critical computers against drive-by install from flash drives, Microsoft closes the autorun hole with an update?

      They haven't fixed the USB hole at all. Go plug a U3 enabled drive into your computer, and see if it works. Whaddya know? Here it comes auto-launching a SanDisk U3 interface. Replace that code with malware, and there's your attack vector.

      Of course we still don't know if this was the vector used; it could have been this vector or someone simply using the USB stick to carry the payload launcher and had to manually install it.

    3. Re:Now Microsoft closes the hole by djdanlib · · Score: 1

      Don't trust the major tin foil manufacturers, man! The Commies paid them to introduce subtle pattern defects in the foil so even if you make a hat out of it, specific waveforms will still penetrate the hat! The only way to be safe is to make your own! Open source the tin foil manufacturing process!!1!one!

  20. Ahmadinejad's Hypocrisy by MarkvW · · Score: 2

    Ahmadinejad craves Western technology while rejecting the social structure necessary to create that technology. They are the biggest bunch of hypocrites.

    1. Re:Ahmadinejad's Hypocrisy by mr100percent · · Score: 2

      Really, how does "social structure" translate into creating technology? I'm sure places like India would love to know how they're making microchips while lacking this vital piece of civilization.

    2. Re:Ahmadinejad's Hypocrisy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simple. We got the information/designs from foreign companies.

      I would say Social lifestyles/interactions rather than structure but I completely agree with the statement. If you want to consider India and China as similar - here's one: China has fast long-distance trains, possibly one of the fastest in the world. India - not even close.

    3. Re:Ahmadinejad's Hypocrisy by Zancarius · · Score: 2

      Bill O'Reilly thinks that Jesus makes the tides work http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/02/11/you-cant-explain-bill-oreilly/ [discovermagazine.com].

      As much as O'Reilly annoys me, I really, sincerely hope that you are able to recognize satire when you see it and are just hoping for some karma by being sarcastic or trolling. For the benefit of the doubt and for my sanity, I'll presume the latter.

      --
      He who has no .plan has small finger. ~ Confucius on UNIX
    4. Re:Ahmadinejad's Hypocrisy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      >As much as O'Reilly annoys me, I really, sincerely hope that you are able to recognize satire when you see it

      uh, did you you not realise that, while the various meme-variations based on it are satire, Bill O'Reilly did actually cite an inability to explain the tides as supporting evidence for religion? Here is the quote:

      “I’ll tell you why [religion is] not a scam, in my opinion. Tide goes in, tide goes out. Never a miscommunication. You can’t explain that. You can’t explain why the tide goes in.”

      For the benefit of the doubt and for my sanity, I'll presume that you are just ignorant rather than deliberately trying to conceal the truth.

    5. Re:Ahmadinejad's Hypocrisy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Caste System?

    6. Re:Ahmadinejad's Hypocrisy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Erm, I don't think O'Reilly was being satirical...

    7. Re:Ahmadinejad's Hypocrisy by dskoll · · Score: 1

      India is absolutely civilized. It's a democracy (imperfect, maybe). It respects religious freedom (again, maybe imperfectly, but it's a hell of a lot better than Iran.) And most importantly, India doesn't waste its resources trying to promote fundamentalism around the world or funding terrorist groups to the tune of $1B/year.

    8. Re:Ahmadinejad's Hypocrisy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      India is a democracy, dumbass.

    9. Re:Ahmadinejad's Hypocrisy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As is Iran, fool.

    10. Re:Ahmadinejad's Hypocrisy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      India is more western than Iran in many respects. Not so much in others.

    11. Re:Ahmadinejad's Hypocrisy by ItsJustAPseudonym · · Score: 1

      O'Reilly don't surf.

    12. Re:Ahmadinejad's Hypocrisy by Zancarius · · Score: 1

      uh, did you you not realise that, while the various meme-variations based on it are satire, Bill O'Reilly did actually cite an inability to explain the tides as supporting evidence for religion? Here is the quote:

      âoeIâ(TM)ll tell you why [religion is] not a scam, in my opinion. Tide goes in, tide goes out. Never a miscommunication. You canâ(TM)t explain that. You canâ(TM)t explain why the tide goes in.â

      I don't watch television, and I most especially do not watch Bill O'Reilly.

      For the benefit of the doubt and for my sanity, I'll presume that you are just ignorant rather than deliberately trying to conceal the truth.

      Funny how you paraphrase me. Great originality. You're right, though. I dislike O'Reilly enough that I was ignorant!

      Now, being as you're an AC and you're probably trolling, I'll do the work for you since you were evidently far too lazy to bother using Google. Sure, I should've used it initially, but I was surprised that O'Reilly was even dumber than I thought--hence why I simply assumed that the meme, like most, was entirely satirical.

      Here's a good link among many others related to O'Reilly's inability to explain the tides and related ideas in science. Since our AC friend who replied to me could only provide me with a quote (and not a link), I will redeem myself by providing it.

      So yes, I was wrong. It wasn't entirely satirical; I simply assumed someone couldn't be so stupid as to state something so outlandish as to declare that the tides cannot be explained. Hence, that is why I assumed it was pure satire. Of course, it's easier to make assumptions about me being ignorant--and that's fine because I shouldn't have given O'Reilly the benefit of the doubt and assumed it was simply something taken out of context--but please do us all a favor and supply useful links instead of just quotes or cite your quotes by providing a link. It's much more educational and it doesn't waste as much of my time as having to go look up this rubbish myself.

      Then again, I'd probably be posting as an AC, too, if I couldn't use Google well enough to find a link to what I was quoting. :)

      --
      He who has no .plan has small finger. ~ Confucius on UNIX
    13. Re:Ahmadinejad's Hypocrisy by bstender · · Score: 1

      you mean to say: "rejecting the social structure necessary to _purchase_ that technology".

      that is to say, has rejected the terms of fealty from the West.

      --
      look sig is kool
  21. Re:Beautiful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    kinda racist there, so all Arabs are bent on war? What about the two largest Arab countries that have peace treaties with Israel, Egypt and Jordan?

  22. Re:Beautiful by TheLink · · Score: 4, Informative

    Hamas doesn't want peace with Israel in the long term:
    http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp

    The only peace they want is one where Israel is wiped out.

    Fatah's old charter also stated similar stuff: http://www.alzaytouna.net/arabic/?c=1598&a=97061

    Article (8) The Israeli existence in Palestine is a Zionist invasion with a colonial expansive base, and it is a natural ally to colonialism and international imperialism.
    Article (12) Complete liberation of Palestine, and eradication of Zionist economic, political, military and cultural existence.
    Article (19) Armed struggle is a strategy and not a tactic, and the Palestinian Arab People's armed revolution is a decisive factor in the liberation fight and in uprooting the Zionist existence, and this struggle will not cease unless the Zionist state is demolished and Palestine is completely liberated.

    Apparently their new one no longer calls for Israel's destruction. http://jta.org/news/article/2010/01/27/1010372/new-fatah-charter-omits-negationist-language

    But there will be problems as long as most of them continue to hold on to the popular "radical/extremist Islam" concepts listed here: http://www.tawfikhamid.com/abcs-test-for-radical-islam/

    --
  23. Re:Beautiful by mr100percent · · Score: 4, Informative

    You're operating on outdated ideas there.

    First, the Quran does not say that, I think you're getting such a ridiculous notion from a neocon/zionist/Islamophobe. No "real Palestinian" (who?) would tell you that.

    Second, look at The Palestine Papers. The Palestinian government just fell because the PA was scandalously offering to give away Jerusalem and most of Palestine with nothing in return, and yet Netanyahu's government rejected the offers.

    Thirdly, the president of Iran is such a red herring. Does he control the military? No. Did he say "wipe Israel off the map?" No. To quote his exact words in Farsi: "Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad." No such idiom exists in Persian, and Ahmadinejad actually just quoted an old speech of Khomeini in which he said “The occupation regime (over Jerusalem) must vanish from the page of time.” It's not about tanks going into Israel, but more like how Regan said the USSR would one day only exist in a history book. Of course Ahmadinejad does wish Israel would disappear, but he is not the Supreme Leader so he cannot make such an order. It's like the US Secretary of the Interior saying Iran should be invaded, he has no authority to do so. Believe it or not, Ahmadinejad denies he is anti-Semitic, he supports Jewish leaders in Iran and groups like Naturei Karta, and insists he is anti-Zionist, not anti-Judaism.

  24. The mandatory anti-Sionist comment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The mandatory anti-Sionists comment: The Jews were behind it.

    For once they were correct! :)

  25. The paranoia trick is useless today - sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That paranoia trick is useless today - sorry

    Microsoft is an accomplished cooperator here. They are doing its governments wishes, big deal.

    What other tool reaches out globally with such power? None.

    It may well become Android, which is also known to leak like hell. If the Nokia - Microsoft deal, the US government will have an even stronger tool available.

    So, stuff your 9-11 Holocaust tax cuts were it belongs.

    This is for real.

  26. Why not me? by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

    Why no one claims that I wrote it?

    It would be just as plausible.

    --
    Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
  27. Re:Beautiful by robinvanleeuwen · · Score: 4, Interesting

    [quote] No. Did he say "wipe Israel off the map?" No. To quote his exact words in Farsi: "Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad." No such idiom exists in Persian, and Ahmadinejad actually just quoted an old speech of Khomeini in which he said “The occupation regime (over Jerusalem) must vanish from the page of time.” [/quote]

    Maybe people who say things like: "The occupation regime (over Jerusalem) must vanish from the page of time.” Should stop being suck fucking morons and stop saying shit like that because things like that will be interpreted by a lot of people fanatic muslims, anti-muslims, the whole western world , and a lot of people i forget to mention here, as: "We should wipe Israel of the map"

    It can either be that he is to dumb to realize that quotes like that will just flame the hatred because people interpret it as calls for agression, but my guess is that if he's got the brain to get to be leader of a country, he fully realizes that...

    You can be all 'he didn't say that, and he meant it in a good way' but that's bullshit... He knows he says thing that can be interpreted in a wrong way.... even if he doesn't comprehend that he shouldn't lead a country anyway....

    --
    If you don't like my sig then don't read it.
  28. Re:Beautiful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're way off-topic here. How does this relate to Stuxnet?

    Besides, most experts say that Hamas has de-facto recognized Israel for years and supports a two-state solution. One senior official was quoted to have said "We want a divorce from the Jews, not to live closer to them... Israel has won, why can't they just leave us alone."

  29. Misattribution by Ukab+the+Great · · Score: 5, Funny

    Technically speaking, Microsoft really deserves more of the credit than Gabi Ashkenazi.

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

      and don't forget Siemens industrial controllers which are open to replay attacks - oooops, that probably means all SCADA controllers - bye, bye industrial control for oil plants, chemical plants etc unless someone spends a shitload of money making the all the controllers robust.

  30. Re:Beautiful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nobody is saying "he meant it in a good way," but there's quite a difference in what he actually said and people interpreting it as a sign of genocidal intent

  31. So, in less sensationalist terms. by EnsilZah · · Score: 1

    During the farewell ceremony for the Israeli army's chief of staff a video was shown that summarized the events of his term, that video included news reports about stuxnet and the attack on the nuclear reactor in Syria.

  32. So it is all right then ? by Alain+Williams · · Score: 1

    If Iran/pakistan/n.korea/... had created Stuxnet and it had targetted military infrastructure in the UK/USA/Israel/... imagine the broohaha, the passionate outpourings from politicians, the chasing down of those who wrote it.

    But the USA/Israel did it: so that somehow makes it OK ?

    1. Re:So it is all right then ? by dskoll · · Score: 1

      But the USA/Israel did it: so that somehow makes it OK ?

      Yes, correct. Israel and the USA are both democracies, and neither has expressed interest in exterminating another member state of the UN. Iran is a fundamentalist theocracy that regularly expresses hatred towards Israel and the US and the wish (sometimes intention) to destroy them.

      The difference is that the US can be trusted with nuclear weapons. It's had them since 1945 and keeps careful control over them with strict procedures in place to prevent their misuse. Iran cannot be trusted with such weapons and must be prevented from obtaining them.

      Israel is just the first and most convenient target of Islamofascists. What they really hate is freedom and the Western way of life.

    2. Re:So it is all right then ? by Apuleius · · Score: 1

      Iran has not only targeted military infrastructure, it has gone so far as to target the Jewish Community Center of Buenos Aires, Argentina.

      So, yes, ruining their uranium centrifuges is A-OK.

    3. Re:So it is all right then ? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The difference is that the US can be trusted with nuclear weapons.

      As the only country to ever actually use nuclear weapons, the USA has proven itself to be untrustworthy beyond any doubt.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:So it is all right then ? by thijsh · · Score: 1

      This fact can never be stated enough, and why the only nuclear aggressor ever isn't more closely monitored despite violating the NNPT in several ways is beyond me.
      In fact even a crazy ruler like Ahmadinejad correctly pointed out at the UN that the USA is almost exempt from inspection by IAEA while Iran is heavily scrutinized, they alleged the IAEA is not performing their agreed duties. Also of note is that Israel is one of the few nations who have nuclear weapons and refused to sign the NNTP or cooperate with the IAEA. This dude might be crazy and his motives might be questionable but he raises a good point, the NNTP and IAEA seem pretty useless and are only used by the USA for their own agenda...

    5. Re:So it is all right then ? by dskoll · · Score: 1

      As the only country to ever actually use nuclear weapons, the USA has proven itself to be untrustworthy beyond any doubt.

      I think you may have omitted just a wee bit of context there.

    6. Re:So it is all right then ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We should have sent your whole family as soldiers to fight the japanese, so that they could be the few of the 500000 people that would need to have died in the beach head. USA's primary imperative is to keep its citizens safe, if we would not have nuked japan, then we would have lost another 500000 or more of our brothers and sisters taking the country by foot. You are pathetic.

    7. Re:So it is all right then ? by lennier · · Score: 1

      As the only country to ever actually use nuclear weapons, thereby initiating a 50 year cold war with the potential to destroy civilisation, during which time it conducted covert operations to destabilise democratically elected governments in Europe, South America, and the Middle East, ultimately being caught in a bare-faced point-blank lie to the United Nations when it sought diplomatic cover for invading a sovereign nation, which it failed to get but proceeded with anyway, leading to a wholly predictable and protracted period of insurgency and unrest claiming the lives of 100,000 people, after which the economic philosophy it championed at the cost of drastic austerity measures in third world nations led to a global financial meltdown wiping trillions from the world economy which was repaid by government fiat from the working and middle class into the pockets of the rich, the USA has proven itself to be untrustworthy beyond any doubt. But it's all okay because the other guys were doing that stuff too, or we're sure they would have if they'd been in our position, and if they hadn't actually been on our payroll in the first place, and if we weren't fully aware and okay with what they were doing unless they were strategic competitors. But anyway we don't have to play by any rules because we're the Good Guys (tm). Oh, and we did build the Internet. So there's that.

      I think you may have omitted just a wee bit of context there.

      There, is that better? Too fair and balanced?

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
  33. Re:Beautiful by mbkennel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Nobody is saying "he meant it in a good way," but there's quite a difference in what he actually said and people interpreting it as a sign of genocidal intent."

    It is reasonable to suppose that the interpretation of genocidal intent might be reasonable given the throngs of thousands chanting "Death To Israel" many weeks per year for for 32 years, and the support for Hezbollah which has an explicitly exterminationist policy.

    If the interpretation was "we want Israel to change its policies to have a much more satisfactory resolution so that Jews and Arabs will live peaceably", that clarification could have been offered.

    But as far as I am aware, the ratio of that vs "Death To Israel" is something like zero to 30,000.

  34. Re:Beautiful by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

    "We should wipe Israel of the map" would be a fine example of modern propoganda, but we don't do that sort of thing, do we?

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  35. Re:Beautiful by gknoy · · Score: 1

    From what I've read and heard, the Israeli view of the Middle East is that they really ARE out to get them. I'm sure they're quite likely to err on the side of pessimistic estimates of their neighbors enmity, because that's how they view recent history.

  36. Re:Beautiful by mr100percent · · Score: 1

    I think the phrase is lost in translation. In Persian, it means "Down with Israel," rather than the idea of killing everyone there that everyone is led to think. It doesn't mean killing or wiping everyone out.

    When Mousavi was running in the presidential election against Ahmadinejad, the latter was giving away free potatoes to the crowds. Mousavi's followers didn't like that, and started the rallying cry "Death to Potatoes."

  37. Re:Beautiful by mr100percent · · Score: 1

    But there's the problem, if you act paranoid and bomb your neighbors, who in turn get pissed and start organizing military in defense, then suddenly you begin assuming your paranoia was valid all along. Case in point, Hizbullah didn't exist until after 1982, when Israel invaded Lebanon and then began claiming sections of it as Israeli land promised to it by God.

  38. Ghabi? LOOOL! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Ghabi" means "Stupid" in Arabic... If you don't believe me, look it up.

  39. I've run out of mod points by Kupfernigk · · Score: 1

    But, well said. The whole "We're under threat so we have to attack our neighbours and steal the land of non-Jews who live in our country" is a complete distortion of one of the world's greatest cultures. In the US and the UK, Jews are doing (for the most part) very well, and deservedly so because of their focus on social cohesiveness, education, and family values. Like Ireland and many Middle Eastern states, Israel has suffered from a succession of piss-poor governments (which are, because of their policies, themselves a threat to the security of Jews world-wide). In today's world, the Zionists are past their sell-by date.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  40. Just like a General.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to take credit for the work of his subordinates. I doubt this joker could put together "Hello World" in any major programming language or is personally capable of conceptualizing or planning a complex cyber operation. Did anyone else catch the irony of his name, Gabi may be a bit too Gabby. Ohh the hubris of it all.

  41. Re:Beautiful by gtall · · Score: 1

    Hezbollah was created after the Amal militia proved ineffective against the Sunni's and Christians. Stop kidding yourself, the Israelis were simply the local boogie-man Hezbollah trots out to scare the locals into supporting it.

  42. Re:Beautiful by mr100percent · · Score: 2

    Really, if that's the case, then let's look at their founding manifesto. In 1985, they listed their goals (from wikipedia):

    • To expel Americans, the French and their allies definitely from Lebanon, putting an end to any colonialist entity on our land.
    • To submit the phalanges to a just power and bring them all to justice for the crimes they have perpetrated against Muslims and Christians.
    • To permit all the sons of our people to determine their future and to choose in all the liberty the form of government their desire. We call upon all of them to pick the option of Islamic government which, alone, is capable of guaranteeing justice and liberty for all. Only an Islamic regime can stop any future tentative attempts of imperialistic infiltration onto our country.

    Granted this translation comes from an Israeli website, but the fact that Israel was colonizing Lebanon made for a pretty popular rallying point of opposition. In 2009 they updated their manifesto, given that Israel withdrew from Southern Lebanon (though they do keep bombing it and shooting people over the border)

  43. Does Israel have nuclear weapons? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

    They have neither denied nor confirmed this. But it doesn't matter. What matters, is, that Israel's neighbors think that they might have nuclear weapons. Which is a great deterrent against starting a war with Israel.

    Did Israel develop Stuxnet? And are they capable of creating even more nasty computer weapons? Again, it is very formidable, to have your enemies think that you have stuff . . . even if you don't. So this could be a clever disinformation leak . . . or maybe not . . .

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    1. Re:Does Israel have nuclear weapons? by Archwyrm · · Score: 1

      That is no deterrent at all. That is only an encouragement to acquire your own arsenal so that there actually is a real deterrent. There is a great deal of evidence that they do have nuclear weapons, yet they don't want to play by any international agreements regarding their arsenal either.

      --
      Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power. -- Mussolini
  44. Terrible, misquoted translation... by boazarad · · Score: 5, Informative

    I just read the original article, and as a fluent Hebrew speaker, can safely say that it's been grossly misquoted and misinterpreted.

    During the generals retirement party, news coverage of both the Stuxnet and the Syrian reactor attack was shown, probably as part of a recent army related events montage. This was no power-point slide titled "recent accomplishments". The conclusion drawn here are akin to claiming that the US was responsible for the recent unrest in Egypt, since news coverage of that even was played at the retirement party of a state secretary...

    Israel may have been responsible for these events, but I'd hardly say this "evidence" is conclusive

  45. Saudi Arabia is called a moderate state? by __aailob1448 · · Score: 1

    I think it's understood that Saudi laws are crazy, what with the hand cutting and the sex segregation and whatever else goes with some of their stifling, barbaric tribal traditions.

    If you ask any arab about Saudi Arabia, they'll tell you that the only good things about current Saudi Arabia are money and dates.

  46. Re:Beautiful by Ender_Wiggin · · Score: 1

    "as far as you're aware"?
    Do you watch Iranian TV channels? How about international news channels based in the region like Al Jazeera? Don't speak Arabic or Farsi? How about PressTV or AJE? (they both have "Watch live online" buttons)

    Still No? Then it's kinda bold of you to say that it's something like zero people who articulate balanced critiques of Israeli foreign policy. Has it occurred to you that news outlets like CNN will never air such material unless it's inflammatory and "News-worthy?" Believe it or not, there are intelligent and rational people in other parts of the world who have forums, commentators, and Op-ed pages just like the US and Europe do.

  47. Re:Beautiful by Thing+1 · · Score: 1

    (though they do keep bombing it and shooting people over the border)

    What, with catapults?

    --
    I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
  48. This was the source for the Times. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't you people read the news?

    Ex-CIA spy arrested in St. Louis to be released on $10,000 bond

    Jeffrey A. Sterling, 43, was arrested Jan. 6 in St. Louis on 10 counts, including obstruction of justice and unauthorized disclosure of national security information. He is accused of leaking classified documents and information about an agency program to a New York Times reporter. It is believed Sterling is accused of disclosing details of a ruse to thwart Iran's nuclear weapons program.

    http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/article_9549d88e-28af-11e0-b8b4-00127992bc8b.html

  49. Re:Beautiful by mr100percent · · Score: 1

    I mean Israel keeps shooting over the border. And now Israel is threatening to invade Lebanon again

  50. It's funny how people bash Israel... by dskoll · · Score: 1

    But realistically, anything that prevents or delays Iran from getting nuclear weapons is a good thing. And if it can be done without the loss of life or even any physical property damage, so much the better.

    I really don't know who is responsible for Stuxnet, but historians will probably look back on it as an important victory in the struggle to prevent medieval religious nutcase thugs from obtaining nuclear weapons.

  51. Acts of war. by Apuleius · · Score: 1

    Iran and Israel are in a state of war.

    Committing an act of war against a country with which you are, in fact, in a state of war, is not a crime, nor anything to be embarassed about.

    1. Re:Acts of war. by Smiths · · Score: 1

      Iran has never been at war with Israel.

      Never.

      They critize the Israeli the government..so now they are being demonized in attempt to get America to go to war against them.

    2. Re:Acts of war. by Apuleius · · Score: 1

      Uh, no. They "critize the Israeli the government", they send missiles into Israel from Lebanon, they bomb Jewish targets in places like Argentina, and they declared war in 1980.

  52. Stupid by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    If Israel ever thought they would play nice with Iran, sabotage isn't exactly the way to good relations...

  53. Re:Beautiful by Apuleius · · Score: 1

    You do realize that PressTV is a bunch of lying sons of bitches? In 2009 they went so far as to "interview" an Iranian dissident in a room made to look like a studio, that was in fact a cell in Tehran's notorious Evin prison.

  54. MOD PARENT UP by Apuleius · · Score: 1

    This is a nonstory

  55. Re:Beautiful by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    The state of Israel was obviously created to keep the region in turmoil. It has succeeded brilliantly. Go Brits!

    There can never be peace in the middle east until the people living there give up their ridiculous religions. Any religion that tells you to treat people who believe different things like subhumans is evil and must be destroyed.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  56. Fake Story by alcmaeon · · Score: 0

    Read the guy's name. The head of the super-secret cyber attack force is named "Gabi Ashkenazi" i.e. a European Jew who talks too much. Right. Reminds me of that "Under the Bleachers" by Seymour Butts joke.

    1. Re:Fake Story by Lazbien · · Score: 0

      Mod parent up. Bang on with the name.

    2. Re:Fake Story by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 2
      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
  57. Re:Beautiful by tehcyder · · Score: 1

    There can never be peace in the middle east until the people living there give up their ridiculous religions.

    I wonder why no one thought of that breathtakingly stupid argument before?

    --
    To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  58. Israel owns the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No matter any offense committed by Israel, the US will continue to support endless Wars for Israel, it all started nearly a decade ago under a false flag attack.
    9/11 and Israel, here:
    http://www.iuniverse.com/Bookstore/BookDetail.aspx?BookId=SKU-000190526

  59. Re:Beautiful by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    I wonder why no one thought of that breathtakingly stupid argument before?

    Many, many people have thought up this argument before. It doesn't seem likely to happen any time soon, and people are in denial, which is why you don't hear it more often.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  60. declarations vs actions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    there's a huge difference between a declaration and an action. e.g. "i'll fcking kill him!" vs "omg he's fcking killed him!"

  61. The above has nothing to do with it by dbIII · · Score: 1

    The Iranians are not even Arabs and mostly put on a big show of hating Israel so that the Arabs will think they have a lot more in common with Iran than with another non-Arab Islamic state like Indonesia or Pakistan.

  62. et tu Slashdot? by Alimony+Pakhdan · · Score: 1

    Oy freaking vey, where to start? - TFA is nothing more than speculation. No confirmation.
    - TFA's link to googtrans of the original Ha'aretz is broken. Fortunately for me I can read the original article. That too is nothing more than speculation.
    - Ha'aretz is hardly the best source anyway. They are like the Fox News of the Israeli left.
    - The whole "ZOMG JOOS" mentality surrounding Stuxnet from day one mentality is unfortunately not surprising. Somewhere down inside I'd hope Slashdot was "better than that" but since these articles keep getting posted with many comments, I guess I was wrong. Again.

  63. Re:Beautiful by Swave+An+deBwoner · · Score: 1

    I think the phrase is lost in translation. In Persian, it means "Down with Israel," rather than the idea of killing everyone there that everyone is led to think. It doesn't mean killing or wiping everyone out.

    That does not seem to be the take on it by the author of the Guardian UK article that is referenced in your huffingtonpost link:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/may/14/potatoes-iran-election-protest

    For 30 years it has been the signature slogan of Iran's revolutionary lexicon, swearing an oath of death upon America, Britain, Israel, Saddam Hussein and sundry other presumed enemies.

    Now the once chilling "death to" chant, an expression of zealous radicalism still heard at Friday prayers and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's rallies, has been unleashed on a new and unlikely object of wrath: the potato.

    "Death to potatoes" ("marg bar sibzamini" in Farsi) has been adopted as a mantra by anti-Ahmadinejad campaigners in Iran's forthcoming presidential election. Supporters of Mir Hossein Mousavi, a former prime minister who has positioned himself to woo the reformist vote, chanted the slogan this week at a rally in Yasouj in central Iran.

  64. Good for him! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey, it's fair game. China hits us, Israel hits Iran...US posturing on this topic is breathtakingly hypocritical.

  65. Re:Beautiful by mr100percent · · Score: 1

    So you actually think the Persians want to KILL potatoes? If that's the case, I can't change your belief. Go ask an actual Iranian then.

  66. Re:Beautiful by Swave+An+deBwoner · · Score: 1

    So you actually think the Persians want to KILL potatoes? If that's the case, I can't change your belief. Go ask an actual Iranian then.

    No, I think that your interpretation that the phrase used means "Down with .." is clearly at odds with what the author of the Guardian UK article thought and stated that it meant, i.e., "Death to .." .

    I hope that clarifies the issue for you.

  67. Re:Beautiful by bstender · · Score: 1

    If you were to actually ask a real Gazan or Palestinian it is possible to make peace with Israel -- they will tell you that the best Qu'ran will allow them to do is "hudna" -- i.e. long term cease-fire.

    normally i'd see a sentence like that and toss it into the 'dumb racist blowhard' pile, but since 4 million souls are being brutalized at this exact moment, i have to say that beside being ignorant, racist, and ridiculous on its face, trotting out this canard to justify the rest of your post casually justifying the whole bloody criminal enterprise, is really over the top. congrats

    --
    look sig is kool
  68. PERHAPS THIS IS THE JEWS PROBLEM: READ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Verify this for yourself, it made me ill, personally:

    http://groups.google.com/group/soc.men/browse_thread/thread/2385ab653d66252/6cc421202f854b7b

    Disgusting... especially the "top 5":

    ----

    #1. Sanhedrin 59a: "Murdering Goyim (Gentiles) is like killing a wild
    animal."

    #2. Aboda Sarah 37a: "A Gentile girl who is three years old can be
    violated."

    #3. Yebamoth 11b: "Sexual intercourse with a little girl is permitted
    if she is three years of age."

    #4. Abodah Zara 26b: "Even the best of the Gentiles should be killed."

    #5. Yebamoth 98a: "All gentile children are animals."

    ----

    Got kids of your own, especially daughters? Perhaps that list above, only partial mind you, is their reason and why Jews are hated and shunned the world over and have been since time immemorial?

    Like I said: You read, you verify, you decide.

  69. You need to know more, take a read by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You ought to read what's below your words quoted, and re-evaluate your stance:

    There was a huge difference there between those who want themselves and others to live a good life (the Israelis) and those whose single purpose was to destroy others (Hezbullah). Pretty obvious if you think about it with regards to the facts and demonstrable history, but sadly you appear not to have analyzed this rationally. by SplashMyBandit (1543257) on Thursday February 17, @02:31AM (#35229464)

    Verify this for yourself, it made me ill, personally:

    http://groups.google.com/group/soc.men/browse_thread/thread/2385ab653d66252/6cc421202f854b7b [google.com]

    Disgusting... especially the "top 5":

    ----

    #1. Sanhedrin 59a: "Murdering Goyim (Gentiles) is like killing a wild
    animal."

    #2. Aboda Sarah 37a: "A Gentile girl who is three years old can be
    violated."

    #3. Yebamoth 11b: "Sexual intercourse with a little girl is permitted
    if she is three years of age."

    #4. Abodah Zara 26b: "Even the best of the Gentiles should be killed."

    #5. Yebamoth 98a: "All gentile children are animals."

    ----

    Got kids of your own, especially daughters? Perhaps that list above, only partial mind you, is their reason and why Jews are hated and shunned the world over and have been since time immemorial?

    Like I said: You read, you verify, you decide.

    From http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1997640&cid=35252722