Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Helps Israel Blacklist Air Travellers
Jeremiah Cornelius writes "According to a report by the Associated Press, protesters have been stopped in their tracks after Facebook aided Israel in cracking down on the group of activists from the UK, France, and Belgium who planned their event using the popular social networking site. Facebook allowed government agents to track the activists activities and then create a black-list of people who participated in the planning of the protests. The black-listed group was then forwarded to airlines with instructions to prevent the activists from boarding air flights to Israel. Over 200 activists were prevented from flying after being added to the airlines terrorism watch list, according the the AP report. Was Julian Assange correct, when he warned that Facebook was a giant, 'appalling spy machine'?"
Facebook is in routine use by various "authorities " to profile people. So why not the Israelis?
And in other news. Bears shit in woods.
Most groups in Facebook are public by default. They are also public to those who belong to the group. So they didn't have to do any super-spy type thing. It's the users of the group who left themselves out in the open.
At least they didn't just let the protesters get there and gun them down. This is surprisingly restrained behaviour from the Israeli government.
There's a difference between facebook actively aiding Israel officials, and those officials viewing the members of a facebook group. Maybe not planning activities in a publicly-viewable setting would have helped these people?
Police, officials, whatever, viewing publicly-accessible information posted on social media sites is a Good Thing, occasionally. If you don't _want_ it viewed, don't post it publicly [and please note, I don't mean, don't post it online. Some medium of privacy should be expected, and the summary and my [brief] skim of TFA didn't say this was privacy violation in any way].
Anything to do with Facebook, Israel and super hidden government agents is going to be bad. For those who have not watched Pilger's film The War you Don't see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ah20IAyYxg
I know Julian and he is also quite right about facebook being an appalling spying machine. I loathe facebook with a passion, but there again I am a non-conformist, facebook is the sheep following sheep society and if that is not enough, people get emotionally blackmailed into using it. You do not need facebook, you need a life!
All cows eat grass!
How does this differ from what the US has done since 2001? Placing people on a no-fly list for associating with groups/causes that the state deems "terror-y"? The only thing that you might be seen as new here is Facebook, but if you don't believe they'd give the US government lists of people who joined a group supporting "terrorism", I've got a bridge to sell you.
disruptions, and told their friends."
Sounds like they bragged in public, using their own names. And nothing more.
It's shit like this, Slashdot...
"Facebook aided Israel" - you mean, people in the Israeli government also have Facebook profiles (GASP!) and used them to look at the group descriptions and members of groups organizing the protests? You know, if you shout out loud to the world to try to get support, it isn't that surprising that people opposing you will also hear you. Besides, how should Facebook have disallowed it?
If there was any mention of Facebook allowing access to, say, a private group, that would be a serious issue, but I don't see any such claims, and I doubt that there would be no such claims if that is in fact what happened.
Besides, I see no mention of any "terrorism watch list" in the article - it's actually common practice for an airline not to let you board a flight to a country where they know you will be denied entry - try flying to the US without a visa.
Israel handled this debacle badly enough that there's enough material to rip on them without distorting the truth, so why not stick to that?
Maybe you should look into the work of some Jews like Noam Chomsky, in case you think being a Jew inherently makes you a supporter of Israels policies.
Equating being a Jew with being pro Israel comes off as racist.
How come this is not modded informative but -1?
Since the end of WW2, saying negative things about Jews will get you in trouble. Luckily for him the worst punishment here is a downmod.
They SHOT and KILLED 8 protestors on a boat in international waters, they even shot protestors across the border in Syria recently, so I think these protestors stopped at the airport got off lightly.
Really, it's just a murderous state, USA should NOT be paying it $2.5 billion a year to them, the CIA should be blocking all those donations from Israeli linked companies to US politicians, and USA should be extracting itself from links to that regime.
It doesn't need the bases there anymore, it can't afford to subsidise them when it can't pay its bills at home, and the way they funnel money into the US political machine is against the law too. Yet nothing is done about it, the money flows into politics, so the politicians turn a blind eye to what Israel does and just keeps sending them the check each year.
No questions asked too, unlike other countries the money isn't traceable. It magically disappears into Israels military machine, and Israeli linked USA companies magically have a lot of money to spend in political donations.
"These people announced on their Internet sites that they planned to come here and cause disruptions, and told their friends."
Sounds like they bragged in public, using their own names. And nothing more.
What's the difference between this and what happened during the 1960's when people wanted to see Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. speak and were turned away?
Care killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back.
The community moderation system here is a failure.
So anyone could setup a fake profile with someone else's name, join one of these groups and then that person goes on the terrorism watch list? Sounds fair to me.
I dream of a nation where a man is not judged by his skin color but by an number assigned by a credit rating agency.
My point wasn't regarding the politics. It was that Slashdot blatantly distorted the article to manufacture a sensationalist headline.
"Mark Zuckerberg called his first few thousand users "dumb fucks" for trusting him with their data,"
Well, for one, the US were a free country back then. Israel is maybe half of that-- assuming the press here (Netherlands) gives an accurate picture, anyway.
No, it isn't.
Is a bunch of young Israeli lawyers working round the clock sustained only by Diet Coke, falafel and cigarettes about to pull off the legal equivalent of the Six-Day War? A really good link which you should read. Here is another.
The Israelis have learned from the last flotilla, and hacked international law to serve their ends. The law firm Shurat HaDin (motto: "Bankrupting Terrorism - One Lawsuit at a Time") has done a bang-up job worthy of admiration, even if you're one of those people who thinks (like Hamas, the recipient of the aid flotilla) that Israel has no right to exist. I really recommend reading the link above, it does a great job of laying out what exactly has been done. They wrote letters to the insurers of the boat, warning them that under international law they would be legally liable for the consequences of helping Hamas. They informed INMARSAT that continuing their service exposed the company to liability. And, most hilariously, the legendary Greek bureaucracy has helped tremendously. Once a complaint is filed and an investigation started, the Greeks aren't exactly known for efficiency. American government is a model of speed compared to this.
Some more interesting facts: there is no pressing need for the aid flotilla. The last convoy actually succeeded in making the Israelis open up land borders and things are super in Gaza now. If the goal was to actually deliver aid, then the flotilla could dock in Egypt and have the goods delivered overland, permission has already been granted. Of course, this offer was refused because that's not the goal of the flotilla. It exists only to remove Israel's legitimacy as an entity (in other words, the same goal as Hamas). Yeah, yeah, right, you don't believe me. OK, how about what Adam Shapiro, co-founder of the International Solidarity Movement and a board member of the Free Gaza Movement said at a speech at Rutgers (to enormous applause, by the way)
Nobody in the Free Gaza movement gives a shit about being a delivery boy for rice and cooking oil. Journalists should really listen when organizations state their goals in public, but who gives a shit when the facts don't fit the narrative.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
And no, it doesn't.
They deserve it. When you post information on the facebook, don't complain when someone reads it.
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
The Wikileaks on Israel say otherwise. Specifically the leak saying that Israel intended to keep Gaza near collapse. They could have docked in Egypt, but the shipment would then have gone through Israel border controls which is where goods would be held back.
Money of course is another problem, with Israel spending money in palestinian bank accounts being the latest shocking revelation that nobody will act upon.
Of course, governments have been trying to deny people the opportunity to protest for generations. Sometimes their concerns are legitimate (e.g. riots due to the mob mentality), and sometimes they are not (since some protests are genuinely peaceful).
Even with the Facebook angle, I'm fairly certain that the situation is not unique. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister of Canada) was barring activists from the opposition due to statements on Facebook months prior to this Israel thing. And if Harper's Conservatives did it, it has probably been done by other people a million times before. There isn't a creative bone in the party's collective body.
Incidentally, I am neutral on Israel barring access to their country based upon Facebook shenanigans. I am opposed to people being placed on terrorism watch lists. The former is simply an expression of national sovereignty, even if I think it's foolish. The latter is an assumption of intent that may have far reaching impacts upon innocent lives.
Where does it say in the article that they were added to the 'terrorism watch list'?
In fact the Israelis told the airlines that the people on the list would not be allowed to enter Israel, so the airlines prevented them from flying.
There's no mention of terrorism: the submitter made that bit up.
Unfortunately the likely to be pro-Israel raises if you are a Jew and decreases if you are a Muslim.
But being a Jew doesn't mean that you necessarily agrees with everything that happens in Israel.
In other words - which other sites can you suffer this on? I suspect that if the FBI comes in they can get a list of whatever they want as soon as they whisper "Terrorism" and "Patriot Act" - even if they are acting outside the US territory because a company owner providing a service in another company certainly doesn't want to end up on the terrorist list - which he/she will do if cooperation isn't provided.
The Patriot Act and several other items in control by the US government is working well outside the borders of the US.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
Summary article title should read "Israel, like all other countries, uses facebook to track what it deems as 'undesirables' "
I'm shocked! that's almost like China sabotaging protests about Tibet...It's always political. Arab media does not talk much about the horrible Chinese occupation of Tibet. Mostly because they depend on China for a lot of trade.
If you want to start pointing the finger, just watch how arab states historically treated their own protestors & lately how their governements too used facebook to track protesters.
Or maybe we should just assume this article was really meant to inform us of important events and has no ulterior motive...doubtful.
TFA has little to do with the summary offered here on slashdot. The summary is really an attempt to "expose" Israel but I think the moral of this should be very different and more like the following:
Sign up to facebook and join the 'revolution', it's easy and you can make everyone's life so much easier to know who you really are. You'll be happy to know that you could be identified by your friends happily tagging your picture without requireing you to fill in some data or possibly even be on the site.
it's pretty easy if they'd(these protesters) organize just a little bit to make that black list ridiculously big and include too many names that have nothing to do with anything. Israels policies are borderline ridiculous, everyone knows that, hence who the fuck wants to even go there? it's not a good protest to go there and dump money on them by staying over, you would think if more governments were up to scratch they'd recommend for tourists staying the fuck out of Israel and neighboring countries - every year it's the same shit, people oppressing some other people and 100km away it's the other way around and another 100km and it's some other branch of some other religion doing just the same - how the fuck can they receive tourists with an open heart when they can't even bicycle 100km from where they live in peace? so now they could organize those groups to include vast amounts of people and instructing people to copy paste the same threats to the isreali about protesting against them, that way you can make the list hit airlines and the list itself becomes a far larger movement than their pesky little planned excursion to israel(which by the way, wouldn't have mattered at all, they got protests going all year round).
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
I would hope that we have made some progress in 50 years. If something that happens today is wrong, why does it matter if something similar happened 50 years ago?
This story isn't about Facebook, as a company helping Israel blacklist these activists. This is a story about how Facebook's service was used as a tool to compile this blacklist. Slashdot, nor the linked article mean to imply that FB, the company actively provided any assistance other than what the service already provides, to everyone. When it's said the Facebook aided Israel in spying on the activist, the correct context again is that Israel used Facebook's services which aided in monitoring these individuals, in the same way FB aided the activists in coordinating their efforts.
Parent modded "Troll", but I would say that I'm not surprised since it would in the world of today in the US be classified as racism.
The fear of "Racism" has in my opinion gone too far in some cases - but at the same time the US government still classifies people as being of different classes like Caucasian, Hispanic, Black etc...
So it's forbidden to joke about black people frequenting KFC but it's OK to have a government label on people classifying them???
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
Or do they just threaten Israel's own propaganda?
You mean if you plan things in a publically accessable area on the Internet, other people might read it and plan accordingly?
Are these people really stupid enough to think this would somehow work? I guess for their next act they'll discuss plans to eat & dash at a restraurant by yelling the plans to each other right outside the restraurant front door?
-- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
Facebook help Israel Blacklist Air Travelers
simply means that Facebook, the service helped Israel compile this blacklist, the same way the activists used it to coordinated their efforts. The context of how Facebook is used isn't clear from the headline, which actually makes it a good headline because people will read it. Hopefully they will understand once they do, that they were referring to the service, and not the company when they say Facebook.
Is that why the US frequently uses its veto to stop anything in the UN that might have an impact on Israel?
Because assholes come in many colors and shapes, tying greed and general antisocial behaviour to a group of people (where its members didn't choose to be part of it) is kinda nonsensical.
If I'm an asshole to people, I chose to be that way. I didn't choose the color of my skin or the origin, religion or culture of my parents.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Culturally oblivious ^
And no it wasn't. (Think about why MLK needed to speak there?!)
You must be new here, welcome to slashdot! And yes, I do see your uid.
I didn't get the impression that Facebook had done anything proactively, as you appear to have. Granted, not the clearest summary I have ever seen, but by /. standards, this is pretty clear.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
I can't but the Pacific side of WW2 could have shown you a few.
So, because the situation is now hopelessly fscked up and it's almost impossible to establish cause and effect for all the minor incidents that occur, we should all forget that Palestine was invaded, occupied and settled?
mediocrity rules, man
Yes, there is nothing in the article to say that Facebook supplied personal details to Israel.
What's the difference between this and what happened during the 1960's when people wanted to see Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. speak and were turned away?
Well, other than the two being completely different and totally unrelated situations, the primary difference is that Dr. MLK, Jr. was not in a foreign country giving his speech in an area which was under an Embargo and a Naval blockade.
World and Palestinians have waited far too long. Israel does not want peace, it want's to continue it's ethnic cleansing. It is time for people in free world (not counting USA where this is apparently illegal) to boycott Israel in same way as South Africa was boycotted during Apartheid.
If you see any product where the numbers on barcode start with 729, don't it! It comes from Apartheid country, that does routinely war crimes, tortures and kills people (including children), does slow motion ethnic cleaning etc.
And if somebody tries to sell you some Israeli goods (especially if they are from occopied territories), refuse and say that you are opposing Apartheid (again, this might be illegal in USA which doesn't seem to allow this kind of consumer freedom).
I even refuse meet people from dating sites if they are from Israel (unless they support Noam Chomsky type of thinking). I just say politely, but straight, that I cannot help not to think the extremely poor situation of plastinians if I meet people from Israel. And if I think the situation of palestinians, I cannot get any sleep. Therefore I cannot meet you, sorry.
Sounds like they bragged in public, using their own names. And nothing more.
It's shit like this, Slashdot...
o_O ...And this is is the part where I say you're a moron if you believe I don't use YOUR name, Paul, to brag in public about my anti-copyright protests.
Well, perhaps I don't use your name; Maybe someone else does, and I use some other's name... In reality, without Facebook's Help, how would they verify that the IP addresses posting as Susan Someone really belongs to Susan, and not Jane?
Are you suggesting that they just took the names and added them to the no-fly list without identity verification? Is this not even more outrageous?
Go ahead. Continue to ignore the ease of which I can now use your name online to falsely incriminate you... If you are not outraged now, then maybe you will be when you can't fly, ride a train, get a driver's license, or vote because of something I said or did using your name?
I think this a good example why enforcing real names is evil.
The activists had no other choice than using their real names, otherwise their accounts might have been blocked.
Don't drink and sudo
"These people announced on their Internet sites that they planned to come here and cause disruptions, and told their friends."
Sounds like they bragged in public, using their own names. And nothing more.
What's the difference between this and what happened during the 1960's when people wanted to see Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. speak and were turned away?
The difference is that Dr. Martin Luther King was peaceful. Palestinians are the opposite. Oh, and the fact that King had a legitimate complaint. Palestinians are "homeless" because they choose to cause trouble for anyone that gives them a place. So they decide to invade Israel's ancestral homeland.
Oh c'mon, don't you learn anything in history these days? How about that one?
Desperate people will take desperate means to achieve their goals. Regardless of religion.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
By 'working' do you mean the stripping away of people's civil, moral and legal rights?
If so, I concur.
My blog
I don't disagree, but I'm curious: how were the Japanese "desperate"?
I'm pretty sure that the connection between Islamist suicide bombers and kamikazes has to do with extremist ideology/religion and not being "desperate".
Despair is a universal human condition. There are desperate people everywhere. By itself it does not inspire one to mass murder. I have seen the triumphant video suicide notes of terrorist bombers and these men and women do not appear to be overcome with despair.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Why does everyone behave like the internet is automatically a private forum? At best, it is semi-private, and generally it is a public forum. These people started a public Facebook event. No spying necessary. Don't want everyone, including the authorities and people who may not like what you are doing, to know what you are doing, don't post it in a public forum.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
There is a difference between movement within your own country and being permitted to enter a foreign one, if your purpose is to stir things up. It's not as though they were blacklisted for forming a group of people on Facebook that were going to all meet at a beach party in Eilat.
The stupid neither forgive nor forget; the naïve forgive and forget; the wise forgive but do not forget.
Thomas Szasz
its hard to call it a "spy" machine when its public access and you put your data there willingly for all to see. It is not much different if your group puts their pictures and 'hey lets do this' on the bulletin board in their local library or grocery store.
Its a *voluntary* 'data collection machine'... nothing more, nothing less.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Except the people being targeted by Israel using Facebook are not terrorists. They are political activists seeking to engage in non-violent protest.
Now if you've really had a jeroboam of the kool-aid you could say that merely by supporting Palestine you become a terrorist, but if so you are beyond the reach of this discussion or really, any discussion.
This is from the article:
You can watch footage of the "deadly naval raid" and it consisted of a Israeli commandos descending from attack helicopters firing automatic weapons into unarmed and empty-handed protestors. It was less a "clash" than a massacre.
Israel's Facebook-spying is about keeping out peaceful protestors for public relations purposes.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Was Julian Assange correct, when he warned that Facebook was a giant, 'appalling spy machine'?"
Yes.
Facebook has the potential for such uses, and we've learned that any such potential will be exploited.
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
In comparison, Armenians do not get any benefits from being too victims of genocide. Why only Jews?
It seems that after the lotilla incident Israel allowed at least once shipment of shoes and clothes in Gaza -- the first one in three years! But maybe shoes and clothes are weapons
material...
When the israelis tried to stop a flotilla that was trying to break the naval blockade, that Israel keeps on Gaza to prevent arms smuggling to the terrorists there. The "protestors" attacked the first israelis commandos with knives, clubs, iron bars, chairs. The commandos where armed with paintball rifles. Only after several israelis were severely injured, the commandos got permission to open fire with their handguns to save their comrades and themselves.
And recently, the Sirian dictatorship allowed to hundreds of civilians to try to cross the border with Israel by force, cutting the barb wire. After the several warnings and shots into the air, the israelis fired to stop the horde that was tryng the break the border.
Each time the israelis act in legitimate defence, their are slandered.
Well, for one thing, facebook didn't exist 50 years ago.
When they started the suicide attacks the war was pretty much a lost case for the Japanese. IIRC the first attack happened in the second half of 44 when they already lost most of the areas that provide any meaningful resources. The US had a decisive superiority of ships and planes by that time and shortages were common in Japan. The idea to trade a plane for a ship seemed logical, considering that this had a few advantages over the more conventional bombing/torpedo attacks. First, you conserved fuel (which was desperately short by that time): No reason to fuel the plane for a round trip, one way suffices. The planes could be built much cheaper (no reason for a sturdy landing gear or parts that sustain some damage, if it crashes during descent it's pretty much what it should do) and the chance to hit was a lot higher (the cynic in me would call it the first optical guided weapon).
This is of course nothing you do if you're not desperate enough to send your people into certain death. Training a good pilot takes time. Suicide attackers rarely get more than a few hours of it. The most difficult operation, landing, can easily be omitted. Still, it doesn't really sit well with your people. Do you think any US soldier would go on a suicide run in whatever war the US is fighting currently, no matter how patriotic? How do you think the public would react to it? Now imagine the US get conquered and the enemy is near the heart of Washington, don't you think it would be a DAMN lot different, with people volunteering to sacrifice themselves for the country, and the public seeing it as a desperate but necessary sacrifice?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
So, because the situation is now hopelessly fscked up and it's almost impossible to establish cause and effect for all the minor incidents that occur, we should all forget that Palestine tried to invade, lost, and got their own territory occupied and settled?
Fixed that for ya.
Equating being a Jew with being pro Israel comes off as racist.
I agree with this, but you have to bear in mind that the Israeli establishment and its supporters themselves have long attempted to equate any criticism of Israel with anti-semitism, which implies the same thing as that above (albeit for different reasons and coming from a different direction) and is equally reprehensible.
I've made comments critical of Israel here in the past, fully expecting to be smeared in this manner, and I was not let down in that respect.
It should also be noted that the same right-wing grouping (*) is viciously hostile towards Jews who are remotely critical of the state and its actions, looking at and/or smearing them as traitors, "self hating", etc.
(*) I say right-wing because, regrettably, the present-day Israeli establishment (though arguably less so in the past) quite clearly *is* right-wing. While there are certainly dissenting voices in the country, they're obviously not part of the establishment, holding neither significant power nor being reflective of the country's apparent attitude as a whole.
Tried to invade who, if all the land was theirs in the first place? Palestine was there way before Israel was more than a dream.
Dilbert RSS feed
You got to admire a guy with ambitions.
He's obviously not content having won Time magazine Man of the Year.
He's simply amping up his credentials for Tool of the Year.
And I think he should get it.
if you support terrorists, you ARE a terrorist. i dunno how you can disagree with that. but we CAN have disagreement whether palestinians really are terrorists.
Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
I remember when words like 'racist', and others such as 'discrimination' were only used against people who were prejudiced, who were acting according to ideas which only existed within their own heads. I'm pretty sure the idea that Jews are more likely to support Israel than non-Jews is actually factual. It's not anything special about Jews; almost all groups of people have a tendency to support the organisations of those similar to them, but it's true nevertheless. And the existence of counterexamples doesn't mean you can't observe a general rule.
If someone was to make a similar observation about something non-emotive - say, "that guy supporting the American sports team? He's an American citizen. What do you expect?" I doubt anyone would be jumping to point that counterexamples exist and suggesting the observation was racist.
Indeed. Search `Benjamin Freedman Khazars'. By a simple application of empirical induction, one may cast doubts on that rogue state's existence after 2018,19. They dig their own grave, world widely.
Instead of the above it's a fairly recent thing that grew from Pakistani and Saudi involvement. Even the Taliban were the kids that grew up in the refugee camps and came back to apply the harsh "morality" (eg. protect your women and rape any unprotected women) of a refugee camp to an entire country.
One thing needs to be pointed out that almost always gets ignored is there's a difference between support for Israel and support for the Israeli government. As a concept, Israel as a county represents something important and core to Judaism. The Israeli government doesn't.
Bark less. Wag more.
I support my favorite football team. I guess that means I'm on the football team.
I support women's rights. I guess that makes me a woman.
I support Canada's independence. I guess that makes me Canadian.
I support the troops. I guess that makes me a soldier.
Do I need to go on?
Any sufficiently advanced influence is indistinguishable from control.
It sucks that I need to say this explicitly nowadays, since in the past it would have been implied. But, no, I do not support terrorists, nor their acts. I find the entire issue of controlling people through irrational impulses an anathema.
Any sufficiently advanced influence is indistinguishable from control.
[quote]It should also be noted that the same right-wing grouping (*) is viciously hostile towards Jews who are remotely critical of the state and its actions, looking at and/or smearing them as traitors, "self hating", etc.[/quote]
The aforementioned Chomsky is a good example of just that. As to whether Jews are more nationalistic than people from the US or South Sudan, I don't know, but Jewishness does give you a more vertically integrated experience out of the box. It's a religion, culture, diet (,"race"?) and nation-state with clear and present enemies all around to make you a tightly knit community. And history will offer reasons to view your present day struggle as righteous.
On the other hand, Jews in Israel are living pretty much in the middle of (and often participating, through conscription in) the unfair (just look at the bodycount) treatment of Palestinians.
Soldiers are coming forward and speaking out. People are sick and tired of violence that hasn't brought them peace. How many are they? I don't know, but I'm not sure it's as obvious as one could think that Jews are pro Israel in a dramatically bigger way than US citizens are pro USA...
Anyway, thank Jahve for people like Chomsky, making it clear for me that Jews and Israel isn't the same thing, whatever the Israeli-anti-defamation-lobby says.
Another case of abusing a tragedy after the fact for political purposes, in this case by militant Zionists?
I don't want to support Palestinian terrorists either, but I'm starting to doubt that the US government should be behind the Israeli government 110%.
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
The closest it comes to describing what happened is: Israel had tracked the activists on social media sites, compiled a blacklist of more than 300 names and asked airlines to keep those on the list off flights to Israel. and "These people announced on their Internet sites that they planned to come here and cause
disruptions, and told their friends."
Sounds like they bragged in public, using their own names. And nothing more.
It's shit like this, Slashdot...
When you're trying to attract as much attention to an issue as you can, and make a public statement about where you stand on that issue, keeping it a secret doesn't really work very well...
A non-Islamic suicide bomber?
Easy. The guy who flew his plane into the IRS building in Austin last year.
Except the people being targeted by Israel using Facebook are not terrorists. They are political activists seeking to engage in non-violent protest.
A "terrorist" is anyone that any government says is a terrorist. It's arbitrary. There cannot be any objective definition, because such a definition would include groups supported by the same governments (this applies to the US, Israel, France, and probably most other governments). "Terrorist", like "regime", is a word with great emotional content but little objective content. It applies to those a government disapproves of, but not those who it counts as friends or minions.
LTTE? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberation_Tigers_of_Tamil_Eelam#Suicide_bombings
They were the first group to use explosive belts and vests.
How come this is not modded informative but -1?
Because it was also modded by a Jew.
The three laws of thermodynamics:(1) You can't win. (2) You can't break even. (3) You can't even quit.
One route to sort out the mess in the middle east, is not to fight over useless desert, but to provide water to make much more land usable.
The founders of Israel had a plan.
http://discovermagazine.com/1994/nov/bettermedorredth452/
Why they have not carried it out, baffles me.
If the Jews set this plan into motion they would attract love and respect from the Arabs and the rest of the world.
It's called an elephant's trunk whereas it is in fact, an elephant's nose, a nose by any other name would smell as sweet
People who chain themselves in front of abortion clinics are also "non violent protestors".
Protests don't magically become harmless because they are "non violent".
The irony is so thick you need a chainsaw to cut it.
And if you still think Israel deserves sympathy, Google "Rachel Corrie" and
get a good look at what these people are capable of.
Most of the world recognizes Israel has been a bad actor for a long time now,
it is the very powerful Jewish lobby in the US which prevents this from being
so obvious to people who do not read international news. However, there are
even some American Jews ( I am one ) who are against Israel's policies and behavior,
and the reason we are against it is that we KNOW it will work against the cause of
peace and foment hatred of Jews worldwide.
Facebook aided Israel in cracking down on the group of activists from the UK, France, and Belgium who planned their event using the popular social networking site.
Well there's your problem right there.
'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
Clueless nitwits post 'secrets' on Facebook and get caught! World stunned! Who would have imagined that anyone could have the technical sophistication to gather information from Facebook?!?
Elsewhere in the news, slashdot poster makes false claims about terrorism watch lists! World stunned again! Read the original article, there is nothing about anyone being put on an 'terrorism watch list'. Israel simply put them on a blacklist of people who would not be allowed to enter Israel, which is perfectly within their rights. A terrorism watch list would have prevented them from getting on any airplane going anywhere.
Great point!! FarceBook does facilitate this kind of abuse and it is the "so-called authorities" who are now okay with equating suspicion as incriminating evidence and applying summary "justice" to the (unverified) offenders. My question: What good is it to create a list that is bogus and based on hearsay? The country/company end up getting bad publicity, the people on the list get offended (worse a real person with the same name may get harassed or worse) and FarceBook gets free publicity.
Well, perhaps I don't use your name; Maybe someone else does, and I use some other's name... In reality, without Facebook's Help, how would they verify that the IP addresses posting as Susan Someone really belongs to Susan, and not Jane?
Are you suggesting that they just took the names and added them to the no-fly list without identity verification? Is this not even more outrageous?
Well seeing as the people with those names actually did try to go to Israel to protest, yes, I'd say the people were stupid enough to use their own names in public groups to plot their protest and Israel was able to block them from entering the country. Now that it's happened once however, I don't expect it to work again, at least not as well. Next time Israel (or whatever country) will need actual confirmation from Facebook/etc. to get real identities, and they might not be able to get that information.
And they didn't put them on any kind of general no-fly list, they denied them entry to Israel, which is well within Israel's rights. (They don't have to let anyone enter if they don't want to.) If they'd put them on a general terrorist no-fly list that affected their travel to other countries it would be outrageous, but they didn't do that, so no, it's not more outrageous. Using someone else's name would have had no impact on that person unless that person was also planning to travel to Israel.
Go ahead. Continue to ignore the ease of which I can now use your name online to falsely incriminate you... If you are not outraged now, then maybe you will be when you can't fly, ride a train, get a driver's license, or vote because of something I said or did using your name?
I'd be royally pissed off at you, more so than whatever I was blocked from. But that's not the issue here, the block was very specific (only preventing people from being allowed to enter Israel), not blocking them from traveling in any other way. Sure the potential is there, but so far it's not happening. I also don't see many other countries trying this and as I noted above, it's not something that's likely to work effectively a second time.
I can't say I like this kind of thing, but Israel is within their rights to block entry to anyone they want, and there's no indication Facebook provided any non-public information to Israel in this case. So as much as I don't like it personally, nothing really shady's going on, and one would hope people using false names for something like this would pick a name of someone who was unlikely to be impacted. That is, make sure to use a name of someone unlikely to be traveling to Israel as their cover name for discussing a protest in Israel.
are we talking about people excercising what should be a basic human right to protest against a government they don't like.
You speak of "rights" as if they are universal. Rights for people exist in different ways in different countries.
The protestors have the "right" to protest in a lot of places. They could go almost anywhere to protest. Yet they chose Israel...
Israel, as with any country, has the "right" not to let people into the country they do not want, and that includes those that are vociferous in the assertion Israel should not exist.
I can't even think of a "right" that would be universal where you would be allowed to come into someones home just to tell them they should not exist. That doesn't sound like a "right". That sounds like a "wrong".
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
At every moment, governs around the world are commiting crimes against human rights. Any governement that attacks the constitution of its own people has to be stopped. Such a gov is as criminal as any other political organisation. Including political organizations that use terror to achieve their goals. I don't see any difference between using terror to stop a flotilla or using terror to stop the colonization of your territory by an occupying nation. By this pace, using this repugnant distorted agenda, one day the peoples that resisted nazi occupation will be judged terrorists since they did not obey. They are 2 faces of the same coin. Unless we stop this, I don't see the world having a better future for our nations. What is wrong with these govs nowadays? Everyhting that is good for me is right? Are we going to return to the law of jungle? I don't understand the argument that accepts an error as a justification to commit another error? But I think there could be a solution: Democratic countries should have more instruments available for their people to intervene, specially when the ruling governemnts violate their constitutions. Otherwise we are condmened to live in an spiral of war, ignorance and poverty
If you are not outraged now, then maybe you will be when you can't fly, ride a train, get a driver's license, or vote because of something I said or did using your name?
The day I am 'legally' restricted from traveling or voting because of another man's speech, I will personally begin America's Second Revolutionary War starting with dispatching the authority that attempts to restrict me from traveling or voting.
Lords and serfs, I'm telling you. We're nothing but a bunch of subjugated serfs suffering at the hands of our Lords.
Yes, and as despicable and creepy as they are, we don't send commandos in to slaughter them. Nor do we track them on Facebook in order to put them on travel blacklists as the Israeli government has done to the protestors from the UK.
You are welcome on my lawn.
The whole notion of the end being used to justify the means was debunked a long time ago. So whether Israel is fighting for it's survival as you imply or not doesn't justify their behaviour (and if Israel is so fragile that 200 foreign protesters could threaten it's survival then...).
The US repeatedly basis it's support on the 'fact' that Israel is the only true democracy in the region- despite the fact that israel is has much more in common with Iran- both are run by religious fanatics interested more in their own survival that actually adhering to their religion.
And as to your last point: perhaps if you had been around in the 1960s you'd have been busy telling Dr Martin Luther King Jr that he shouldn't bother protesting or trying to change things because 'there is no racial equality in America"? Or perhaps if you'd been around earlier that century you'd have been telling Emily Pankhurst not to bother fighting for the vote for women because "we've all admitted 'there is no right to vote for women'"? Or perhaps if you'd been around in early 19th century England you'd have been telling Williamn Wilberforce not to bother trying to outlaw slavery because 'there is no freedom for slaves"?
The whole point of protesting is to get things changed and if that thing is 'bad' -for example pretty much the entire history of the behavious of the Modern Israeli state- then the protest deserves to succeed.
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
Show me the non islamic suicide bomber.
The Tamil Tigers killed the Indian Prime Minister, Sri Lankan President, sunk the SLNS Sagarawardena and blew up the Sri Lankan central bank killing 90+ and injuring 1400+, all with suicide bombers, some of them women.
In 2010 Andrew Joseph Stack III flew his private plane in to the IRS offices in Austin.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
You couldn't be more wrong in fact.
http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
Are you referring to Syria, by any chance? You know, the Syria the Palestinians, to date, still embrace wholeheartedly?
If by any chance, you were referring to the Israelis, please provide some proof to back your allegations. Any of them.
You claim the Flotilla members were non-violent. That assertion has been proven wrong (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qG0EfG8mnAo/).
You claim the commandos had been sent to slaughter them. That also is false. (same video, note the use of paintball guns)
You claim you do not put people on travel blacklists if they did not demonstrate willingness to commit violent acts against you, yet you did so. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/08/iranian-officials-travel-blacklist)
""The UK is working closely with its partners to prevent a wide range of individuals connected with Iran's nuclear enrichment and weaponisation programmes from entering our countries. These include scientists, engineers and those procuring components," Hague said in a statement."
scientists and engineers are put on travel blacklist by the British government? A government is exercising it sovereignty against civilians who had done nothing illegal or violent against it? good grief!
In short, most of your allegations are false. Please provide some shred of logic and facts to support such allegations in the future.
Nah, racism/discrimination are and always have been applied to those who treat an entire group of people as if they are all the same. For example, just because the average IQ of blacks in America is factually lower than whites does not mean you're not racist if you assume that the current black person you are dealing with is unintelligent as a result, and you're definitely discriminating if you don't hire them for a job for that reason.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
Present the facts to me, then, you well-oiled propaganda machine.
Don't post AC, make a respectful request and I'll share some history. If you're going to be a dick who won't read it anyway, no- I've got better things to do.
I don't disagree, but I'm curious: how were the Japanese "desperate"?
They were desperate in late 1944 which is when they started launching kamikaze attacks. They were NOT using kamikazes in 1942 when they were flying high and winning battles all over the place. In fact they would've laughed in your face if you suggested it.
I'm pretty sure that the connection between Islamist suicide bombers and kamikazes has to do with extremist ideology/religion and not being "desperate".
Well you're wrong, and you need to read some history. Suicide attacks are always a desperation measure of last resort. Nobody does them unless they feel there's no other way to retaliate.
Germans as far as I know don't have an "extremist" religion, and even they resorted to suicide attacks late in the war when all hope seemed lost.
And Islam was just as an "extremist" back in the Crusader days as it is now. But back then, the Muslims actually had an army that was competitive. So when foreigners invaded their land, they launched a military offensive to kick them out. And they succeeded after a while.
In 1947 when Israel was created out of Arab land, the Arabs didn't launch suicide bombers. They attacked with their army. Again and again. It is only after they failed for the umpteenth time and realizing they have absolutely no chance of defeating the Israeli/USA alliance, that they started resorting to suicide bombers.
I am willing to donate up to 20$ to help you buy any credible history book from amazon. You choice. Just please - read it.
Palestine, to your utter amazement and horror never existed. before the British mandate the Ottoman empire ruled. as a distinctive land it only existed, to my recollection, during the crusades. Would you claim the mamluks were the invaders and the region should be pan-european?
To the asshole jew who modded me down: Fuck you and fuck Anne Frank's skull!
Do you think any US soldier would go on a suicide run in whatever war the US is fighting currently, no matter how patriotic?
Pat Tillman did.
JEWS ARE NOT A RACE.
Judaism is a superstition like all other religions, which one may adopt or reject at will.
Your first sentence was fine, but there is ZERO excuse for confusing RACE with RELIGION with ETHNICITY.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Hamas writes:
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/hamas-official-israeli-settlers-are-a-legitimate-military-target-1.312108
Well guy, I guess your statements ring out the truth for at least one of the players on that team.
Not only Facebooks help, but also the ISPs help. In Belgium that would mean that either the ISP has broken the privacy law that says that NO information may be given, unless given by a court order. Not even a policeman in uniform will be allowed to get it.
In three different companies I have policemen said to get out and come back with a court order. I also said that I would already do the investigations requested and put it aside for when they would come back.
Somehow I don't believe that that has happened. If that would be the case, those people could at least sue the ISPs and perhaps even the state, depending on what comes up. And they would win.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Jews and Muslims, are, after all, enemies in that Judaism and Islam are competing exclusive superstitions.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
You are a victim of the Terry Gilliamesque, "Brazil"-style coverage of world events.
Suicide bombing in, the modern era, was introduced and maintained for a couple decades by Hindu Tamil separatists, in Sri Lanka.
The "suicide belt" and "suicide vest" - as well as the use of young women as bombers and blast decoys originate here, and are far more institutionalised and part of ongoing strategy by the Tamil Tigers.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
In what way were the attacks of 9/11 a "desperation measure of last resort" rather than an offensive attack? A "desperation measure" suggests they had no other option. There was a world full of targets of opportunity. Just the fact that there were (and are) so many soft targets indicates very specifically that 9/11 was not a "desperation measure of last resort". How were the London subway bombings a "desperation measure of last resort"? The attackers were comfortable middle class muslims.
I'm not sure which history you're reading, but suicide bombings were never a strategy for the Germans. There may well have been some individual German troops or commanders, but it was never seen as a means to an end the way it was with the Kamikaze and the way it is for extremist muslims today.
There is no widespread strategy of suicide bombing without extremist ideology or religion.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Today's news: âFreedom Flotillaâ(TM) Organizer says Jews Are âPigsâ(TM).. Right there in his own fucking words. Speaking to a sympathetic audience in his own language - who would have thought someone would translate it?
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
No, the most you can guess from the story at that link is that the Israeli press is promoting a particular perspective on the Palestinians.
The mainstream Israeli press is even more a tool of powerful groups with a particular ideological bent than the US press. Compared to the mainstream news media in the US and Israel, Soviet-era TASS is a piker.
You are welcome on my lawn.
You can watch footage of the "deadly naval raid" and it consisted of a Israeli commandos descending from attack helicopters firing automatic weapons into unarmed and empty-handed protestors.
Biased much?
(yes, I've seen the videos - they're nothing like what you just described - but unlike you, I will simply suggest that people look them up and make their own mind)
Any sources other than the Old Testament?
Tamil Tigers were, they invented the suicide vest.
http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2008/january/tamil_tigers011008
Suicide planes were a strategy for the Luftwaffe though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonderkommando_Elbe
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonidas_Squadron
I happened to be in Palestine this past week when the protests happened and have lived there in the past. Because people were saying, upon their entry interview, that they were coming to protest human rights offenses, they were expecting Israel to turn them right around. I don't know the percentages of course, but there was a very sizable group of foreigners (a couple hundred I would guess), that seemed to make it in and do their protests. As someone with tons of Palestinian contacts, and who travels to Israel (and the occupied territories) frequently, I make a habit of disabling any social media for crossing airport security.
*awaits slashdot to give up my personal date to Israel in order to blacklist me*
Are you suggesting that they just took the names and added them to the no-fly list without identity verification? Is this not even more outrageous?
Actually, that is exactly what happens. How do you think Edward Kennedy, former US Senator (RIP), ended up on a no-fly list?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17073-2004Aug19.html
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/aug2004/kenn-a21.shtml
The 72-year-old Kennedy briefly recounted the Kafkaesque incidents: âoeHe [the ticket agent] said, âWe canâ(TM)t give it to you ... You canâ(TM)t buy a ticket to go on the airline to Boston.â(TM) I said, âWell, why not?â(TM) He said, âWe canâ(TM)t tell you.â(TM) Tried to get on a plane back to Washington ... âYou canâ(TM)t get on the plane.â(TM) I went up to the desk and said, âIâ(TM)ve been getting on this plane, you know, for 42 years. Why canâ(TM)t I get on the plane?â(TM)â
On each occasion, at Bostonâ(TM)s Logan International Airport, Washingtonâ(TM)s Reagan National Airport and one other, airline supervisors ultimately overruled the ticket agents and permitted Kennedy to board his plane. All the flights were on US Airways.
Kennedy staff members eventually telephoned the Transportation Security Administration, a branch of the Department of Homeland Security, and officials there promised to rectify the mistake. However, it took them several weeks to clear up the matter. In fact, only days after Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge called Kennedy in early April to apologize, another airline agent attempted to block the Massachusetts Democrat from boarding.
We need to realize that terrorist is an objective term, and our soldiers are terrorists by all rational standards.
"Shock and Awe"
This is proof that terrorism legislation is openly used against regular people.
We all could vote for the Green Party in our individual countries, just to piss off the people who want to control us. Never fear that the green party is going to win and ruin anything. They generally rarely win, but can be good as a balancing party for dividing the power.
A total of 13 such attacks.
Either way, you could certainly say that an extremist ideology/religion was the impetus for these attacks.
My point stands. In the absence of such extremist ideology or religion, there is no suicide bomber. They are the strategy of insanity, not of despair.
Find me a suicide bomber that was not an extremist religious or ideological freak.
You are welcome on my lawn.
"paintball guns"? Are you shitting me?
That "analysis" is just ridiculous. We've got Israeli commandos descending from ropes with automatic rifles onto the deck of a civilian ship in international water and then complaining because the unarmed occupants of the ship defended themselves.
The effort made by the western media to make Israel appear to be the "victim" in this is unbelievable. They kill 9 civilians and then complain that they're the victim. Claiming that "shaking the rope" that they're using to board a civilian ship is an excuse for slaughter.
It's getting harder and harder to support Israel without asking some serious questions about how their own behavior has contributed to the problem. This conflict has been going on for more than a half-century. They are not winning any new friends and are losing some of the current ones. When your existence depends upon powerful benefactors, petulance does not help.
You are welcome on my lawn.
The headline and the original AP article suggested that Facebook provided information about users to the Israeli government so it could block those people from entering the West Bank. That is not true, and the AP issued a correction:
JERUSALEM (AP) _ In a story July 8, The Associated Press reported that Israel's effort to identify and stop foreign pro-Palestinian activists planning to fly to Israel was "aided by Facebook." It should be understood that Israeli officials were aided by public posts on Facebook pages, and not by the company itself.
Joe Sullivan
Facebook CSO
I described the incident as "Israeli commandos descending from attack helicopters firing automatic weapons into unarmed and empty-handed protestors".
Were they Israeli commandos? Did they descend from attack helicopters? Did they fire automatic weapons? Were the protestors armed? Did the commandos kill 9 of them?
Maybe you could point out where I'm wrong. There is a straightforward video of the incident.
I am inclined to be on the side of people who have built an impressive country in the middle of the desert after having a very horrible history throughout the world. For a lot of years I could accept that they were the victims of unprovoked attacks and that was the entirety of the story. in 2007 on a visit to Israel I spent some time in Gaza, met some people, saw some things. Saw the settlements going up. Saw bulldozers destroying the homes of Palestinians just trying to make a living, feed their families. It's not such a black and white issue to me any more. There is blame to spread around. After more than a half-century, hostilities do not continue unless both sides are culpable to a certain extent. Israel is not blameless.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Could it be that you are Jewish & so have a stronger emotional attachment to Israel than you do to the US?
Therefore, you are willing to forgive the actions of a country that you love vs one that you merely like?
After all, you might say that Afghanistan or Iraq are fighting for their survival, but my guess is that you aren't sympathetic to the actions of their "freedom fighters" at all.
Dude, you really must not be familiar with Haaretz. It is a left-leaning pro-peace paper.
Maybe you were thinking of J Post?
Interesting that peaceful activists would be added to the terrorism watch lists, no?
You couldn't be more wrong in fact.
Ask the Chinese how well that applies.
I can post a story too saying we all have a right to ice cream, but it doesn't mean I'll be coming home with a cone. The reality is that countries have different rights.
Also, did you check to see if the protestors rights are covered in the fantasy document you posted? Wouldn't it be funny if you made such a glaring mistake?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I assume you refer to the Mavi Marmara boarding; if not, please correct me.
Can you link to a video that shows Israeli commandos descending from a helicopter ("Black Hawk" is not an attack helicopter, by the way, it's a transport) and immediately firing into unarmed protesters? Because the videos I've seen show commandos descending one by one, not firing, and being mauled by the crowd ("unarmed" only in a sense that they didn't have firearms; but plenty of blunt melee weapons, and there are documented knife wounds on IDF soldiers) waiting for them on the deck.
FWIW, the commandos they didn't even have any automatic weapons - when it came to the fight, they used their backup pistols, since their primary weapons - paintball guns - were non-lethal and highly ineffective. Even then, they had only started using firearms after the first batch was subdued, and their arms removed from them by the passengers and used to arm themselves.
There is some claim that there was fire from the chopper before boarding; however, I'm not aware of any evidence presented to that effect. All previous boarding attempts (which were caught on video) - from boats - show the use of stun grenades and paintball guns; the soldiers descending on the deck also had paintball guns. It doesn't make any sense whatsoever to fire live rounds from the chopper, and then send troops with non-lethal weaponry to mop up. UNHRC report which makes this claim (and which seems the primary source for it) is light on facts in that regard - it pretty much admits that it is based on witness reports (from those on the ship, hardly an impartial party), and the fact that most gunshot wounds on the victim were in the upper half of the torso. Considering the present membership of UNHRC, I'm inclined to assume significant bias on behalf of that body, and so I would need more evidence to be convinced on this point.
One other reason why I believe that sequence of events to be highly unlikely is because it only happened on one ship. On other ships - where the passengers did not try to put up violent resistance - there were no live rounds fired, and no casualties. This is consistent with Israeli claims that boarding parties were given rules of engagement that only authorized the use of lethal weaponry in case of imminent threat of death or bodily harm - which is what they encountered on board of Mavi Marmara. If commandos were authorized to use live rounds from the get go, before or during the initial boarding, why didn't they do so on all other ships?
The black-listed group was then forwarded to airlines with instructions to prevent the activists from boarding air flights to Israel.
Air flights? As opposed to what other kind of flights?
Friendly fire. Then the cover-up.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Surely the point is that exercising freedom of expression in a democracy (UK) resulted in people being placed on a terrorism watch-list with the cooperation of western companies (airlines)?
Assuming that the story is accurate in that respect...
Read Pynchon.
" most Gazans can travel abroad only by crossing into Egypt through their shared border."
These troublemakers are pro-palestinian-arab or, in simpler words, criminals. They didn't get a tenth what's coming to them.
"Violent resistance". What kind of resistance do you put up to someone boarding a ship in international water?
Why were they boarding, exactly? By what authority? They weren't on their way to Israel, they were on their way to Palestine, and the ship was not in Israeli water?
You are welcome on my lawn.
The same way that the New York Times and the Washington Post and ABC, NBC and CBS are "left-leaning"?
Maybe the way The New Republic is "left-leaning"?
People say the New York Times is a liberal, "left-leaning" publication but they still enabled the Bush Administration to lie us into two wars. The Washington Post is said to be "left-leaning" but consistently puts forth a very distorted, corporatist view of events and issues.
You don't have to be a right-wing outfit like Fox News to have a particular agenda that does not fit with the honest description of events and issues.
You are welcome on my lawn.
just wondering.
According to the customary law of the sea as it stands, it is legal to attack and/or board ships in neutral waters that "are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and if after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture" (per San Remo Manual summary of the law). The ships in question had a publicly declared goal of breaching the blockade, so it would seem to apply. To the best of my knowledge, no-one disputes that the boarding itself was legal if the blockade is legal. The legality of the latter is disputed, but at that point we are into very murky territory, since it hinges on whether "the damage to the civilian population is, or may be expected to be, excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated from the blockade", and in particular if it "has the sole purpose of starving the civilian population or denying it other objects essential for its survival" - and both are very subjective measurements which are easy to reinterpret according to one's biases.
Anyway, my point was not to debate the legality of the boarding in the first place, but rather to dispute your account that IDF went in guns blazing. All in all, I think that soldiers at the scene had shown remarkable restraint to use lethal force (compared to e.g. US police - consider how long it would take a cop to decide to draw out a gun if he sees someone swinging a metal pipe at his partner).
The Tamil Tigers. Nationalists, not religious or ideological freaks.
Suicide bombers for Fatah, also not religious or ideological freaks, just plain old nationalists.
Remember the Christmas story? Roughly 2000 years ago? There were Jews and Romans in the holy land. No Palestinians. No Arabs. Islam didn't even come around for another couple hundred years. It's the Jews land. They are the indigenous people.
Why did 9/11 happen at all, hmm? It's interesting that nobody ever asked this question, why the attack on the US? Israel? C'mon, not enough of a hassle, especially since Ozzy was not only the CIA's lapdog for the longest time but also because he had little, if any, involvement with the anti-Israel attacks from Palestinians.
Personally, I think it was retaliation for something. An attack this size ain't something you do unprovoked. "Hey, it's Tuesday, let's bomb the US", that's not really a motivation. There's lots of other, more "sensible" targets for an Islamic terrorist. Even aside of Israel. They could have turned on Iraq for suppressing the more radical Muslims (well, the US took care of that now). Or on India to support Pakistan, which would have been heaps closer to home. Attacking the US was strategically very insensible, so the only reason can be that the US somehow managed to piss Ozzy off enough that he wanted to retaliate, and retaliate hard. And somehow I doubt it's Israel. Else, he would certainly not have accepted US support to get shipped to Afghanistan and fight Russia instead of sending his suicide dummies simply across the border.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
As annoying and somehow worrying as I still find it - not in a major scale of things-, I really kind of don't think it is a massive surprise.
Yea, Assange called it an 'appalling spy machine' and it was obvious since we first even signed up to Facebook.
Every change that's been made clearly was not made to 'help us share' whatever blah with our friends, family and stuff.
So yes, once you know that, if you're doing something that 'delicate' / important / secret, maybe creating Facebook groups is not exactly the best idea.
The content you put up there is 'public', like it or not.
Very good points, Opportunist.
I get the feeling that if you're right, whatever set off the "insensible" retaliatory direct attack on the US happened in Afghanistan, possibly in the last years of the Soviet quagmire.
That would put it during the Reagan Administration, which makes perfect sense. Evil begets evil.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Actually *reading* the page you linked to:
"The Jewish community accepted the plan, but the Arab League and Arab Higher Committee of Palestine rejected it. On December 1, 1947, the Arab Higher Committee proclaimed a three-day strike, and Arab bands began attacking Jewish targets."
And again:
"On May 14, 1948, the day before the expiration of the British Mandate, the Jewish Agency proclaimed independence, naming the country Israel. The following day, the armies of four Arab countries â"Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq â" attacked Israel, launching the 1948 Arabâ"Israeli War; Saudi Arabia sent a military contingent to operate under Egyptian command; Yemen declared war but did not take military action. After a year of fighting, a ceasefire was declared and temporary borders, known as the Green Line, were established. Jordan annexed what became known as the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and Egypt took control of the Gaza Strip."
Regardless of what HAS happened, it's important to note what CAN. Or are you truly a Fool?
Also, This is illogical:
one would hope people using false names for something like this would pick a name of someone who was unlikely to be impacted. That is, make sure to use a name of someone unlikely to be traveling to Israel as their cover name for discussing a protest in Israel.
If you think I'm NOT going to use false names of people who will be MORE likely to be unjustly wronged by the system that I am protesting against, you are sadly mistaken.
Logically, which makes more of an impact? -- Using false names that get hunted down a dead end path, or using real names that further draw attention to the issue I'm protesting when the oppressors inconvenience others needlessly?
ITT: Fools remaining fools, despite their "enlightenment". A fool learns from their mistakes; A wise man learns from the mistakes of others -- I put it to you that a wiser man need not wait for the foolish mistake to be made at all.
Instead of submitting everyone who enters their country to electronic groping (or physical), they do _detective work_ to identify the threat even before it gets to them. I recall, but cba to find and link, the article about airport security in Israel and how they profile people from when they reach the front door, and have intelligence agencies dedicated to finding and stopping potential terrorists _before_ they get to the airport.
America (the TSA) could learn a lot from them.