Slashdot Mirror


Israel Airport Security Allowed To Read Tourists' Email

wiredmikey writes "Israeli security officials at Ben Gurion airport are legally allowed to demand access to tourists' email accounts and deny them entry if they refuse, the country's top legal official said on Wednesday. Details of the policy were laid out by Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein in a written response to the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI), the group said in a statement. 'In a response dated April 24, 2013, the attorney general's office confirmed this practice,' ACRI said, quoting sections of the document which said it was only done in exceptional cases where 'relevant suspicious signs' were evident and only done with the tourist's 'consent'. 'Allowing security agents to take such invasive measures at their own discretion and on the basis of such flimsy "consent" is not befitting of a democracy,' commented Lila Margalit from ACRI."

438 comments

  1. My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Israel has every right to require you show just cause why they should let you in. Just like the US has that same right.

    You have no right to enter a country of which you are not a citizen, and they can deny you entry for any reason, and require whatever they want of you as a condition of entry.

    That's just the way it is. Don't like it? Don't go to Israel.

    1. Re:My house, my rules by slashdyke · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      That is part of why I avoid travelling to the US. Their house, their rules, not for me thanks.

    2. Re:My house, my rules by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The question isn't whether they can require something; but whether they are showing good taste by doing so.

      Given that nation states exist largely in a state of nature unless they piss off enough members of the security council, what they can do is a very broad category indeed. That, however, makes judging them on what they do choose to do rather easier...

    3. Re:My house, my rules by PopeRatzo · · Score: 0

      That is part of why I avoid travelling to the US. Their house, their rules, not for me thanks.

      But that's every country on Earth.

      Do you know a country where they don't play by their own rules?

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    4. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The USA is but one of many that doesn't play by its own rules. The US government quite blatantly violates its country's constitution, after all.

    5. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Israel has every right to require you show just cause why they should let you in. Just like the US has that same right.

      Israel has no rights, nor does the US. Rights belong to people, not governments. Governments have powers, and to say that no government should have this particular power is right, proper, and objectively correct.

    6. Re:My house, my rules by joe_frisch · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The point is to decide which rules you are willing to accept. I will not enter a country that might ask for access to my private accounts, assuming that I can verify that this is really the case.

    7. Re:My house, my rules by shawn(at)fsu · · Score: 5, Insightful

      IMHO Israel is not worried about what's in good taste and is more worried about national security from countries that have stated in no uncertain terms that Israel should be wiped off the map.

      --
      500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
    8. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Rules are always made to benefit those making them. When those rules no longer benefit the rule-makers, they change the rules. Every government in the world follows that basic principle.

    9. Re:My house, my rules by Alex+Zepeda · · Score: 1

      Somalia?

      --
      The revolution will be mocked
    10. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn right. We can worry about freedom, liberty, privacy and other such trivial matters when we have no enemies left to fight.

    11. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn you're stupid

    12. Re:My house, my rules by WaywardGeek · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Their airport security works, and the environment is hostile, so I can't blame them much for their airport interview techniques. In 1996, I was consulting for an electronics company in Haifa, where I wrote a technology mapper for digital logic. At the exit interview, the security guy wanted to understand exactly what it was I was doing in Israel, and he almost made me miss my plane. He just couldn't figure out what the heck I was paid to do no matter how I explained it. No biggie. I have a Palestinian friend who tells me about having to go through cavity searches to get on a plane. Their methods violate privacy big time, but it works.

      If we want to pick on Israel, I think pointing out that 45 years of brutal occupation of the West Bank isn't cool. I can let the airport thing slide.

      --
      Celebrate failure, and then learn from it - Nolan Bushnell
    13. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The USA lost its political sovereignty in 1974 when capital controls were removed allowing foreign investment and thus influencing of internal affairs.

    14. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In defense of the US, at least the government still pretends to follow its own rules where it thinks it might get caught and it could cause a stink, costing someone (or several or many someones) reelection, etc. This provides a lot more stability than many governments do. In America, it's actually possible to go your entire life without having to bribe anyone, for example. Living somewhere where they at least pretend to care about civil liberties, etc. is better than living somewhere where they don't even bother to pretend, which explains in large measure why so many people came here, still come here, and why so many stay who could leave.

      Being able to leave, coincidentally, is another nice feature of our system. If I want to travel abroad, I don't have to SNEAK AWAY. Can the prisoners... er... 'citizens' of every other country say that? Also, for all the other countries whose citizens CAN, in fact say that, how many might have more repressive governments than they do were it not for America's influence? Historically, this long-suffering and oft derided nation has been responsible for a lot of freedom beyond its borders, thank you very much you fnck!ng ingrates.

      For example, if you live in France, and you enjoy not speaking German, (or if you live anywhere in Europe, for that matter, and enjoy not being required to speak German...) you're welcome. If you live anywhere in Asia, and enjoy not having to speak Japanese, if only to ask your masters for water, or for them not to whip you so hard... you're welcome. Has everything this nation done been good, and on the up and up? Of course not - but on balance, if we're not the best, when it comes to civil rights, and being a great place to live, raise a family, etc., then we're certainly near the top of the list, regardless of how some one or more groups who have had the temerity to presume to rate and rank various places' worth, generally by criteria that necessarily skew the results one way or another.

      Did we perhaps get overzealous recently? That's probably fair to say. Have some of our policies, foreign and domestic benefited the rich at the expense of everyone else? Clearly. Does that make the entire nation a benighted sh!+hole worthy only of scorn? Hardly. If anything, it underlines the point that people should give a lot more thought to how, and for whom they vote, and less time worrying about whether the people have (D) or (R) after their names, or how slick their hair is, or how menacing they make the notion of their opponents' victories seem in advertising, because most, if not all of the horrible things this country has done, looking back, can ultimately be attributed to a careless, negligent, uninformed, and/or easily frightened or manipulated, apathetic electorate.

      The fix for this is simple, though far from easy. Education. Without education, we're doomed. Now if you'll pardon me, I'm going to go read.

    15. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      eh.... why do you suddenly have the right to enter any country you please regardless of the conditions of entry?

    16. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's just the way it is. Don't like it? Don't go to Israel.

      The bigger problem with having an Israeli stamp on your passport means if you try and enter other countries in the region you are subject to being denied entry or detained simply for having been to Israel.

      Not a tradeoff I'm willing to make especially if they are going to adopt the same hostile/paranoid additude twoard visitors as the US.

    17. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I think I would believe that if you're not worried about freedom, liberty, privacy and other such trivial matters then you will, forevermore, have many enemies left to fight.

    18. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They don't violate it, they just "interpret" it differently.

    19. Re:My house, my rules by joocemann · · Score: 3

      you need a non-corporate interpretor.

      The direct translation was that Israel's current leadership needs to cease to exist.

      Did you ever check your source?

    20. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      careful, these are rage-inducing words on this site

    21. Re:My house, my rules by flimflammer · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yeah man, just imagining each country having its own laws fills me with rage.

    22. Re:My house, my rules by interkin3tic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're making a straw man argument. No one is saying they CAN'T do this.

    23. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What did I say that implied such a thing? Nothing whatsoever.

      What I said was that making "give us your personal correspondence" as a condition of entry is not a power any government should have.

    24. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      kill yourself, statist

    25. Re:My house, my rules by cffrost · · Score: 3, Insightful

      [I]f you live in France, and you enjoy not speaking German, (or if you live anywhere in Europe, for that matter, and enjoy not being required to speak German...) you're welcome. If you live anywhere in Asia, and enjoy not having to speak Japanese, if only to ask your masters for water, or for them not to whip you so hard... you're welcome.

      Now if you'll pardon me, I'm going to go read.

      I suggest you read a history book, particularly one that covers the Soviet Union's role during World War II. I suspect that your grade-school history/social studies books were either similar to or identical to mine, which were published in the United States during the Cold War on the behalf of government, and were therefore appropriately biased.

      --
      Thank you, Edward Snowden.

      "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
    26. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From an extraterrestrial perspective humans and their concept of 'countries' are totally ridiculous.

    27. Re:My house, my rules by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In this particular case, it would seem that they are sacrificing the freedom and privacy of visiting non-citizens for the sake of security of their citizens. As a nation-state, the goal of the State of Israel is to provide for these things for its citizens first and foremost, so it sounds like a reasonable trade-off. Especially given that they're facing some very real, rather than imaginary, threats.

    28. Re:My house, my rules by KGIII · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They didn't deny the Soviet Union's influence, are you attempting to deny US involvement, commitment, influence, and success? Why? They were allied - did he say don't thank a Russian? My questions are mostly rhetorical but concern why you seem to chose to reply the way you did. The subject is the US's help/involvement. Ah well, that question is for you alone to answer.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    29. Re: My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    30. Re:My house, my rules by mi · · Score: 1
      Not after you get there, they can't. Or should not be able to. At the very least, they can tell me before departure: we will need to see your e-mail, if you don't agree, here is the refund of the ticket-price.

      Perhaps, they ought to have a visa-regime — to have travelers pass their verification muster before even buying a ticket. But to demand such privacy-surrender from people, who already flew in — that's obnoxious.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    31. Re:My house, my rules by ohnocitizen · · Score: 1

      Why is this marked insightful? My house, my rules, up to a point. I couldn't commit a crime and use that flimsy little truism as a legal excuse.

      The other problem with your argument is "Don't like it? Don't go to Israel.". What about people returning to Israel?

    32. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Being able to leave, coincidentally, is another nice feature of our system. If I want to travel abroad, I don't have to SNEAK AWAY. Can the prisoners... er... 'citizens' of every other country say that? Also, for all the other countries whose citizens CAN, in fact say that, how many might have more repressive governments than they do were it not for America's influence?

      "no fly list"

    33. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I feel sorry for those people that work at Intel in the US who have to travel there.

    34. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. Of course, the last man alive will fight the voices in his own head...

    35. Re:My house, my rules by sFurbo · · Score: 4, Funny

      For example, if you live in France, and you enjoy not speaking German, (or if you live anywhere in Europe, for that matter, and enjoy not being required to speak German...) you're welcome.

      Conversly, if it weren't for the French, you would be writing English.

    36. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For example, if you live in France, and you enjoy not speaking German, (or if you live anywhere in Europe, for that matter, and enjoy not being required to speak German...) you're welcome. If you live anywhere in Asia, and enjoy not having to speak Japanese, if only to ask your masters for water, or for them not to whip you so hard... you're welcome.

      I didn't realize you were Russian.

    37. Re:My house, my rules by thelexx · · Score: 1

      Totally agree. And fuck Israel.

      --
      "Gold still represents the ultimate form of payment in the world." - Alan Greenspan, 1999
    38. Re:My house, my rules by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You have no right to enter a country of which you are not a citizen, and they can deny you entry for any reason, and require whatever they want of you as a condition of entry.

      Actually, no, they can't. Well, they can require it, but if I acquiesced to those demands and got caught doing so, I could lose my job, get sued for millions of dollars, and then do several years in federal prison.

      At the core of the problem is the fact that most people do not have a legal right to give anyone else access to their email account. As an employee of a major Fortune 500 company, I am prohibited from doing so not only by my employment contract, but ostensibly by SEC regulations as well, because granting such access could constitute facilitating insider trading.

      And even if you're not working for anyone at all, allowing other people access to your account is a violation of the terms of service, which according to the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, is punishable by up to 10 years in prison.

      And God help you if you happen to be working on anything that requires D.O.D. clearance. Sharing that sort of info with a foreign government could get you life in prison or even summary execution for treason.

      In other words, Israel basically just closed their borders to U.S. citizens, for all intents and purposes, legally speaking. I mean, sure, you can go, but if you do, know that you're taking a very real risk that they might decide to demand that you break U.S. law as a condition of entry, at which point you have two choices: give up all the money you spent on travel and lodging or go to prison when you get back to the States.

      Thanks, but no thanks. There are plenty of countries that actually want American tourists.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    39. Re:My house, my rules by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      And by that, I assume you mean Old English, i.e. German, give or take.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    40. Re:My house, my rules by Jonner · · Score: 1

      That is part of why I avoid travelling to the US. Their house, their rules, not for me thanks.

      I have heard of US border police searching computers carried with people entering the country but I haven't heard of them demanding access to information that isn't physically present. In any case, neither policy is appropriate for a free society.

    41. Re:My house, my rules by mvdwege · · Score: 1

      It has been tried before, three times, of which at least two times with the support of a superpower.

      What makes you, or even Israel, think that the current wrecks in the Arabian world and Iran are any threat whatsoever compared to that?

      Aside from irrational paranoia or a need to justify its own right-wing's authoritarian behaviour, I see no objective reason for Israel to act like this.

      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
    42. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For example, if you live in France, and you enjoy not speaking German, (or if you live anywhere in Europe, for that matter, and enjoy not being required to speak German...) you're welcome. If you live anywhere in Asia, and enjoy not having to speak Japanese, if only to ask your masters for water, or for them not to whip you so hard... you're welcome.

      Did you personally have anything to do with this? In that case, thanks!
      If not, it is fucking awful of you to try to take credit for that and you should be punched in the face for it.

      Also, as much as I enjoy not speaking German I live in a country where it is pretty much mandatory to be able to speak English so fuck you for that, I don't see how that is any better.
      English is a horrible abomination of languages, it is what you get when you take German and slap on French pronunciation rules "because the French were so cool when they were a superpower."
       

    43. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If I want to travel abroad, I don't have to SNEAK AWAY. Can the prisoners... er... 'citizens' of every other country say that?

      That reminded me of a former friend of mine. German-born, German citizenship, with parents from Syria. He had to learn the hard way while traveling to Syria (to get to know relatives) that you couldn't just drop your Syrian citizenship you never knew you had. He was taken into custody, questioned (at least they had an interpreter, since he didn'd speak a single word of the Arab language) , could not contact the German embassy (as he was a "Syrian" citizen) and was subsequently brainwashed into a "believing" muslim, why he was held captive for much longer than his trip was intended. He could return to Germany only when those people in Syria decided he could be let go. The weirdest thing I know of. His girlfriend (he had a German gf) was forced to stay at home after he came back, not go out, and was on the brink of leaving him. It took many months for him to recover and become the liberal citizen he had been. He never talked about what happened to him in Syria. That was in 1998 or 1999. I still remember that his parents were really worried, both about his absence and his return.

    44. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Israel has every right to require you show just cause why they should let you in. Just like the US has that same right.

      Israel has no rights, nor does the US. Rights belong to people, not governments. Governments have powers, and to say that no government should have this particular power is right, proper, and objectively correct.

      This amusing thesis is completely devastated if examined from the perspective of public international law, in which states most certainly have duties and rights. Among those are the right to sovereignty (and the duty of non-intervention of sovereign affairs) and the right to self-defense (and the duty of non-aggression and pacific settlement of conflicts). While the aspiration towards the supremacy of personal rights over state rights (or corporate rights) is adorable, the world does in fact work differently.

    45. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      countries that have stated in no uncertain terms that Israel should be wiped off the map.

      You'll be able to put that quote right here:

      ______________

      That is, the original quote. Not what Fox told you.

    46. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In defense of the US, at least the government still pretends to follow its own rules where it thinks it might get caught and it could cause a stink, costing someone (or several or many someones) reelection, etc. This provides a lot more stability than many governments do. In America, it's actually possible to go your entire life without having to bribe anyone, for example. Living somewhere where they at least pretend to care about civil liberties, etc. is better than living somewhere where they don't even bother to pretend, which explains in large measure why so many people came here, still come here, and why so many stay who could leave.

      Being able to leave, coincidentally, is another nice feature of our system. If I want to travel abroad, I don't have to SNEAK AWAY. Can the prisoners... er... 'citizens' of every other country say that? Also, for all the other countries whose citizens CAN, in fact say that, how many might have more repressive governments than they do were it not for America's influence? Historically, this long-suffering and oft derided nation has been responsible for a lot of freedom beyond its borders, thank you very much you fnck!ng ingrates.

      For example, if you live in France, and you enjoy not speaking German, (or if you live anywhere in Europe, for that matter, and enjoy not being required to speak German...) you're welcome. If you live anywhere in Asia, and enjoy not having to speak Japanese, if only to ask your masters for water, or for them not to whip you so hard... you're welcome. Has everything this nation done been good, and on the up and up? Of course not - but on balance, if we're not the best, when it comes to civil rights, and being a great place to live, raise a family, etc., then we're certainly near the top of the list, regardless of how some one or more groups who have had the temerity to presume to rate and rank various places' worth, generally by criteria that necessarily skew the results one way or another.

      Did we perhaps get overzealous recently? That's probably fair to say. Have some of our policies, foreign and domestic benefited the rich at the expense of everyone else? Clearly. Does that make the entire nation a benighted sh!+hole worthy only of scorn? Hardly. If anything, it underlines the point that people should give a lot more thought to how, and for whom they vote, and less time worrying about whether the people have (D) or (R) after their names, or how slick their hair is, or how menacing they make the notion of their opponents' victories seem in advertising, because most, if not all of the horrible things this country has done, looking back, can ultimately be attributed to a careless, negligent, uninformed, and/or easily frightened or manipulated, apathetic electorate.

      The fix for this is simple, though far from easy. Education. Without education, we're doomed. Now if you'll pardon me, I'm going to go read.

      Yeah, you need education...
      If France has to thanks someone it is not the government of the USA but its soldiers along with British, Canadians and other nations' soldiers and we should not forget the poor Russians that died by millions (21M according to wikipedia). The allied governments (the gov) were more preoccupied with preventing the Russians from going too far (check how they rushed to Berlin fearing that the Russians would get there first). They certainly didn't do it for France or Belgium or any other country in particular.

      If there is one thing that everybody can say about the USA is that you don't have any fucking idea of what "proportionnality" means (see fog of war).

    47. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I feel the same way. A country that is so hostile towards anyone who is not from there does not deserve my time, energy and money.

    48. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They only pretend to care about your civil liberties if you have their passport.

    49. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In America, it's actually possible to go your entire life without having to bribe anyone, for example.

      You'll get some pretty poor service if you don't tip people, though. Paying people directly to perform services for you while they're on the clock with their employer ... yes, it's a form of bribery, just as if you'd paid a health inspector to ignore the rats, or a receptionist to see to you before the other people in the queue.

      Seriously, just pay your servers a decent wage, and stop tipping them. Treat them like people who've earned their pay, rather than animals capering for a handout that you may or may not decide to give them.

    50. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The USA lost its political sovereignty in 1974 when capital controls were removed allowing foreign investment and thus influencing of internal affairs.

      I would say foreign influence in the North America started hurting when the native americans were forced to live in reservations.

    51. Re:My house, my rules by Yoda222 · · Score: 1

      All occupied countries ?

    52. Re:My house, my rules by Yoda222 · · Score: 1

      Can you prove that if the USA wouldn't have taken part in WWII Germany will still be occupying France after 70 years ?

    53. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AFAIK, the Israeli authorities are aware of this, and if requested will stamp a separate piece of paper instead of your passport

    54. Re:My house, my rules by Stuarticus · · Score: 1

      Only an American could display such astonishing ignorance about world travel. "Why do I need freedom of movement in other countries, I have everything I could possibly want here in English!"

      --
      If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
    55. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, what he means is that without the French, we never would have won the war against England and become our own nation.

    56. Re:My house, my rules by xelah · · Score: 1

      They may have the right, just as they have the right to close their border entirely or impose trade restrictions. It doesn't make it the right thing to do, nor make it illegitimate to criticise it, or seek to change it through politics. Nor would there be anything illegitimate in a country using diplomacy to try and make other countries treat its citizens better. (Not that the US would, they'd probably love to do it themselves).

    57. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not much help if you're really trying to visit Palestine.

    58. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Their airport security works, and the environment is hostile, so I can't blame them much for their airport interview techniques. In 1996, I was consulting for an electronics company in Haifa, where I wrote a technology mapper for digital logic. At the exit interview, the security guy wanted to understand exactly what it was I was doing in Israel, and he almost made me miss my plane. He just couldn't figure out what the heck I was paid to do no matter how I explained it. No biggie. I have a Palestinian friend who tells me about having to go through cavity searches to get on a plane. Their methods violate privacy big time, but it works.

      If we want to pick on Israel, I think pointing out that 45 years of brutal occupation of the West Bank isn't cool. I can let the airport thing slide.

      Speak for yourself, there is no way I'd ever let a forced cavity search 'slide'...

    59. Re:My house, my rules by quenda · · Score: 1

      Do you know a country where they don't play by their own rules?

      Iraq and Tibet come to mind.

    60. Re:My house, my rules by quenda · · Score: 2

      if it weren't for the French, you would be writing English.

      The Canadians might disagree with the implication that they are English, or somehow enslaved because they did not violently secede.

    61. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People don't get summarily executed for treason. They get tried, and might get convicted and executed, if a judge/jury is convinced (and there's the constitutionally required two witnesses, etc.). But that's hardly "summarily".

    62. Re:My house, my rules by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

      The bigger problem with having an Israeli stamp on your passport means if you try and enter other countries in the region you are subject to being denied entry or detained simply for having been to Israel.

      Mostly hellhole misogynistic anti-semitic countries you shouldn't be spending your money in anyway.

      Last time I was in the Middle East I went from Israel to Jordan to Egypt. No troubles crossing the borders at all. In fact, the biggest hassle was subsequently getting into the USA with Arabic Egyptian and Jordanian visas in my passport. (I'm Canadian.) Eventually I just got a new passport.

    63. Re:My house, my rules by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      I wonder what it would be like in Ireland if the British never imposed their language on us. It has certain advantages that we share a language with the UK and US. If large swaths of Europe all spoke German, would that be such a bad thing? I know people are going to be up in arms about how language is a reflection of your culture and is so super important, but we haven't been speaking Irish on a regular basis in quite a few decades, but out national identity seems intact. The benefits of speaking English, otoh, have been enormous.

      I also learned German in school, and don't see why you think it would have been such a bad thing if more countries spoke it. Do you still equate speaking German with being a Nazi?

    64. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    65. Re:My house, my rules by Xylantiel · · Score: 1

      Seems like crossing the border with no information in your possession is the only reasonable way to go.

      I had a friend mention recently that at NASA you can't take your laptop overseas (or maybe it was just to China), they give you a blank ipad when you leave and then you give it back and they wipe it when you get back. Assuming that you wait until you are in-country to start using the ipad this means you would cross the border with no information on you subject to search. It seems like with the "consent" requirement you could get away with refusing to sign into your email from a device that isn't yours if you cite company policy.

      And to add to your list: if you work at any educational institution, the federal laws on student data privacy are such that you would be violating them with this kind of open-ended access as well.

    66. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, GP referred to France's support of the fledgling USA when it tried to break away from the UK.

      Or, more explicitly, GP states that claiming
      "country A should currently be thanked because without it, things in country B would be vastly different and country B would be under the control of country C"
      works for A=USA, B=France, C=Germany as much as it works for A=France,B=USA,C=UK.

    67. Re:My house, my rules by at_slashdot · · Score: 1

      You know what's the problem, is that it's not clear they are going to ask to read your e-mail, I wouldn't have any problem if they ask 100% of the people 100% of the time, then I would know not to go there, however if I already made plans, bought a ticket, took vacation and then when I arrive at the airport they ask to read my e-mail I might have to agree only to make sure they don't screw up my plans. Their claim that is "only done is exceptional cases" is actually making the thing worse, how can I be sure they won't make me such a case? Maybe I posted something on slashdot that they don't like...

      --
      "It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." -- Prof. Dumbledore
    68. Re:My house, my rules by halltk1983 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Without the United States crippling the Axis production lines, the USSR would have found their westward march a little more difficult. Not to say they might not have won anyway, but it would have been much harder pressed. As it is, with the US and the USSR working together, the loss of life, and difficulty of the fight was astounding. Let's just agree that had any of the key players sat on their thumbs any longer, things might have been a bit more difficult.

      --
      Watch for Penguins, they eat Apples and throw rocks at Windows.
    69. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [I]f you live in France, and you enjoy not speaking German, (or if you live anywhere in Europe, for that matter, and enjoy not being required to speak German...) you're welcome. If you live anywhere in Asia, and enjoy not having to speak Japanese, if only to ask your masters for water, or for them not to whip you so hard... you're welcome.

      Now if you'll pardon me, I'm going to go read.

      I suggest you read a history book, particularly one that covers the Soviet Union's role during World War II. I suspect that your grade-school history/social studies books were either similar to or identical to mine, which were published in the United States during the Cold War on the behalf of government, and were therefore appropriately biased.

      Ok, fine... You are welcome for not having to speak Russian if you live west of the middle of Germany.

    70. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh bull. Go read Chaucer. It was written in the 1400s, LONG before Napoelon in the 1800s, or the English attempts at conequest of the 1500s and it's similar enough to modern English to be mutually intelligible. More akin to the difference between Norwegian and Danish, but nothing like the difference between German and English.

    71. Re:My house, my rules by operagost · · Score: 0

      45 years of brutal occupation of the West Bank

      If life in the West Bank is brutal, it isn't because of Israel occupation.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    72. Re:My house, my rules by operagost · · Score: 1

      Only a European could display such poor reading comprehension of a language you apparently know how to read.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    73. Re:My house, my rules by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      That's just the way it is. Don't like it? Don't go to Israel.

      Part of the problem is that rules like this don't exist when you first book your trip, or may exist and aren't published, or don't exist but then do exist as convenient to whomever decided they want the rule to apply.

      It's easy to say 'Don't like it, don't go', but very often you won't know you will even be subjected to such activity until the instant it is applied to you. By then you 'not liking it' also means 'be comfortable with tossing away $10,000 worth of booked hotels, airfare, vacation time, seized luggage/laptops'

      Obviously NOW I would know this about Israel, but only because I happened to read this article. I could still be impacted by this even if I hadn't travelled there yet but had simple booked my flight last month.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    74. Re:My house, my rules by phorm · · Score: 1

      Can the prisoners... er... 'citizens' of every other country say that

      If they can, where would they go? Just because they can leave doesn't mean other countries are obligated to take them in.

    75. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I live in the Great Lakes region. If it weren't for the English, I would be French-Canadian you insensitive clod!

    76. Re:My house, my rules by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      So, in the land of 2 triangles one can say, "read about crazy reproductive nigerians, get rich." and be able to decide yes or no as to the haunting question, "Bad Guy?"

    77. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Create a throw-away account on one of the free services like hotmail (now Outlook), yahoo, gmail, etc. Fill it full of lolcats and trivia. When the airport screeners ask for your email account, give them that one. How are they going to know about your other, "real" email accounts?

    78. Re:My house, my rules by ImprovOmega · · Score: 1

      He's saying that they would be speaking German if Germany had been allowed to conquer Europe. Not so subtly implying that without the U.S.'s involvement that would have happened. The follow up joke of course being that we completely bastardized English after separating from Britain, with the echoing irony that we do, in fact, speak English anyway.

    79. Re:My house, my rules by Stuarticus · · Score: 1

      Au contraire, you just display an astonishing lack of knowledge if you think that this is acceptable and a suitable solution is "don't go there".

      --
      If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
    80. Re:My house, my rules by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 3, Insightful

      He knows what he did. He is just being a dickwad liberal/socialist, who can't admit that the US has actually done more good than harm in this world. Yeah, we've made some mistakes, some fairly big ones, but that does not change the fact that there are MUCH worse people out there, and given a chance, they would enslave as many people as they can.

      The left loves to support tyrants, as long as they are socialists railing against America. Sean Penn's infatuation with the former Hugo Chavez is among the most notable. Michael Moore and Cuba is another. Dennis Rodman and NK. I could go on, but I think you get my point. If you listen to these leftists, you would think the world would be better off with their "benevolent dictators".

      So, yeah, it is blindness to anything that doesn't fit their rose tinted view of the world.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    81. Re:My house, my rules by knarf · · Score: 2

      The fix for this is simple, though far from easy. Education. Without education, we're doomed. Now if you'll pardon me, I'm going to go read.

      May I suggest reading Fahrenheit 451?

      --
      --frank[at]unternet.org
    82. Re:My house, my rules by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Do you still equate speaking German with being a Nazi?

      I think the point was that it's now an option, rather than a requirement to avoid being sent off to a work camp. I don't think the OP had anything particular against German as a language.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    83. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So Israel implements some messed up rules... causing you to refuse to travel to the US. Genius.

    84. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh here we go again. The US saved everyone else from the Germans and the Japanese. Completely discounting any notion that there were a bunch of other countries fighting both the Germans and the Japanese for years before the US ever got involved.

      Maybe you should thank those other countries for you not having to speak German on the east coast and Japanese on the west coast.

    85. Re:My house, my rules by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      English just as much French as it is Gaelic, Germanic, Latin .... English is a made up language based on a whole bunch of influences.

      In law, you heard the phrase "Cease and Desist", well those aren't two different words meaning two different things. They mean the exact same thing, because the two words come from two different language groups. "Breaking and Entering" same thing.

      So, by speaking English, we already are speaking "French" in a way. And Latin, Germanic, Gaelic ....

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    86. Re:My house, my rules by deadweight · · Score: 1

      True, but that did not alter our writen language. To make it a good comment, we would be writing about Behaviour in the Theatre and Harbours and so on. The French saved us from all those extra letters and national health care too if you assume we would be one giant Canada absent victory in the war.

    87. Re:My house, my rules by Taibhsear · · Score: 1

      Being able to leave, coincidentally, is another nice feature of our system. If I want to travel abroad, I don't have to SNEAK AWAY.

      Try to buy a plane ticket to Cuba.

    88. Re:My house, my rules by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Which is why, if you go to Israel, or other country, you give them a rarely, if ever, used email address. I have several to choose from. Short of the Wrench decryption method, that is all they are going to see. I'll let them sort through my hotmail spam account all they want.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    89. Re:My house, my rules by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Israel has every right to require you show just cause why they should let you in. Just like the US has that same right.

      Israel has no rights, nor does the US. Rights belong to people, not governments. Governments have powers, and to say that no government should have this particular power is right, proper, and objectively correct.

      Any country's government has the power (and duty) to protect its citizens from outside threats.

      The only people with the right to complain about this are Israeli citizens. Everyone else is free not to go to Israel if having their emails/bags/rectums searched is beyond the pale.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    90. Re:My house, my rules by RivenAleem · · Score: 2

      I got that, it was quite obvious when he said also "Historically, this long-suffering and oft derided nation has been responsible for a lot of freedom beyond its borders, thank you very much you fnck!ng ingrates."

      The problem with this statement is that the US has only gotten involved when it suited their interests. They only joined WW2 after Pearl Harbour. They only get involved with "freedom beyond it's borders" in Iraq when the Oil supply was at risk. How many events can we say the US helped preserve freedom, for the sake of freedom and not for its own motives? How often have we heard that the current round of dictators were all put there by the US? Some argue that we'd be better off without the US imposing freedom on people.

    91. Re:My house, my rules by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      What did I say that implied such a thing? Nothing whatsoever.

      What I said was that making "give us your personal correspondence" as a condition of entry is not a power any government should have.

      Then the citizens of Israel should take that power away. Whiny foreign tourists have no say in the matter.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    92. Re:My house, my rules by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Can you prove that if the USA wouldn't have taken part in WWII Germany will still be occupying France after 70 years ?

      Germany is already the economic powerhouse of Europe. In 50 years time, most Europeans will be speaking German voluntarily so they can get a good job.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    93. Re:My house, my rules by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      There are plenty of countries that actually want American tourists.

      *tumbleweed rolls*

      *the wind whistles softly*

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    94. Re:My house, my rules by rk · · Score: 1

      Methinks you two are talking about two different influences on history. His rather longer ago than the one in which you are referring.

    95. Re:My house, my rules by MickLinux · · Score: 1

      Oh, and sign up for a gmail account, for personal chitchat

      --
      Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
    96. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't like it? Don't go to Israel.

      ok, I don't and I wont.

    97. Re:My house, my rules by Sprouticus · · Score: 2

      The US role on the eastern frotn in WW II is actually quite significant.

      1) The US supplied logistical equipment (mainly in the form of trucks) to the USSR which was critical in their efforts.
      2) The US involvement in the pacific gave the USSR a great deal of breathing room and prevented Japan from putting pressure on their eastern front.
      3) The daytime bombing efforts kind of speak for themselves.

      That having been said, it took both the Americans AND Russians to take down Germany. Both were critical.

      That doesn't really change the argument of the GP though. The record of the US on civil/human rights has been better than most. It has kind of gone downhill in the last 15 years though. 9/11 did change our country, and not for the better.

    98. Re:My house, my rules by Jiro · · Score: 1

      They didn't close their borders to all US citizens, they closed their borders to people who they ask for email access and who won't give it. They only ask for email access if they're already suspicious of someone. So this amounts to closing the borders for people they are suspicious of, which is probably the right way to go.

      Yeah, that means you lose the money you paid for the flight. If they didn't ask for email and just refused you admission period, you'd still lose the money you paid for the flight, but I hope you're not going to argue that it would be wrong of them to refuse people admission.

    99. Re:My house, my rules by f1rb · · Score: 1

      My British friends and I were amused to see this sign in the Wendover (Utah) Airfield museum: http://www.brough-superior.com/files/cms/news/bild1_2685.jpg
      (The museum is worth a visit if you happen to be in the area)

      --
      "There is nothing so simple that works so well that it can't be made to work better by making it more complicated" - ?
    100. Re:My house, my rules by Jiro · · Score: 1

      The alternative to asking to read your email is just not letting you in, email or not. If you can ask "how do you know you're not in an exceptional case where they read your email?", you can equally well ask "how do you know you're not in an exceptional case where they just don't let you in?" I hope you don't think that means they are obligated to let everyone in.

    101. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He means British English, as France bailed us out of ass-deep alligators with the British at least three times before the Civil War.

    102. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More imaginary than real.

    103. Re:My house, my rules by TuringCheck · · Score: 1
      In no country a visa is a guarantee that you will be allowed entry.

      The correct solution is to go elsewhere. Write about it. Complain to embassy or citizens of that state - they can change the rules.

    104. Re:My house, my rules by deadweight · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. That is a PERFECT solution, unless you somehow think non-Israelis have a vote on their laws. I'll vote with my cash and avoid them ;)

    105. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do know that most citizens of other countries are not SNEAKING AWAY(maybe except North Korea, Burma and really few countries). They are SNEAKING INTO the US because they will not be allowed to get a visa into this place legally since the want to stay here. And viceversa, you are not sneaking in or out of anywhere since most countries want your tourist US dollars.

    106. Re:My house, my rules by at_slashdot · · Score: 1

      Why would they not let you in if they issued you a visa? If they don't want you in, they don't give you a visa. Stopping people at the border as opposed to tell them in advance is very costly and wasteful for travelers.

      --
      "It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." -- Prof. Dumbledore
    107. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      States do indeed have duties, but they do not have rights.

      You correctly identify a state's duty of non-intervention in the affairs of other states, but what you fail to recognize is that what you refer to as the "right of sovereignty" is merely the result of that same duty as applied from other states. For example, the United States' "right of sovereignty" is simply the duty of Mexico, Canada, etc not to intervene in the affairs of US citizens.

      Furthermore, you mistake the ability of state and corporate interests to violate personal rights for evidence against the absolute moral supremacy of the latter. Were that the case, there would literally be no possible argument against any action taken by such entities.

      Incidentally, characterizing an argument with terms like "amusing" and "adorable" does not actually reduce the credibility of that argument, but rather serves to expose a lack of confidence in your ability to support your own.

    108. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry.

    109. Re: My house, my rules by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Inciting people to commit a crime is, in itself, a crime, so refusing access outright is preferable. The problem is not whether they do this only for suspicious people, but rather that the definition of suspicious is fluid, whereas the list of people that they would outright not allow into the country is likely to be less so.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    110. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only people with the right to complain about this are Israeli citizens

      Every single person, regardless of who or where they are, has the right to complain about this and about anything else.

    111. Re:My house, my rules by dgatwood · · Score: 2

      Chaucer is Middle English, not Old English, and is still barely understandable. The dividing line between Old and Middle English is when France conquered England in 1066. Go read Beowulf in the original language and see how much like English it is. Hint: Slashdot doesn't even support all the required letters.

      Hwæt! We Gardena in geardagum,
      [thorn]eodcyninga, [thorn]rym gefrunon,
      hu ða æ[thorn]elingas ellen fremedon.
      Oft Scyld Scefing scea[thorn]ena [thorn]reatum,
      ...

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    112. Re:My house, my rules by dadelbunts · · Score: 1

      Maybe if they stopped being aggressor assholes to their neighbors they wouldnt be so hated.

    113. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any country's government has the power (and duty) to protect its citizens from outside threats.

      Half truth. A country's government has the duty to protect all people in its domain - citizens or not - from ALL threats, outside or inside. The use of coercive force to violate the privacy rights of people entering the country is such a threat. If the government claims that power, then it is contradicting its own purpose and undermining its own legitimacy.

    114. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Whiny foreign tourists" is doublespeak for "I need a convenient excuse to dismiss facts I can't refute".

    115. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A post high school level history book would be a good choice, you definitely need it friend.

    116. Re:My house, my rules by airdweller · · Score: 1

      Commenting to undo an accidental moderation.

    117. Re:My house, my rules by KGIII · · Score: 2

      What I really enjoy (and I shouldn't) is people who find various stages or choices and point to those as places where WWII could have had an outcome where Germany won.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    118. Re:My house, my rules by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I lean left and strongly Libertarian though not in the context of those who claim the party these days. I prefer strong personal responsibility with an effective social net.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    119. Re:My house, my rules by Taelron · · Score: 1

      Actually the French initially only provided us minimal arms and money with a few Observers. It wasnt until victory was certain that the French commited any real resources. Even without the French forces, victory was assured within months. They were afraid of backing the wrong side and facing the wrath of England, so actually did very little to help the US. So bare no baring what-so-ever on whether or not we speak English.

      In retrospect, a lot of the French citizens got pissed off at the United States when they finally revolted against their king and we refused to help them fight off their own tyrant. Not surprising when you realize we were still struggling as a nation and in no shape to help someone else revolt, and the fact that we felt some slight loyalty to the King of France for the limited aid he did provide.

    120. Re:My house, my rules by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      Given you posted this reply on ANZAC day I'm just going to point out that the USA weren't the only nation to send troops to both the European and Pacific theatres of war in WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam, Gulf Wars 1 & 2 etc... You're welcome.

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
    121. Re:My house, my rules by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      The bigger problem with having an Israeli stamp on your passport means if you try and enter other countries in the region you are subject to being denied entry or detained simply for having been to Israel.

      Mostly hellhole misogynistic anti-semitic countries you shouldn't be spending your money in anyway.

      Last time I was in the Middle East I went from Israel to Jordan to Egypt. No troubles crossing the borders at all. In fact, the biggest hassle was subsequently getting into the USA with Arabic Egyptian and Jordanian visas in my passport. (I'm Canadian.) Eventually I just got a new passport.

      Does that mean the USA are a hellhole misogynistic anti-semitic country you shouldn't be spending your money in? :-)

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    122. Re:My house, my rules by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      Bugger, I have mod points but have already posted in this thread or I would be modding you up about now.

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
    123. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the first place, what law or policy is there that prevents you from showing your personal email account to a third party? The only issue I can imagine is with a work-related e-mail account. TFA doesn't mention what accounts you're asked to show. If you're channeling secret or confidential work-related emails to a personal account, you're surely in more trouble than this already.

      In the second place, TFA does mention that you can refuse, in which case your refusal will be considered "among other factors" in the decision as to whether to allow you entry. If you've got a good reason to refuse, tell them.

      In the third place, your employment contract is negotiated between you and your employer. If you're worried about it, talk it over with your employer before you go. If they're sending you for work-related reasons, they'll just have to give you a waiver; if you're going on your own initiative, it depends what kind of company you work for, but it's entirely up to them whether they want to be dicks about it.

    124. Re:My house, my rules by WGFCrafty · · Score: 1

      Not being able to fly != not being able to leave

    125. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IMHO Israel is not worried about what's in good taste and is more worried about national security from countries that have stated in no uncertain terms that Israel should be wiped off the map.

      You mean Iran

      That is a lie and myth only Isreal and yhe Untited states wipe off nations

    126. Re:My house, my rules by Common+Joe · · Score: 1

      This. And also just because a government tells you that you must do something doesn't mean that it is morally right to do it.

    127. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2) The US involvement in the pacific gave the USSR a great deal of breathing room and prevented Japan from putting pressure on their eastern front.

      The Soviet–Japanese Neutrality Pact seems to disagree with you.

    128. Re:My house, my rules by mi · · Score: 1

      In no country a visa is a guarantee that you will be allowed entry.

      Then, perhaps, it is time for an international treaty to make it a guarantee: unless material new facts have become known about a particular traveler holding a valid visa, their entry to the country shall be guaranteed. In case an entry is denied for whatever reason, the person's return voyage shall be fully paid for by the visa-issuer.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    129. Re:My house, my rules by Sigg3.net · · Score: 1

      Exactly.
      Their house, their rules, no guests.

    130. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then how do you get into your own country?

      I had a friend who got deported from the US after a US border security officer forced him to give access to his laptop and email account and found an email talking about him working in the US on and off over the next few years (some of you probably know the drill - in the US for a few months, then exit for a few weeks then back in again...), however he didn't have a work visa. This was BEFORE 9/11.

      It sounds to me VERY hypocritical for US citizens to call out Israel for following a path the US trail blazed years earlier and so far as I can tell still follows.

      As an aside, does anyone else think it ironic that stopping my friend from working in the US for a few years had 0 impact on preventing 9/11? I guess the terrorists knew they shouldn't take laptops through border security.

    131. Re:My house, my rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This assumes that good and bad come in credit lines. "We've done so much good in the past that we're allowed to do a whole bunch of evil now and still be on the good side of the ledger." Ahhh, no.

      Personally I like the German journey over the last 60 years a whole lot more than the US. The Germans 60 years ago (nominally) supported an evil madman (actually its more like were forced to support - the first country the Nazis invaded was Germany). Then they were defeated, humbled, split up, grew, were reunited and then became benefactors, even to nations that opposed them in the war.

      The US on the other hand fought for freedom 60 years ago, and in Korea, then for money and oil in the 90s, and recently has begun dictating policy to sub-Saharan Africa and even started removing freedoms from their own citizens in favour of big business. The US constitution is being trampled and manipulated at every turn turning what was once a hard fought for democracy into an autocracy where the few dictate to the rest of the citizens who they are allowed to vote for (in the primaries and even before the primaries get started).

    132. Re:My house, my rules by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      "effective social net"

      No such thing. Social Nets become crutches, not for the occasional fall, but rescuer of those that are repeatedly stupid.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  2. Throw away email account by slashdyke · · Score: 1

    I guess that might be a good reason to have a throw away email account. They want to read your email, well, sure officer, here you go. mydummyaccount@gmail.com and my password. Have fun with it.

    1. Re:Throw away email account by Culture20 · · Score: 2

      "It looks like this email account only has a month of history. Please follow me into this private discussion room."

    2. Re:Throw away email account by Nerdfest · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It might also be a good reason not to visit a country. Of course, if all countries keep heading towards police states like they seem to be currently, it won't really matter where you go. Goodbye privacy, "papers please".

    3. Re:Throw away email account by slashdyke · · Score: 2

      I've got a 'junk' email account that has been active for about 4 years now. That would work as a throw away account.

    4. Re:Throw away email account by gatkinso · · Score: 1

      Your spam reveals a lot more than you think.

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
    5. Re:Throw away email account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Discuss away. Your call. It's your country. Feel free to refuse me admittance and send me back home for not giving you permission to scan and archive all my e-mail going back potentially for years. I guess you'll have to decide how much you really want my tourism dollars. You can make it clear to me that my "refusal will be taken into consideration along with other relevant factors, in deciding whether to allow [me] entry to Israel", and I'll take the potential for this unreasonable request into consideration when deciding to go to Israel as a tourist (or any other capacity) in the first place.

      It's a pretty fair deal. You might make a request, I say "no" if you do ask, you judge accordingly, and so do I. But in the ideal case I just don't go, and you can simply enjoy the lower tourism revenue your decision will cause.

    6. Re:Throw away email account by safetyinnumbers · · Score: 1

      Does anyone else remember the days of POP3, when most of your email would be stored in a PC on your desk at home?

    7. Re:Throw away email account by Cwix · · Score: 1

      For the most part it shows I shop online lol. Newegg spams me constantly.

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    8. Re:Throw away email account by Lawrence_Bird · · Score: 2

      And still is thank you very much. Why people insist on leaving mail on insecure servers I dont know, not to mention that the govt (US at least) feels no problem about reading anything 6 months or older. And the IRS... well they'll start with that email that just showed up 5 minutes ago.

    9. Re:Throw away email account by flargleblarg · · Score: 2

      Doubtful that NewEgg is spamming you. If you've purchased things there, then what they're sending you is targeted marketing, not spam. Spam is random garbage. You can opt out of NewEgg mailings; you cannot opt out of spam.

    10. Re:Throw away email account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the most part it shows I shop online lol. Newegg spams me constantly.

      Newegg doesn't spam you because you have given them permission to send you emails, when you create an account they aren't even on by default, you have to select the option to get them. You simply did not select the option in your account to not receive emails about specials and offers. I would hardly call 3 emails a week at the most spam.

      I bet you would subscribe to a news paper and then claim they are spamming you. Retard.

    11. Re:Throw away email account by tftp · · Score: 1

      "It looks like this email account only has a month of history. Please follow me into this private discussion room."

      Sir, I did create this account just before coming to your wonderful country. It was created *specifically* so that I can use it here. After I'm back home it will be deleted. I always do that when I travel. Only my family knows this email account, and I don't plan to use it for anything except daily emails about my health and my plans. Nobody else needs to know it; I'm on vacation, and the work doesn't exist for me now. But if you are curious, my work email is stored in my permanent email account, that is on a server that is physically located at my office.

      If you want, I can tell you the password to my permanent email account. But it will not do you any good because the IMAP server is accessible only from my office and from my home. I don't have the USB token with me anyway, and it's required to connect.

    12. Re:Throw away email account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And still is thank you very much. Why people insist on leaving mail on insecure servers I dont know, not to mention that the govt (US at least) feels no problem about reading anything 6 months or older. And the IRS... well they'll start with that email that just showed up 5 minutes ago.

      Your countries tax department reads peoples email?

    13. Re:Throw away email account by Cwix · · Score: 0

      Spam as in email I did not request, do not want, and will not read, sent rather often to many different people who are in the same situation.

      Frankly I do not care if it is "target advertising" it is spam in my book.

      If I purchase something from a mail order catalog, and they insist upon sending me a postcard 4 to 5 times a week can I not call it junk mail?

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    14. Re:Throw away email account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unwanted, unsolicited content I can opt out of is still unwanted, unsolicited content.

      So. Spam, I says.

    15. Re:Throw away email account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      We are not desperate for your tourist dollars. If you have what to hide from the security, your dollars may come with a price tag too high indeed.
      If you do not want to cooperate with the security, please spend your tourist dollars elsewhere.

    16. Re:Throw away email account by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 2

      Yeah! If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear, right?

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    17. Re:Throw away email account by WaywardGeek · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Did you notice how Google seems incapable of providing any sort of encryption feature? I can't even digitally sign gmail. Secure communication with their servers has been there from the beginning, yet somehow Google doesn't have the technical prowess to incorporate a bit of GPG? If you think Google just finds it too hard to offer public key encryption with their email, I've got a bridge in Alaska you might want to invest in. Someone from the government has spooked them into keeping everything in plain text.

      --
      Celebrate failure, and then learn from it - Nolan Bushnell
    18. Re:Throw away email account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You have that option to opt out at the moment when you created the account, on the very first page. If you negligently didn't select the option that suited your individual preferences, it's not unsolicited.

      Stop being a bitch.

    19. Re:Throw away email account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, alternatively, they can't make money with their free service by pitching you boner pills if they can't determine you're a single, late middle age guy by having their algorithms snoop up on your correspondence. Occam's Razor and all.

      Besides, if they implemented it on a server somewhere, they'd probably have to have access to your private keys to keep it all nice and integrated with the gmail experience. Sound like a good idea?

    20. Re:Throw away email account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Calm down, Tinfoil Man. I doubt they could access anything you can't, so just delete it, and presto! Or, give them an e-mail address you don't use for anything but for which you have access. For example, were I planning a trip to Israel, I would make a new e-mail account somewhere using a variation of my name that I don't use for my regular e-mail. For example, if my name were Firston Middleton Lasterson, and my regular e-mail were firstmlast@free-email.com, I'd make up a new one on some other free service, such as flasterson@some-other-freemail.com, then use it to correspond with websites and get some spam going, then I might perhaps invent a few more with plausible names, such as someoneelse@someothermail.net, and notme@large-popular-service.ending and e-mail with myself back and forth for a week or two (or month if I know I'm going to travel that far in advance,) so it looks good. Make sure the password is nothing like (and definitely not the same as) any other e-mail you use! Then make sure you are carrying no business cards or letters with your REAL e-mail address on them. If they ask, (rehearse this!) demand to know why they expect you to give your e-mail up (like you didn't know!) then grudgingly provide them... the made up one.

      For bonus points, use THAT e-mail to make all the travel arrangements, hotel reservations, etc. Once you clear the airport, login and change the password, and reverify they haven't changed your reservations, etc., perhaps tell the hotel your e-mail was hacked (which in a sense it was,) and that any changes should be voice only, or only be allowed after the person claiming to be you has given them an agreed word, perhaps "shibboleth"... or would that be too obvious?

      Probably keep the account for travel to that country, or at least until you leave, as they might keep records. Best method of all? Don't use e-mail for anything you would feel uncomfortable with the Jackbooted Thugs knowing about. No one smart does...

    21. Re:Throw away email account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Thank you. Board this flight for a return trip to your country of origin. Your baggage will arrive a day later. We are sorry you didn't get to float in the Dead Sea."

    22. Re:Throw away email account by Cwix · · Score: 1

      Ohh AC calling someone a bitch over the definition of a word.
      Pot, meet kettle.

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    23. Re:Throw away email account by Cwix · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I had no idea that the definition of a word would get the vocabulary nazis riled up.

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    24. Re:Throw away email account by tftp · · Score: 1

      Per Wikipedia, "In 2010, tourism constituted 6.4% of Israel's GDP."

      Now, think about it for a moment. How many wealthy business owners and managers come to Israel who have at least one email account that is beyond access by Israel's border guards? What's even the point of asking them about free hosted accounts? Do you think Bill Gates has registered and is actively using a Google account?

      As someone else already pointed out, if you filter visitors by this criteria then the only people who you let into the country are those without jobs; or terrorists, who have enough money to last them to the end of their lives.

    25. Re:Throw away email account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe next time you shouldn't select the "send me information about special offers and promotions" check box?

    26. Re:Throw away email account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you somehow implying that the AC is even more incorrect about the meaning of words?
      Otherwise your pot kettle remark makes no sense.

    27. Re:Throw away email account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If we ever get to that point, it will be too late.

      If we ever get close to that point, well...apparently a certain tree needs to be refreshed with a certain bodily fluid periodically.

      Say what you want about the human race. However, not everyone is content to live life as a slave.

    28. Re:Throw away email account by KGIII · · Score: 2

      Maybe you should read the page (and either tick or untick the box) before clicking "continue." Yeah, you requested the emails. Don't lie to us. We ALL order from the same company.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    29. Re:Throw away email account by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Why use a word that you don't understand the meaning of?

      Hmm... More so, why blame other people and get mad at them because of your ignorance? We did not make you ignorant.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    30. Re:Throw away email account by Jiro · · Score: 1

      Asking for email access, and refusing to let people into the country if they refuse, is no worse than just refusing to let them into the country in the first place without bothering to ask for their email. As long as Israel only refuses to let into the country (wither directly or by asking for email) those people who they are legitimately suspicious of, it's unlikely such businessmen will be affected. And if they are affected, Israel can just directly go to "not letting them in the country" rather than asking for Bill Gates' private account, being refused, and then not letting him in their country.

      if you filter visitors by this criteria then the only people who you let into the country are those without jobs; or terrorists, who have enough money to last them to the end of their lives

      If you only ask this of suspicious people, at worst you end up filtering out all the suspicious people.

      You're also assuming that everyone who enters Israel is as computer-savvy as your average Slashdotter.

    31. Re:Throw away email account by mvdwege · · Score: 1

      Google could easily offer you GPG for its webmail, while still passing all your information on to the government, including the plaintext of your 'encrypted' emails. Seriously, do you even know how public-key encryption works?

      You're an idiot, as your ranting about conspiracies would indicate.

      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
    32. Re:Throw away email account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Encryption would prevent Google from access to your mail, which it needs for their targeted advertisement. Their whole business model relies on access to your mail.

      --Beau

    33. Re:Throw away email account by joseph90 · · Score: 1

      Google could easily offer you GPG for its webmail, while still passing all your information on to the government, including the plaintext of your 'encrypted' emails. Seriously, do you even know how public-key encryption works?

      You're an idiot, as your ranting about conspiracies would indicate.

      Of course, in that case they would have to actively give the key to the government but if it is in plaintext then the gov. can automatically and "silently" just read all the emails on the wire, so to speak. Easier for government and google can pretend they do not know about it (which officially they wouldn't)

    34. Re:Throw away email account by jotajota1968 · · Score: 1

      If they ask you to open your e-mail account, it is because they ALREADY know which is your real e-mail account and probably they have already checked it.

    35. Re:Throw away email account by Yoda222 · · Score: 1

      "I delete my old emails after one month"

    36. Re:Throw away email account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whenever I visit another country they ask "papers please" - it's called passport control...

    37. Re:Throw away email account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Arstotzkans only.

      Kolechians never allowed.

    38. Re:Throw away email account by WaywardGeek · · Score: 1

      Google has been hostile to attempts to use GPG. GPG support can easily be added in their API, and plugins for the popular browsers developed. In recent JavaScript updates, there's a file API, where a private key could be decrypted with a user password, encrypting the data in the browser independently of which browser is in use. If we're more security minded, we could have additional methods in place. With an iframe and postMessage, I could encrypt data through an encryption service, which could be on a server I control. Or... the browser companies, including Google, could simply provide for GPG encryption, the way ssh does.

      The other guys on this thread are right. Google wants to read your email to make more money in advertising. Any encryption defeats that. However, you are quite wrong.

      --
      Celebrate failure, and then learn from it - Nolan Bushnell
    39. Re:Throw away email account by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      If you checked the box "please send me a daily postcard" when you ordered from a mail order catalog, then yes you can't call it junk mail. You now, like you did with a newegg order at some point.

      You could try clicking the "Manage your e-mail subscriptions" or "unsubscribe" links on any of those emails to and tell them you've changed your mind about getting mail from them, but whining on slashdot is probably more fun I guess.

    40. Re:Throw away email account by jimicus · · Score: 1

      Google could easily offer you GPG for its webmail, while still passing all your information on to the government, including the plaintext of your 'encrypted' emails. Seriously, do you even know how public-key encryption works?

      Only if your private key was stored on their servers could Google do this.

      It's a relatively recent innovation, but ISTR reading of a few JavaScript implementations of public-key cryptography, which would open the door to GPG-encrypted webmail without having to put your private key on a third-party provider's server.

    41. Re:Throw away email account by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      "Targeted marketing" is what spammers call their spam. Just like cold-calling is "direct marketing".

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    42. Re:Throw away email account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      :>

    43. Re:Throw away email account by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      If you checked the box "please send me a daily postcard" when you ordered from a mail order catalog, then yes you can't call it junk mail. You now, like you did with a newegg order at some point.

      You could try clicking the "Manage your e-mail subscriptions" or "unsubscribe" links on any of those emails to and tell them you've changed your mind about getting mail from them, but whining on slashdot is probably more fun I guess.

      Yes, we all know how well emailing "unsubscribe" to someone who wants to verify it's a genuine email address works.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    44. Re:Throw away email account by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Good luck lying to Israeli customs/immigration officers. They'll sniff you out a mile away, and they won't assume you're lying because of theoretical concerns about privacy.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    45. Re:Throw away email account by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      And still is thank you very much. Why people insist on leaving mail on insecure servers I dont know, not to mention that the govt (US at least) feels no problem about reading anything 6 months or older. And the IRS... well they'll start with that email that just showed up 5 minutes ago.

      Your countries tax department reads peoples email?

      You assume yours doesn't?

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    46. Re:Throw away email account by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      You might as well just take out the money that the ticket to Israel would have cost and flush it down the toilet, then stay at home buggering yourself with a cucumber. It'll amount to pretty much the same thing as your actual "holiday" if you try to be a smartass to Israeli security staff.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    47. Re:Throw away email account by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Whatever your opinion of Bill Gates, I doubt that the Israelis have much to fear from him as a suicide bomber.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    48. Re:Throw away email account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every time you post you show what a good little drone you are.

    49. Re:Throw away email account by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      Except it isn't emailing anything, and it isn't a random mail from something you've never heard of - it's from a company you've ordered things from who already know your email address is good (heck they already have you credit card number).

    50. Re:Throw away email account by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Oh the humanity.

      Put your name to it coward. Not that I care but being a coward is lower than being a child molester.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  3. Of course. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Border guards of pretty much any country can deny you entry (or exit) for pretty much any reason at all. If you abhor this practice, you can vote with your dollars by not visiting that country.

    I haven't visited the U.S. since 2001, which is about when their war-on-tourrists seems to have begun.

  4. Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by EmagGeek · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    To generate some sense of outrage against Israel and Jews for doing something that every other country on the planet does - except they do it better than anyone.

    I feel safer walking down the street in Tel Aviv than I do walking down the street in Detroit.

    1. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 5, Insightful

      To generate some sense of outrage against Israel and Jews for doing something that every other country on the planet does

      Citation needed. What other counties demand access to tourists' e-mail? And outrage against Israel's human rights crimes is not "anti-semitic" or "outrage against Jews". Anyone with a lick of sense is tired of Israel playing the victim card.

      I feel safer walking down the street in Tel Aviv than I do walking down the street in Detroit.

      Damning with faint praise, there. And if you're Jewish, that's like a white person in 1965 talking about how safe he felt in Alabama, Bloody Sunday be damned.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    2. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by realityimpaired · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Israel does a pretty good job of generating anti-Israel sentiment on its own, really... at least among anybody who's actually seen the numbers for the death toll in their war in Gaza...

      That doesn't mean anti-semitism or anti-jew sentiment (there is a difference between the two), but it does mean that the state of Israel isn't exactly a good neighbour....

    3. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by Mister+Liberty · · Score: 0

      That's because Tell Aviv is owned by Americans from the Atlantic board,
      while Detroit is ..., well just middle America.

    4. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by frovingslosh · · Score: 1

      Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose. Well, yea, and it is also completely true. Perhaps the truth is Anti-Semitic. Shame on you for pointing that out.

      --
      I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    5. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm Jewish but I'm still trying to process your response... maybe Slashdot can help me.

      Unfortunately, bigots like you...

      The parent did a good job differentiating condemnation of Jews and the state of Israel's actions. There is a massive difference between the two. Even then, let's say that there wasn't a difference. In the United States, we value the freedom of speech which includes the freedom to offend. We critique and criticize Christians and Muslims all the time. Is any of that Christianphobia and Islamophobia? Sure. Is it all Christianphobia and Islamophobia? No. We also criticize our own government. Does that make us America Haters? No. Criticism and critiques come with nuance. Jumping to the extreme shows a fragile nature.

      ...have done everything they can to allow Muslims into Israel...

      Last I checked, plenty of Muslims have lived in that area. The expulsion of non-Jews from Israel either through constant terrorism or other forms of force is well documented. Denying Palestinians (Muslims and Christians alike) the right to return to their homes is a policy that hawks and right-wing fanatics in Israel's government (and Slashdot commentators) gets them slobbering at the mouth in glee. It doesn't make it right. Your comment is starting to become offensive at this point.

      ...so [Muslims] can commit terrorist attacks against innocent civilians.

      Do you believe Muslims alone commit terrorist attacks against innocent civilians? Or do you believe that all Muslims commit terrorist attacks against innocent civilians? The reality is Israelis, and by extension Jews, commit plenty of terrorist attacks against Palestinians and Muslims. The fact that it is sanctioned by the government by people in soldiers doesn't make it just. Also, the fact that settlers commit terrorist attacks against Palestinians and Muslims while kicking them out of their land doesn't make it just. Your comment has crossed the line to offensive at this point.

      And as for the moronic comparison to 1965 Alabama, no. There is no comparison there. Give it up.

      The parallels are appropriate. Right-wing/militant Israelis and their sympathizers would love nothing more than to claim offense at the comparisons to the pre-civil rights era of the United States and Apartheid South Africa but there is no better description. Don't shut down honest discussion on this topic but using accusations of "antisemitism" or "bigotry."

    6. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Anti-Muslim sentiment while calling someone else a bigot.

      Bigots didn't let Muslims into Israel. As is typically the case with idiots like yourself, you seem to lack a basic understanding of history. They were already there!

      That's right! Muslims were living on the land that is now Israel before Israel existed! OMG! mindblown.gif

      Can we be done with these insane ideals now? Believing in figments of the imagination conjured up by a long dead people is just sad.

      The inclination of these groups to spread fear, ignorance and oppress others is getting old. Thankfully studies are beginning to show that, globally, belief in this nonsense is fading. Good riddance, you crazy bastards.

    7. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone who disagrees with anything Israel has ever done or is doing is a bigot and hates Jews.

      Well, it's Israel, Jews are supposed to feel safe there.

      If measures like this make anyone feel safe, then he/she is merely an imbecile. Why do countries want such idiotic security theater? This is something I'd expect from the TSA.

    8. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by theVarangian · · Score: 1

      To generate some sense of outrage against Israel and Jews for doing something that every other country on the planet does

      Citation needed. What other counties demand access to tourists' e-mail?

      North Korea?

    9. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a bit surprised at the allegations for critizing this; if I wanted to hear really controversial opinions about Israel, I'd ask some people I know from college,in particular I'm thinking of the Isreali citizens I met there. Granted, it always easier to accept criticism from within, but I think it really demonstrates there are valid opinions which disagree with some of the decisions Israel has made.

    10. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh Please! The fact that you responded with a rational and well thought disputation just shows that you're just a self-hating Jew

      Never underestimate the power of name calling and ad hominem !

      :-P

    11. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by Isaac+Remuant · · Score: 2

      You seem to be one of those guys that equates a criticism of Israel with anti-semitism. You're the only one trying to make this about a religion.

      --
      "Science can amuse and fascinate us all, but it is engineering that changes the world. " - Asimov.
    12. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      One only needs to stand in another's shoes for perspective. Imagine the uproar if for instance, Italian border security demanded to know your religion and then demanded access to your private information if you weren't a Catholic.

    13. Re: Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    14. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In response to your claim of "terrorism" by the State of Israel you probably need to get clued up on the legalities. Here's a video for you to look at that covers the relevant International Law. It turns out that only by denying International Law can you claim that the State of Israel is terrorist. You can claim it is heavy handed etc, but you cannot claim it has no legal basis to do what it does (which would make it a "terrorist" state). In short, Israel is not a terrorist state, despite what its critics would like you to believe (and many do believe the falsehood, because they never ever check the historical facts from objective sources):
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ub2x5UvjUs4 [youtube.com] "The Legal Case for Israel" (46 minutes)

      Since you are Jewish you might also want to learn about the history of Palestine. You would see that the Israelis have an extremely good case for their right to be there (of course, the whole notion of a people having to justify their right to be in a land they inhabited continuously for over 3000 years is pretty immoral, but we won't worry about that here). I've got some *factual* videos you may wish to look at in this post (which I'll link to rather than re-post):
      http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3682915&cid=43543411

      Israel does have a right to do what it is doing as a UN Member State. That's why it cannot be touched on legal grounds (despite the rantings of the genocidal OIC-bloc in the UN).

    15. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by BlackPignouf · · Score: 1

      the whole notion of a people having to justify their right to be in a land they inhabited continuously for over 3000 years is pretty immoral

      https://vimeo.com/50531435

    16. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 1

      Oustanding!

      Bill Whittle once made an interesting statement about land ownership, recognizing how complex it is the further you go back in history in *all* countries. He said, "There are only two unique claims to the land, the first inhabitants and the last inhabitants". I would add, the guys who are able to hold the land against all comers can be the owners, if you can't hold the land - or you depopulate yourself (crazy Russia and 'traditional' European populations) then it is probably going to be taken away from you. This sucks, but that is the nature of Nature. No point whining about it, as some do - just get on with improving your claim (and the lives of citizens).

    17. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by joseph90 · · Score: 1

      (of course, the whole notion of a people having to justify their right to be in a land they inhabited continuously for over 3000 years is pretty immoral, but we won't worry about that here).

      That's what the Palestinians said ;-)

    18. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 2

      That's what the Palestinians said ;-)

      I understand the point you are trying to make, but shall we examine the facts instead? The original inhabitants of the land at the turn of the 20th Century is about 5% of the current population. In the 19th Century and earlier the population hadn't changed for about 400 years. What does this mean? It means that there has been immigration and massive birth rate increases for both Jews and Arabs in Palestine. The Arabs have been in Palestine for about 1300 years and the Jews for about 3000 - but both in relatively small numbers in the last 500 years. The notion that the Jews displaced the Arabs in a sparsely inhabited country is not borne out by the known populations. What was scarce was arable land until the Jews set about draining the swamps. Meanwhile, many Arab farmers abandoned tracts of land due to the predations of the Bedouin. Please have a read of the following research from Harvard
      http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~hireview/content.php?type=article&issue=spring01/&name=myth

      What this means is that claiming that the Palestinian Arabs were displaced is a myth. What happened is that after hundreds of years of extremely low population growth the Palestinians started breeding and immigrating from other Arab countries. Meanwhile the many non-Arabs also immigrated and their birth rate also went up. They simply made more land area from swamp and filled the empty land (when I visited the area I couldn't believe what an empty and barren dump Samaria is - as they say, "the fighting is so vicious because the stakes are so small" [plus, there are the genocidal goals of the religious folks too - on both sides, but Government sponsored on the Arab side]). The Jews and Jewish Agencies also purchased land from willing sellers - as the article points out. That means the sentiment of your statement is not historically correct. Given the inflammatory nature of the subject it is better not to put false memes out there and try stick to the facts where they are known. Sound good?

    19. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by Yoda222 · · Score: 2

      Citation needed. What other counties demand access to tourists' e-mail?

      United States of America can look inside your electronic devices at the border. This is not strictly equivalent, but I think the spirit is the same.

    20. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      Israel does have a right to do what it is doing as a UN Member State. That's why it cannot be touched on legal grounds (despite the rantings of the genocidal OIC-bloc in the UN).

      The "genocidal OIC-bloc" includes everyone on the UN Security Council except the United States. Those Brits and French must really be full of anti-Semites, right?

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    21. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your comment is a holocaust, hitler!

    22. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by Jiro · · Score: 1

      ... and if they did this because lots of non-Catholics were entering and killing people.

    23. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by deadweight · · Score: 1

      Anyone living in the Americas that is NOT an Indian of some type would be wise to STFU about "My 300th great grandfather lived here to get out" and even most original American tribes had numerous wars stealing territory from each other. I think only Polynesians get to make the "first in and never left" claim ;)

    24. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by deadweight · · Score: 1

      "We walked outside, Ben-Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question, What is to be done with the Palestinian population?' Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said 'Drive them out!" -- Yitzhak Rabin, leaked censored version of Rabin memoirs, published in the New York Times, 23 October 1979 Just sayin'

    25. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by Lew-the-nerd · · Score: 1

      Israel does a pretty good job of generating anti-Israel sentiment on its own, really... at least among anybody who's actually seen the numbers for the death toll in their war in Gaza...

      That doesn't mean anti-semitism or anti-jew sentiment (there is a difference between the two), but it does mean that the state of Israel isn't exactly a good neighbour....

      How does one be a good neighbor to someone who declares that their sole purpose is to wipe you out and persists in shooting rockets at you? The toll in Gaza was high as it was on the Palestinian side for several reasons, not the least of which that they placed their munitions, rocket stores and batteries purposefully in densely civilian areas. Despite the overwhelming imbalance in firepower, the toll on the Palestinian side was as low as it was because the Israelis actually dropped leaflets and made tens of thousands of phone calls to warm Palestinians to move away from those stores and batteries. I encourage you to watch this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aE-sDemDWWI , the testimony of a British Army colonel who was an observer for the UN who declared that the Israelis did more than any army in known times to safeguard civilians on the 'other' side. One penultimate fact - the typical ratio of civilian casualties to combatant casualties in wars is 10:1; that is ten civilians die for every combatant. In the Gaza combat, that ratio was 1:1; fair proof that the Israelis did all that they could to minimize civilian casualties. And the last - in the year before the war, there were >3000 rockets shot from Gaza into Israel. How would any other country react to 3,000 rockets sent across the border from a territory they have left in hopes of peace?

    26. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 1

      I live in New Zealand. There is a claim that the Maori here (of which I have ancestry) displaced an earlier wave of migration, the Moriori. Fortunately the Maori polynesians pretty much wiped out the pacifist Morioris and the last full-blooded Moriori died out nearly a century ago. Even the polynesians can't claim to be immune to the territory grabs and conquest that every other country is afflicted by.

      Oh, and let the lesson of pacificism in the case of genocidal invaders be a lesson to you all - we can;t appeas Islam or our 21st Century Culture will be supplanted destroyed by a 7th Century Culture.

    27. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 1

      You are correct. That was the mindset of "Eretz Israel" at the time. However, the Israeli Government has changed policies - which is why it gave Gaza back (hoping for peace, but instead they got more rockets - perfectly predictable if you understand that Islam is a large factor in driving the Arab political decision making).

      Now there are still factions of Israeli society that still believe in this concept. The Israeli Government does try and reign them in. You can compare that to the Palestinians where the terrorists *are* the Government. Anyway, I agree with your point, but please understand it is of historical interest and is not the stated policy of the Israeli Government for the last decade (times change! but unfortunately many people's understanding of the situation is colored from decades ago, rather than the policies today).

      ps. If the Israelis really were interested in driving all the Palestinians out for real, just how many days do you think their mighty IDF would take to accomplish this? not long, yeah? it should be clear when you think about it that the Israelis believe what they say, they are prepared for a Two State Solution provided there is permanent peace and mutual recognition (although I have the sneaking suspicion that the Israelis also know the Arab terrorist government could never agree to this - the Qur'an won't let them; but that is not Israel's fault, they're just making use of the ideology of their opponent).

    28. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

      I note you're not counting the number of people impacted by the trade embargoes that Israel has imposed on the strip...

      There's more to the death toll than the simple number of people actually killed by Israeli bullets/rockets. And since you're good at pulling up statistics... how many Israelis died versus how many Palestinians? Since 1987, just over 1500 Israelis, of whom 142 were under the age of 18. Since 1987, a little under 8000 Palestinians, of whom 1620 were minors. In 2008-2009 alone, the Israelis killed more Palestinians than Israelis have died in the entire 25-year period. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli%E2%80%93Palestinian_conflict#Fatalities_1948.E2.80.932011

      That means that Israel has killed more Palestinian children than Hamas has killed Israelis, total. And that's just by guns, not by the economic impact that Israel is having on the region with their embargoes and blockades. I don't care how much out of their way they're going to minimize civilian contracts, they still fail at the balanced response.

    29. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by Lew-the-nerd · · Score: 1

      The difference is that the Palestinians, by their own statement and actions, are both trying to kill Israelis and their children and are purposefully putting their own children in harms way by putting rocket emplacements in the midst of civilian establishments while the Israelis are trying to avoid harming that same population. If the embargo has had such an impact on day to day life, how do all the rockets and explosives get in? Why not substitute the other items you seem to think are missing for some of those rockets? You might also spell out the proper 'balanced response' there is to a neighbor that, at every opportunity, sends rockets and actually attempts to kill you? If Hamas wanted all this to stop, perhaps they could change their charter where it calls for a Palestine that extends to the sea and stop their speeches about the eradication of Israel and publicly proclaim that they accept that Israel is a Jewish State and they recognize its existence and declare peace. Perhaps your 'balanced response' should also take Hamas to task for perpetuating the conflict and shedding the blood of their own children.

    30. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

      You do realize that Hamas and the Palestinians are two separate entities right? The only reason that Hamas has any support in the region at all is because they're the only ones providing supplies and keeping the schools open due to the Israeli blockade. Almost everything they have is smuggled in by Hamas. All anybody wants in the area is to be allowed to live in peace, and Israel is, by far, the single biggest impediment to that.

      If Israel were to, you know, allow medical supplies and construction supplies into the area, stop bulldozing Palestinian neighbourhoods to build Israeli ones, and allow them to conduct trade as a legitimate entity, then they would find that support for Hamas would evapourate. The land is very fertile farmland, and they could easily keep their own economy going without Hamas if it weren't for Israel's interference: they can't import the supplies and equipment they need to do it, and even if they could, they can't export the finished product. Israel has created Hamas, and they're the only ones who bear responsibility for its continued power.

    31. Re:Article has Anti-Semitic Purpose by Lew-the-nerd · · Score: 1

      Crap, do you actually know nothing about this situation and yet you still have an opinion?
      Do some reading about the issues and then try to figure out these answers:

      If Gaza needs goods desperately, why does the Gazan Government spend effort to import all the rockets and arms?
      In the face of these problems, why does Hamas still pledge to eliminate the Zionist State?
      Why is there a embargo? - and a wall separating Israel from the West Bank?
      Why does Hamas still support the rocketing of Israel - and brag about it?
      Why doesn't Hamas just recognize the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish State? ........ just as there are many Muslim countries?
      How many Palestinians live in Israel?
      How many Palestinians are in college in Israel?
      How many Palestinians are in the Knesset?
      Why were all of the Jews kicked out of the Arab countries? Can't those governments distinguish between Jews and the Zionist government?
      How many opposition newspapers, parties and organizations are there in Israel?
      How many opposition newspapers, parties and organizations are there in Gaza or the West Bank?
      Why does Hamas and the Palestinian Authority state that Jews can never live in a Palestinian State?
      Why is the West Bank flourishing and Gaza struggling?

      Here is some reading for you.

        From Wikipedia (with many refs) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Israel

      "A significant number of residents of the Palestinian territories seek medical treatment in Israel, often for sophisticated tests or treatments not available at Palestinian hospitals. Their treatment is paid for under a financial arrangement with the Palestinian Authority, or in some cases, at their own expense. Medical treatment for Gaza Strip residents is paid for by the Palestinian Authority or organizations such as the Peres Center for Peace.[14]
      Palestinians who apply for medical treatment in Israel must obtain a humanitarian entry permit from Israel, of which thousands are issued annually. In January 2009, following the Gaza War, the Palestinian Authority canceled financial coverage for all medical care for Palestinians in Israeli hospitals, including coverage for the chronically ill and those in need of complex care not available in the Palestinian territories.[15][16] In 2012, The Palestinian Authority's Ministry of Health reported spending approximately $42 million in 2011 to finance medical coverage of Palestinians in Israeli hospitals and the Arab World. [17] Arab citizens of Israel belong to the same health care system as that of all other citizens of the country."

      Note that the Palestinian Authority cancelled the healthcare, even while Israeli hospitals were willing to treat Palestinians, nominally their enemy.

      From Al Arabiya http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/08/08/231069.html

      "A report was released in March by Israel’s Civil Administration announcing that 115,000 Palestinians were treated in Israel in 2011, a rise from the previous year by 13 percent according to The Jewish Press news website. Over 100 Palestinian doctors were trained at Israeli hospitals and five organ transplants took place in Israel to save the lives of Palestinian patients."

      Come back with facts.

  5. Twitter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is why I do all my confidential corporate communication via Twitter and Slashdot postings.

    1. Re:Twitter by Nerdfest · · Score: 1

      Funny, but insightful. Typical email is almost the same thing security-wise. As with everything else on the internet, if it's private and you insist on sending it or storing it, make damn sure it's well encrypted.

  6. Re:Jews by Nerdfest · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... or, you could be a racist douche-bag. The possibilities are endless.

  7. Whats email grandad, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about those of us that left email behind long ago, just after we taught our grandparents to use it.

    At the point that the government requires data retention of a means of communication its time to move on.

  8. Pointless by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is a stupid policy because anyone intent on doing harm will just set up a dummy account full of fluffy happy mail to show to airport security. Basically the only outcome of this policy is to deny entry to people who are not a threat.

    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    1. Re:Pointless by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      My guess would be that they don't widely deploy this for exactly this reason. But if someone on their terror watch list forgets about this headline and they get flagged for "enhanced" security they'll "wipe down" their laptop behind the white wall and in the process go to your history and download your email before returning it without making much of a fuss.

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

      This is a stupid policy because anyone intent on doing harm will just set up a dummy account full of fluffy happy mail to show to airport security. Basically the only outcome of this policy is to deny entry to people who are not a threat.

      Yeah I mean you'd think that anybody traveling to Israel with the intention of harming the Jewish state would be smart enough to not carry around with them emails entitled "Our plan to strike at Israel" with an unencrypted PDF attachment containing their complete plan of action. If any terrorists actually do that those E-mails will be encrypted with something you need a quantum computer to crack and terrorists are not the only ones to use those sorts of precautions, these days even mundane civilian businesses and private citizens use encryption for perfectly legitimate reasons.

    3. Re:Pointless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a stupid policy because anyone intent on doing harm will just set up a dummy account full of fluffy happy mail to show to airport security. Basically the only outcome of this policy is to deny entry to people who are not a threat.

      Well, it's quite likely that the ones who get "volunteered" for suicide missions might not be the sharpest tools in the shed...

    4. Re:Pointless by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      This is a stupid policy because anyone intent on doing harm will just set up a dummy account full of fluffy happy mail to show to airport security. Basically the only outcome of this policy is to deny entry to people who are not a threat.

      they`re doing it to stop trade to gaza. that's the most common activity they could catch with this.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    5. Re:Pointless by phorm · · Score: 1

      If they're targeting it, I'd imagine that they may have some idea of the email account(s) used by persons of interest, if perhaps not the contents of all emails.

  9. Consent or get back on that airplane! by girlinatrainingbra · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Consent, eh? Really?
    -- Consent, or get back on that airplane!
    -- Consent, or get into that jail!
    -- (DUI checkpoint, consensual, of course) : consent, or give up your driving privileges, and line up over there for your breathalyser test!
    -- (Border patrol checkpoint, right outside San Onofre Nuke plant, on I-5 north bound and southbound, about 50 miles NORTH of the California-BajaCalifornia USA-Mexico) border -- consent or step out of the car please
    -- (Watertown MA, search for a terrorist, where did I misplace those 4th amendment rights, weren't they here just yesterday?) -- we're coming into your house NOW, consent or we're pulling you out anyway and we've got automatic weapons, so consent NOW!
    -- (DUI checkpoint) -- roll down your windows and answer these questions, with your CONSENT! Hey, don't make a u-turn, we'll chase you DOWN for not CONSENTING to this intrusive non-probable-cause DUI checkpoint!!!
    .
    I musta signed that consent during that EULA as I was coming out of the womb, yeah, that must have been when I consented to all of this crap...

    1. Re:Consent or get back on that airplane! by tftp · · Score: 1

      we're coming into your house NOW, consent or we're pulling you out anyway and we've got automatic weapons, so consent NOW!

      I wonder who they got consent from to search an empty residence?

      If there is no response then the searchers have to operate on a theory that (a) there is nobody there, or (b) there are terrorists inside. If the police is thinking logically, all [suposedly] empty houses must be entered as hostile places - with doors blown out, and with a flashbang grenade thrown into each room before entering.

    2. Re:Consent or get back on that airplane! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Flying is a privileged activity. You have no right to fly.

      Driving is a privileged activity. You have no right to drive.

      Any time you partake in a privileged activity such as flying or driving, you give your implied consent to whatever conditions are attached to that privilege. It just so happens that implied consent to search is a condition of both flying and driving.

      And yes, any officer who stops you can search your car if they stopped you for violating a traffic law. It's called search incident to an arrest - and a traffic stop is an arrest (because an arrest occurs the moment a reasonable person believes they are not free to leave). They try to get consent because it makes convicting you easier, but they do not need it.

      Constitutional protections do not apply when you are engaged in a privileged activity, and there is over a century of case law that says so.

    3. Re:Consent or get back on that airplane! by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      Living in a particular city is a privileged activity. The constitution doesn't apply! Don't like it? Move.

      Any time you partake in a privileged activity such as flying or driving, you give your implied consent to whatever conditions are attached to that privilege.

      Just because I want to get on a plane doesn't mean that I have given the TSA consent to harass me. If I wish to get on a plane, it is the government's problem if they send thugs to harass me and force me to consent to certain conditions (with them possibly resorting to violence if I resist) before they'll let me on the plane.

      Yes, none of this 'logic' is exploitable at all. By moving to or living in city X, you have implicitly given away all of your rights! You have the option to move elsewhere, so it's all okay!

      Constitutional protections do not apply when you are engaged in a privileged activity, and there is over a century of case law that says so.

      The constitution just flies out the window because a few judges who couldn't care less about freedom supposedly think that people don't deserve rights when trying to get on a plane and think that it's perfectly okay for government thugs to harass people who wish to do so. Right.

      That said, I don't think you had to make that comment, did you? Constitutional protections do not apply when you are engaged in a privileged activity, and your comment just happened to offend me. You'd better hope some random judge doesn't decide that the first amendment no longer applies.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    4. Re:Consent or get back on that airplane! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Physical presence in a jurisdiction IS consent to the laws that govern said jurisdiction, unless you are a diplomat or an invading force.

    5. Re:Consent or get back on that airplane! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you read "The Orphaned Right: The Right to Travel by Automobile 1890-1950" by Ralph Roots?

    6. Re:Consent or get back on that airplane! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "And yes, any officer who stops you can search your car if they stopped you for violating a traffic law."

      I hate to do this, but citation please?

      I happen to know for fact that a warrant is required for them to do this without your consent, unless you get pulled over for something serious, like reckless driving or DUI, but speeding, no. Now, they will try to make you give your consent by saying "I want to search your car.", but that doesn't mean you have to say okay. Your false premise is that a traffic stop is a form of arrest. It isn't. Proof. At arrest they are required to read Miranda rights. I've never been read those, hence I've never been arrested. If they take you into custody without reading you those, then it means they have no intent on prosecuting and will only detain you with consent, hence you have not been arrested, and in fact by taking you into custody without reading you your rights and against your will, you can now sue their asses off. This of course never happens, because they never do that.

    7. Re:Consent or get back on that airplane! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      kill yourself.

    8. Re:Consent or get back on that airplane! by xtal · · Score: 1

      The OP is dead wrong. The officer needs cause.

      --
      ..don't panic
    9. Re:Consent or get back on that airplane! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is so full of fail, I don't know where to begin.

      For one thing, you are not "under arrest" when you're stopped by the cops. You may be detained without formal arrest.

      Secondly, the cops have no right to search your car unless they have reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed.

      Thirdly, Constitutional protections apply at all times, except for a narrow set of circumstances which are legally well-defined. Asking you to waive some constitutional rights in exchange for a privilege is not the same as saying the protections don't apply.

      Watch this video if you don't understand your rights when detained by police.

    10. Re:Consent or get back on that airplane! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, being in a jurisdiction means you are subject to the laws there. Your consent is not implied or necessary, you do not consent to laws except by voting for the representatives who write them. Actually laws wouldn't be necessary if everyone "consented" to not stealing, murdering, etc.

    11. Re:Consent or get back on that airplane! by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      Thirdly, Constitutional protections apply at all times, except for a narrow set of circumstances which are legally well-defined.

      I'd like to think so, but the justification for the TSA seems to be that you don't have to get on an airplane (which I think is ridiculous). Someone I argued with before used similar arguments and provided this link. Whether it's true or not, such logic would give the government a tremendous amount of power.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    12. Re:Consent or get back on that airplane! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Flying is a privileged activity. You have no right to fly.
      > Driving is a privileged activity. You have no right to drive.

      Then there is also no right for anyone to DENY me to fly or to drive, is there?

  10. No good and then some . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sometimes i wonder if the Israeli State forgot the lessons of world war 2 .
    Sad to say , but i believe they forgot. There's no excuse to invade tourist's privacy .
    And puh-lease none of that " we need to protect ourselves " bullshit.
    Spying on human rights activists and stepping on human rights is no concern to them.

    The Israeli State has become the enemy of it's own People.
    I got no sympathy left for the Israeli State and government , at all.
    Their people gets screwed just like we do , and that is terrible for a people that suffered so much .
    I do make a distinction between the State and the People. Great people . Sad State.

    1. Re:No good and then some . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would that be the lesson on how to pull off the greatest lie to fool the world in the history of the human race? Because I believe they are still rather good at that one.

    2. Re:No good and then some . by Yoda222 · · Score: 1

      Israeli State did not exist during WWII. So it's impossible for it to remember the lessons from that war, isn't it ?

  11. Is Isreal some small town in the US? by Technician · · Score: 0

    What does Isreal's policy have to do with flying to the US? I suppose if you are from Isreal, and returning, you may be deported from your home country. Where would you go?

    Personally, I have several email accounts. Not all of them are accessable from the web outside the office. One of them is used only for sailsmen, scam baits, web page registrations, and other junk. I have NO texting on my phone, so it has NO email.

    Private personal email is just that, private.

    --
    The truth shall set you free!
    1. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Israel gets a lot more attention from political forces in the US than most small towns.

      It gets a lot more attention than most big cities within the US also.

    2. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      the u.s. is home to about as many jewish people as israel itself.. so here, anyway, things in israel *are* news.

    3. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      What does the Jewish religion have to do with Israel? Please explain because I am baffled....

    4. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by AK+Marc · · Score: 0

      Israel was created by the UK at the end of WWII for a haven for Jews, who were recently heavily persecuted. It was essentially the UK paying an undeclared reparation on behalf of Germany.

      Go read a book sometime, though yes, I do get it that you are lying to pretend ignorance for rhetorical games.

    5. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 2, Informative

      Israel used to be mostly ignored by the US until 1970 when Israel help save the King of Jordan from being overthrown by Palestinian terrorists. The US concluded that the Israelis were trustworthy allies and an 'unsinkable aircraft carrier' in the region - which the US could use to further their interests (particularly against Soviet influence in the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East). The US needed Israel more than the other way around (since before this the Israelis mostly got arms from the French and Russians-via-Czechoslovakia).

      The loss of Israel would be very bad for US self-interest - which is why the US does what it does. Conspiracy theory fruitcakes always start frothing that the Jews control the White House this is utterly false. The Jews and Israelis have influence in the US, but are among many influences. The White House today is instead heavily infiltrated by racist Jew-hating Muslim Brotherhood affiliates, refer: http://www.investigativeproject.org/3869/egyptian-magazine-muslim-brotherhood-infiltrates. I'm digressing here because of all the bullshit spun about that the White House is controlled by Jews - this is false, ever since George W Bush it is the jew-haters that have excessive influence in the State Department and White House.

      Note that the jihadi Arabs like the *Egyptian* Yasser Arafat caused murder and instability in Israel, Gaza[then illegally occupied by Egypt], Judea/Samaria/West Bank [then illegally occupied by Jordan]), Jordan proper, Lebanon, and globally (Munich, Pan Am, Achilles Lauro murder etc). Israel is a bulwark against these guys and it suits the US to do the heavy lifting. The Israelis also tend to take out nuclear weapons programmes, like Iraq, Syria and soon-to-strike Iran when it would be more politically difficult for the US.

      The US 'aid' programme to the Israelis also benefits the US more than the Israelis. US tax dollars are used to pay US companies for equipment the Israelis use (including regional supplies and munitions the US intend to call on, if ever in a pinch).

      The relationship between Israel and the US works for both parties. It turns out that the US receives far far more benefit from this than most in the US realize (and certainly much more benefits than the anti-Israeli left-leaning media would have you believe). I hope that gives some explanation as to why Israel gets so much attention from the US after the 1970's (replying to the parent AC's true statement by way of explanation).

    6. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 5, Informative

      False. Your recall of history is factually incorrect - which makes your assertion about the UK ridiculous.

      The League of Nations in 1922 declared an intention to create the states of Palestine and Transjordan. Palestine was a Jewish region of the Ottoman Empire and 'Palestinians' meant Jewish dhimmis in the Palestine region. Arabs were simply 'Arabs'. Palestine was to get all the land west of the Jordan River and Transjordan the land to the East. Then the British decides to split the Palestine region into a Jewish part and an Arab part. The Jews living in the region had been living there continuously for 3000 years (although Jews were temporarily excluded from Jerusalem in 70 AD and in the 3rd Century, but remained in the surrounding areas). In the late 18th Century the 'zionist' movement got going and the Jews that were already in the region were joined by Jews from other parts of the World. These Jews bought swampy land near the coast that the Arabs didn't want. The Jews set to work clearing the swamps and started importing Arabs from other parts of the Arab world (most of whom arrived *after* the Jews, and in 1967 took the name 'Palestinians' for political reasons I'll explain later).

      World War II came along and many Jews fled to Palestine if they could. The British kept many of them out (where they were murdered in millions by the National Socialists). Meanwhile the Mufti of Jerusalem, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Amin_al-Husayni headed to Hitler and suggested the Final Solution to the Jewish Problem (reminding Hitler that if the Jews were exteminated no one would remember them, citing how the Armenians were mostly forgotten by the Turkish genocidal jihad against Armenians in 1915). The Mufti also proceeded to the Balkans to raise a pair of Bosnian and SS Divisions that killed tens of thousands of Yugoslavian Jews. The Mufti was not a nice man.

      After World War II ended many surviving Jews were convinced that Europe would always be anti-Semitic and left for Palestine (which is true, we see a rise again today; one cannot be racist but it is perfectly acceptable in polite society, politics and academia these days to demonize all Israelis without considering individuals - if you are doing this you are in fact a racist; please stop being racist).

      The Jews conducted terrorism against the British and the British decided to leave Palestine (it was also in an anti-colonial mindset and divesting itself of all colonies as well at that time, eg India etc). In 1948 the UN offered states for Jews and Arabs in Palestine. The Jews accepted and Israel was formed. The Arabs rejected the UN plan and attacked with the armies of many neighbouring Arab states as part of the Arab League (and driven by several things; the lust for land and conquest and the intention to commit genocide of Jews as commanded in the Qur'an and hadiths). The Arab Legion told the Arabs in Palestine to move out of the area so that the genocide would be easier. These Arabs are the refugees that no Arab host country wants to integrate. The Jews also had to flee Judea, Samaria in the face of the Arab League armies and were expelled from Arab countries (eg. Egypt). The Jewish refugees were accepted as full citizens by Israel. The Arabs who remained in Israel were accepted as full citizens, and were given Members of the Knesset (eg. similar to Congressmen/Senators in the Israeli political system). There are about 1 million Arab Israelis (who fight for Israel, because they see themselves as citizens of *their* country) and have 3 Members of Knesset. After a year of fighting the Israelis won and their State survived.

      After 1948 the Jordanians annexed Judea and Samaria and renamed it "The West Bank" [of the Jordan] to deflect any Jewish historical claim on it. The Egyptians occupied Gaza. The Arabs in Gaza did not call themselves "Palestinian" (a term used for Jews before 1948) but instead called themselves "Egyptian". The Arabs in the West Bank did

    7. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by etash · · Score: 4, Informative

      the only part i would disagree with is the "Palestine was a Jewish region of the Ottoman Empire and 'Palestinians' meant Jewish dhimmis in the Palestine region". The Jews in Palestine at the time were only about 16% of the population. The rest were arabs.

    8. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (which is true, we see a rise again today; one cannot be racist but it is perfectly acceptable in polite society, politics and academia these days to demonize all Israelis without considering individuals - if you are doing this you are in fact a racist; please stop being racist).

      Uh... no. Please quit abusing the English language in this way. The word you're looking for is "bigoted". The word "racist" is much more narrow, and has exactly one meaning—prejudice against a race. Demonizing Israelis cannot be considered racist because:

      • Israeli is not a race; it's a nationality. So demonizing people from that country is not racist. It is nationalist.
      • Jewish isn't a race, either. It's a religion.

      That last point bears further explanation. Although Israelis are predominantly from a single racial group, that racial group also contains a lot of people who are not Jewish. Israeli Jews are genetically very similar to the Palestinian Arabs (source: fieldofscience.com), Kurds (source: haaretz.com), Turks, and Armenians. So if you're talking about people who hate all Jews, Palestinians, Kurds, Turks, and Armenians, you might legitimately use the word "racist". Otherwise, that's definitely not the right word. :-)

    9. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 2

      I was not saying the Jews were the majority, so I agree with you. What is important is that Jews had been living there continuously for 3000 years. Most people think that the *all* Jews were evicted by the Romans, but this is not true (the ban was Jerusalem only, AFAIK).

      What I did meant is that the British controlling the region at the time generally used the words "Palestinian" and "Arab" to refer to Jews and Arabs respectively. Even more importantly the arabs of the region did not generally refer to themselves as "Palestinian" (since my understanding is that they saw themselves as part of the Arab nation greater than any nation) - this was a later invention by PLO leaders so they could claim Haifa and Tel Aviv etc in the eyes of the World and deligitimize Israel and legitimize their planned genocide/ethnic cleansing (as my citation from Al Rassooli indicates, in the words of PLO founders themselves). I hope that point wasn't missed.

    10. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      Jewish is both. It is an ethnicity as well as a religion. And you are also wrong about "racist" in that the term "racist" means a person who demonstrates prejudice, whether from race, religion, nationality or sexual orientation. I'm not arguing that I agree with it, but that's how it's used by most people today.

    11. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by AK+Marc · · Score: 0

      The land was "owned" by the UK until may 14, 1948. After that, the British left, and Israel was immediately recognized by the US and USSR. Are you disputing that prior to that date, the UK claimed rights to the land? You complained about what I said, then laid out a long post. But nowhere did you indicate what, if anything, was incorrect in what I said. I think I was 100% correct, but simplified it to the point you objected, as nothing in your narritive appears to directly contradict anything I said.

    12. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by BlackPignouf · · Score: 1

      The Jews conducted terrorism against the British and the British decided to leave Palestine

      Oh, so terrorism was a good thing back then?

    13. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 1

      The *UN* offered Israel and the Palestinian Arabs nation status in 1948. The Israelis accepted, the Palestinians did not. Your assertion was that the UK did this. This is not true. The UK's involvement was from 1917 to 1948 and primarily in 1922 in the League of Nations providing an area in their Mandate for Jews in Palestine.

      It's just that your post was inaccurate. No problem, I was just fixin' it for ya and adding detail lest people get the mistaken impression that Jews only arrived in the place after WWII and at the behest of the UK, when they'd been there all along (even if in small numbers in the Middle Ages) and formed a country based on the League of Nations, UK and most importantly, the United Nations all forming the legal basis for the State of Israel.

      I didn't mean offense by correcting you, but your post did need correction to be historically accurate (and then I took the liberty to go into more detail about some of the aspects of the situation and history). Hopefully some people will learn some correct historical facts as a result, I'm sure you don't mind that :)

    14. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      UK never claimed the rights to the land. Under the terms of Lausanne and Cevres treaties, the League of Nations created a mandate system which was designed to help the inhabitants of the conquered territory to attain working nations. This was achieved by appointing a protector country which will administrate the said nations in preparation according to modern values until such time the inhabitants are able to govern themselves. UK was such a protector country - a Mandatory Power, language of League of Nations Covenant. Dozens of such Mandates were set up all accross the Middle East. All of them vested the ultimate power with the people who inhabited the mandate territory, with the exception of one, and that is the Mandate for Palestine, where Britain received far greater powers and duties such that "recognition has thereby been given to the historical connexion of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country" and particularly that "[the Mandatory] Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes."

    15. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by AK+Marc · · Score: 0

      What idiot would think that the Jews only got there after 1948? They were there long before that, even if they were run off specific places or specific times. The political reality is that the land was UK before the "UN" offered nation status in 1948.

      My "offense" at the correction is that if I repeat it again, what was inaccurate for me to correct? Given that there was no overt correction, it seems the issue was overplaying the UK involvement when the land passed almost directly from UK to Israel.

    16. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 1

      I wasn't passing moral judgement for or against the terrorism (although my private opinion is that this was bad). I mentioned it because I don't want to deny it happened and it was significant.

    17. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it is perfectly acceptable in polite society, politics and academia these days to demonize all Israelis without considering individuals - if you are doing this you are in fact a racist; please stop being racist

      I've never seen anyone demonize Israelis collectively, but I've seen plenty of people criticise the Israeli government - and plenty more trying to pretend that doing so is racist. I have nothing against anyone on the basis of their race. I do dislike the Jewish religion (as distinct from the ethnicity), but no more so than Islam, Christianity, etc. And I have a very low opinion of the Israeli government, and of those citizens of the country that support its more objectionable actions.

    18. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No worries. Just one more tiny point, the land wasn't "UK". It was a Mandate granted by the League of Nations for the UK to administer (not own). I know I'm picking hairs here, but given the nature of the subject it pays to be a little pedantic with regards to the history.

      What idiot would think that the Jews only got there after 1948?

      Dude, you would be surprised. It is a common refrain of some Islamic supremacists that the Jews have no right to the land because they all came from Europe to displace Arabs at the end of WWII. That's why they mistakenly call for all Israelis to go back to Europe. Since even Western readers are also often confused I thought I'd better make the history explicit, and some folks might learn something. Much of the political problems are due to intentional or unintentional re-writing of history. I didn't mean to suggest you didn't know this. I just saw that some could misconstrue your original post as being that the Israelis only arrived at the end of WWII because the UK put them there - and displaced Arabs in some fit of colonialism. Since that meme is common, but not true, I thought I'd post just so no-one gets confused. I did not mean to raise your hackles.

    19. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was not saying the Jews were the majority, so I agree with you. What is important is that Jews had been living there continuously for 3000 years. Most people think that the *all* Jews were evicted by the Romans, but this is not true (the ban was Jerusalem only, AFAIK).

      Genetic evidence suggests a whole lot of them didn't leave, they just changed religion. Which means that a whole bunch of the Palestinian 'Arabs' are actually estranged Jews.

    20. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I take issue with your "genocidal jihad against armenians" as it is completely wrong. You may also benefit from reading a book or two, especially the ones written by the historians who constantly receive death threats from Armenians (Justin McCarthy being one example). The Armenians at the time decided to side with the British and the French and rebelled against the Ottoman empire in Asia Minor and attacked other people as well as the Ottoman Army. A good number of people died during this attempt, after all if you collaborate with the enemy and attack your neighbors, you are in treason. The Ottoman Government at the time did the best they could (consider that they had at least two Ministers of Armenian descent in their cabinet) and decided to relocate the population to safer regions. It is true that a number of people died during this conflict but it is very unfair and factually incorrect to say that this was genocide (which is a term coined after WW2 by the way, so let us file its use here under anachronism). If the Armenians are looking for who is responsible for all of this, they only need to look into the mirror. Enough said!

    21. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A fundamental problem is how the state of Israel defines "Jew". My understanding is that they essentially accept an orthodox definition that you're a Jew if your mother was. Technically this might not define a race, that term being pretty fuzzy scientifically, but seems to me it's even worse since it's clearly defined genetically. That strikes me as hyper-racist or ultra-racist.

    22. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 1

      After a year of fighting the Israelis won and their State survived.

      After 1948 the Jordanians annexed Judea and Samaria and renamed it "The West Bank" [of the Jordan] to deflect any Jewish historical claim on it. The Egyptians occupied Gaza. The Arabs in Gaza did not call themselves "Palestinian" (a term used for Jews before 1948) but instead called themselves "Egyptian". The Arabs in the West Bank did not call themselves Palestinian but called themselves "Jordanian". This is because Arabs mostly see themselves as part of one Arabic community so had no problem with the Jordanian annexation and Egyptian occupation (part of the Muslim "Ummah").

      All this talk of Arab annexation or occupation, but you seem to be omitting that not only did the Israelis win and their state survive, but the land area of Israel roughly doubled. It's not entirely accurate to portray this as a defensive war when a great deal of the combat took place outside of UN Partition Plan Israel and resulted in massive territorial gains for Israel. This would be like the United States annexing both Iraq and Afghanistan yet referring to the conflict as a defensive one.

      --
      Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
    23. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by operagost · · Score: 1

      Thanks for posting this.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    24. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by operagost · · Score: 1

      A defensive war is defined by how it begins, not how it ends. If you look at a map of Israel before 1967, you'll see how indefensible its geography was. Since they knew they were going to be attacked, it would have put their citizens in peril to NOT make a strategic, preemptive attack.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    25. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it was moderated insightful for what was after the spelling correction.

    26. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by operagost · · Score: 1

      Helen Thomas, former mascot of the left wing media, is one of those people who called for Jews to "go back to Poland or Germany"-- the implication, whether intentional or not-- is clear, and I applaud the organizations and people who decided to end their relationship with her.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    27. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 1

      I was talking about 1948, not 1967. Wrong war, but I'll bite anyway.

      If, as you say, a defensive war is defined by how it begins, and the 1967 war began with Israel's surprise bombing run in Egypt, destroying the majority of the Egyptian air force while it was still grounded on the tarmac, then I'd argue it was indeed a defensive war. For Egypt.

      And indeed, I'm not questioning the Israeli decision to carry out a strategic, preemptive attack against Egypt. It was the only rational option. But let's call a spade a spade; this was not a defensive war in any sense. I don't understand this desire to whitewash history. Israel made the right decision in moving first, and this should be evident to anyone with even a cursory understanding of what the area looked like at the time. This doesn't, however, mean that Israel was defending itself. Let's not twist language to fit our purposes, let's be honest here. Israel's intentions were good, but they did shoot first.

      --
      Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
    28. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by timq · · Score: 1

      ... it is perfectly acceptable in polite society, politics and academia these days to demonize all Israelis without considering individuals

      It's a pity you had to spoil your informative, insightful and interesting post with this stupid sweeping generalisation (which, ironically, accuses of making a stupid, sweeping generalisation).

      Thanks for your post anyway.

    29. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (which is true, we see a rise again today; one cannot be racist but it is perfectly acceptable in polite society, politics and academia these days to demonize all Israelis without considering individuals - if you are doing this you are in fact a racist; please stop being racist).

      That's a very convenient way to dismiss criticism. "If you don't agree with me, you are a racist/communist/fascist/terrorist/pedophile/heretic/etc."

      In all honesty, Israel (as well as the Palestinian state, Egypt, Iran, and numerous others) have done many terrible things. There is a long history there, and it's possible to justify or condemn any given action. However, to dismiss all anti-Israeli sentiment as pure racism is a great way to Poison the Well in debate.

      People verbally attack the United States, Russia, Iran, China, Korea (both North and South), and numerous other countries. Why is Israeli condemnation alone considered "racist" in your book?

      (To be clear, yes there are attacks against all Jews or what have you. I only take offense at your suggestion that "if you are [attacking Israel's policies or actions] you are in fact a racist".)

    30. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      the term "racist" means a person who demonstrates prejudice, whether from race, religion, nationality or sexual orientation

      No, that's just silly. There are other terms for people with irrational prejudices for reasons other than race (e.g. xenophobe, sexist). Anti-muslim sentiment is generally driven by racism, even if they're not identical, simply because most muslims have brown skin.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    31. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You surely are a prolific little astroturfer!

    32. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by tehcyder · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The Jews conducted terrorism against the British and the British decided to leave Palestine

      Oh, so terrorism was a good thing back then?

      The terrorists won, so they became freedom fighers. That is how it always works. It's like the ANC in South Africa.

      If Germany hadn't lost WW2, the French Resistance would have been remembered as a bunch of deluded terrorists.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    33. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by smooth+wombat · · Score: 1

      What is important is that Jews had been living there continuously for 3000 years.

      As were many Palestinians though oddly, immediately after Israel was created, they barred any Palestinian from returning to their homes after they were expelled by the fledgling Israeli forces, even though they had land titles and deeds showing proof of ownership since before Israel existed.

      The law Israel created to prevent the return of those who either left of their own accord or who were forced out either by the nascent Israeli military or settlers is unique in that it only applies to those people of non-jewish heritage (whatever that means). The law, and a series of other laws afterwards, prevents only Palestinians from returning to their homes and even more conveniently, sets a specific date for when this takes effect: the day after Israel's creation. In other words, if you weren't on your land the day after Israel was created, you cannot come back even if you have proof of ownership.

      So, to sum up, Jews had been living in what is now Israel for roughly 3,000 years, the same as the Palestinians. After the creation of Israel, only those of jewish heritage are allowed to return, everyone else, tough luck.

      Looks like the Israeli's learned a thing or two from Hitler (yup, I just godwinned this thread).

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    34. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by dadelbunts · · Score: 1

      Mod up.

    35. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 1

      So, to sum up, Jews had been living in what is now Israel for roughly 3,000 years, the same as the Palestinians.

      False. The Arab invasion was 1300 years ago. The time scales are different. Now we may argue that the 'Palestinian' Arabs may deserve to return to Israel (ignoring the fact there are over 1 million Arabs already in Israel), but then we could also argue that a far larger number of Jews then deserve to return to Muslim majority countries without fear of persecution. Trying to re-litigate history is fraught with peril. If the Arabs have claims then the Jews/Israelis also have counter-claims (which are are rarely mentioned, and I did not see that in your post). I hope you watched the links I posted for the legal status of the situation :)

    36. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 1

      Thanks for that criticism. It's noted. I wanted to put it in there because many people in the West go past legitimate criticism of Israel into racism. Once you start thinking about it you'll see how people who don't think they are being racist actually are. They go past the facts and judge people based on their ethnicity/nationality. I think we can agree that racism against anyone is bad yes? (primarily because your race is not something you have the power to change, unlike say, a political affiliation where you can change from Nazi to anti-Nazi or Islamist to secularist etc). I hope that softens your judgement on that statement a little? Thanks for the feedback :)

    37. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by zipn00b · · Score: 1

      Terrorism is always a good thing when they win and actually take over - depending on what historical accounts say.... Hell the US wouldn't be a country had it not been for "terrorist" acts such as the Boston Tea Party. The biggest issue of whether it's considered terrorism is which side you support and how many innocent lives are lost in the process - the latter appearing to be more of a modern thing. One man's terrorist is another man's patriot depending on how history wants to write it. Perspective always matters. If you lose somebody you know to "terrorism" you might not think it's such a good thing. But if you think it's only "bad guys" getting killed you might agree with it.

      I think the best definition for how it gets interpreted is "situational ethics"

    38. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by zipn00b · · Score: 1

      The best defense is a good offense.......

    39. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about the multiple attempts by Israeli agents to steal away secret information from the government and the Israeli bombing of the USS Liberty?

      It is difficult to count Israel as an ally under those circumstances.

    40. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Brown skin isn't a race. Xenophobe is a term for someone "afraid" of them, not prejudiced against them. And, since most prejudiced bigots are ignorant of race, they are racist based on continent of "origin" with "origin" being some untrue idealized historical image of those locations. Xenophobe is the proper breadth, but wrong meaning, and strictly speaking, many haters would hate 10th generation Americans who still speak their "original" language in the home, if it's not English. So they aren't "alien" and are more American than the hater, but they are brown. So what, are we back to using the term SM-Anglophile (straight-male-Anglophile)?

    41. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hah, I love how you call conspiracy theorists fruitcakes, and then not even two sentences later launch into your own frothing conspiracy theory!

    42. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by belmolis · · Score: 1

      The circumstance of the Liberty incident remain far from clear. In any case, it was a single incident during wartime many years ago. As for espionage, there have not been any documented cases of Israeli espionage against the United States. All of the small number of cases involve Israel obtaining US intelligence on third parties. It simply isn't true that Israel has acted against US security interests.

    43. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by belmolis · · Score: 1

      No, anti-Muslim sentiment is generally not directed at people per se but at the ideology of Islam. For the most part, it consists of resistance to Islamic hegemonism, religious intolerance, terrorism and forced conversion, the oppression of women, shari'a law, an so forth. This is clear from the reasons that people give for disliking Islam and is confirmed by the poor correlation between criticism of Islam an actual racism and xenophobia. Among the groups with the strongest anti-Islamic sentiment are Middle Eastern Jews and Christians, who are just as "brown" as Muslims, and in some cases out and out "black". They don't care about Muslim's race - they are hostile to Islam because of their direct and prolonged experience of oppression.

    44. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SplashMyBandit,

      You are totally wrong. First of all, Israel rules America. Have you ever heard about AIPAC, the Israeli lobby? Every president candidate is screened by AIPAC. If they are not a Israel supporter, they will not be approved by AIPAC, which means political death.

      AIPAC rules the congresse and the white house. See here: AIPAC CEO Steiner had to resign for a taped telephone call he made
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aipac#Steiner_resignation
      "Steiner stated that AIPAC had "a dozen people in [the Clinton] campaign, in the headquarters... in Little Rock, and they're all going to get big jobs."[35] NY real estate developer Haim Katz told The Washington Times that he taped the conversation because "as someone Jewish, I am concerned when a small group has a disproportionate power. I think that hurts everyone, including Jews. If David Steiner wants to talk about the incredible, disproportionate clout AIPAC has, the public should know about it."

      Ex president Jimmy Carter also talks about the enormous power AIPAC has. Maybe an ex president knows about internal politics in the US?
      http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Former_President_Carter_blames_media_proIsrael_1217.html
      "And any member of Congress who's looking to be re-elected couldn't possibly say that they would take a balanced position between Israel and the Palestinians, or that they would insist on Israel withdrawing to international borders, or that they would dedicate themselves to protect human rights of Palestinians it's very likely that they would not be re-elected," Carter added."

      Here is a congress man writing a book after 22 years. He talks about how AIPAC rules the congresse. Read the reviews and prepare to be shocked. People write in the reviews how this book is a eye opener.
      http://www.amazon.com/They-Dare-Speak-Out-Institutions/dp/155652482X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1366965306&sr=8-1&keywords=paul+findley

      USA gives 3 times more foreign aid to each Israeli than a US citizen. Read this again. Why does USA give 300% more money to an Israeli, than to a US person? Is it because Israel rules USA?

      Israel is illegaly occupying 95% of Palestine, dating back to 1967. By international law, a government has the right, and obligation to protect it's citizens to an aggressive foreign occupation power. Thus, palestine is defending against a aggressive occupation. And Israel is the agressor. By international law. And still we read in west media:
      -Israel: defence, retaliation, counter attack, etc.
      -Palestine: attack, provocation, terror, etc
      How can that be? In all west media we read that Israel defends, and Palestine is the agressor? By law it is not true. IDF - means Israeli Defense Forces. Journalist John Pilger has examined this further, google him.

      There is lot of FUD and lies going on, from Israel. By Geneve convention, an occupying country is forbidden to move their own citizen into occupied territory (see Section III):
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention#Part_III._Status_and_Treatment_of_Protected_Persons

      Second: The jews in Israel has not lived there for 3000 years, they are new comers. In the 12th century, the jews were almost extinct. But they managed to convert a big warrior tribe in East europe to judaism. They where called the Khazar jews, Ashkenzi jews. All original jews in Israel are extinct since long. In 1931 it turns out that 92% of all Jews where Ashkenazi (i.e. they are german origin)
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazi
      ~10 years later, Israel was created and Jews moved to Israel. The jews that moved there are all from Germany, no other Jews existed than Ashkenazi Jews. If you look at todays demagogy of Israel, you see that there does not exist any Jews with origin from middle east, all jews today in Israel, are from Germany (Ashkenazi), Spain (Sephardic), etc.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israelite#Post-Israelite_groups_during_the_Middle_Ages
      There is a study by an Israeli in this link, that shows that all Ashkenazi jews are from

    45. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The funny thing is Islam is basically a badly made copy of Judaism. I think Muslims are mad God picked the majority of Abraham's sons to be his chosen people. Mohammed had to draw a very tenuous line from himself to Ishmael before he had any claim to Abraham's God, most Muslims are conquered people. The Persians would certainly not be Muslim if Alexander hadn't left them in disarray, and then they created their own flavor which freaked out the Arabs.

      I particularly think it's funny that they think of themselves as united when they have some of the largest disparities in wealth. The poorest most desperate subjugated people in Yemen live right next to the immensely wealthy and opulent Saud family. (Another irony Saudi's are supposedly the most observant Muslims (Salafis), yet Islam stresses a lack of need for material possessions)

      Christians went from the dark ages to the renaissance. Muslims went from the golden age of tolerance and math and science to the dark ages of thought. This does not bode well.

    46. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by WGFCrafty · · Score: 1

      I think i knew most of that, but interesting none the less.

    47. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by WGFCrafty · · Score: 1

      &Problem is the Romans sacked the temple so there's nothing to point to and say "look the second iteration of our temple stood here almost a millennium before your prophet existed." And with the Muslims and Christians going back and forth over the land for another millennium, and many more people added who call it home, it's easy to forget the people who originally, still do call it home.

      One thing you can say about the Egyptians and their pyramids, despite no one practicing their religion (in numbers): despite Cairo being 9:1 Muslim:Coptic Christian, no one will ever forget the people who built them. As long as humans exist on this earth anyway.

    48. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 1

      Thanks. I'm glad some readers didn't mind the recap (there was a lot going on, and it affects the claims of legitimacy today).

    49. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 0

      One thing you can say about the Egyptians and their pyramids, despite no one practicing their religion (in numbers): despite Cairo being 9:1 Muslim:Coptic Christian, no one will ever forget the people who built them. As long as humans exist on this earth anyway.

      You may be interested to note that the Salafis released after the fall of Mubarak (thanks to the clueless Obama pulling the rug out from under him and unleashing the Islamists across the region) wish to destroy the 'pagan' Pyramids and Sphinx just as they blew up the Buddhist statues in Afghanistan and destroyed the medieval mosque in Timbuktu, Mali in the last year. Now not every Egyptian feel this way, but these guys are "on a mission from Allah" and feel they are commanded to destroy all non-Muslim cultural artifacts. As time goes one expect the Salafis to win additional power over more moderate Islamicists (just as in any organisation those who can claim to be 'holier than thou' can marginalise moderate voices, leading to the organization becoming more and more extreme over time).

      Mandatory citations of the proposed madness:
      http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/11/12/249092.html
      http://frontpagemag.com/2012/raymond-ibrahim/muslim-brotherhood-destroy-the-pyramids/
      Here's a claim made nearly half a year later, showing that the call for destruction was not an isolated incident or single imam, but an intended goal of the Salafis and Muslim Brotherhood once they are in a position to do so:
      http://au.christiantoday.com/article/muslim-brotherhood-backed-egyptian-president-renews-call-for-destruction-of-pyramids-and-sphinx/14432.htm

      Now here is the apologies for the Islamicists from a left-leaning media source (typical, the leftist media in the US loves Islam and make excuses every way they can). It claims that the calls for destruction of the pyramids were a 'hoax' yet then goes on to say the claims were 'fringe'. That means the claims were *real* (not a hoax as the apologist makes out) but still on the fringe. The pyramids are safe, for now, but expect as Egypt becomes more and more extreme. This is also the plan of the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafis to impose more and more Sharia on Egypt progressively [incidentally, what they are trying to do through 'Cultural Jihad' through the OIC-dominated UN is similar, but on a much longer timescale so ordinary joes won't notice the installation of special rights for Muslims and limits being placed on Free Speech for non-Muslims; all in accordance with Sharia and enacted through "political correctness"].
      http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-24/blow-up-the-pyramids-u-s-pundits-fall-for-a-hoax.html

      The Islamicists aim to take over the World (as the Qur'an commands them to). If they are prepared to rob other cultures of irreplaceable antiquities just how much less do they value your human rights or even your life. Islam must be stopped by all Free People (regardless of our differences in political leanings or beliefs in the best economic system). If we don't unite to stop Islam our culture will be destroyed and forgotten, just as the former cultures of the Middle East have been (eg. Roman/Byzantine culture that lasted around 2500 years; the Persians with a similar heritage; the Graeco-Egyptian culture in Egypt; etc). Israel is first on the chopping block and then the West is next (as the Muslims say to themselves, "First the Saturday people and then the Sunday people" [the planned order of conquest and subjgation]).

      Most people simply aren't aware just how barbaric Islam is. No wonder, the Lefti

    50. Re:Is Isreal some small town in the US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Jews conducted terrorism against the British and the British decided to leave Palestine

      Oh, so terrorism was a good thing back then?

      The terrorists won, so they became freedom fighers. That is how it always works. It's like the ANC in South Africa.

      If Germany hadn't lost WW2, the French Resistance would have been remembered as a bunch of deluded terrorists.

      Lets be clear about differentiating the "terrorism" of Palestinian Jews pre-Israel and current Muslim terrorism.

      For example:
        Jews:

      The bombing of the King David Hotel by Jews. The hotel was used by the British military who had just confiscated Jewish Agency records that the Irgun wanted to destroy, so the Irgun planned to destroy the wing of the hotel used by the British government. Prior to the explosion, the Irgun warned the hotel, more than once, to attempt to mitigate casualties.

      Attacking governmental targets is not terrorism. Its treasonous perhaps, or rebellious, but not terrorism (as much as governments love to describe it as terrorism, it isn't).

      Muslims:
      Numerous, almost innumerable attacks specifically targetting civilians cafes, pizza shops, markets, marathons, tourist busses, school busses, Olympics, mosques, churches, planes, cruise ships, etc. etc. etc.

      Playing the moral equivilancy game in this instance is repugnent given the lopsided discrepancies. But then, people always want to hold Jews up to a far far far higher standard than they hold anyone else up.

  12. Don't worry folks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This will be coming to America soon.
     
    The one party system has 300+ million willing slaves who won't lift a finger for anything less than instant gratification. Ideas of civil liberties and human rights are passing by the wayside and there isn't a damn thing the new power elite will let you do about it.

    1. Re:Don't worry folks by icebike · · Score: 1

      This will be coming to America soon.

      What do you mean "SOON"?

      http://www.kpbs.org/news/2011/may/18/no-warrant-needed-search-laptops-phones-border-cro/

      The 9Th Circuit ruled this unconstitutional, but for now that only applies to the 9th. Other circuits may make other rulings.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  13. Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I wonder if people realize that to enter US you need a Tourist Visa (except if you are from approx. 17 states that are exempt).
    To obtain a Tourist Visa, you need to prove your "residential ties" to the country of origin, which include your bank account statements, your apartment lease, etc.
    On top of that you are finger printed on entry.

    And If you think US is bad then try entering Switzerland if you are not from EU, US and a few other countries.

    1. Re:Duh by jonfr · · Score: 2

      Here are the requirement for tourist visa for Switzerland if you are not from EFTA/EU+Schengen area. They are extremely strict and troublesome.

      http://www.eda.admin.ch/eda/en/home/reps/eur/vgeo/ref_visinf/visgeo/toutif.html

      But this is nothing compared to going to Falkland Islands. They have rather strict measurements there too. Even worse then Switzerland.

      http://www.falklandislands.com/product.php/36/17/visas

    2. Re:Duh by mrbester · · Score: 1

      The last time a bunch of people popped by the Falklands unannounced they weren't tourists...

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    3. Re:Duh by Isaac+Remuant · · Score: 1

      Yeah, cause reading emails will stop invasions...

      --
      "Science can amuse and fascinate us all, but it is engineering that changes the world. " - Asimov.
    4. Re:Duh by gweihir · · Score: 1

      And if you are traveling to Switzerland from the Schengen Area, you are likely to not even see an immigration official. The last 3 times I did, no controls at all in the train. These requirements are just the Schengen standard and they are not extreme or strict or troublesome.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    5. Re:Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A communications disruption can mean only one thing... invasion.

    6. Re:Duh by jkflying · · Score: 1

      Last time I entered Switzerland they saw the color of my passport and waved me through without even checking it was mine. Of course, that was a few years back, and they may now be stricter to comply with Schengen rules.

      --
      Help I am stuck in a signature factory!
    7. Re:Duh by Archimonde · · Score: 1

      I was there recently. Nothing much to see though. Just a lot of flat land, cold wind and sea, and some penguins. There are a lot more nicer countries to visit though.

      --
      Trolls are like broken clocks. They show the truth two times a day. The rest of the day they talk nonsense.
  14. What if you say you do not have an email address? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will they lock you up in an attempt at avoiding giving them access, even if you legitimately do not have one?

    Big Israeli brother is watching.

  15. Hmmm.... by dskoll · · Score: 5, Informative

    I traveled through Ben Gurion airport in 2011 and I have to say, I found the security there a lot less invasive and arbitrary than security at US airports. They didn't make me take off my shoes or walk through a body scanner. And they didn't confiscate my bottle of water.

    What they did do was actually spend time talking to me and watching me. I think the security there is really security, not security theatre.

    As for demanding to read your email, that's probably crossing the line. I likely would have refused. But really, it's no worse than the US which can confiscate your laptop at the airport and go through all your files.

    1. Re:Hmmm.... by icebike · · Score: 2

      But really, it's no worse than the US which can confiscate your laptop at the airport and go through all your files.

      Citation?

      http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/8/court-limits-feds-ability-search-laptops-border/

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    2. Re:Hmmm.... by BoRegardless · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "What they did do was actually spend time talking to me and watching me."

      Israeli security are trained heavily in how to watch, talk to, ask questions, banter, and totally focus on all reactions from the traveler to see any signs of tenseness, irritation or unusual reactions, however slight. These guys are true pros and not the wimpy minimum wage TSA types (yeah I know they make more than minimum wages).

    3. Re:Hmmm.... by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I traveled through Ben Gurion airport in 2011 and I have to say, I found the security there a lot less invasive and arbitrary than security at US airports. They didn't make me take off my shoes or walk through a body scanner. And they didn't confiscate my bottle of water.

      Israeli airport security is different from American security in one crucial way: they profile passengers.
      So if you found their security less invasive, it's most likely because you don't have the wrong name/skin color/country of origin/family background.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    4. Re:Hmmm.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And my Jew girlfriend with family in Israel gets harassed by the Israeli border guards like nothing else, asking all these asshole questions. When they part her down, they put their hand in the top inch or two of her underwear.

    5. Re:Hmmm.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But really, it's no worse than the US which can confiscate your laptop at the airport and go through all your files.

      Oh, I almost forgot that as long as a country isn't the most Fascist on Earth they're okay.

    6. Re:Hmmm.... by dskoll · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So if you found their security less invasive, it's most likely because you don't have the wrong name/skin color/country of origin/family background.

      Absolutely true. Given the situation in the Middle East, they'd be insane not to profile.

      And no matter how politically-correct you are, all security involves profiling. There simply aren't the resources not to profile. So while it may not be as obvious in the US or Canada, you can bet your bottom dollar you're being profiled.

    7. Re:Hmmm.... by dskoll · · Score: 1

      I was unaware of that ruling, being aware only of the previous decision by the three-member panel. Thanks.

      Not sure about the US, but when I returned to Canada one time I was asked to power up my laptop and let the agent look at it. He was searching for kiddy porn (I guess) and after five minutes of eyes-glazing holiday snaps, he let me go. I didn't feel like finding out what would happen if I refused his request to see the files on my laptop.

    8. Re:Hmmm.... by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      But really, it's no worse than the US which can confiscate your laptop at the airport and go through all your files.

      ...unless you're a Palestinian.

      FTFY

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

      Exactly if your a Jew your ok, if your an Arab spread those checks. Racial profiling at it's finest.

    10. Re:Hmmm.... by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      The difference is that in Israel you're profiled because you appear to be a young Muslim and therefore require further questioning, whereas in the US you're profiled for being a blonde 36DD and therefore require a second pass with the RapeyScanner.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    11. Re:Hmmm.... by Yoda222 · · Score: 1

      And if you are an Arab Jew ?

    12. Re:Hmmm.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then you're truly screwed.

    13. Re:Hmmm.... by asicsolutions · · Score: 1

      I think the bigger thing is that security starts before you even enter the airport. They have less flights, so it's easier, but they check the lists.
      Entering the airport you go through security where they check the car. My father in law is a native, they checked his car.
      The Janitors are all ex-military or at least look it. They also carry radios and have bulges in the back of their uniform. I'm sure they are packing.
      I'm also sure they listen to everyone talking in the airport. They take security seriously.

      In fact. Leaving the US we weren't allowed to bring bottles for our daughter. We also got hand sanitizer taken away (it was about 1/2 of an 8oz bottle but since the bottle was big it was denied even though the contents fell below the amount allowed. When we left amsterdam, we walked right through w/ the bottles and anything else.

  16. If you call the US embassy about this by purnima · · Score: 5, Interesting
    they ask you about your religion and tell you that in any case Israel is able to access your gmail account without your password, because they 7h3y RUL3.

    See The U.S. Government Wanted to Know: Am I Jewish"

    "This is the conversation I recall having with Chris Kain at the US Embassy in Tel Aviv by telephone:"

    CK: Hello. I got your number from ___. You are being questioned by the Israeli authorities, I understand.
    ST: They are threatening to deny me entry and to deport me.
    CK: Are you Jewish?
    ST: No
    CK: Have you been in contact with the Israeli government or military in the past?
    ST: No
    CK: Have you been here before?
    ST: Yes, several times. I am a Palestinian with family in the West Bank.
    CK: Oh, you have family in the West Bank. Then there is nothing I can do to help you. In fact, if I interceded on your behalf, it will hurt your case with the Israelis.
    ST: I don't understand. You are saying you can't speak with them. You have no influence. They are demanding to access my gmail account.
    CK: If they have your gmail address, they can get in without your password.
    ST: What do you mean? How?
    CK: They're good!
    ST: This is crazy. You mean you know about these requests to access emails and you have no problem with it.
    CK: It is in our travel warning. They won't harm you. You will be sent home on the next flight out.I hope I have been of good service to you.
    ST: Frankly, you have done nothing for me.
    CK: Well at least you can say I did it kindly.

    1. Re:If you call the US embassy about this by PhamNguyen · · Score: 2

      Those statements by Chris Kain sound anti-semitic: asking if the guy is Jewish and implying the the Israelis have magical powers to hack email addresses.

    2. Re:If you call the US embassy about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      double heresay!

      This is an "as I remember it" story being recounted, and the bolded portions are heresay to begin with.

      Worse, the whole story is told with an agenda. The person was trying to enter israel to get to the west bank, and couldn't satisfy the border agency's suspicions that he was there for reasons other than what he claimed, so he was questioned and put on a plane to where he came from.

    3. Re:If you call the US embassy about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm not sure what the deal is with those magical powers, but there's a reason Kane asked whether he was Jewish. If you're Jewish, you get automatic Israeli citizenship no matter where you're from, so entry is generally pretty painless. If you're Palestinian or Arab or Muslim or an activist, you're probably just shit out of luck.

    4. Re:If you call the US embassy about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who is this "Noone" I keep hearing about these days?

    5. Re:If you call the US embassy about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You do know that Google is founded and controlled by Jews right?

    6. Re:If you call the US embassy about this by valugi · · Score: 0

      how do they know what is my email address. I have a least 10 emails, so I can give them one or a couple that are not even used so much. One can even create one for a trip to Israel. This is so irrelevant...

    7. Re:If you call the US embassy about this by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      CK: If they have your gmail address, they can get in without your password.
      ST: What do you mean? How?
      CK: They're good!

      What a stupid thing to say!

      Hacking into gmail is considered a crime in the US (even if it's done by an allied country). A US government official shouldn't be praising criminal activity. Plus anyone can hack into gmail if they believe you're worth their attention: China, Israel, Anonymous, any hacker from Eastern Europe, etc. As far as I am concerned, my gmail is as secure as most US diplomatic cables, which means it's probably just wide-open to most hackers.

      And even so, that my email can be hacked is no excuse for me to simply give up my password.

    8. Re:If you call the US embassy about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The only anti semites are the Europeans that invaded and killed the Semites in Palestine. They call themselves Jews.

    9. Re:If you call the US embassy about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    10. Re:If you call the US embassy about this by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Who is this "Noone" I keep hearing about these days?

      It's not a "who", it's a "when".

      It's when most of us eat our lunch.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    11. Re:If you call the US embassy about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Both Hebrew and Arabic are semetic languages.

    12. Re:If you call the US embassy about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hacking into gmail is considered a crime in the US (even if it's done by an allied country).

      Why are you assuming "hacking" or "criminal activity" on behalf of Israel, necessarily? It might just as well be a case of Israel asking Google for access and Google saying "hmmm... ok".

      It's not like it would have been surprising, given how Google, Facebook, Apple, Microsoft et al. are so happy with CISPA-like laws. (Protip: if gives them immunity regarding something they are ALREADY DOING and which is opening them to possible, but unlikely, litigation.)

    13. Re:If you call the US embassy about this by Stuarticus · · Score: 1

      Heresy or Hearsay? Or some amalgamation of the two? Heretical rumour?

      --
      If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
    14. Re:If you call the US embassy about this by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      You mightn't like it but the Law of Return is a simple fact, and hence being Jewish changes your options and thus is an important bit of information to know when discussing those options with someone.

      He didn't imply magical powers, he implied that Israel is considered good at spying. That Mossad probably has someone inside google seems a pretty safe assumption to me. That they would risk them to read some random email account is getting into paranoid territory though.

    15. Re:If you call the US embassy about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still not as blatantly anti-semitic as our new head of the CIA John Brennan, whom actually refers to Jerusalem as Al-Quds.

    16. Re:If you call the US embassy about this by jimicus · · Score: 2

      Hacking into gmail is considered a crime in the US (even if it's done by an allied country).

      He said "get in", not "hack in".

      There is a process known as "lawful interception", and it's existed for the telephone network for decades - it's a term that covers the legal and technical framework that allows government to intercept phone calls. Something similar exists in most countries worldwide.

      In short, in most countries the government can demand that local telcos assist in tapping telephone conversations. There may be various bits of legal paperwork that need to be filled in first, but the upshot's the same - the telephone company cannot say "No" to a properly submitted demand.

      I know nothing about Israeli law, but I would not be surprised if Israel had extended something similar to email communications.

      Google have an office in Tel Aviv, so Google can't turn around and say "We're an American company; you can stuff your lawful intercept request".

    17. Re:If you call the US embassy about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is always the conversion option. However, the Ministry of Interior has a secret whitelist of botei-din (rabbinical councils) whose conversions are not questioned. Common sense will dictate that these are the ones most likely to make certain that the prospective convert will "drop out". They do not want any more potential olim (immigrants) that what the "documented identity pool" currently numbers.

      Sometimes the truth is Judeopathic. However, that does not grant sanction to embrace the lies with impunity.

  17. Re:Jews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Otr he could be an antisemitic, funny how Arabs and Jews are the most Antisemtic peoples I have ever met.

  18. Sure, I'll cooperate, they can have the... by heretic108 · · Score: 1

    ...credentials to my Mailinator account :P

    --
    -- In the beginning was the WORD, and the WORD was UNSIGNED, and the main(){} was without form and void...
  19. Good luck with that. by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I use Thunderbird to POP my mail down to my local desktop at home. The server copy is *not* retained. Furthermore, I don't even know my ISP mail and Gmail passwords off hand - they're stored in my local mail client, which, as I mentioned, is a desktop at home.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:Good luck with that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they believe they have reason to demand your email history, they're suspicious of you. If you give them an empty account or refuse, you don't enter the country.

      You have the right to refuse. They have the right to refuse entry.

  20. You tell him! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately, bigots like you have done everything they can to allow Muslims into Israel so they can commit terrorist attacks against innocent civilians.

    You tell him! I got a problem with people like him too!

    There are two kinds of people I hate in this World:

    People who are intolerant of other people's culture and the Dutch.

  21. Re:Jews by chilvence · · Score: 1

    Huh. I thought we bombed enough nazi's into the stone age. I guess next on the agenda is more bombing of nazi's, who would have guessed? Always hard to deal with single issue political parties....

  22. Israeli Airport Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    They routinely take your laptops and make the backup and give it back to you. Please don't go to Israel with your laptops or any data that you want to protect. Sanitize your email accounts (esp with respect to commercial information where you are bidding against an Israeli company) and then visit the place. The people and the country are a complete delight in surprising contrast to the airport experience. Please take an informed decision.

    1. Re:Israeli Airport Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Buhahaha! Truecrypt to the rescue. Sure guys, have all the copies you want! I've already started keeping my laptop "clean" in all unencrypted areas because of travel to areas that don't like porn (some have a very strict definition of it - one nipple and you're done there.). I felt it was important to seem to have a working laptop without needing truecrypt to mount anything. Once I was concerned enough to remove truecrypt so they wouldn't even have that clue. Kindda sucks but you can get a fresh copy later.

    2. Re:Israeli Airport Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They routinely take your laptops and make the backup and give it back to you. Please don't go to Israel with your laptops or any data that you want to protect. Sanitize your email accounts (esp with respect to commercial information where you are bidding against an Israeli company) and then visit the place. The people and the country are a complete delight in surprising contrast to the airport experience. Please take an informed decision.

      So Israel is just like China?

    3. Re:Israeli Airport Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are not fools. The security personnel know how a "worked" file system appears, They have a litany of reasons in hand to use to deny entry. There only three types of people who wish to enter Israel:

      1. Jews coming home.
      2. Christians engaging in tourism
      3. All others endeavoring to do harm.

      Don't like it, you can go to hell because you have already irrevocably consigned yourself that destiny by declaring space, time, matter, energy and chance to be your pantheon.

      Calvin was right. Humans are born dependent, collectivist, lazy and antisemitic.

      "Don't like it, you can go to hell?" Very nice, I suppose anyone that disagrees with Israel is anti-semitic and can go to hell. Good argument.

    4. Re:Israeli Airport Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I went to china a few years ago, and they never took my laptop from me.
      Unless they have magical devices that can wirelessly copy data off of hard drives, they're not copying everyones data.

    5. Re:Israeli Airport Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's your Hell, YOU go burn in it, you fucking psychopath. Go set yourself on fire and get a taste of what you believe. And then maybe learn some koine Greek and read Origen and his contemporaries.

      Oh wait, no, the Calvinist/presup mind is far too flabby and weak for actual research. You're all content masturbating to that bizarre little philosophical trick. Oh well. The nice thing for you about worshiping your own mind is you're sure you've got an appreciative audience, I suppose.

      PS: I'm not an atheist. Even most other Christians think Calvinism is sociopathic bullshit.

  23. This is news? by ktetch-pirate · · Score: 1

    It's nothing new. I wrote about this a year ago, when the same issues came up http://falkvinge.net/2012/06/29/your-email-privacy-is-under-increasing-threat/

  24. Cry me a river by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Whine all you want, but more than happy to help these guys. They have:

    * A legitimate reason for increased security. They're under far more serious security threats (and frequency) than the US and Europe.
    * A better security record (% of attacks foiled) using far less money
    * Real security at airports and malls, unlike the security theater going on elsewhere in the world.

    Trust me, if they ever get to the point of asking for your email they have flagged multiple levels of suspicious behavior. I have been traveling there for years and their security is *far* less intrusive than the US and Europe. Personally I wish them all the best. They're the only country in the entire world that is actually winning against Islamic terrorism. That's most than most countries can say.

    1. Re:Cry me a river by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      * A legitimate reason for increased security.

      I believe there are few legitimate reasons for wanting to violate people's privacy or freedoms in the name of security, and the fact that there may be real threats does not matter to me. If the TSA was actually anything other than security theater, I'd still be against it completely.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    2. Re:Cry me a river by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You used the word "whine" when you meant "state facts and logical arguments that I don't want to hear and cannot refute". This makes you a liar.

    3. Re:Cry me a river by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      I believe there are few legitimate reasons for wanting to violate people's privacy or freedoms in the name of security

      There is exactly one reason to do so, and that's when the threat to one's security is so paramount that his very existence is at stake.

      Which, for Israel, is actually the case.

    4. Re:Cry me a river by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, this does not increase security at all. In fact it decreases security, as it takes away man-power from checks that actually work.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    5. Re:Cry me a river by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're the only country in the entire world that is actually winning against Islamic terrorism. That's most than most countries can say.

      They're one of only a handful of countries that are even threatened by Islamic terrorism, and it's at least partly a problem of their own making. You might as well praise the USA for winning against Native American scalping attacks.

      And to say that they're "winning" is bizarre. The only thing they're "winning" at is oppressing innocent civilians. The actual terrorists are laughing. They know that all those children who are being cavity-searched at gunpoint just for trying to go to school are not going to grow up believing in Israel's right to exist.

    6. Re:Cry me a river by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 1

      They're the only country in the entire world that is actually winning against Islamic terrorism.

      I wouldn't call allowing government officials to poke through my private communications when I have committed no crime "winning".

      --
      Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
    7. Re:Cry me a river by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      There is exactly one reason to do so, and that's when the threat to one's security is so paramount that his very existence is at stake.

      So in other words, when there's actually a threat. Nope. I'd rather have freedom. If you want security, find a way to have it without violating people's rights.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    8. Re:Cry me a river by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      So in other words, when there's actually a threat.

      No, that's not what it means. Actual threats vary in severity. Israel faces an extremely severe threat, as compared to, say, US.

      If you want security, find a way to have it without violating people's rights.

      What if there's no such way?

    9. Re:Cry me a river by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      Israel faces an extremely severe threat

      Which I'm sure looking through emails would solve! Security theater is security theater no matter where it is.

      What if there's no such way?

      Then I believe you should stop acting like a coward and just accept that there are sometimes casualties.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    10. Re:Cry me a river by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Which I'm sure looking through emails would solve! Security theater is security theater no matter where it is.

      They're not looking through everyone's emails. They're looking through emails of people they deem suspicious for other reasons. And yes, I can definitely imagine that they might find something identifying the person as a threat that way.

      Then I believe you should stop acting like a coward and just accept that there are sometimes casualties.

      Oh, I see. So, by the same logic, US shouldn't have run any counter-espionage operations during WW2, then? They obviously trample on privacy, so they should have "just accept that there are sometimes casualties". And it doesn't matter how many casualties we're talking about, right? Even if it's thousands regularly, better all die than one non-citizen would have to prove that he's not a threat. That'll show them!

    11. Re:Cry me a river by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      They're looking through emails of people they deem suspicious for other reasons.

      So it's selective harassment, then? Regardless, if these suspicious people are so incompetent that their devious plots would be foiled because some government thug was granted access to their email accounts, I doubt they're that dangerous to begin with.

      So, by the same logic, US shouldn't have run any counter-espionage operations during WW2, then?

      I do not believe people's privacy should be violated if the government does not at least have a warrant in a grand majority of cases. In Israel, this move is mere security theater, so I'd oppose it anyway.

      They obviously trample on privacy

      Ah, but whose? There needs to be some oversight at the very least.

      Even if it's thousands regularly, better all die than one non-citizen would have to prove that he's not a threat.

      This tells me that you'd accept the TSA if its current policies were actually effective at saving the lives of many, many people. If that is so, that also tells me just how much you truly care about freedom.

      That'll show them!

      At the very least, it would show them that you're not a coward who takes away people's rights at every given opportunity. We failed to demonstrate that in the US, and the terrorists subsequently emerged victorious because of our cowardice.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    12. Re:Cry me a river by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      Ah, but whose? There needs to be some oversight at the very least.

      Also, in this case, they're just harassing random people who they deem "suspicious" (which is ambiguous). Though I suppose you were just reacting to my overly broad statement that you should just accept that there are sometimes casualties, and took this to mean that no one's privacy should ever be violated under any circumstances. Is this wrong?

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    13. Re:Cry me a river by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      So it's selective harassment, then?

      No, it's selective deep investigation. It is only harassment if they pick people at random, or for reasons unrelated to their being a potential security threat.

      The point of accessing email is not to foil devious plots, but to look for further corroborating evidence. If a guy with the appropriate background has, say, YouTube comment notifications from a video titled "Let's dedicate our lives to jihad", he may or may not be involved in any devious plots (or he may not be involved yet, but will get involved later), but the risk is high enough that he should be denied entry.

      Remember, we're not talking about citizens in their day to day life here. This is citizens of other countries crossing the border. Requirements for warrants and such have never applied in such circumstances in any country I can think of.

      This tells me that you'd accept the TSA if its current policies were actually effective at saving the lives of many, many people. If that is so, that also tells me just how much you truly care about freedom.

      Yes, I would accept TSA screening policies if they were actually effective and the threat was proportional (I don't believe the threat to US to be proportional, and I certainly don't believe them to be effective).

      The basic principle here is that freedoms may have be suspended in times of actual crisis to survive through it in a reasonable shape. A good example is a state of war - even the US constitution recognizes that e.g. habeas corpus can be suspended "in cases of rebellion or invasion". So even the Founding Fathers recognized that there are limits.

      So the only reasonable point to argue here is whether Israel is in sufficiently dire straits to justify an invasion of privacy of this magnitude. Given that it is limited in scope to non-citizens crossing their border, and given their recent history re: wars and terror attacks against their population, I believe that they are.

      At the very least, it would show them that you're not a coward who takes away people's rights at every given opportunity.

      It's not cowardly to dodge a punch that's actually thrown at you. The reason why US is the laughing stock of many other countries is because its security response was vastly disproportional to the threat, and also because measures taken were repeatedly shown to be useless to screen for actual threats.

    14. Re:Cry me a river by zipn00b · · Score: 1

      According to TFA it's only "exceptional" cases so it's not ordinarily going to take man-power away. Israel is anything but stupid when it comes to security and it doesn't appear this is any exception. I'd expect that the average tourist would have to try REALLY HARD to meet the criteria for the email check. TFA also mentions that denying them access to your email doesn't automatically mean you don't get into the country. I'll readily admit I don't care for that sort of policy but I also don't care for the policies the US has implemented since 9/11. I have no intentions of travelling to Israel and do my best to avoid flying in the US. But I would far rather deal with Israeli security than the circus we have in the US...........

      Interesting thing is I've had to deal with the increased security we have at US military bases since 9/11 and think it's rather overkill as well in many cases but at least I was getting paid to deal with that...... :)

    15. Re:Cry me a river by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      No, it's selective deep investigation. It is only harassment if they pick people at random, or for reasons unrelated to their being a potential security threat.

      So far, this sounds like selective harassment to me. What does it take for them to begin thinking that you're dangerous? What oversight is there?

      This is citizens of other countries crossing the border. Requirements for warrants and such have never applied in such circumstances in any country I can think of.

      I'm well aware of that, but I don't particularly care about what the law says at the moment. I disagree with many laws, after all.

      Yes, I would accept TSA screening policies if they were actually effective and the threat was proportional

      That doesn't surprise me.

      So even the Founding Fathers recognized that there are limits.

      I believe the founding fathers made a number of mistakes, and if I were given the chance, I would rectify them. I still believe they had many good ideas, though.

      So the only reasonable point to argue here is whether Israel is in sufficiently dire straits to justify an invasion of privacy of this magnitude.

      I'll decide for myself what is reasonable to argue about.

      If you want to talk effectiveness, I very highly doubt that someone who is truly dangerous (and I do not consider any old incompetent bomber truly dangerous) would be defeated because someone took a look at his/her emails.

      It's not cowardly to dodge a punch that's actually thrown at you.

      Infringing upon people's rights is quite different than dodging a punch. The only one affected by a punch is you, and you're simply defending yourself. When a government takes actions such as this, though, it results in the loss of freedom and privacy for many people.

      The reason why US is the laughing stock of many other countries is because its security response was vastly disproportional to the threat, and also because measures taken were repeatedly shown to be useless to screen for actual threats.

      The number of people who actually value freedom are small even among those who oppose the TSA, it seems.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
  25. Wow. Impressive. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You do know what country Ben Gurion airport is in, right? Despite what you may have heard, Israel != The United States. This means if you never travel to or through or even over or near the US, you could STILL end up going through BG, and be subject to this pointless bit of security theater. Did you even read the article?

    Also... on the subject of security theater, since I now know about this, all it means is I must set up a dummy e-mail account to "hand-over" to authorities next time I pass through Ben Gurion (which coincidentally will be just a week or two after NEVER.) They can check THAT e-mail all they want. The only step beyond what any prudent person takes when traveling with a computer nowadays is to delete all cookies, etc., or IMAP or POP configurations, so the machine can't tell them anything about your REAL e-mail account no matter what they ask.

    In fact, I would, if I traveled regularly, have a travel machine that booted off a stick, maybe even had no HDD, and never use it to process any info I consider private or sensitive. It seems this is just common sense today. As for the stick, I'd have that concealed somewhere they wouldn't find it.

  26. Re:Jews by WaywardGeek · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    I "read" ebooks now at 600 to 800 words per minute by listening to text-to-speech wav files sped up by 3-4X. If you're stuck reading at average or below speed, I can forgive you for being somewhat ignorant of history. I was until I started speed listening. By "we", I assume you mean the USA. Britain bombed the heck out of Germany, far more than we did, and the Russians may have even outdone England. While the bombing was terrible, it was primarily communist Russia that defeated Germany. They both inflicted and took more casualties than the rest of us fighting Germany combined by something like a factor of 3X. That in part is why Russia was in military possession of so many countries at the end of the war, and why they felt they couldn't just go home after fighting so hard for every mile. The even greater casualties on the Russian side relative to Germany helps explain the rape an pillage by the communists as they rampaged through Europe, though Stalin encouraged it, and sh-t flows downhill. Are you confusing Nazi Germany with Japan? It's probably fair to say we bombed Japan into the stone age, partly with nuclear bombs, though our napalming of Japanese cities made of wood probably did far more damage. Now, this was all under a Democratic dominated government in the USA. Are they the single-issue party you are referring to?

    --
    Celebrate failure, and then learn from it - Nolan Bushnell
  27. They have asked to see e-documents for a long time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I have only traveled to Israel once. My passage in and out was very quick and easy. I spent less time in customs and security than I usually do flying into America. This may be because my company has a branch in Israel, and I think some pre-arrival and departure documentation was provided.

    However, already 5 years ago when I traveled there, it was well documented that security screeners would ask questions like:
    What do you do for a living? Why did you come to Israel? What did you do while you were here? etc.

    For example, if you said that you were a writer working on a book about early Christianity, they would ask you to fire up your laptop and show them some of your writing, notes, and pictures. They would take your laptop and read some of the documents. If your story and the documentation didn't match, you could expect a lot more questions.

    The fact that they have extended this to email does not surprise me much.

  28. Google is though and through Jewish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    including both founders. Why would they not give 'special access' to Mossad?

    1. Re:Google is though and through Jewish by Yoda222 · · Score: 2

      Why would they ?

  29. Well... by jonr · · Score: 4, Funny

    Time to register iloveisrael@gmail.com....

  30. Re:Fuck Israel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    protip: don't stand in front of bulldozers.

  31. Do they force you to install Windows 8 too? by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 2

    Then it would be too much.

  32. Well this is stupid. by seeker_1us · · Score: 1

    "We demand to see your email account."

    An email account isn't like a passport or other official document. It can be created, or deleted, on a whim. What kind of "security" do they think this will bring?

    1. Re:Well this is stupid. by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

      "We demand to see your email account."

      "Sure, let me just go over to Gmail and make one especially for you."

  33. Can I haz passw0rds? by TiggertheMad · · Score: 1

    I will be more than happy to show them any of the number of fake e-mail accounts that I maintain for spam. How exactly are they going to be able to tell that they aren't legitimate? Oh, they aren't. They want to go through my email, they will have to spend all afternoon picking through idiotic threads of forwarded cute cat pictures....

    Hey Israel, fuck you for being stupid.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
    1. Re:Can I haz passw0rds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, good luck with that.

      You seem to be forgetting this is not a trial. There is no burden of proof. If they suspect you're not being cooperative, they'll simply refuse entry.

      This is not SOP. If you're asked to do this, it means they suspect you of something. The burden of proof is on YOU.

    2. Re:Can I haz passw0rds? by CimmerianX · · Score: 1

      Exactly. How do they know that the email I give them is not a primary? Maybe I don't have an email address that I use at all? Lot's of older people don't use email. My grandma doesn't have one, would she be denied entry based on that 1 fact?

    3. Re:Can I haz passw0rds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually the young people today don't use email either...
      email is sooo old fashioned. it is only for old dudes you know :-D

  34. And this is why... by jon3k · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I have about a dozen email accounts.

  35. Remind me to never go in Israel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's enough space left in other places. I don't think people need to degrade themselves to this level to travel.

  36. If only that maxim also applied in the US... by KonoWatakushi · · Score: 2

    Thanks to lobbying, even in the US, Israel's interests are often placed above that of Americans. For a recent example, see this.

  37. Re:Fuck Israel by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 1

    Actually, Rachel Corrie put herself in harm's way where the bulldozer driver could not see her. She committed suicide by bulldozer, dude. Check the facts. That's why the driver was cleared, she idiotically placed herself in a position the driver simply could not see and therefore could not stop. Same would happen to the idiots that walk in front of buses in every city when they are jabbering on their cellphones.

  38. Stupid and ineffective by gweihir · · Score: 1

    Any competent attacker will just set up a fake account or use a separate one for anything that would be suspicious. The Israelis used to really understand effective security. Seems that time is over and security theater has not taken over.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  39. No fly zone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ho hum...guess I'm adding another place to the "No fly zone" list then.

  40. Re:Fuck Israel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Same would happen to the idiots that walk in front of buses in every city when they are jabbering on their cellphones.

    It'd happen a lot more if the buses were 3 meter tall, the driver had a 5" viewport, and the front side of the bus was heavily armored.

    Fun fact, the armored D9 bulldozer was used in the area where Rachel Corrie died because of Palestinian terrorists' sniper fire on that day. Another fun fact, Rachel Corrie was not "protecting the house of a doctor" (who was not even a doctor) but a tunnel used by abovesaid Palestinian terrorists for smuggling weapons. And yet another fun fact, immediately after Corrie died, her enable organization ISM, a leftwing extremist organization famous for enabling and encouraging suicide bombings, posted fake pictures of the incident which were taken in another location, with another bulldozer, and with people photoshopped into them in order to create a false impression that the driver could see Corrie and therefore chose to drive the D9 over her, so that they could claim she was a martyr murdered by occupation forces.

  41. Big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They already know your email address, your password, and everything, they just want to make sure you're sincere.

  42. Which email? by Shag · · Score: 1

    This could give me a very good reason to stop deleting all the stuff I get on one of my dot-edu accounts.
    If there's anything that can incapacitate a Mossad agent, it's reading a few years of mail-to-all from vice-chancellors of whatever.

    If they insisted on accessing the address that's on my business cards, that might be almost as good, since my email at the dot-org that gives me business cards is full of nearly a decade worth of stuff about international policy on environment and development.

    I don't think I'd give them the other dot-edu, the dot-gov, or my personal account.

    --
    Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
  43. Don't care... by alci63 · · Score: 1

    I use SMIME to encrypt my mails! Oh wait... I use a certificate from StartSSL. Should I trust them?

  44. Say it ain't so! by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    So terrorists have to create a free email account if they want to travel?
    That will discourage them.

  45. That is a genius idea by Arancaytar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Because terrorists are way too dumb to sign up for more than one email account.

    1. Re:That is a genius idea by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

      Yeah well, I have about 10 junkmail accounts on outlook.com and I'm just a fairly ordinary geek, not a terrorist.

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
  46. Which Email Address Should I Give Them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's see, there's 3 on gmail, 4 on yahoo, 2 on hotmail, and over 100 on my own server. I think I'll give them one of the hotmail ones. They've got the most spam and will look pretty "used".

  47. not using email by FilatovEV · · Score: 1

    Israeli security officials at Ben Gurion airport are legally allowed to demand access to tourists' email accounts and deny them entry if they refuse

    What if I do not use email? Would I be allowed to enter Israel, or would I need to set up a fake account?

  48. Re:Don't think so... by RaceProUK · · Score: 2

    The british empire, happy to fight any man in the room as long as he's much shorter, starved, and they can sneak up behind him and hit him over the head with a baseball bat first.

    What, you don't always look for every advantage over who you're fighting?

    --
    No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
  49. it doesn't matter... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...if you don't like the rules, don't travel to Israel. Easy enough.

  50. Re:Wow. Impressive. by nedlohs · · Score: 1

    Sure, and when they see the amazingly blank email account they're fre to take that as suspicious and not let you in.

    If you have no friends or don't use email then don't look Arab while trying to enter Israel.

  51. Re:Don't think so... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh hail the mgihty Merkins , who like to pick on nations like Grenda , what did they threaten your pinapple growers or something?

    Land of the brave and home of the free and who never win a war when the natives can actually shoot back straight or were the French did the fighting and the Amerkins did the running away.

    American definition of winning a war , Invade Canada with the intention of sezing the whole country, get pushed back into your own country . Net result the borders stayed where they where at the start. VICTORY!

  52. Double Standard? by gstoddart · · Score: 0

    You know, Western countries are moving towards an appalling level of hypocrisy in this regard.

    If any other country did this, there would be howls of banana republics, references to the USSR, and comments on the rule of law. When the West does this, it's okay.

    So if someone put in a reciprocal policy that says "OK, we'll check all of the emails of people coming from Israel" there would be outrage, cries of anti-Semitism, and discrimination. Kinda like when the US said it was going to fingerprint visitors, and other countries started talking about the same thing.

    For all the chastising one hears of 'other countries' doing things which the West disagrees with, the trend is to do the exact same thing and say "yeah, but we're the good guys, so it's OK".

    I fear the terrorists have done far more damage than people realize, because what used to be our laws and rights are now mostly guidelines to be changed and ignored as they see fit.

    Countries are moving towards deciding their highest legal principles are something you can decide don't apply if it's expedient for your needs. At which all of this talk about democracy, freedom and rights is pretty much just lip-service.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:Double Standard? by Jiro · · Score: 1

      A policy "we'll check all the emails of people coming from Israel" would not be a reciprocal policy. A reciprocal policy would be "we'll check the emails of a few foreigners who we're really suspicious of and who we might otherwise not let in at all." The left would hate this because the US would then be doing profiling, but it would not exactly be the equivalent of the USSR.

  53. Deary me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A cricket bat, yes. Even a rounders bat but NOT a "baseball bat"!

    As for the rest, a rather warped and shall we say "inaccurate" interpretation of the facts?

    btw, perhaps you could suggest how an evacuation of troops off a shallow sloping beach to destroyers and merchant ships might be facilitated in a short time scale? Evacuating nearly 240000 troops in a period of some 10 days from start to finish under severe German interference was certainly a triumph of impromptu organisation by the British. Perhaps you should study the wikipedia entry Operation Dynamo Also consider the Battle of Britain, the action that followed immediately after Dunkirk. Hmmmm????

  54. Nothing new here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They've been demanding email access for years - this isn't anything new. They use this to try and identify Westeners visiting to campaign for Palestinian rights. When I last visited they deported an American Christian pastor who was going to the West Bank to spend a week helping Palestinians pick olives on their own land that Israeli settlers were trying to claim -- he was honest when questioned so was deported.

    Regulars are well versed in the Israeli security facade - it's easy to get around. It's just a case of keeping your name off the internet - if you comment on Palestinian rights on the internet then use a pseudonym. Have secondary Facebook, Twitter and Email accounts just to show the Israelis - with no controversial friends. Make sure your SD cards are blank as they often demand to examine photos. Avoid having stamps of Muslim countries (eg. Malaysia) in your passport. Ensure your phone is free of anything they might not like (eg. contacts, notes, emails). They search the luggage of many people leaving and some entering, so expect that and post back anything Palestinian related - eg. souvenirs and SD cards with photos.

    A friend got back last week and they searched his email & fb - he said he was lucky as he had a Google News alert on Israel and there were hundreds of emails - those fortunately obscured some email exchanges with Palestinian activists. He was let in.

    The whole thing is a joke .. anyone they don't like is likely to know how to get around it. The publicity is only likely to put off tourists.

  55. Not a big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If you don't like their policy, you can just choose not to enter the country, no big deal - it's not as if you were you were arrested but the government refuses to Mirandize you...

  56. Re:Don't think so... by tehcyder · · Score: 1

    I take it you're a neo-nazi Yank who's disappointed Hitler lost and has a large collection of swastika armbands?

    --
    To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  57. bogus email? by schlachter · · Score: 2

    Why not have a 2nd email account that you use for travel confirmations, bookings, etc. that you can share if needed while protecting your true email account?

    i like how Israel uses a human approach to security, and doesn't just radiate us to death for security theater purposes like the TSA.

    --
    My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
  58. Re:Trip to Israel cancelled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As anatheist(emphasis mine), I'm concerned whenever traveling to any country/society that allows religion into the culture so completely. On the whole, I think religion has been a terrible thing for humans over the last 10,000 yrs. Once in a while, religion has been helpful to hide things from governments, but that hasn't been worth all the suffering cause to billions of people over all of time. Just look at what christians and jews and muslims have done to themselves over the last 200 years. Sad. Very sad.

    If you desire not to be flagged for hypocrisy in your Atheism (fighting hypocrisy IS a sacrament in Atheism), you better start criticizing some non-Abrahamic religions in your posts. Reincarnation does not absolve guilt for violence committed.

  59. Our Shared Rules by andersh · · Score: 1

    While Israel is a sovereign nation, it is also a signatory to a number of human rights conventions... They've voluntarily given themselves restrictions on what laws they can make and how they apply them.

    The Universal Declaration of Human Rights' Article 12 says:

    "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks."

    http://www.hri.org/docs/UDHR48.html

    1. Re:Our Shared Rules by deadweight · · Score: 1

      I think they violate that stuff about 10,000 times a day even without the email thing.

  60. always better than amerikans customs security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ps ...so if in israel they are strict/invasive (and i experienced it also, and to me they were gentle despite a libyc stamp on my passport) it is never like the amerikans !
    this is my story of the u.s. customs security...

    my name is paolo ventura. i am from italy (rome). i am 46 years old now. i live in italy.
    i have lived in new york city for less than a couple of years as "tourist" and student.
    i left your nyc february/2011.

    i am going to bother you with a silly story: my experience with u.s. "department of homeland security customs and border protection".

    i am quite sure you wouldn't be interested in, but i am going to write it anyway, just to vent out my rage ..to try to loosen up and forget forever these unfortunate events. and maybe you might give me some advices ?!

    first of all, please forgive my disconnected speech and english.

    and secondly let me say that i understand how delicate it could be the work of a policeman.

    especially after 9/11 (my american girlfriend is a surivor. she was in one of the tower).

    so, i understand all.

    what i can't understand is why most of the policemen at the customs control of the nyc airports have to be so mean, unkind, abusive, arrogant and bad as if they find pleasure in harass people, as if they have subtle sadistic low instincts to leak.

    i think ..if you want to inquiry me, because you think i did something wrong/illegal you can do it in a different way... maybe not politely, but at least dry/plain/coldly.

    why in that area you loose any rights civil, legal, human ?!

    aren't we talking about u.s. country ?!

    the big country, the "freedom" nation ?! ...anyway i gave up. i will not try to enter anymore your land.

    and this is my story (or maybe the story of what happen daily at the u.s. border).

    i have worked for 20 years in the "information technology" field, in italy. but i was sick and tired of

    so, i "exploited" the situation of my company (that was in crisis) and via the italian union i signed an agreement to be in a kind of "sabbatical" for four (4) years.

    during which i earn a subsidy, montly (i know it sounds strange but in italy social welfare in some cases could be very advantageous. in many other not).

    then i rented my apartment in rome, to get another income.

    so with both earnings i could count on 2000 $/month ish

    in 2010 i decided to leave italy. to go to new york city. to study english and see if there were new routes to walk.

    the first of may i arrived in nyc with the tourist visa program, called "esta" - the one who allows you to stay for three months (90 days).

    i did use it twice with no issues. the first three months i went to an english school, then quit. and the followings i used to meet american people privately and "exchange" languages, italian for english.

    so, i met lot of people ! i was deep in love with nyc !

    november/9/2010, the third time i arrived in nyc. always using "esta" visa. customs policemen brought me to their office.

    of course, question was: how could i have been living there for six months, without a job ?!

    i explained about my incomes showing also the printout of my bank account with the transactions.

    of course, they didn't believe me. they told me i was an "abuser" of the visa program "esta".

    several policemen "interviewed" me about what, why, where, which, whatever.whatnot.

    their strategy is alternate a good, kind cop follow by a mean one.

    they suggested me to tell the truth because i was high risking (but i was telling the truth).

    time passed one of them called me in a hallway and asked me the wallet.

    he will found 2 different kind of business cards. one as photographer, the other as personal chef - with internet blog address and phone number, too.

    as a matter of fact i wasn't any of the two (just a big passionate about).

    but the price to print 500 of them was only 10

  61. Re:Trip to Israel cancelled by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

    He doesn't have to insult every conceivable religion in existence in order to not be a hypocrite, and it seems silly to say otherwise.

    --
    Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
  62. No Problems by Optali · · Score: 1

    No probs, go ahead... And despite looking legit don't answer to the mail from the widow of the former president of Nigeria.

    --
    -- 29A the number of the Beast
  63. Re:Don't think so... by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

    If Britain, its Dominions and Empire hadn't stood up to the Germans in 1940, the Germans and Russians would have carved up Europe between them. Then could you imagine Stalin and Hitler having any sort of "peaceful co-existence"?

    So the Brits forced Hitler to attack Russia?

    Hitler never was interested in a "peaceful coexistence" with Stalin. All he was interested in was that Stalin thought he'd be safe from Hitler until Hitler actually attacked.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  64. Demo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Demowhat?