This myth of peace loving Israel that only acts in self defence is deeply engrained in its apologists (which includes much of the west). In addition to the other actions quoted above, lets provide some obvious ones.
Egypt, 1956.in response to the nationalisation of the Suez canal. Yes, this set the Israeli standard for what is considered offensive action by its neighbours,
Egypt, Syria and Jordan 1967. Although it is widely alleged that this was in response to a joint plan by these countries to attack Israel, the military offense was all Israeli and without warning or any actual attack.
Egypt and Syria, 1973. Note that while Egypt and Syria had attacked Israeli positions, these were to reoccupy land occupied by Israel in 1966 and Israel's borders were never threatened; the Syrians even stopped on the Golan when they could have carried on.
Well, if tax rates are 100% then there is no disposable money left, so no economic activity and no tax revenue
No economic activity at 100%? The citizenry may not be spending money but the government will still be doing so; if the money is not spent it will be a meaningless concept. If in this hypothetical situation the government spends the money to to cater adequately for all citizens needs (i.e. the nation becomes an utopian socialism), then there is in theory no problem. It is not necessary for the government to spend the money itself, it is perfectly possible for the government to give every citizen an allowance to spend according their wishes.
Don't ask for examples; this is just a rebuttal of the quoted statement, which is not 'obviously correct'. I appreciate it might make more sense in the context of monetarist economics. But that comes with a whole load of preconceptions, which you have taken for granted.
In my experience the British police are rarely bucolic [http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bucolic]; in common with the rest of the population, most live and work in the cities.
In support of the comments that this industry can be brought out; I refer you to this interesting comparison on what entertainment is worth, even if it is both UK specific and music specific. From http://www.telegraph.co.uk/gardening/3343543/Country-roses-A-cut-above.html. The value of retail cut flowers (e.g. roses for your mother when she is in hospital) in the UK is about the same as that for music. It puts it all in perspective, especially when you consider that flower growers do not lobby governments to prevent us from giving our home grown roses to our friends.
No, it has to do with most current representations of democracy. The elected representatives do not act in the best interest of the electors, they can and very often will be be corrupted by monied interests. Now, if any elected representative was elected on a contract, that they could be tried by his / her electors at any time after the election, even if retired, and punished if it was found their actions were not in the elector's best interest, that might help. Perhaps with a shooting squad in the background and an occasional execution to give it teeth.
"when Charles II was crowned king of England in 1660, the coronation sparked the Enlightenment era in Europe"
Talk about Anglocentrism! Are they sure it was not the fact that he was crowned king of Scotland and Wales at the same time that caused the Enlightenment?
Basically, the British judges are out of control. And the judges are the problem here. No sensible judge concerned with the dignity of his office would issue such a ridiculous gag order for twitter users.
It should be 'some British judges are out of control', and it is about more than the dignity of their office. To forbid someone from talking to their member of Parliament on any matter that concerns them is, to me anyway, interference with the functioning of Parliament. The proper action here would be for the House of Commons to impeach the judge responsible. Will they do so, given that MP's have slipped into a well established role as lobby fodder rather than the supreme authority in the land that they should be, is another matter.
The English language website http://english.cntv.cn/01/index.shtml has it on the front page, second item. The headline is, interestingly, "Chinese citizens not injured in Egypt", which suggests that they are as willing as anyone to see and report things from their own perspective.
From a quick look, it it does not mention Russia or India either. It does mention the USA. That's just three of the world's four most populous countries. You have found an official state journal, for a state that is not commenting on something that does not concern it or its citizens. Possibly only because it does not have the resources, but nevertheless a commendable attitude.
How was this incident "harrowing"? Was the land surface of Manhattan torn up to several inches deep? Were people's feelings deeply and permanently hurt by this flight? Or is this another journalist using a long word that he/she does not actually have any idea of the meaning of but thinks it makes them sound good?
If it was hidden behind a badly done pay wall, I think it fairly clearly implies you should be paying first, even if the technical side is a debacle.... leaving something unprotected is no more implying access than leaving your front door open. It's bloody stupid, but that's another matter entirely...
Anything on the internet that is reachable without security is public by definition. Doesn't matter if it was also 'behind' a paywall; it it could be reached by a straightforward url without going through the paywall, then it was public. And it is a false analogy to compare it to the front door of a private house; it was a business website that invited access, even if it only wanted paying access. Using the locked door analogy, it is as if a pay to view facility (a cinema or museum say) had a pay counter on one street door, but left another open.
According to the LA times article, the state mineral is gold!
Do they know that gold is a heavy metal, and as poisonous as lead? (Yes alright, I know it has get into your blood in soluble form or something, and that is a bit difficult to manage, but if it did happen, it would be poisonous).
It's not just pollinating insects. Beneficial insects and arachnids (ladybirds and their larvae, all manner of spiders) as well as birds could be cooked. Only a millimetre penetration into human flesh is a small fraction of our total volume, we're big creatures and may just feel some pain, but a millimetre into an insect will probably kill it. This has all the potential that the catchall insecticides like DDT of previous decades had, to cause environmental devastation.
Openstreetmap is good and useful if you don't want to fork out money. But it suffers from some vandalism, and some bad data. It needs more quality control if I'm going to depend on it in a remote location or when a life may be at stake. It will probably get more QC and then end up with some of the negative points that Wikipedia has.
Acknowledged; I did know that, even though it had slipped my mind. However, let's not fragment opposition more than is needed. I have previously voted Green and intend to do that again, because of their other policies. I understand that not everyone who agrees with me on open rights will want to vote that way.
Is fielding candidates the best course, for a single issue group like yours? I am in agreement with you on this subject. However I have multiple other concerns, including the economy, equalities issues, environmental issues, foreign relations. Are you going to address these, and if you do, what are the chances that I will still be in agreement?
It seems to me that a better course would be to form a pressure group to exert influence on copyright and related matters, on all politicians. As it is, the likely poor showing you will get will enable politicians to say that your concerns have been rejected by the electorate.
The "user" being referred to in the quote is UK government staff, using UK government IT, and his response is wholly within that context.
The Slashdot story may have 'shifted the context', but this may be less significant than the shift in the original answer. The question by Lord Avebury was about 'public sector' users. The answer however was restricted to government staff. In much normal usage, public sector does not equal goverment. "Public sector" includes health service, local goverment, quangos, et.c. The term "goverment" may or may not include these, though it does usually exclude quangos. In any case, the public sector group includes a variety of IT management methods and it is quite likely that some of these have less adequately managed IT than others.
I have to admit that I don't know how far the modern car depends on electronics when in motion. I'd like to see a study on what happens to cars if their electrics and electronics die (or get fried) suddenly at speed, till then I'll assume that there is potential for disaster.
BTW, it is an electromagnetic device by definition; it induces current in a distant conductor. If it is adequately directed, that is one thing, but then the question was what else could be in that direction. I've no idea about the camera of course, maybe it was an old style hand cranked roll film camera immune to all EMP!
(ps. not only is universal health care a good thing, it is socialist also.)
Nothing, because those vehicles are off and wouldn't be affected.
Wrong. They would be affected, since EM induction occurs anyway, whether things are on or off. What you mean is that the cars would not crash if they are not moving. You would probably find that you have to replace all the electronics and some of the electrical components before you could restart those cars however. And the dealership would likely also lose all its computers, communications, and anything else electronic on the site, whether on or off.
Slashdot Mirror
This myth of peace loving Israel that only acts in self defence is deeply engrained in its apologists (which includes much of the west). In addition to the other actions quoted above, lets provide some obvious ones.
Egypt, 1956.in response to the nationalisation of the Suez canal. Yes, this set the Israeli standard for what is considered offensive action by its neighbours,
Egypt, Syria and Jordan 1967. Although it is widely alleged that this was in response to a joint plan by these countries to attack Israel, the military offense was all Israeli and without warning or any actual attack.
Egypt and Syria, 1973. Note that while Egypt and Syria had attacked Israeli positions, these were to reoccupy land occupied by Israel in 1966 and Israel's borders were never threatened; the Syrians even stopped on the Golan when they could have carried on.
Well, if tax rates are 100% then there is no disposable money left, so no economic activity and no tax revenue
No economic activity at 100%? The citizenry may not be spending money but the government will still be doing so; if the money is not spent it will be a meaningless concept. If in this hypothetical situation the government spends the money to to cater adequately for all citizens needs (i.e. the nation becomes an utopian socialism), then there is in theory no problem. It is not necessary for the government to spend the money itself, it is perfectly possible for the government to give every citizen an allowance to spend according their wishes. Don't ask for examples; this is just a rebuttal of the quoted statement, which is not 'obviously correct'. I appreciate it might make more sense in the context of monetarist economics. But that comes with a whole load of preconceptions, which you have taken for granted.
In my experience the British police are rarely bucolic [http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bucolic]; in common with the rest of the population, most live and work in the cities.
That's what it is, a remote tool controlled by the surgeon. Not a robot which would work independently.
A hobo could plant seeds and water a flower .
So why don't you get that hobo to do it for you and get yourself that UK floral market?
In support of the comments that this industry can be brought out; I refer you to this interesting comparison on what entertainment is worth, even if it is both UK specific and music specific. From http://www.telegraph.co.uk/gardening/3343543/Country-roses-A-cut-above.html. The value of retail cut flowers (e.g. roses for your mother when she is in hospital) in the UK is about the same as that for music. It puts it all in perspective, especially when you consider that flower growers do not lobby governments to prevent us from giving our home grown roses to our friends.
No, it has to do with most current representations of democracy. The elected representatives do not act in the best interest of the electors, they can and very often will be be corrupted by monied interests. Now, if any elected representative was elected on a contract, that they could be tried by his / her electors at any time after the election, even if retired, and punished if it was found their actions were not in the elector's best interest, that might help. Perhaps with a shooting squad in the background and an occasional execution to give it teeth.
"when Charles II was crowned king of England in 1660, the coronation sparked the Enlightenment era in Europe"
Talk about Anglocentrism! Are they sure it was not the fact that he was crowned king of Scotland and Wales at the same time that caused the Enlightenment?
Basically, the British judges are out of control. And the judges are the problem here. No sensible judge concerned with the dignity of his office would issue such a ridiculous gag order for twitter users.
It should be 'some British judges are out of control', and it is about more than the dignity of their office. To forbid someone from talking to their member of Parliament on any matter that concerns them is, to me anyway, interference with the functioning of Parliament. The proper action here would be for the House of Commons to impeach the judge responsible. Will they do so, given that MP's have slipped into a well established role as lobby fodder rather than the supreme authority in the land that they should be, is another matter.
The English language website http://english.cntv.cn/01/index.shtml has it on the front page, second item. The headline is, interestingly, "Chinese citizens not injured in Egypt", which suggests that they are as willing as anyone to see and report things from their own perspective.
From a quick look, it it does not mention Russia or India either. It does mention the USA. That's just three of the world's four most populous countries. You have found an official state journal, for a state that is not commenting on something that does not concern it or its citizens. Possibly only because it does not have the resources, but nevertheless a commendable attitude.
How was this incident "harrowing"? Was the land surface of Manhattan torn up to several inches deep? Were people's feelings deeply and permanently hurt by this flight? Or is this another journalist using a long word that he/she does not actually have any idea of the meaning of but thinks it makes them sound good?
See http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/harrow
If it was hidden behind a badly done pay wall, I think it fairly clearly implies you should be paying first, even if the technical side is a debacle.... leaving something unprotected is no more implying access than leaving your front door open. It's bloody stupid, but that's another matter entirely...
Anything on the internet that is reachable without security is public by definition. Doesn't matter if it was also 'behind' a paywall; it it could be reached by a straightforward url without going through the paywall, then it was public. And it is a false analogy to compare it to the front door of a private house; it was a business website that invited access, even if it only wanted paying access. Using the locked door analogy, it is as if a pay to view facility (a cinema or museum say) had a pay counter on one street door, but left another open.
Keep in mind that people who make just $159,619 or more are in the top 5% of wage earners, but pay 58% of all income taxes.
Do by any chance the top 5% of wage earners also get an undue percentage of the total of all income?
Source: WikiLeaks & ABC News (Al Jazeera claims to have found far more embarrassing records but I went with ABC for obvious reasons.)
So, why it is obvious that you should go with a mainstream US news source rather than an Arab one?
What information in a SVG would be useful to a searcher?
Think of maps and the text in them for a start.
According to the LA times article, the state mineral is gold! Do they know that gold is a heavy metal, and as poisonous as lead? (Yes alright, I know it has get into your blood in soluble form or something, and that is a bit difficult to manage, but if it did happen, it would be poisonous).
But they don't all have homes to go to, like some bees (not all) do.
It's not just pollinating insects. Beneficial insects and arachnids (ladybirds and their larvae, all manner of spiders) as well as birds could be cooked. Only a millimetre penetration into human flesh is a small fraction of our total volume, we're big creatures and may just feel some pain, but a millimetre into an insect will probably kill it. This has all the potential that the catchall insecticides like DDT of previous decades had, to cause environmental devastation.
Openstreetmap is good and useful if you don't want to fork out money. But it suffers from some vandalism, and some bad data. It needs more quality control if I'm going to depend on it in a remote location or when a life may be at stake. It will probably get more QC and then end up with some of the negative points that Wikipedia has.
Acknowledged; I did know that, even though it had slipped my mind. However, let's not fragment opposition more than is needed. I have previously voted Green and intend to do that again, because of their other policies. I understand that not everyone who agrees with me on open rights will want to vote that way.
Is fielding candidates the best course, for a single issue group like yours? I am in agreement with you on this subject. However I have multiple other concerns, including the economy, equalities issues, environmental issues, foreign relations. Are you going to address these, and if you do, what are the chances that I will still be in agreement? It seems to me that a better course would be to form a pressure group to exert influence on copyright and related matters, on all politicians. As it is, the likely poor showing you will get will enable politicians to say that your concerns have been rejected by the electorate.
The "user" being referred to in the quote is UK government staff, using UK government IT, and his response is wholly within that context.
The Slashdot story may have 'shifted the context', but this may be less significant than the shift in the original answer. The question by Lord Avebury was about 'public sector' users. The answer however was restricted to government staff. In much normal usage, public sector does not equal goverment. "Public sector" includes health service, local goverment, quangos, et.c. The term "goverment" may or may not include these, though it does usually exclude quangos. In any case, the public sector group includes a variety of IT management methods and it is quite likely that some of these have less adequately managed IT than others.
I have to admit that I don't know how far the modern car depends on electronics when in motion. I'd like to see a study on what happens to cars if their electrics and electronics die (or get fried) suddenly at speed, till then I'll assume that there is potential for disaster.
BTW, it is an electromagnetic device by definition; it induces current in a distant conductor. If it is adequately directed, that is one thing, but then the question was what else could be in that direction. I've no idea about the camera of course, maybe it was an old style hand cranked roll film camera immune to all EMP!
(ps. not only is universal health care a good thing, it is socialist also.)
Nothing, because those vehicles are off and wouldn't be affected.
Wrong. They would be affected, since EM induction occurs anyway, whether things are on or off. What you mean is that the cars would not crash if they are not moving. You would probably find that you have to replace all the electronics and some of the electrical components before you could restart those cars however. And the dealership would likely also lose all its computers, communications, and anything else electronic on the site, whether on or off.