Most of the hate is coming from the fact of the permanent war with Palestinians.
A "war" which the rest of the region and Arab countries could have solved decades ago if they'd actually wanted to. There were as many Jews chucked out of Arab countries after 1948 as Palestinians uprooted by the creation of Israel. It should have been possible to balance things up quite easily, but unfortunately countries like Syria and Egypt were more interested in treating Israel as an enemy which they thought they'd be able to eradicate militarily.
Part of the hatred of the Jews can be traced to the increase in atheism. If you look at alot of the atheism groups you find anti-Jewish commentary by the majority and the belief that the destruction of Israel and destruction of all people with the Jewish beliefs would solve alot of the worlds problems.
Your post is proof that, no matter how much stupid shit you've read in your life, someone on the internet is capable of saying something stupider.
As applied to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, evolutionary biologists (in Science 18 May 2012 for example) have found in human societies at all times and all places are capable not only of first, destroying their enemies with war, but second, reconciling themselves with their enemies. The Israels have excelled at the first but not the second.
It's hard to reconcile yourselves to enemies who don't think you should exist in the first place.
Israel isn't stupid to use nukes in any major conflict in their immediate neighbourhood. That would be MAD.
No it wouldn't be Mutually Assured Destruction, as none of their neighbours have nukes. It would, however, be vastly disproportionate and would lead to all its allies severing links.
Israel's nukes are a last resort against (a) someone like Iran acquiring nukes and launching a suicide strike and (b) some improbable co-ordinated attack by conventional Arab forces that crippled Israel's armed forces and led to the prospect of an invasion and massacre of the population.
I don't blame the US government in this, the US citizens at the time could hardly be roused to the massive threat of Imperial Japan (just as they cannot be roused to worry about the threat from growing international militant Islam).
Comparing the threat of Imperial Japan to that of a bunch of terrorists is ludicrous. And even if all the militant Islamic countries joined together to form a military coalition they still wouldn't have a chance of inflicting much damage.
For the situation to be so bad that Pakistan would use its nuclear weapons on the US (and be completely annihilated in return) is to enter the realms of fantasy
Civilian germans cheered V2 rockets hitting London during WWII. The name V2 was even chosen for propaganda purposes, as it means "Vengeance Weapon 2" Should the allies then have designated the entire german population as enemy combatants?
Yes, we did. Something like the firebombing of Dresden was done to show the Germans we could be as ruthless as they were in our treatment of "civilians", a term which is close to meaningless when you are engaged in modern warfare. The farmer growing food to feed the factory workers who are manufacturing tanks is just as legitimate a target as the tank driver when it comes down to it.
Most of the trouble spots in the world today can be traced to the British Empire. It's time for the British and other colonial nations to face up to the disaster they caused the rest of the world and start paying reparations.
Similarly, the US should pay reparations to all the slaves from Africa and the Native Americans, and send all the invading French, British, Germans etc back home to Europe. Same with the Spanish and Portugese from South America.
FBI saying the opposite is hardly more credible then Kim Dotcom, I do not trust both of them.
It would be newsworthy if they found a trustworthy government agency or a trustworthy politican or laywer.
The cynicism of 13 year olds gets quite tiresome after a while.
Entrapment? OK, maybe there was entrapment, but why would the FBI even need to do that? Megaupload was swamped with freely downloadable copyrighted material. Users paying for premium access to download that stuff was Megaload's cheif source of income.
Most likely because, any time someone gave them a correct notice, Megaupload would delete that stuff on demand. This means that what they were doing was legal under the terms of the DMCA and equivalent rules all around the world. The FBI needed a way to interfere with that process so that Megaupload would behave "illegally" so that by the time they found out about the trick, the FBI would have got some dirt on them (on the principle that everybody is guilty; they just don't know it yet).
Anything megaupload deleted following a DMCA request could immediately be posted again by someone else.
Most criminals are good at following the letter of the law but breaking its spirit.
The police don't care who their guy is; They just need a guy. There are no innocent people in the world anymore... there's just guilty, and not yet guilty.
Yeah, Kim Dotcom was just a guy in the wrong place at the wrong time who happened to have made tens of millions off copyright infringement.
"According to an article on the New Zealand Herald, Kim Dotcom says..."
Uh huh.
Careful, you're not allowed to attack that slimy fucking con man on slashdot. He's become a sort of modern day Robin Hood here, stealing from the rich to give to...himself.
You bend over and get fucked, me, i'm going to fight it.
Yeah, fight the fucking power. You use your weapons cache to stop ZOG from interfering with your constitutional right to download Rihanna songs and Transformer movies without paying.
You'll have to excuse the overwhelming majority of humanity who don't follow you out onto the barricades over this issue.
If the cost of free, unregulatable speech is the existance of some unobtrusive kiddie porn sites, then I'd consider that an acceptable cost.
I wouldn't. The fact that the nice paedophiles aren't shoving their stuff in your face does not mean it's not there. Images and videos of child abuse are illegal and should not be protected by any bollocks about "free speech": they are recordings of criminal activity and therefore quite justifiably banned. Except in people's libertarian wet dreams, any sane society must have rules and laws in order to remain civilised. Your right to free speech most certainly does not extend to a right to break any law you feel like.
People like you should be co-operating with the authorities in reporting and hopefully tracking down paedophiles when you come across their spoor, not wittering on about the non-existent rights of disgusting criminals.
Big Media fought them all and take huge portions of the revenues of these other businesses for themselves. It's more than disliking people not paying for content. They presume domain over ALL content whether it's actually theirs or not. People routinely create their own only to have to taken down by DMCA demand. They are assaulting all content and delivery methods until they get paid.
Their 'rights' go to far and they are buying newer, better and more powerful rights every day.
If you get a DMCA takedown and you have not infringed on copyright, you should argue against it.
If you get rid of the MPAA/RIAA and have a new generation of artists who can't make much money themselves (because their product is freely distributable) but are extremely popular, it just means that someone else is getting rich off them instead; and that someone will basically be Google or whatever rival search/host/advertising company replaces them.
No. The content industry has a continuous campaign against internet companies which help to distribute material. The same players have gotten other country's law enforcement to act on their behalf even when what they were doing wasn't actually illegal. Getting the US enforcement agencies (note I did not call them law enforcement... just 'enforcement') to break the law in such an overt way is proof of the power and influence these content providers carry.
I will not miss them. They are a cancer on progress. Volunteer entertainers are popping up everywhere just to get a million likes instead of a million dollars. They can't compete against that kind of currency.
In the UK, the "government" refers to the majority party in power. So at the moment the government is made up of a Tory/LibDem coalition, there is a Tory prime minister, and so on. You wouldn't say that Labour MPs are part of the government. Organisations like the police or military or social services are part of the state, but not really controlled by the government in any direct way.
Likewise, all of MU's customers have been stuck without their files.
It must be scary living in your world where the only copy of your data is tied up with a legally dubious operation run by a well known fraudster and con man.
There're some that think that Argentina had every right to take over the Falkland Islands (they call it Malvinas), and yet, there were consequences.
The Argentinians were lucky Britain didn't nuke Buenos Aires. As it turned out, the main consequence (apart from the unnecessary loss of life) was the overthrow of General Galtieri and his bunch of weak-minded fascists and the introduction of what passes for democracy in South America..
That's good to know, but doesn't really need to be stated as downloading is not a crime.
Copyright infringement is illegal in the sense that you can be sued for it under civil law, but not generally a criminal offence, although this is in the process of changing in places like the US.
Slashdot Mirror
To paraphrase Marx, opium is the religion of the thinking classes.
Because the magical man in the sky told them to.
I'm an atheist, but even I would say that that's a fairly childish way of summarising thousands of years of culture, politics and history.
Most of the hate is coming from the fact of the permanent war with Palestinians.
A "war" which the rest of the region and Arab countries could have solved decades ago if they'd actually wanted to. There were as many Jews chucked out of Arab countries after 1948 as Palestinians uprooted by the creation of Israel. It should have been possible to balance things up quite easily, but unfortunately countries like Syria and Egypt were more interested in treating Israel as an enemy which they thought they'd be able to eradicate militarily.
Part of the hatred of the Jews can be traced to the increase in atheism. If you look at alot of the atheism groups you find anti-Jewish commentary by the majority and the belief that the destruction of Israel and destruction of all people with the Jewish beliefs would solve alot of the worlds problems.
Your post is proof that, no matter how much stupid shit you've read in your life, someone on the internet is capable of saying something stupider.
Can they ban Donald Trump, too?
Wouldn't a drone attack be more effective?
As applied to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, evolutionary biologists (in Science 18 May 2012 for example) have found in human societies at all times and all places are capable not only of first, destroying their enemies with war, but second, reconciling themselves with their enemies. The Israels have excelled at the first but not the second.
It's hard to reconcile yourselves to enemies who don't think you should exist in the first place.
Israel isn't stupid to use nukes in any major conflict in their immediate neighbourhood. That would be MAD.
No it wouldn't be Mutually Assured Destruction, as none of their neighbours have nukes. It would, however, be vastly disproportionate and would lead to all its allies severing links.
Israel's nukes are a last resort against (a) someone like Iran acquiring nukes and launching a suicide strike and (b) some improbable co-ordinated attack by conventional Arab forces that crippled Israel's armed forces and led to the prospect of an invasion and massacre of the population.
I don't blame the US government in this, the US citizens at the time could hardly be roused to the massive threat of Imperial Japan (just as they cannot be roused to worry about the threat from growing international militant Islam).
Comparing the threat of Imperial Japan to that of a bunch of terrorists is ludicrous. And even if all the militant Islamic countries joined together to form a military coalition they still wouldn't have a chance of inflicting much damage.
For the situation to be so bad that Pakistan would use its nuclear weapons on the US (and be completely annihilated in return) is to enter the realms of fantasy
Civilian germans cheered V2 rockets hitting London during WWII. The name V2 was even chosen for propaganda purposes, as it means "Vengeance Weapon 2" Should the allies then have designated the entire german population as enemy combatants?
Yes, we did. Something like the firebombing of Dresden was done to show the Germans we could be as ruthless as they were in our treatment of "civilians", a term which is close to meaningless when you are engaged in modern warfare. The farmer growing food to feed the factory workers who are manufacturing tanks is just as legitimate a target as the tank driver when it comes down to it.
Most of the trouble spots in the world today can be traced to the British Empire. It's time for the British and other colonial nations to face up to the disaster they caused the rest of the world and start paying reparations.
Similarly, the US should pay reparations to all the slaves from Africa and the Native Americans, and send all the invading French, British, Germans etc back home to Europe. Same with the Spanish and Portugese from South America.
Egypt has chosen to keep its border closed because Israel begged them to.
Yeah, that sounds really likely. I'm sure the sovereign state of Egypt acted against its own good intentions just to keep Israel happy.
FBI saying the opposite is hardly more credible then Kim Dotcom, I do not trust both of them. It would be newsworthy if they found a trustworthy government agency or a trustworthy politican or laywer.
The cynicism of 13 year olds gets quite tiresome after a while.
Entrapment? OK, maybe there was entrapment, but why would the FBI even need to do that? Megaupload was swamped with freely downloadable copyrighted material. Users paying for premium access to download that stuff was Megaload's cheif source of income.
Most likely because, any time someone gave them a correct notice, Megaupload would delete that stuff on demand. This means that what they were doing was legal under the terms of the DMCA and equivalent rules all around the world. The FBI needed a way to interfere with that process so that Megaupload would behave "illegally" so that by the time they found out about the trick, the FBI would have got some dirt on them (on the principle that everybody is guilty; they just don't know it yet).
Anything megaupload deleted following a DMCA request could immediately be posted again by someone else.
Most criminals are good at following the letter of the law but breaking its spirit.
The police don't care who their guy is; They just need a guy. There are no innocent people in the world anymore... there's just guilty, and not yet guilty.
Yeah, Kim Dotcom was just a guy in the wrong place at the wrong time who happened to have made tens of millions off copyright infringement.
"According to an article on the New Zealand Herald, Kim Dotcom says..." Uh huh.
Careful, you're not allowed to attack that slimy fucking con man on slashdot. He's become a sort of modern day Robin Hood here, stealing from the rich to give to...himself.
You bend over and get fucked, me, i'm going to fight it.
Yeah, fight the fucking power. You use your weapons cache to stop ZOG from interfering with your constitutional right to download Rihanna songs and Transformer movies without paying.
You'll have to excuse the overwhelming majority of humanity who don't follow you out onto the barricades over this issue.
If the cost of free, unregulatable speech is the existance of some unobtrusive kiddie porn sites, then I'd consider that an acceptable cost.
I wouldn't. The fact that the nice paedophiles aren't shoving their stuff in your face does not mean it's not there. Images and videos of child abuse are illegal and should not be protected by any bollocks about "free speech": they are recordings of criminal activity and therefore quite justifiably banned. Except in people's libertarian wet dreams, any sane society must have rules and laws in order to remain civilised. Your right to free speech most certainly does not extend to a right to break any law you feel like.
People like you should be co-operating with the authorities in reporting and hopefully tracking down paedophiles when you come across their spoor, not wittering on about the non-existent rights of disgusting criminals.
Big Media fought them all and take huge portions of the revenues of these other businesses for themselves. It's more than disliking people not paying for content. They presume domain over ALL content whether it's actually theirs or not. People routinely create their own only to have to taken down by DMCA demand. They are assaulting all content and delivery methods until they get paid.
Their 'rights' go to far and they are buying newer, better and more powerful rights every day.
If you get a DMCA takedown and you have not infringed on copyright, you should argue against it.
If you don't think the movie trilogy of the Lord of the Rings was a massive budget, media/pop culture artifact, you must be taking some funny drugs.
If you get rid of the MPAA/RIAA and have a new generation of artists who can't make much money themselves (because their product is freely distributable) but are extremely popular, it just means that someone else is getting rich off them instead; and that someone will basically be Google or whatever rival search/host/advertising company replaces them.
Speculate much? Imaginative speculation anyway.
No. The content industry has a continuous campaign against internet companies which help to distribute material. The same players have gotten other country's law enforcement to act on their behalf even when what they were doing wasn't actually illegal. Getting the US enforcement agencies (note I did not call them law enforcement... just 'enforcement') to break the law in such an overt way is proof of the power and influence these content providers carry.
I will not miss them. They are a cancer on progress. Volunteer entertainers are popping up everywhere just to get a million likes instead of a million dollars. They can't compete against that kind of currency.
Crusty jugglers!
Maybe the usage is different in the US.
Likewise, all of MU's customers have been stuck without their files.
It must be scary living in your world where the only copy of your data is tied up with a legally dubious operation run by a well known fraudster and con man.
There're some that think that Argentina had every right to take over the Falkland Islands (they call it Malvinas), and yet, there were consequences.
The Argentinians were lucky Britain didn't nuke Buenos Aires. As it turned out, the main consequence (apart from the unnecessary loss of life) was the overthrow of General Galtieri and his bunch of weak-minded fascists and the introduction of what passes for democracy in South America..
Nor have I downloaded anything illegally
That's good to know, but doesn't really need to be stated as downloading is not a crime.
Copyright infringement is illegal in the sense that you can be sued for it under civil law, but not generally a criminal offence, although this is in the process of changing in places like the US.