>The only real difference is the subsitution of a >real-time ultrasonic display for an X-ray.
Well, that's a significant improvement, wouldn't you say? There are somthing like 20+ different patents on various forms of clothespin.
I agree that there's a huge amount of abuse in the modern patent system, but this guy really has, from what I can tell, produced a new and useful improvement. You make a convincing argument against a general patent, but he should definitly be able to get a patent for this specific device.
I suppose I should have said 'more consistently applicable graphical user interface' instead of 'better metaphore'. I realize that there's power in using a command line interface. I think that Macromedia's approach to programming actionscript code with visual assistance would be nice to ease the way into linux by newbies. For all I know, there could be a "point and click to insert code" method of using the linux command line with a chance to edit the text afterwards, but there weren't any with the distro as far as I could find and that should have been put in before the 'mouse spedometer'. And like I said somewhere else, trying to install an RPM was a lot more frustrating than using the install sheild. I'm willing to learn the hard stuff, but I'd prefer to be eased into it. There may be easy fixes out there. I'm sure the mix of hardware probelms that I had didn't help (A friend of mine, and brilliant CS major couldn't figure out the problem but Linux wouldn't load on one of my boxes when Windows loaded fine- that was my first attempt in college). I'm also a little biased considering I have a lot more experience with Windows than Linux and I'd probably be a lot more comfortable with Linux if I'd been using it for my courses, papers, etc. for the past few years.
Gotta find a users group one of these days, I suppose.
I played with Red hat 6.0 and later with 6.1. The only useful thing (for me, at least) that I could get to work was Perl and some programming tools And some graphics stuff, but I'm not sure if I'd call that useful, given the quality of the tools and the situation I was in. I think I'm just spoiled by Photoshop et al. I'm not scared off by command prompts, but if I managed to install the programs I was trying for, I didn't notice. There were some features that 6.0 required a kernel update for (don't remember what features) and I couldn't figure out how to do it.
I use the command prompt when I'm telneting into my server etc. but don't do anything too complex. It like Linux a lot better when someone else is responsible for maintaining it.
I've always wondered- since your sound card is a digital to analog converter which could be used to measure the changing stregnth of an electric current, then couldn't it be used for making a lie detector (i.e. Polygraph). All you'd need would be a current source and some bare wires from somthing that plugs into your sound card- I have some headphones I could use. And of course, programs for reccording sound abound, and would work for recording the changing signal streghth.
Is a sound card sensitive enough? Or more worrisome, is it too sensitive? I haven't tried it because I don't want to fry my machine.
Speaking as someone who's had a lot of experience with computers (windows and mac), multiple programming and scripting languages (Java, C++, actionscript, and a tad of perl), but still had so much trouble with Linux that I quit using it I'd like to list a few problems that I had
If you call me stupid, so be it, but I'll bet others have encountered these barriers to entry;
The biggest was the lack of any ready metaphore. Windows has the 'windows metaphore'. Despite about a week of study, I'm still missing out on a few key concepts such as how to install programs on Linux or how to compile a kernel.
The second was the trouble I had configuring my devices. Albeit, there turned out to be a problem with my hardware, but under windows I would have know this.
I bought some CDs from macromedia a while ago with a student discount. After I opened them, the shrinkwrap EULA said that I couldn't use them for commercial purposes, as I had hoped to. It said that if I didn't agree, I should return the item to the store. I tried to, but they wouldn't give me a refund even though they were obligated to.
I called Macromedia and sent them letters but they gave me the runaround.
I'm using the program now, and have my documentation in case macromedia calls someday.
What do you want to bet that music stores won't honor their obligation to accept returned CDs unless your lawyer breathes down their necks?
How do we separate drugs from nutrition. Last olympics, an athelete was accused of using drugs because they seemed to be detected in his body. Turns out he just ate a lot of a certain nutrient and his body produced the chemical naturally.
Here's an idea. Atheletes should be allowed to use any chemical that they want, so long as it occurs naturally in the human body. If you die of liver failure or somthing like that within ten years after winning, they take back your medal.
What the hell is the difference if one athelete produces loads of a hormone naturally and another injects it?
Or maybe they should just do a variation of Roman law and say that it's illegal to use any drug which is detectable. If you can't detect it, it shouldn't be illegal.
Saudi Arabia blocks sex and pornography sites, as well as those relating to religion and human rights.
No more of those damn sex site popups, not to mention those annoying advertisements for religion and Mother Jones Magazine. Now if they could only make a filter that stoped those damn webcam ads...
I don't think literature controls what technology is made or else asimovs repeated reference to mass drivers might have resulted in one by now.
Rather, consider looking at books like "Brave New World" which influence people's reactions to technology. The greatest influence that a book has on technology is through the consumer/marketplace
I've heard that some Government agencies do intelligence for the sake of American corporations. (i.e. if they find out about technology that a corporation in another country is developing they may pass it on to an American corporation). The question is, couldn't American corporations use this to spy on other American corporations? Does anyone know how likely a US agency would be to do a thing like that?
Armed helicopter with anti A/V R/C Capabilitities
on
Geek Gift Ideas 2001
·
· Score: 1
Hey, I wonder if I could rig a paintball gun to a remote control helicopter.
I don't think that you've really represented what is being said. You've put things in absolutes more than most posts here have. No, government and corporations are not ALWAYS bad. The question is, are they ALWAYS good? And when they're not, what recourse do citizens have? Traditionally, corporations have, in practice, been given more legal rights and protections than individuals. A store can try overbilling me, and unless I catch it, I lose my money. But if I accidentally take somthing from a store, they can put me in jail. There are analogs with environmental law and pollution or just about anything else. The best way to nail bad corporate practices is to demonstrate a particular environment/trend/company practice and that requires information. The same goes for government. A single mistake always has plausable deniability.
Chai is also traslated as life or breath, as it was in Genesis. I'm not saying that it dosen't have synonyms. Chaim is plural.
Yeled = a boy
yeledim= children
aetz= tree (pardon my transliteration)
aetzeem= trees
chai= breath
chaim= breaths, spirts or life.
Plurals are sometimes used to refer to a singular group of things, such as the term 'waters' in hebrew (mayim) which can refer to a single body of water.
I think that this might be a misstatement. And personally, I think it's rather condescending of people to think that all our ancestors lived in little isolated tribes. If people from Africa could colonize Australia and people from asia could colonize Hawaii, we have to give our ancestors a bit more credit in the 'getting around' department than we have previously. After all, there aren't a whole lot of pit stops between Hawaii and the nearest land mass, which indicates some people made a pretty big jump.
Personally I've always been intrigued by the similarity between hebrew and some japanese.
Chi- life, breath in Hebrew
Chi- life breath in Japanese.
Atata(if memory serves)- "you" in Japanese
Ata- "you" in Hebrew.
Well, mass drivers are the prefered method of launching material into orbit. They're safer than engines because you don't have anything that could detonate like fuel and it's easier to have groundbased redundant systems, or to stop the material along the runway if somthing goes wrong. You also don't have the possibly destructive fire from the engines. Short of sabotage, the failure risk is infintesimal compared to a shuttle or even an airplane.
Explosions in orbit are unlikely since the stuff won't go into orbit- it'll leave orbit. And the radioactive material shouldn't produce enough hydrogen gas for a misson-endangering explosion.
Bear in mind that Russia has dumped a considerable amount of nucelear waste into the ocean -filling ships with the stuff and sinking them. This has got to be better than that.
I'm not saying 'put all waste into the sun'. Typically that wouldn't be cost effective. But considering how much it costs to dispose of a ton of radioactive waste ($59.00 per cubic foot, and there are tons of the stuff) , and the failure rate of burrying somthing in a container that has to last for millenia, a mass driver would be the quickest, safest and ultimatly most cost effective solution.
I'm surprised I've hardly heard anyone saying they'd work on the construction of a mass driver.
With tons of nuclear waste piling up on earth and no legitamate and safe means of disposal, a cheap method of jettisoning material into space seems crucial.
A mass driver would not only provide this, but also pave the way for cheaply transporting materials around the globe. Once in space, little problems like drag and wind resistance become irrelevant. Take-off costs would be less than the x-33. Nasa has succeeded most in those areas where it has made avionics commercially affordable- namely aeronautics. Let Nasa give business the capacity to put a McDonalds on the moon and, unholy as it may sound, they'll lobby congress more effectivly than geeks ever could.
In the early days of the automotive industry, GM was effectivly immune to lawsuits (what's good for GM is good for America!). In the earliest part of this century, there was an attempt by the publishing industry to prevent the resale of books. Similar events are now happening in the tech sector with attempts by the BSA to ward off liability issues related to software, laws against software resale, and even new problems such as patenting of genes and other expansions of IP law inconsistent with the goal of moving information into the public domain while rewarding its creator.
My question is; will the influence of the software industry fade as these new technologies become less new or will these trends, which seem to contradict legal precedent, only gain legitimacy as they establish a precident of their own?
If I were being dishonest, you would have actually refuted some of my points. You haven't. You can disagree with me and you can insult me but it's not the same thing.
Here's some background on pan-Arabism. http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/history/A0837455.htm l
The movement began a long time before Israel was even a state.
Apparently a great deal of Muslims, including decendants of the Prophet Mohammud were propagating 'Zionist propaganda'. It's true that a few nations such as Egypt have traditionally placed their own welfare above the perceived need for a unified middle east, rejecting pan-arabism in practice. However calling pan-arabism 'zionist propaganda' is inflamatory not to mention incorrect.
>* Israel is not a democracy if you are not a >jew.
Correction. Israel is not a democracy if you are not a citizen. There's a difference.
And palestine isn't a democracy even if you're a palestinian which is absolutly no better. That was my original argument, if you'll recall.
>Palestinians have less freedom than jews
I don't disagree with this. Palestinians have killed a lot of Israelis and Israelis have killed a lot of palestinians (though Israelis tend more towards attacking millitary targets). Both sides are now justifiably paranoid and have denied civil liberties to groups likely to harm them. My argument was that Arabs in Israel have more freedom there than they do in Palestine, and considerably more than a Jew in Palestine would have.
I'm not saying "There is a perfect standard and Israel matches it exactly". No nation rises to that level, though a fanatic or patriot can surely justify everything that his or her nation does. I'm saying that
Israel comes closer to that standard than the Arab nations do, that a person cannot simply walk into palestinian territory and vote for or against Arafat, or even freely practice their choice of religion as they can in Israel.
And yes, when you live in a desert, control of water supplies is vital to national defense.
>The creation of
>the state of Israel was not a clean, friendly >affair.
Neither was the creation or maintence of the various Arab States. Neither was the creation of America.
It's easy to see the faults of those you dislike and difficult to see the faults of your friends.
Try applying your standards to all sides here. You can demonize any person or nation on earth by listing only their negatives.
Unless you advocate the destruction of Israel, which may be your aim, it would seem more logical to pay reparations to those who lost property in the formation of Israel. And all the other Arab nations can pay reparations for the various violations of international accords that they've committed during warfare, such as summary execution of prisoners during war.
>As for the so-called lack of help towards the >palestinians, might I remind you of US military >support to Israel as well as economic & >political pressures against Arab states that >keeps them in check right now?
Yes, you can remind me of it. What about it?
I checked out the link you gave me. I don't see how it supports your point in the slightest.
Hatred is not the same as knowledge, though it can make your own position very clear and make the position of your enemy seem terribly wrong. I've met a lot of people who loved Rush Limbaugh mainly because they failed to understand this. Everything that I've said is 'the real truth'. Drop the condescending attitude. It dosen't work on anyone who dosen't already agree with you.
In addition to the fact that Osama bin Ladin (sp?) is one of the few people with the resoures and organization to do somthing like this, he has set off explosives at the trade center before. Furthermore, this is the anniversary of the camp david peace accord. All circumstantial evidence, true, but it does make bin Laden the most likely suspect.
I have a little problem with the whole 'liberal media' stereotype. Socially the major media outlets are very liberal, but economically, they're fairly conservative.
I suggest that you get some of your friends together and try throwing rocks at the local cops. Let me know how it goes.
The Arab nations attacked Israel numerous times intent on total genocide, vowing to 'push the Jews into the sea'. They acted, then, in a unified fashion claiming that 'all arab nations were one'(panarabism). Against all odds they lost, no American aid involved. Then the Arabs couldn't give a shit about the palestinians. Sure, the nations like to complain, but has Syria allowed the Palestinians to move into Syria since all Arab nations are one? Prior to the creation of Israel, there was no such thing as 'Palestine'. What hypocracy. Palestine was what the Romans tried to rename Israel when they wated to destroy it. The Arabs got 99% of the land in the Middle East. Israel got 1%. And apparently this was too much for the Arabs.
Israel tries to keep Palestinians from settling near Israeli millitary establishments because it would pose a national security risk. They can't get permits in those areas (so it's very difficult for palestianians to get building permits anywhere, since Israel is such a small place- the size of New Jersy, for god's sake.). They build anyway, and then get pissed off when the buildings are bulldozed.
Keep these things in mind;
1. It's easy to judge others, but name one nation in all of history that has had its very existance continually threatened for over 50 years and maintained such a high degree of personal liberty. An arab Israeli citizen still has more freedom than a Palestinian, an Iraqui, a Syrian etc.
2. While Arafat claims to have given up on the destruction of Israel he gave as a condition of 'peace' what he calls the 'Palestinian right of return'. Any Palestinian who wanted to could become an Israeli citizen. Israel, unlike it's neighibors, is a democracy and would not survive intact. No nation should be forced to submit to its own destruction.
3. If you think Syria or Iraq is better than Israel you should seriously go live there. If you're feeling really frisky, try telling your neighibor about your religious beliefs if you have any. Find out what the government thinks of that kind of behavior. Iraqui and Palestinian broadcasting stations make up facts wholesale to support the government's chosen political beliefs. Oh yeah, they don't even bother to rebroadcast the BBC.
4. A person watching WWII late in the game might have had difficulty telling the Americans from the Germans. They may have pointed out that there were concentration camps in both nations. Reading history, it becomes clear who the agressors were. Israel made huge concesions during the peace process. What have they gotten to date? More bombings. The only thing that has prevented the wholesale slaughter of all Israelis has been the use of force in self defense. In that situation, I'd make the same choices that the Israelis have.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, but frisking is just so much FUN!
>The only real difference is the subsitution of a >real-time ultrasonic display for an X-ray.
Well, that's a significant improvement, wouldn't you say? There are somthing like 20+ different patents on various forms of clothespin.
I agree that there's a huge amount of abuse in the modern patent system, but this guy really has, from what I can tell, produced a new and useful improvement. You make a convincing argument against a general patent, but he should definitly be able to get a patent for this specific device.
I suppose I should have said 'more consistently applicable graphical user interface' instead of 'better metaphore'. I realize that there's power in using a command line interface. I think that Macromedia's approach to programming actionscript code with visual assistance would be nice to ease the way into linux by newbies. For all I know, there could be a "point and click to insert code" method of using the linux command line with a chance to edit the text afterwards, but there weren't any with the distro as far as I could find and that should have been put in before the 'mouse spedometer'. And like I said somewhere else, trying to install an RPM was a lot more frustrating than using the install sheild. I'm willing to learn the hard stuff, but I'd prefer to be eased into it. There may be easy fixes out there. I'm sure the mix of hardware probelms that I had didn't help (A friend of mine, and brilliant CS major couldn't figure out the problem but Linux wouldn't load on one of my boxes when Windows loaded fine- that was my first attempt in college). I'm also a little biased considering I have a lot more experience with Windows than Linux and I'd probably be a lot more comfortable with Linux if I'd been using it for my courses, papers, etc. for the past few years.
Gotta find a users group one of these days, I suppose.
I played with Red hat 6.0 and later with 6.1. The only useful thing (for me, at least) that I could get to work was Perl and some programming tools And some graphics stuff, but I'm not sure if I'd call that useful, given the quality of the tools and the situation I was in. I think I'm just spoiled by Photoshop et al. I'm not scared off by command prompts, but if I managed to install the programs I was trying for, I didn't notice. There were some features that 6.0 required a kernel update for (don't remember what features) and I couldn't figure out how to do it.
I use the command prompt when I'm telneting into my server etc. but don't do anything too complex. It like Linux a lot better when someone else is responsible for maintaining it.
I've always wondered- since your sound card is a digital to analog converter which could be used to measure the changing stregnth of an electric current, then couldn't it be used for making a lie detector (i.e. Polygraph). All you'd need would be a current source and some bare wires from somthing that plugs into your sound card- I have some headphones I could use. And of course, programs for reccording sound abound, and would work for recording the changing signal streghth.
Is a sound card sensitive enough? Or more worrisome, is it too sensitive? I haven't tried it because I don't want to fry my machine.
Speaking as someone who's had a lot of experience with computers (windows and mac), multiple programming and scripting languages (Java, C++, actionscript, and a tad of perl), but still had so much trouble with Linux that I quit using it I'd like to list a few problems that I had
If you call me stupid, so be it, but I'll bet others have encountered these barriers to entry;
The biggest was the lack of any ready metaphore. Windows has the 'windows metaphore'. Despite about a week of study, I'm still missing out on a few key concepts such as how to install programs on Linux or how to compile a kernel.
The second was the trouble I had configuring my devices. Albeit, there turned out to be a problem with my hardware, but under windows I would have know this.
I bought some CDs from macromedia a while ago with a student discount. After I opened them, the shrinkwrap EULA said that I couldn't use them for commercial purposes, as I had hoped to. It said that if I didn't agree, I should return the item to the store. I tried to, but they wouldn't give me a refund even though they were obligated to.
I called Macromedia and sent them letters but they gave me the runaround.
I'm using the program now, and have my documentation in case macromedia calls someday.
What do you want to bet that music stores won't honor their obligation to accept returned CDs unless your lawyer breathes down their necks?
How do we separate drugs from nutrition. Last olympics, an athelete was accused of using drugs because they seemed to be detected in his body. Turns out he just ate a lot of a certain nutrient and his body produced the chemical naturally.
Here's an idea. Atheletes should be allowed to use any chemical that they want, so long as it occurs naturally in the human body. If you die of liver failure or somthing like that within ten years after winning, they take back your medal.
What the hell is the difference if one athelete produces loads of a hormone naturally and another injects it?
Or maybe they should just do a variation of Roman law and say that it's illegal to use any drug which is detectable. If you can't detect it, it shouldn't be illegal.
Saudi Arabia blocks sex and pornography sites, as well as those relating to religion and human rights.
No more of those damn sex site popups, not to mention those annoying advertisements for religion and Mother Jones Magazine. Now if they could only make a filter that stoped those damn webcam ads...
I don't think literature controls what technology is made or else asimovs repeated reference to mass drivers might have resulted in one by now.
Rather, consider looking at books like "Brave New World" which influence people's reactions to technology. The greatest influence that a book has on technology is through the consumer/marketplace
I've heard that some Government agencies do intelligence for the sake of American corporations. (i.e. if they find out about technology that a corporation in another country is developing they may pass it on to an American corporation). The question is, couldn't American corporations use this to spy on other American corporations? Does anyone know how likely a US agency would be to do a thing like that?
Hey, I wonder if I could rig a paintball gun to a remote control helicopter.
Copter wars!
I don't think that you've really represented what is being said. You've put things in absolutes more than most posts here have. No, government and corporations are not ALWAYS bad. The question is, are they ALWAYS good? And when they're not, what recourse do citizens have? Traditionally, corporations have, in practice, been given more legal rights and protections than individuals. A store can try overbilling me, and unless I catch it, I lose my money. But if I accidentally take somthing from a store, they can put me in jail. There are analogs with environmental law and pollution or just about anything else. The best way to nail bad corporate practices is to demonstrate a particular environment/trend/company practice and that requires information. The same goes for government. A single mistake always has plausable deniability.
Chai is also traslated as life or breath, as it was in Genesis. I'm not saying that it dosen't have synonyms. Chaim is plural.
Yeled = a boy
yeledim= children
aetz= tree (pardon my transliteration)
aetzeem= trees
chai= breath
chaim= breaths, spirts or life.
Plurals are sometimes used to refer to a singular group of things, such as the term 'waters' in hebrew (mayim) which can refer to a single body of water.
>Travel back then wasn't the luxury it once was
I think that this might be a misstatement. And personally, I think it's rather condescending of people to think that all our ancestors lived in little isolated tribes. If people from Africa could colonize Australia and people from asia could colonize Hawaii, we have to give our ancestors a bit more credit in the 'getting around' department than we have previously. After all, there aren't a whole lot of pit stops between Hawaii and the nearest land mass, which indicates some people made a pretty big jump.
Personally I've always been intrigued by the similarity between hebrew and some japanese.
Chi- life, breath in Hebrew
Chi- life breath in Japanese.
Atata(if memory serves)- "you" in Japanese
Ata- "you" in Hebrew.
Well, mass drivers are the prefered method of launching material into orbit. They're safer than engines because you don't have anything that could detonate like fuel and it's easier to have groundbased redundant systems, or to stop the material along the runway if somthing goes wrong. You also don't have the possibly destructive fire from the engines. Short of sabotage, the failure risk is infintesimal compared to a shuttle or even an airplane.
Explosions in orbit are unlikely since the stuff won't go into orbit- it'll leave orbit. And the radioactive material shouldn't produce enough hydrogen gas for a misson-endangering explosion.
Bear in mind that Russia has dumped a considerable amount of nucelear waste into the ocean -filling ships with the stuff and sinking them. This has got to be better than that.
I'm not saying 'put all waste into the sun'. Typically that wouldn't be cost effective. But considering how much it costs to dispose of a ton of radioactive waste ($59.00 per cubic foot, and there are tons of the stuff) , and the failure rate of burrying somthing in a container that has to last for millenia, a mass driver would be the quickest, safest and ultimatly most cost effective solution.
I'm surprised I've hardly heard anyone saying they'd work on the construction of a mass driver.
With tons of nuclear waste piling up on earth and no legitamate and safe means of disposal, a cheap method of jettisoning material into space seems crucial.
A mass driver would not only provide this, but also pave the way for cheaply transporting materials around the globe. Once in space, little problems like drag and wind resistance become irrelevant. Take-off costs would be less than the x-33. Nasa has succeeded most in those areas where it has made avionics commercially affordable- namely aeronautics. Let Nasa give business the capacity to put a McDonalds on the moon and, unholy as it may sound, they'll lobby congress more effectivly than geeks ever could.
Or a pair of glasses that gives a surgeon a HUD of how much health insurance a patient has left...
In the early days of the automotive industry, GM was effectivly immune to lawsuits (what's good for GM is good for America!). In the earliest part of this century, there was an attempt by the publishing industry to prevent the resale of books. Similar events are now happening in the tech sector with attempts by the BSA to ward off liability issues related to software, laws against software resale, and even new problems such as patenting of genes and other expansions of IP law inconsistent with the goal of moving information into the public domain while rewarding its creator.
My question is; will the influence of the software industry fade as these new technologies become less new or will these trends, which seem to contradict legal precedent, only gain legitimacy as they establish a precident of their own?
If I were being dishonest, you would have actually refuted some of my points. You haven't. You can disagree with me and you can insult me but it's not the same thing.
m l
Here's some background on pan-Arabism. http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/history/A0837455.ht
The movement began a long time before Israel was even a state.
Apparently a great deal of Muslims, including decendants of the Prophet Mohammud were propagating 'Zionist propaganda'. It's true that a few nations such as Egypt have traditionally placed their own welfare above the perceived need for a unified middle east, rejecting pan-arabism in practice. However calling pan-arabism 'zionist propaganda' is inflamatory not to mention incorrect.
>* Israel is not a democracy if you are not a >jew.
Correction. Israel is not a democracy if you are not a citizen. There's a difference.
And palestine isn't a democracy even if you're a palestinian which is absolutly no better. That was my original argument, if you'll recall.
>Palestinians have less freedom than jews
I don't disagree with this. Palestinians have killed a lot of Israelis and Israelis have killed a lot of palestinians (though Israelis tend more towards attacking millitary targets). Both sides are now justifiably paranoid and have denied civil liberties to groups likely to harm them. My argument was that Arabs in Israel have more freedom there than they do in Palestine, and considerably more than a Jew in Palestine would have.
I'm not saying "There is a perfect standard and Israel matches it exactly". No nation rises to that level, though a fanatic or patriot can surely justify everything that his or her nation does. I'm saying that
Israel comes closer to that standard than the Arab nations do, that a person cannot simply walk into palestinian territory and vote for or against Arafat, or even freely practice their choice of religion as they can in Israel.
And yes, when you live in a desert, control of water supplies is vital to national defense.
>The creation of
>the state of Israel was not a clean, friendly >affair.
Neither was the creation or maintence of the various Arab States. Neither was the creation of America.
It's easy to see the faults of those you dislike and difficult to see the faults of your friends.
Try applying your standards to all sides here. You can demonize any person or nation on earth by listing only their negatives.
Unless you advocate the destruction of Israel, which may be your aim, it would seem more logical to pay reparations to those who lost property in the formation of Israel. And all the other Arab nations can pay reparations for the various violations of international accords that they've committed during warfare, such as summary execution of prisoners during war.
>As for the so-called lack of help towards the >palestinians, might I remind you of US military >support to Israel as well as economic & >political pressures against Arab states that >keeps them in check right now?
Yes, you can remind me of it. What about it?
I checked out the link you gave me. I don't see how it supports your point in the slightest.
Hatred is not the same as knowledge, though it can make your own position very clear and make the position of your enemy seem terribly wrong. I've met a lot of people who loved Rush Limbaugh mainly because they failed to understand this. Everything that I've said is 'the real truth'. Drop the condescending attitude. It dosen't work on anyone who dosen't already agree with you.
In addition to the fact that Osama bin Ladin (sp?) is one of the few people with the resoures and organization to do somthing like this, he has set off explosives at the trade center before. Furthermore, this is the anniversary of the camp david peace accord. All circumstantial evidence, true, but it does make bin Laden the most likely suspect.
I have a little problem with the whole 'liberal media' stereotype. Socially the major media outlets are very liberal, but economically, they're fairly conservative.
>dont get so fucking high and mighty
>YOUR BEING MANIPULATED - YOU ARE THE MORONIC >MASSES!
Talk about being high and mighty
Or maybe because bombing those responsible might have started with Rush's radio station.
I suggest that you get some of your friends together and try throwing rocks at the local cops. Let me know how it goes.
The Arab nations attacked Israel numerous times intent on total genocide, vowing to 'push the Jews into the sea'. They acted, then, in a unified fashion claiming that 'all arab nations were one'(panarabism). Against all odds they lost, no American aid involved. Then the Arabs couldn't give a shit about the palestinians. Sure, the nations like to complain, but has Syria allowed the Palestinians to move into Syria since all Arab nations are one? Prior to the creation of Israel, there was no such thing as 'Palestine'. What hypocracy. Palestine was what the Romans tried to rename Israel when they wated to destroy it. The Arabs got 99% of the land in the Middle East. Israel got 1%. And apparently this was too much for the Arabs.
Israel tries to keep Palestinians from settling near Israeli millitary establishments because it would pose a national security risk. They can't get permits in those areas (so it's very difficult for palestianians to get building permits anywhere, since Israel is such a small place- the size of New Jersy, for god's sake.). They build anyway, and then get pissed off when the buildings are bulldozed.
Keep these things in mind;
1. It's easy to judge others, but name one nation in all of history that has had its very existance continually threatened for over 50 years and maintained such a high degree of personal liberty. An arab Israeli citizen still has more freedom than a Palestinian, an Iraqui, a Syrian etc.
2. While Arafat claims to have given up on the destruction of Israel he gave as a condition of 'peace' what he calls the 'Palestinian right of return'. Any Palestinian who wanted to could become an Israeli citizen. Israel, unlike it's neighibors, is a democracy and would not survive intact. No nation should be forced to submit to its own destruction.
3. If you think Syria or Iraq is better than Israel you should seriously go live there. If you're feeling really frisky, try telling your neighibor about your religious beliefs if you have any. Find out what the government thinks of that kind of behavior. Iraqui and Palestinian broadcasting stations make up facts wholesale to support the government's chosen political beliefs. Oh yeah, they don't even bother to rebroadcast the BBC.
4. A person watching WWII late in the game might have had difficulty telling the Americans from the Germans. They may have pointed out that there were concentration camps in both nations. Reading history, it becomes clear who the agressors were. Israel made huge concesions during the peace process. What have they gotten to date? More bombings. The only thing that has prevented the wholesale slaughter of all Israelis has been the use of force in self defense. In that situation, I'd make the same choices that the Israelis have.