idrankwhat

Good one, but it still pales in comparison to Man gets 90 days in jail in vacuum sex act case That reminds me, I haven't dug up my old Zappa albums recently.

That title isn't going to cut it. You've got to trim it down if you want someone to read the story. For example, when given the choice between.... a) Fox News edits a misquote to report optimism on the economy and gives the Obama administration the credit for the good news and b) Dolly Parton addresses lesbian rumors which do you think will get the most hits and generate more revenue? I mean, that's what "news" is all about.

Ok, I'm using my imagination. That's three Californias, most of which would consist wilderness/preserves/and national parks. I suppose that if the population density is 2.6 people per square mile, and you placed only 2.6 people in each square mile......yea, you've got a point. Infrastructure costs would be extremely high.

I know it's hungry but.....

The current State of Palestine has not been established. That's that "two state solution" thing that folks keep talking about. However, Israel was carved out of Palestine. It's neighbors, with one exception, also recognize the State of Palestine. But whatever you wish to call it, the "land of milk and honey", "levant" "Abrahamville", whatever, it's not Israel. And Israel continuing to take what is not theirs is why have a problem.

This one

I'll certainly agree with you there. As as side note, Maybe if we figure out some way to erase all of those squiggly lines on the globe people will start concentrating on the important things.

I agree. I'm hoping that things will change as the news media continues to evolve.

Many don't realize what life is like for the 1.5 million people in Gaza. Few understand that Israel considers lentils and pasta a "luxury", and therefore, banned for shipment into Gaza. But regarding the genocide references, I agree that it's not directly comparable. And that's great, but that doesn't make it even remotely acceptable. What I was/am annoyed at is the previously given "law of the jungle" attitude.

I didn't reply earlier to this directly because my initial response would have been pretty nasty. So I waited until this morning. And yea, it's still pretty disgusting. I don't know what it is about this conflict that does this to people. The Sudanese government and the Janjaweed, the Serbs, Hitler, Stalin, the Tutsi "patriots", were all "big cats". I hate to throw any logic at you but your philosophy asserts that "hey, sucks to be them but that's life in the jungle". And now the argument regarding the recent atrocities in Gaza gets reduced to "hey, at least it's not as bad as some historical examples of genocide". I don't get it.

Oh, so we wanted the Patriot Act and all of the security precautions put in place after 9/11? I didn't realize that. I didn't say were were living in a militarized zone. Although if we had been given another few years with #43 I'm pretty sure that at least our souther border might. They're not simply my Geneva convention concerns. Mine are in line with nearly the rest of the planet, including our own government (officially). The problem that you and Ori seem to have is the notion that might makes right and that rules are to be bent or broken at will by the more powerful. Contrary to your assertion, you're not thinking long term.

They've already partially destroyed our way of life and strained our economy and relations with our allies. And using your definition, they've called for our destruction, therefore, by your logic, we should be able to do as we please. Fourth, article 49, the part that says "The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.". The earlier part of article 49 that deals with the right of return issue is a real sticking point. Both sides agree that's going to be difficult to deal with but Hamas and others have said that they could live side by side with an Israel within it's 1967 borders. Right of return inside of those lines is not likely and both sides know it, except for possibly Jerusalem. That's going to take some really serious negotiation. It's not "pacifist BS". It's called "playing by the rules" and "not using a double standard". Israel has been expanding it's borders for decades. It won't admit it, we won't enforce the rules and we won't allow the UN to enforce the rules. Which is one of the main reasons given for groups like al qaeda to attack us and for countries like Iran and Syria to take a hard line against us. And the lack of any demand for accountability for the violations admitted publicly by IDF soldiers will continue this policy of double standard and ultimately be problematic for our country.

Using a similarly broad sweeping logic then so long as there are Islamic extremists we should be allowed to invade and kill in as many Muslim countries as we can. Except that it violates the Geneva conventions. You can't take the land and you can't transfer your people on to it. Them's the rules. I'd suggest changing them or if we're going to ignore them (any more than we have) then we should withdraw from them. That of course means that we would be acting completely against the best interests of the US. This is simply an example of "turning a blind eye" to the reality of the situation, ESPECIALLY in the context of the topic of this thread.

End result, it did actually make it to the news here in the States. Probably more people know about the conflict regarding the barrier (although probably not many). Giving a canister driven lobotomy to a West Bank resident most likely would not have made the news at all.

I don't think you can watch a disc on another machine until it is finalized. We're trying to get away from video tape for students as well and the flash drive idea has come up as an option. So please folks, keep thinking out loud. The only other option I've been able to think of is where you keep the student files in their own directory on a hard drive, then add the new clip and burn a new dvd each time they come out. That might work for a small DZ but I don't know if it's feasible for larger ones. I know that as a student I really appreciated being able to watch my videos numerous times between weekends. I also know that I probably wouldn't want to keep track of 8 DVD's for 8 jumps (or more).

Maybe. I the reports I read said he wasn't throwing anything but there's no way to tell from what I've seen so far. Hard to say for sure. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ov3Qs8CjPRw

yes i have. Great, then it's pretty easy to see how you can use fire a tear gas canister directly at someone. Now how about this one? http://www.btselem.org/English/Video/200602_Rules_of_Engagement.asp It's more in line with the subject of this thread.

Well what do you know? I just found a small recent story on ABC and a few other less than obscure sources. Of course if he was a hot young blond chick who disappeared in the Bahamas he might have made it to the front page, but that's fodder for a different thread. And for the record, the "warzone" as you call it, is a (yet another) town called Nahalin that Israel is trying to steal from its neighbors. And I have a hard time considering him to be a "moron", "asshole" or "idiot" for going to protest against something that is not only morally and legally wrong, counterproductive to our "war on terror" but is also in direct conflict with the stated US/UN policy in the matter. But thanks for the heads up. I'll have to check the Bay Area newspapers more often.

Do you mean fiscally or intellectually?

Did you watch either one of those videos?

I do every time you say the IDF kills people intentionally or commits war crimes when civilians get hurt, forgetting to mention that these civilians were taking an active role in the fighting (whether by choice or Hamas using them) You seem to think that living in one of the most densely populated places on the planet is considered "taking an active role". That's the "willingness to accept" issue that I was referring to. Only because I actively looked outside of the typical news sources. I got it from some Israelis who think this crap is unacceptable as well. I feel like Jon Stewart. Roll 2:12 If you point it at someone it's "targeted". So, being at and documenting a protest makes you fair game?

The war crimes argument is pretty solid. Getting them prosecuted is another thing entirely. And you have not proven me wrong on my assertions. You change my assertions and then try to debunk your version. The IDF has a history of loose rules of engagement and has a poor (not completely absent, but "poor") record of accountability with regard to infractions that extend beyond those loose rules. And many, not all, Israelis (and Americans) have a tendency to look the other way at crimes committed by the IDF and the settlers. Palestinians are guilty of the same. My problem is that not only do we only hold one side accountable, we are often enablers of the violence. You're right, but we also didn't hear about the IDF shooting an American in the head with a tear gas canister eleven days ago.

So, using that argument (and donning the devil's advocate hat) should we give nukes to the PA in the West Bank? Maybe Israel would stop invading, I mean "settling" on their neighbor's land. But seriously, I think that the best option with regard to the nuke issue is to throw our resources at solving the fusion question. Do that and you can globally ban fissionable nukes. Of course that would mean that we'd have to give up ours, and save probably $50 billion a year

actions that show much more restraint than most countries would when faced with endless terror attacks and missile fire on civilian towns. much more restraint than their "brothers" the Egyptians and especially the Jordanians showed them in the past. war crimes by your definition which do not hold when civilian buildings and people play an active role in the fightting. It's almost as though we've never discussed this topic here. But even in the light of even more specifics with regard to the IDF's culpability, the song remains the same. I really don't know what more to say that hasn't been said numerous times, other than that I continue to hope that the internet will continue to make more and more accurate information available to more and more people.

I don't see them as being unrelated. Shouts of genocide etc. are overstatements of what has been historically a (documented) history of "loose rules of engagement". What is different this time is that it's actually being bantered about in the mainstream press and that people are actually seriously considering holding Israel accountable for their actions. Which leads us to the "justice" aspect of the conversation. We (the US) have well stated policies with regard to what we find acceptable and what we don't. For the most part we hold a hard line on the Palestinians and a very soft line on the Israelis. When the Palestinians commit a war crime we do things such as enable a humanitarian crisis e.g., the blockade. When Israel commits war crimes we basically say "hey, we don't like that" while simultaneously cutting them a check or sending them another shipment of cluster bombs (while on our way to the UN to veto the coming resolution against Israel). Whether you're a state sponsor of terror or a fraudulent banker, connections has its benefits with regard to the meting out of justice. I'm hoping that in both cases that we're going to start putting our justice where our rhetoric is.