They control our money, our armed forces, our tax inspectors, jails, and police. Against that, we the people wield our biggest weapon — information.
The biggest threat to people in positions of power is the flow of news and ideas. The internet is the largest menace, the most powerful tool of the people, so we always knew the pushback was coming. Those who control the net, control the ability of the people to organize en masse, and to judge who is being honest, and who can be trusted. The Internet was vital in publicizing the climate data that contradicts the government climate scientists, because the mainstream media sure didn’t do it.
If SOPA PIPA is stopped (as it appears it might have been, as 6 supporters pull out) the only thing we can be sure of is that there will be other attempts to stop us speaking freely. This is an unending battle.
How bad is SOPA PIPA?
On closer inspection, the legalese in the bill has the potential to eviscerate free speech….and like NDAA, without proof…only with suspicion of “wrong-doing”. It’s all about copyright infringement. If you tick off the powers that be, and you’ve quoted someone, somewhere, saying something, you may have infringed on their copyright. As a defendant, you are not even present at the legal proceeding allowing “them” to shut you down until you prove yourself innocent.
How do they shut you down? Search engines are required to remove you from their listings. Internet Service Providers can be ordered to block access to your site. Advertising networks and payment providers can also be forced to cease doing business with you. This continues until you are proven INNOCENT. Wait – I thought it was innocent until proven guilty….oh….that was “before” the NDAA.
This is not about breaches of copyright:
SOPA and PIPA are proposed government regulations that go far beyond protection of IP.
The regulations in the act are clearly designed to be abused by the government to censor parts of the internet and require organizations such as Facebook and Google to become content policemen.
Source: Economic Policy Journal
There are better ways to solve the piracy problem:
It’s easy to stop movie piracy, put all the movies online for a reasonable fee (say $3 to watch). Apple’s iTunes has mostly supplanted illegal music downloading by offering most of the worlds songs for $1+. — Matthew Lock
(Useful discussion on itunes and piracy here and here.)
Where will the demands end?
The establishment will keep asking for more until something stops it… and what stops it growing? Nothing except us. It grows until the protests become too strong. We must not only protest just to keep what is ours (our freedom) but we must teach our children that protesting unwanted laws is a fact of life.
It’s just as with the laws of physics: a body in space will move until a force opposes it, children will ask for more until they test the limits, and governments will grow until something stops them.
Protests work. More people are checking Wikipedia during the blackout, and the only pages they can see are SOPA PIPA ones. Better to protest loud and strong now than wait til our freedom to speak is reduced.
History repeats — Rulers opposed information flows
Jeffrey Tucker compares the internet to the printing press:
For government to attack Internet freedom today would be akin to burning the seventh-century manuscripts of St. Isidore of Seville, who produced, in the hardest times, the book that summarised all the knowledge of the ancient world (a Wikipedia of his time) and remains a primary source today.
It would be like murdering Venerable Bede in the eighth century, so that he could not have written his history of England that passed on knowledge and wisdom in the darkest of times.
It would be like smashing the 15th-century Gutenberg presses so that printing could have never gotten off the ground.
Historians constantly remind us that all great leaps in human history are inspired by the sharing and spreading of information. This is the precondition. When the first crusaders returned with new manuscripts from the ancient world, we began to see the first signs of the birth of modernity in the West. When populations moved to cities where they could leave behind their isolation and collaborate with others, economic growth followed. And when the Internet blasted down the barriers around the world and allowed anyone to discover new ideas, we saw a new dawn of technology and efficiency.
Tucker reminds us that the government don’t need new laws to shut down sites, they already do it:
* Just this past week, a judge ruled that a 23-year-old British
college student can be extradited to the US for a 10-year prison
sentence, all for linking to other servers that illicitly host
copyrighted content;
* Late last year, US officials shut down 150 domains without hearings
or trials on grounds that they were suspected of selling goods that
violate trademark law. It was done on “Cyber Monday” for a reason:
It was an announcement to the digital world that government is in
charge;
* In 2010, the feds seized some 73,000 domains for the crime of
linking to content that was said to be distributed illegally in
violation of copyright.
Tuckers whole article is worth reading “Blackout Wednesday: The Time Has Come“
Images: 1 Wikimedia 2 Viking age padlock. Found on Björkö in Mälaren, Sweden, Nordisk familjebok (1917), vol.26, Smideskonsten.
“The truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
Joseph Goebbels
“Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of the truth.”
Albert Einstein
00
The internet is like the safety valve on a pressure cooker.
To remove/restrict venting by way of that valve would hasten an explosion.
Politicians that have contact with reality will know that.
00
http://onecandleinthedark.blogspot.com/
“How CNET/CBS Interactive ignited & fueled the ‘Phenomenon of Internet Piracy’
http://thecrowhouse.com/sopa.html
“S.O.P.A. is Pre-Planned”
00
Pre-planned entrapment is a tautology. Entrapment by definition as to be pre-planned.
But Kevin aren’t you the same guy who yesterday typed this:
Now you’ve discovered that SOPA is also a conspiracy? That must mean the same Jews who control the world are now trying to seize control of the Internet?
So Sonny thinks SOPA is just like the Nazis and you link it to the Jews who control the world. Jewish Nazis???
The bill didn’t pass Congress and is now dead. It was unconstitutional to begin with.
As a Skeptic…. what would be interesting is to discover just what the argument for SOPA was to start with?
No, not the argument that only a jewish cabal of Nazi seeking to control the world thought it up, but, you know, the argument that some legislators must have had for suggesting what was destined to become the much reviled SOPA.
You can’t fight a political opponent without understanding what they are on about. So letting your inner moonbat flap free isn’t going to help us better grasp the strategic situation.
For the record, I never support any restrictions on free speech whether on or off line.
What I am against is faulty logic, irrationality and political extremism or mob mentality… even when the mob and extremism is on the right side of the debate.
It’s still wrong.
00
“Relax – take a look at the Bill” Joe Lieberman on YouTube
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?38864-Lier-Lieberman-The-Secret-Behind-SOPA..-
…….
The Money Trail – Supporters and Opposers
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-s968/money
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-s968/show
00
That begs the question what was the safety value on the pressure cooker before the Age of the Internet, circa 1995?
What kept the societal pressure cooker from exploding before the Internet?
Ah, a clue! Politicians disconnected from reality will be voted out of office.
Maybe a better analogy is that the Internet IS the pressure cooker and the safety value is free and fair elections?
00
–from a new book blurb for sale on Amazon
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0465024424/ref=as_li_tf_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=wwwviolentkicom&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=0465024424
00
Sonny, you invoked Godwin’s Law in the very first comment of a thread.
You should have used ALL CAPS too.
00
–Steward Briand, Whole Earth Review, 1985
00
Wes,
You have written many comments here but in the end you have not stated where you stand on SOPA, the only thing you have said is that it is unconstitutional, do you endorse it or do you not
Be careful here Wes because this is a question of civil liberties and we would not want to give the appearance of supporting the policies of a particular far, far, far, far left politician now would we.
Good luck in getting yourself out of this bind
00
I cleared stated above:
SOPA is clearly a restriction on free speech, so I didn’t support it.
Moreover, It couldn’t have survived a court challenge in the United State due to the First Amendment which clearly states:
See Lawrence Tribe’s memo on SOPA which describes the constitutional argument against SOPA.
SOPA isn’t a conspiracy of Pure Evil intent on enslaving the world, just another typically bungling big government attempt at regulating the wildly open free frontiers of the Internet, which they simply don’t understand can’t be directly regulated without throwing the baby out with the bath water.
See Australia’s own bungled history of Internet censorship.
Bungling SOPA is on par with Gillard’s bungled NBN which is essential the government wishing to own and control of the Internet’s physical delivery system in Australia.
Remember these are the same kind of people who can’t install pink bats without burning the whole house down. Now they want to manage the Earth’s Climate and improve the Internet.
They’re not evil, just dangerously dumb.
00
Wes:
About the same result isn’t it? If one is dumb enough then they’ll be used by the evil ones. If the dumb ones hold political office then they are even more easily corrupted than average (evil+).
Who created this piece of garbage SOPA? Where was it written? What lobby wanted it to go through?
Those are the tough questions no one seems to be asking anymore.
00
If we let them take control of the net we may as well all stand aside and let ourselves be become the mindless, servile drones I’m sure many in Government and especially the UN would like us to be, we must stand up and be counted before we become invisible.
00
Great leaps forward are inspired by information. And always resisted by the powers of the day.
This whole idea of having to protest the govt saying “please Mr Govt man or woman, don’t do this” every time they do something like this has got real old, real fast.
I stand with the anarcho-capitalists now. Govt is a bunch of thugs who deserve no respect at all. Best just to get rid of them.
00
It is a strawman argument. Privacy is not such a problem, the designers, authors, promoters and distributors of media have changed during the new mediums development. In the main, they have been able to lock in some value for their IP currently produced and distributed.
The Internets flow of informative value was idealized as a freedom for humankind. It is the regulations of copyright that threatens this ideal. It is wrong, we did need commerce for the stellar growth of the Internet, but again, humans have lost our wills to commerce.
Governments should make available a true global village of Internet information without commerce, along with the commercial Internet.
00
If governments make available a global internet village of information, they can make it unavailable any time they like. The point is whether one wants to abrogate more power and personal freedom to the plutocrats. Qui bono? The same cabal who would impose global control via carbon dioxide regulation.
00
SOPA is one thing and one thing only..designed to STOP internet freedom of information. The NWO is running scared of the alternative media which is fast disseminating the news and FACTS about all its criminal activity not just recent but over the last 50 years or so.
BUT mayb some hope … from infowars.com
00
Nothing gets the attention of a politician faster than the dissatisfaction of constituents. They pay strict attention to their next election chances. We shall see how it all works out.
Write your congressman and senators.
00
I want a list of the ones that supported it at first. I don’t care if they sensed a changing wind and bailed- they should have known better!
I am sick and tired of having to watch the reports all the time to be sure I’m not losing some freedom or right on a weekly basis.
It is past time to put up with this crap and hold them accountable.
00
If only there was a politician that promoted and supported the civil liberties of the people……………..
I have been accused by Wes of………….well several things really but one was calling the USA a dictatorship but really was i that wrong.
Look at the great dictatorships we have today, Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea to name but a few what do they all have in common……………thats right interenet restrictions and why do you suppose that is?
They do this to stop the spread of information, stop this and you keep a tight control on the populace no different here with SOPA as i said the USA is nothing more than a dictatorship whether you like it or not.
00
One of the reasons why I am a huge fan of freedom of speech is because it allows people to self-identify their values and beliefs no matter how ridiculous.
Crakar24, may I ask if you have ever been to the USA?
00
Is the US still Bankrupt?
On March 17, 1993, on page 1303 of Volume 33 of the Congressional Record, Congressman Traficant stated:
“Mr. Speaker, We are now here in Chapter 11. Members of Congress are official trustees presiding over the greatest reorganization of any bankrupt entity in world history, the U.S. Government.”
This is an amazing confession as it applies, not only to “Members of Congress,” but also to the Secretary of the Treasury as the “Receiver in bankruptcy” and to all state and federal “officials” who act under the de facto authority of that bankrupt Foreign Corporation known as the United States as trustees (foreign agents) for foreign principals. Trustees work for the creditors of a bankruptcy and are agents for foreign principals. In this case the creditors are the Federal Reserve Banks, the International Monetary Fund (the Fund) and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (the Bank).
It is worthy of note that an Attorney/Representative is required to file a “Foreign Agents Registration Statement” pursuant to 22 U.S.C.A. 611c(1)(iv), 612 & 613), when representing the interests of a Foreign Principal or Power. (See: Rabinowitz vs. Kennedy, 376 U.S. 605, 11 L. Ed. 2d 940, 18 U.S.C.A. 219 & 951)
00
What your “wonderful military get upto when you are asleep at the helm”
Some reasons why there needs to be an interference free internet and information flow.
see link http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=28753 by Pilger
AND
No dictatorship EH mate!
here
http://tv.globalresearch.ca/2012/01/ndaa-just-one-more-link-chain-tyranny
Note the word TYRANNY never before used so much by so many about one man OBAMA even more than GW Bush!
00
You must be a paid agitprop. The US may appear as a dictatorship, you may imagine it is. It isn’t yet and there will be some difficulty in becoming one. Think what you want and have some tea with Kevin Moore.
Peas in a pod I’d say…..
00
To Wes,
Not sure of the relavance but no i have not been to the USA, i have been to:
England
New Zealand
Thailand
Malaysia
Dubia
Singapore
Saudi Arabia
Yemen
Bahrain
Does this help?
00
To Mark D,
Everything you have just said is bullshit but i mean that in a nice way, let me explain.
In fact i would say that Kevin and myself are the only two here that have a grasp on reality.
We sit here everyday and bang on about the carbon tax but what is the purpose of the CT? Its purpose is to add another layer of government control and it does this in many ways. One way is take a bit more money out of your pocket, how many people here have a mortgage? We get up everyday go to work to pay our debts and then we do the same the next day and the next and the next and we will do this for the rest of our lives. In other words we are slaves to debt, everyone of us are slaves to debt with the help of the private banking system.
The CT also adds a layer of control by restricting our use of electricity, there will never be a replacement to fossil fuels by “alternatives” soon we will be taxed per kilometer so we wont drive our cars, we wont have power 24/7, all restrictions and controlls with the added bonus of a new revenue stream. Agenda 21 of course spells it out more eloquently.
We have GPS systems in our car so they can track us and if we get out of our cars we have a GPS in our phones, they can listen to your conversation via your phone even if you are not making a call, In Australia you cant buy a prepaid phone without showing ID. They want a cashless society so they know where and who we buy things via plastic cards. Next time you are surfing that porn site somebody knows you are there…..remember that.
Echelon enables us to spy on you and you to spy on us, in most places you cant take one step without being watched on CCTV, in the USA you have warrantless wire taps, patriot acts, enemy expiation acts and the NDAA oh and dont forget the TSA who have now taken to random checkpoints anywhere (Ve vant to zee your papers).
The NDAA states quite clearly that if you have more than a weeks worth of food in the house you can be considered and enemy of the state, stripped of your US citizenship sent to Gitmo as an enemy combatant, the thing is written so vague it can be used to detain anyone.
We saw that here when Howard brought in sweeping changes after 911, next thing you know protesters were being arrested under the terrorism act. We see government now trying to muzzle media that does not agree with them. The increase in costs from the CT cannot be displayed on the bill WTF!!!!
Our lives are controlled every step of the way but most are to stupid to see it, we all need to wake up, its your chance to wake up Mark and vote in someone who wants to end this shit. In fact i would say this is Americas Arab spring and we have seen your police brutallity in that area is no different to Egypt and the like.
So in summary Mark we all live in a seudo dictatorship some worse than others you are closer than i and when the first poor schmuck is arrested under the NDAA you will be in one, welcome to the new Amerika comrade.
00
Hi Mark
Perhaps you and Crackar are looking at the US from different angles.
I recently spent two years trying to research and understand where all the money I had in shares went to. The problems may have been world wide but the US was definitely at the centre of the catastrophe and theft and deception and all those ugly things do belong to America.
I have also been through US controlled airport terminals in Washington, New York and Hawaii and can say without any doubt that the US has the nastiest, most unpleasant, most intrusive customs staff in the entire world. Frankfurt in Germany by contrast was better at security but also more pleasant, fair and business-like.
On the other hand I have studied courses in the local university here using US textbooks and stand in awe of the education system at the top levels (climate science excepted).
Have also spent 9 days in the centre of New York city and was gobsmacked at the people. They are polite, decent and obviously well served by their police force following the 9/11 disaster.
They seem not to feel threatened and are relaxed. The average australian could learn a lot there.
No doubt you go outside of Manhattan and you may start to experience a different, more rugged America.
The point is , they know how to make a decent liveable community but they can’t extend it to the entire US.
I dislike their apparent warmongering but without them Australia would have fallen to the Japanese in the 1940s.
The world isn’t perfect and that’s why we need the ability to communicate on the net without censorship.
🙂
00
Quoting Crakar24,
All I can say is that it’s the most arrogant statement I’ve ever seen made by anyone posting on this blog.
Now I would like to call everyone’s attention to some facts — actually I’ll stop with one but you’ll get the point. It is Australia now being driven into the ground with an economy killing “carbon” tax. We beat ours down in the legislature and have a very good chance of beating down the EPA’s attempts at doing the same thing by regulation. If we really want to throw barbs at each other there are plenty to go around.
It ill becomes us to be in this childish pissing contest. We need each other. The United States is not perfect but neither is Australia. We can either go to war through the Internet or stop this and remember that we have a common cause that unites us.
I strongly suggest that the latter is the more beneficial course for everyone.
00
Here you go
http://techcrunch.com/2012/01/19/sopa-opponents-supporters/
00
Proving what I said at 6.1.
The politician isn’t interested in getting things done right. They grease the squeakiest wheel — squeakiest meaning the one most likely to get them reelected. That’s what representative government is all about — who will have power and who will not. And you have power, literally depending on how loud you squeak.
00
Money speaks louder than words –
Top recipients for ALL supporting interest groups -SOPA PIPA
Name Amount Received Vote On Passage
Sen. Charles Schumer [D, NY] $913,165
Sen. Harry Reid [D, NV] $710,470
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand [D, NY] $605,025
Sen. Barbara Boxer [D, CA] $574,114
Sen. Patrick Leahy [D, VT] $441,650
Sen. Michael Bennet [D, CO] $356,556
Sen. Robert Portman [R, OH] $348,325
Sen. Roy Blunt [R, MO] $341,700
Sen. Patty Murray [D, WA] $313,200
Sen. Richard Burr [R, NC] $276,950
Rep. Howard Berman [D, CA-28] $396,700
Rep. Eric Cantor [R, VA-7] $277,050
Rep. Steny Hoyer [D, MD-5] $255,750
Rep. Anna Eshoo [D, CA-14] $190,650
Rep. John Boehner [R, OH-8] $188,100
Rep. Michael Thompson [D, CA-1] $185,309
Rep. James Clyburn [D, SC-6] $182,936
Rep. Mary Bono Mack [R, CA-45] $161,950
Rep. Nancy Pelosi [D, CA-8] $158,050
Rep. David Camp [R, MI-4] $154,000
00
Think of what could be done if every citizen put, say $100 into a PAC. We could buy our country back. The trouble is, you can’t get any two people to agree on what should be done. That’s basically why we lose.
An example from my latest Judicial Watch email update:
What do you do about people who just plain don’t pay attention to what’s going on?
00
If they were serious about copyright piracy they’d go after the pirates. Individually.
This is like suing the RAN for allowing pirates to use the sea. Or like convicting paper manufacturers because some people use their paper for writing treasonous documents.
Personal responsibility is fairness, you reap what you sow etc. Collective responsibility is tyranny. The USA appears to have gone completely bonkers with this excreble legislation.
00
Nice one Bruce.
We’ve had this type of “collectivism” in Australia now for the last 40 years and it has been very damaging.
Personal responsibility is down, crime is up as are social security benefits and all this in the name of “compassion”.
The only real compassion needed in modern society is from politicians.
If politicians did their jobs and pre-planned a little, ensured that those on the Dole were moved onto some useful paid work, provided physical protection to the community by active Policing, supported police with court sentences that actively discouraged crime; what a wonderful world.
I’m tired of just being seen by the “machine” as just a vote that can be manipulated by media for the ease and benefit of politicians who feel they can isolate themselves from the mess they have created of our once promising country.
00
Jo,
Science is in for a major butt kicking and correction.
Who funds science?
Who does the majority of advertising in media?
Who do we go to for information if the internet was not available?
Imagine your mindset 10 years ago and if the internet was not available?
What propaganda were you exposed to and even today without the internet?
00
Joe,
You have nailed it. The government through left wing journalists control the flow of information to the people. It is not just what the MSM disseminate, it is what they fail to disseminate that causes the ignorance. The net solved that problem as it passes on everything and leaves it up to the reader to establish his or her personal view. That is a problem for the MSM for no longer are they relevant and a problem for the government for no longer can they control the flow of information. The perfect example is found here http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/piersakerman/ and his story of the missing report 117. While it seems to have disappeared from the government site it reappeared on a French site and is available much to the embarrassment, one suspects, of Albanese and Gillard. Only for the web it would have just faded away and Australians would not be aware of the parlous condition of our fuel reserves and sources and possible solutions.
00
Lawrie, David Archibald spotted that missing report 117, and we posted it here –http://joannenova.com.au/2011/12/inconvenient-energy-paper-vanishes-from-government-site/
Yes, “it’s what they don’t say”…
00
And internally we have been arguing about whether we can use the material in our research, or not, because we can’t make references to, it that look authoritative. These games are just so frustrating.
00
Jo,
Sorry to change flavor but I saw this article and nearly plotzed
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/8282028/Michael-Mann-vows-to-keep-up-the-street-fight-against-climate-change-deniers.html
After all the work we’ve done exposing the bias in leading climate scientists, sometimes it’s better straight from the horses mouth.
“Scientists are in a “street fight” to prove climate change is happening, according to Michael Mann, the physicist who first created the controversial hockey stick graph.
[Really Michael? A streetlight to prove that climate change is happening? So it’s never been about an honest investigation into the causes of climate change but rather a DIRTY STREET FIGHT with anybody who doesn’t share your particular worldview. These aren’t the statements of a rational and objective scientists. These are statements from a pathological maniac with an axe to grind.]
“The Director of Penn State Earth System Science Center said the so-called ‘climategate’ scandal was meant to “intimidate” scientists.”
[No, it was meant to expose the unethical and unprofessional behavior of climatoligists to any open minded individual who cared to read them. The intimidation felt by scientists such as Phil Jones was a natural response to being caught out engaged in scientific fraud.]
“He said personal emails between himself and colleagues at the University of East Anglia were stolen in a “malicious and intentional” attempt to make scientists afraid to express their opinions.
[Scientists that inform government on billion dollar decisions should not be disseminating their OPINION but should be reporting the objective facts based on rigorous and unbiased analysis]
“What they are trying to do is to blur the distinction between private correspondence and scientific data and methods, which of course should be out there for other scientists to reproduce,” he said.
[This is complete nonsense. The private correspondence included discussions ABOUT scientific data and methods that revealed a completely different reality than what was being reported out on as “settled science”. If Scientific data and methods SHOULD be out there for other scientists to reproduce then why do these guys declare themselves “above FOI requests”, lose data, find data, lie about it, refuse to make code public etc etc.?]
In an interview with a leading British newspaper, Professor Mann suggested that the hacking was a “smear campaign” funded by the fossil fuel industry, who have the most to lose if the world switches to renewable energy.
[How much funding does one individual really need to leak some scandalous emails? Its more likely an anonymous whistleblower from within their own ranks who feels too intimidated to come out in the open? And why wouldn’t they considering the witch hunt going on now to find this ‘cyber terrorist’? Hey Mann, it may be difficult for you to understand but not everybody sells out for cash. Some people will risk everything in the defense of the truth.]
“I think it’s intentional and malicious. Its intended to chill scientific discourse, to intimidate scientists working in areas that threaten these special interests,” he added.
[If scientists feel intimidated by having what they have written to each other made public then perhaps they need to atop writing crap – its not that hard]
Professor Mann became the centre of the climate change debate after he published his ‘hockey stick graph’ in 1998.
[They even made it into a movie!]
The graph show temperature rise over the last 1,000 years.
However sceptics argued that is was inaccurate and misleading because it failed to show the variations over the centuries and much of the earlier information was based on vague data like tree rings.
[It was not only skeptics that thought this particular reconstruction was “crap”. See climate gate emails for more..]
Professor Mann said he had always been clear that the graph had been simplified and in any case it is only one graph that proves man made climate change.
[Yes, if by “simplify” you mean ignore the hitherto accepted temperature history of the past 1000 years and use a “trick” to “hide the decline”. Are all the other graphs that prove climate change held to the same standards?]
“When we first published our Nature article in 1998, we want back six centuries,” he said. “A year later we published a follow-up going back 1,000 years with quite a few caveats. In fact, the caveats and uncertainties appeared in the title, and the abstract emphasised just how tentative this study was because of the complicating issues.
“It is frustrating that to some extent all of that context has been lost and the result has been caricatured. Often the error bars are stripped away, making it appear more definitive than it was ever intended.”
[Who strips away the error bars Mann? Who is trying to make things look more definitive than intended? Are you suggesting that the IPCC reporting process is biased toward a definitive alarmist position? We thought the science was settled!]
Even though the climate change debate is calmer today, with even Republican candidates in the US taking the issue seriously, Professor Mann insisted scientists have to keep up the pressure to prove man made climate change is a threat that needs to be tackled.
[PROFESSOR MANN INSISTED SCIENTISTS HAVE TO KEEP UP THE PRESSURE TO PROVE MAN MADE CLIMATE CHANGE IS A THREAT THAT NEEDS TO BE TACKLED. Mann, you are not a scientist. Scientists dont pressure others into becoming political activists for “the cause”. You are a disgrace!]
“Scientists have to recognised they are in a street fight,” he warned.
[“First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.”
Mahatma Gandhi.]
RELATED ARTICLES
00
Sonny,
If it is a street fight, it is because your side made it so. Just check what happened to this lady:
http://www.rtcc.org/policy/katharine-hayhoe-qa-climate-scientists-in-usa-under-attack/
What about the Australian scientists who received death threats?
And speaking of Mann, how about Steve McIntyre and Anthony Watts linking him to a totally unrelated pedophilia case at Penn State? This is beyond the pale.
Pot, meet kettle.
00
But, not only are they “an official observer” to the UNFCCC, they also run one of the UNFCCC outreach programmes through Climate Change TV. They are a media outlet, albeit a somewhat amateurish one.
The actual interview with Katharine Hayhoe is, in my opinion, sub-par propaganda, full of leading questions and quotes that aren’t quite quotes.
Ms Hayhoe has, according to the article, received some hate mail, which is unfortunate, but the article seeks to link that incident to the fact that she wrote a chapter for Newt Gingrich’s boot that was dropped pre-publication, so was never in the public domain. Say what?
I am not even going to comment on the (perhaps libellous) comment about McIntyre and Watts.
Bernard, you are new at this, aren’t you?
00
… she wrote a chapter for Newt Gingrich’s boot …
She actually wrote it for his BOOK, but Newt gave it the boot. 🙂
I don’t so much need a spell checker as a “Duh” checker.
00
Bernard B
Sorry , I gave you a tick mistakenly without having read comments either side.
Bernard, if thieves and tax parasites get caught out they have no one to blame but themselves.
In a world where Australian Universities are forced to have Departments of Climate Change in their mix we are really in deep do do.
These departments are thinly disguised environmental advocacy units and a disgrace for Australian education.
00
“”What about the Australian scientists who received death threats?””
Get a grip on reality, Bernard.
The cause of angst towards these “scientists” is because they are behaving badly. Obfuscation, lies, misinformation.
They were erroneously predicting catastrophe. “The end of the world is nigh” they have been proclaiming and for the destruction of enlightenment we could have received from ours development of fossil fuel energy.
They are no more than religious charlatans lurking in the white coats of science. They deceived us by claiming Authority.
THE C02 PARADIGM of CLIMATE CHANGE ID DEAD. ENLIGHTENMENT IS UPON US.
THE UNIFIED THEORY OF CLIMATE is the right answer about the atmosphere effects on temperature. We now know the truth. Rejoice for the world is free of climate change fear.
This is from a real scientist;
1) The atmospheric composition is COMPLETELY irrelevant; water vapor has no impact on ATE and the proof is in the fact that all planets follow the same pressure curve (Fig. 5) despite the vast differences in atmos. composition and that, of all planets, water vapor only occurs on Earth;
(2) the atmosphere does not slow down Earth’s cooling as claimed by the current GH theory; it ENHANCES the energy provided by the Sun thanks to pressure;
(3) The thermal enhancement effect of pressure has nothing to do with convection, water cycle or any other transport mechanisms. It is a manifestation of the physical force that pressure represents (since, by definition, pressure is a force per unit area!).
Get down in the streets and party Skeptics, we have won.
00
Markus,
Do you have a link to the quotes you made?
By the way, I have no dog in this argument. There are valid points made by both sides.
00
http://www.wcrp-climate.org/conference2011/posters/C7/C7_Nikolov_M15A.pdf
There ya go.
00
So make your valid points, Bernard Dog, old boy!
To smear Steve McIntyre and Watts as morally equivalent to the last decade of almost daily dirty tricks, media lies and scientific shenanigans of the warmists is a complete mischaracterisation of the climate debate.
And about those Australian scientists who received death threats. They lied. They didn’t even call the Australian Federal Police until AFTER the sent out a Press Release to the ABC and Fairfax media. Btw, the AFP never opened an investigation.
But if you like I have a bookmark folder full of vile warmist beyond the pale stuff.
Perhaps we can post and compare?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfnddMpzPsM&feature=player_embedded
Lest we forget.
00
Bernard, On “Death Threats” the only thing we know for sure is that there was no substantial threat behind the headlines that screamed that climate scientists were receiving them. Thus we can prove that the climate scientists and their media cabal are shameless spinners who will say anything to smear skeptics, and win public sympathy.
http://joannenova.com.au/2011/09/death-threats-respect-the-science/
Even if one threat was made after the headlines, that doesn’t make the outrageous dishonesty acceptable.
00
With all due respect, Bernard, the initiator of the bullying and dirty tactics were the alarmists, through the “settled science” paradigm which brooked no argument through intimidation and vilification (the nazism “denier” tag ) and marginalization (and even rejoicing in their death of colleagues who questioned them), not only individuals who dared challenge them, but also scientific journals who failed to tow the journalistic line and were downgraded and devalued. Scientific knowledge was never attained through suppression. I’m sure every corrupt politician has received hate mail, it doesn’t reduce their guilt in their crime that some other party vilifies or threaten them, and it is hardly fair to tar any and all who recognise the zealotry and that science itself has been tainted, because of the actions of a vast minority of intemperate and ignorant people who react with anger and threaten others when their is the suppression of appropriate dialogue. The ANU death threats were a storm in a teacup, I’ve personally received worse. Purely used a tool to further suppress dissent. So, perhaps some perspective?
00
….Says Bernard
Penn State failed to apply checks and balances, which allowed paedophilia to fester.
The same Penn State failed to apply checks and balances, which allowed bogus science by a bogus scientist to fester.
In both cases, observers may legitimately ask if the revenues brought into the university by the two men influenced the application of the said checks and balances.
You may claim not to have a dog in the fight Bernard, but your fained indignation indicates your failure to:-
A-) grasp the gravity of the situation, or
B-) Blinkered view of the subject matter.
Which is it?
00
If it’s a street fight the Mann gang has a problem. This neighborhood has Eddy A……Nobody messes with Eddy A., Nobody
00
Yeah, don’t mess with Eddy. Just ignore the sod.
00
John,
I do hope you don’t treat your university colleagues to the same contempt you dish out here.
00
I would suggest you follow your own advice, John. Every time I see one of your imbecilic comments on this site I am going to intellectually pound you into silly putty. I don’t know if it is the kindness of Jo’s heart tha keeps you here or if it is for entertainment value but you are an unappreciative piece of work!
I have come to realize that you will never post anything worth reading because lobotomies cannot be reversed!
00
It needs to be said that these “scientists” have totally trashed and bastardised the rigours of scientific method –no wonder there are so many skeptics!
I’m wondering if , next time some press unit does a poll on “trust in organisations” how low on the totem pole will be climate scientists?
00
“S.O.P.A. is Pre-Planned Entrapment”
http://thecrowhouse.com/sopa.html
00
It also isn’t going anywhere.
00
Bernard B,
Did you have any other comments on my post or is
1. You started it, and
2. Pot call kettle black
The extent if your thoughts on the matter?
And by the way, death threats against Australian scientists was a media blowup to vilify the skeptics and deniers and detract from the real issue – dodgy science behind government taxation. Your side has no real evidence and no real defense for climategate so you resort to smear and distract campaigns or my favorite, claiming that scientists were “taken out of context.”
00
Apologies, way O/T but didn’t know where to draw JN attention:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/michael-mann-the-climate-scientist-who-the-deniers-have-in-their-sights-6290232.html
A Michael Manne whinge but the comments in response are incredible.
00
Jo, you are a scientist, can you help me with this philosophical musing?
Can the enhancement of energy be explained by;
EE = Mc2nRT . That is, can Energy Enhancement equal the kenetic energy of its mass?
00
I am Man.
I say, there is no physical changes to our Climate from Man.
I say, the atmosphere does not change our Climate.
I say, the difference in the Energy Enhancement of our atmosphere is caused by the incident pressure of our atmosphere, and that pressure changes our Climate.
I say, GHGs do not change our atmosphere
I am Man, I am the truth.
00
Mmmm, no loony’s in this asylum clearly.
So, have I got this right markus? If you say it is so then it is so? Right? No references, no research, just your word right? Yes, very convincing. Clearly climate science is all crap. What was I thinking?
00
No. I am a man of nature, not science.
The enhanced energy of matter is relative to the value of its kinetic energy. The radiative heat near the earths surface is due to the force of pressure on mass. The temperature of a atmosphere can be predicted by indicative pressure.
Looney, is what flat earthers called Galileo. You will have to eat all the words about AGW you have propitiated.
Yea, I’m brilliantly looney.
00
Please, please don’t say things like this Markus. You really, really shouldn’t.
00
How’s the Murdoch Media hating, lefto greenie, warmist troll today, jonnyboy.
Truth is going to make the job of warmest trolls a bit harder now. Here is a graphic, so you can get up to speed.
http://www.wcrp-climate.org/conference2011/posters/C7/C7_Nikolov_M15A.pdf
There only 15 pages attached to the abstract, jonnyboy, maybe even you can read it. As for your cognitive ability to comprehend it , well you know.
00
Ya mean, Please, please don’t say things like the truth, Markus. You really, really shouldn’t.
jonnyboy, how are you going to cope when the hand of dissonance taps you on the shoulder.
00
Just my word? Of all the types around, why wouldn’t you just accept it?
You have accepted implausibility, when told by Authority. Rather than doing the research, making the references, and formulating your own thoughts, you believed. Go away non-scientist, for science is the domain of Skepticism.
00
Well then reference your peer reviewed work then markus. That’s all I ask. Show me the science. Is that so hard of you’ve done the research?
Or didn’t you quite get that far? Mmm, thought not.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence as I think Sagan would have said.
00
There is a mountain of peer reviewed material in Climate Science. Most of it worth no more than toilet paper.
If the peer review of climate science is so infallible, why has the Co2 theory been disproved.
00
You know a lot of skeptical scientist (and laypeople) have said that many many times. So since you brought it up, where is yours?
00
Extraordinary claims need the truth, not like the extraordinary evidence of C02 Climate Science.
00
Then please explein to me why it’s so cold at the top of mountains. I have the same view as markus. There is no ‘greenhouse effect’, that concept breaks the second law of physics. The only explaination of the temperature of the atmosphere, that obeys the laws of physics, is that the atmopshere merely slows down the escape of radiative energy into space.
Ever wondered why it is warmer in a high pressure whether cell than a low one? If the bogus greenhouse gas theory was true then high and low pressures cells would not make a difference to temperature.
We can already test this and proove it by taking ‘greenhouse gas’ measurements and compare them against barometric pressure and temperature. I just don’t think anyone in both true believers and luke warmers are prepared to let go of this ‘greenhouse ‘gas nonsense and admit we’ve all been royally duped by fallacious logic and intellectual slight of hand.
As for SOPA. The internet is too big. While you can attack the world wide web, the internet will simply morph into the next iteration. Some say usenet is coming back. There will be a resurgence so, do park some money in ISP’s who have developed usenet clients. But, if you look at the trend, it is clear that the internet is becoming peer to peer. Which ironically, is what the original server architecture was until WWW monetisation took place.
00
Your right, Temp, the psuedoscience regurgitated by the climate con men is crap. You are such a cheese eating sorry excuse for a troll that it beggars the imagination and you are a hypocrite to boot. The day you practice what you preach is the day you may get some respect. You post less citations and links than JB.
I have yet to see anything beyond juvenile, sophomoric kindergarten crap fall from your keyboard! Nothing short of intellectual litter that needs to be flushed down the site’s sewer.
I am eagerly awaiting your idiotic response!
00
You’re right as always but do trolls know how to use the apostrophe?
00
Go easy on him, he’s probably just spent all of his youthful years in the compulsory government indoctrination system.
00
Here are the weekend headlines:
Mid summer snow in New Zealand
Waterloo Iowa breaks 108 year snow fall record
Record snowfall Thurston county Washington
Snow in the Sahara desert
Anchorage smashes snowfall record
seattle: Winters worth of snow in one day
Record cold in Canada
Missoula sees record snow fall
Mt Bachelor ski area closed due to too much snow
00
Sorry i forgot
Is there anything CO2 cannot do?
00
Dear JoNova,
In the early years of the Hawke government I was one day going around and around on the tractor listening to the ABC rural radio when Senator Peter Walsh, at the time the acting Minister for Agriculture, was being interviewed.
The journalist asked what I thought was a particularly inane question, “What if the farmers are forced to walk off their land”?
The reply shocked me. “If the farmers walk off their land there are plenty of other people ready and waiting to walk back onto that land and operate it”.
However I was in for an even bigger shock. I immediately stopped the tractor and jogged the kilometre or so back to the house and rang the ABC.
The voice on the line may have been Colin Munro, though I did not ask. His manner suggested that he was not at all surprised to be getting a call over this matter.
I asked for a transcript of the interview.
To get that transcript I would have had to pay $50 and sign an agreement protecting Senator Walsh’s copyright.
I went back to the tractor stunned.
Every word uttered publicly on matters of policy by an elected politician or a public servant should be public property. Not subject to personal copyright.
Who would have got the $50? The ABC could reasonably have charged maybe $5. Would any of that money have gone to Senator Walsh?
As for PIPA. There are people in high places in the US who hope to maintain their economic power through holding property rights on information of all kinds, especially patents. Their hope is futile. Their existing legislation on these matters is heavily overdone, and cannot stand the competition from around the world. There are always people trying to patent the wheel. Their greed will bring them unstuck.
00
Ted O’brien,
Fast forward to today….
You’re on your tractor listening to your iPod and you hear an ABC interview that gets your political juices flowing… you go online to political forums
and post links to the interview file or start a critical blog and upload the offensive interview to your blog so as to preserve it in case the ABC removes it from their servers. We’ve come a long way in information handling.
In fairness to old Auntie, back in the Hawke era they might well have had to sit down a secretary at Selectric typewriter with a reel-to-reel next to her in order to produce a one-off transcript for your order. 50 bucks is cheap, mate.
If a business spends millions of dollars to design a better mousetrap it must have some right to see the value of that mousetrap protected from people who want a better mousetrap but who would rather not pay for one.
If there are no property rights for inventors, designers, artists, drug companies, etc. then the only things that will be invented or created will be done so outside the rules of the free market.
Maybe the Catholic church or the federal government could step in and fund all the research and development we need in the future out of the goodness of their hearts? No evil profit motive necessary.
Perhaps most films, books and music could be created by people funded by political parties and interest groups or teams of enthusiastic volunteer labour? Without any property rights it would be difficult for the creative minorities which quite literally power the evolution of civilisation to fund their efforts.
I worry that extremist positions against ALL property rights on creative products of innovation would not only severely limit innovation, but also lead to exactly the opposite result we would wish for — vastly increasing the power of government and NGOs because only they would have strong incentive to fund innovations of any kind, whether it be artistic or scientific or purely practical technologies.
Perhaps what would suffer the most is incremental improvements in consumer products for which the only possible motive is to market a better mousetrap. For instance, why design a better computer application, if you have to give it away for free?
And the kinds of innovation that government and special interest groups will continue fund in world without intellectual property rights would be mostly designed to consolidate their own power. For your own good, of course.
If inventors and creators have no property rights to the things they created, then why should there be property rights for stuff that is merely bought & sold, you know, like your farm or house? Property rights are just a scam for “people in high places who hope to maintain their economic power. Their existing legislation on these matters is heavily overdone, and cannot stand the competition from around the world…. Their greed will bring them unstuck.”
Be careful what you wish for.
Political philosophy is like analogy clock. You go around too far to the right and you end up on the left. The extreme Left and the Right are just like 12 o’clock and 1 o’clock, they’re very close together.
00
Yes.
There is a story, about an incident in the Spanish Civil War, which has a interesting quote: … I approached three dirty and battle weary soldiers, and asked them if they were fighting for the Communists or the Fascists. They looked at each other. Two shrugged, and the third one said, ‘We don’t know, we just fight’.
00
Rereke,
I’m afraid that’s what it has come to.
I blame our post-modern education system with its emphasis on cultural and moral relativism and its failure to teach our children how to think logically and read the dead languages in which the foundational documents of our civilisation were composed in.
Yet, unlike the children here who imagine a conspiracy lurks behind each stone in the path, I attribute it all to simply the cycles of history, politics and culture and, as always, to human nature’s predilection to — pardon the modern phraseology — fuck up.
00
Hi Wes,
You have taken the big picture view of societies there while I think if you look what causes all the worlds FUs you will find the same basic driving force.
There are always individuals who see the instant pot of gold if they can take over a societies money supply and they will go for it.
The temptation of not having to work 20 years to build a reasonable lifestyle through saving is too great.
Humans will use any sort of deceit, subterfuge or outright theft to get their “instant fix” and too hell with the masses who see their hard work stolen/ re-directed.
You have to hand it to the Proprietors of the Global Warming “Scheme”.
They have done well for themselves but I always look for the good in a situation.
It may be, as Global CO2 Warming collapses and an understanding of the scam is a embedded in our culture, that there will be a cynical backlash against authority that changes the way democracies in the west function.
maybe, but on past history probably we will keep making the same FUs just in different disguise..
00
Wes,
I keep on thinking that you and I need to get together over a beverage as some stage – we can’t keep meeting like this 🙂
00
Fascism is just another flavor of socialism. National Socialist party and all that.
The reason fascists and communists fight is because they are arguing about the implementation of socialism. The most bitter fights are always between those arguing over the implementation of a belief system.
Make no mistake, there is nothing ‘right’ (I hate the term) about Fascists. They believe in government control over individuals and planned economies and societies. They are just a different flavor of socialism.
00
brc
I think you are getting hung up on the similarities of name. There is actually a big difference between National Socialism and Socialism, and that is in the ownership of property.
National Socialists encourage private enterprise, competition between companies, etc. What they do however, is influence how the output of that enterprise is distributed for the “social good”.
Socialists want the government to own the whole supply chain, including the means of production as well as distribution.
Fascism, is actually a good political model, since it encourages those with real ability to rise to the top in industry and the professions. Spain, under Franco, is a good example.
Socialism, on the other hand allows those who are good at intrigue and politics to rise to the top, whether or not they have any productive ability. Most Western governments are socialist, it is just that some are more so than others. Take the UN and EU as examples.
Unfortunately, Fascism is now totally beyond the pale, because of being hijacked by the Nazi movement in the 1930’s and 40’s, in much the same way that the Australian Labour Government has been hijacked by the Green movement today.
00
Rereke – I disagree, and here’s why.
Socialism isn’t necessarily about the government owning everything – although in a pure socialist case, such as communism, the state does own everything.
Socialism can be defined by central planning – the idea that inequities and distortions can be overcome by smart people allocating resources around instead of the highly efficient but imperfect price system.
So the fascists (remember for those playing at home, the Nazis weren’t the only ones) felt that they could achieve this through co-ordinating the efforts of private enterprise – but they were still socialists, albeit of a different manner. As I said, the vilest hate is always reserved for people who are your rivals, rather than your enemy. Hence the communists and fascists ultimately wanting to wipe each other out.
Whether you end up mass-murdering or not as a socialist probably comes down to many other factors, quite possibly to do with the relative wealth of the people before conversion to socialism, or how ‘revolutionary’ they tend to be. Or maybe how far along the grand socialism project they get before they have to abandon it. After all, the murdering and fear are there just because it turns out that people aren’t all the same, and get pretty angry about being treated all the same, crushing their individual spirit which is the essence of the human condition. Regardless of murdering, however, all socialism ends in economic stagnation, despair and general poverty for all – even the people in charge end up much poorer than a CEO at a mid-level prosperous free enterprise.
The only reason any socialist governments have ever had any chance of surviving is because they get the free benefits of technologies developed outside their system. As long as there is somewhere -anywhere – where a truly free individual can risk failure and wasted time and capital on a chance to gain riches for his (or her) efforts.
As I’ve said elsewhere – there are socialists and then there is everyone else. The left/right divide is a foolish way to try and divide great complexities into a simple binary system. And it suits the socialists just fine, because it lets them cast socialism vs non-socialism as two valid, competing theories. Whereas socialism is a completely dead-end idea. But that doesn’t stop the fools from trying to re-inflate it every generation or so with some new woolly-headed thinking. Most people these days try and conflate the modern welfare state/ keynesian debt mess as a ‘social democracy’ – which is a pretty poor analogy. Just because half of the economy is an orgy of government waste and tail-chasing doesn’t mean it’s centrally planned. Even big-government follies like the NBN are still done with private capital, private sector inventions and is ultimately for private sector demand. What it should be called is crony capitalism merged with bad governance – probably the worst of all ideas.
00
Wes, the important cause of indignation from what Ted was saying is this;
To get that transcript I would have had to pay $50 and sign an agreement protecting Senator Walsh’s copyright.
I went back to the tractor stunned.
Every word uttered publicly on matters of policy by an elected politician or a public servant should be public property. Not subject to personal copyright.
Ted is actually correct. We can quibble about whether the cost is reasonable or not (and to answer Ted’s question the ABC would have pocketted all of the $50). Going on about property rights for inventors and creative artists is not relevant to the signing “an agreement protecting Senators Walsh’s copyright”. He is a public figure, an elected representative, talking in a public forum on a public broadcaster. Property rights are not relevant in this case.
00
Truthseeker,
That’s all true.
The ABC should not have demanded an agreement protecting Senator Walsh’s copyright. It would be in the public domain today. So what you are saying is that the copyright rules of the ABC were far less liberal during the Hawke era than today?
I would agree.,
That point settled, please address the germane point of my comment, which is about the right to personally own property, whether it’s the house you own or the novel you wrote or the mousetrap you invented….
Ted thinks its all just greedy “people in high places in the US who hope to maintain their economic power through holding property rights on information of all kinds.”
I think killing off intellectual property rights would have the most egregious unintended consequences, including but hardly limited to, the erosion of all property rights in general.
Where do you stand?
00
I absolutely agree that true intellectual property belongs either to the creator or whomever they pass that ownership to via a commercial or other transaction. However, one has to be careful about assigning property rights to “information”. I can only claim intellectual property rights to what I have created. In the case of a non-fictional work, my intellectual property is my analysis and the words I use to convey it, not the underlying data or information I have used to arrive at my conclusions. Information just is, and is not owned by anyone. It is the human creative element that is deserving of the protection of property rights, not the universe at large. The point is that protecting one is being used to control the other.
00
That’s all true, Truthseeker.
But, gosh, it’s so much more complex than that in the real world.
What if you sell that on to someone else? And what if they sell it on again to some else? Is this kind of third gen ownership of what is after all only “information” protected property?
It gets much worse.
You say that it is the human creative element that deserves property rights. And that’s very true. But it is also true that there can be a “labour” element too. If someone builds a database of information – say a complete record of all equity prices of the last hundred years – they might like to charge for access to this data even though they didn’t create it. They don’t own the data per se, only the access to it in their archives. If you want historic equity prices for free, you’re free to go to the national library and swim through the reams of microfiche to fish out what you need.
Is that fair?
This is essentially what a satellite TV is. You can watch Leave it to Beaver on Youtube, but if you want it organised just so in your living room, you subscribe to Satellite or cable TV.
You can see what I am getting at. In an information-based economy there are many different kinds of information. And the way information is organised defines it usefulness and value.
Increasingly, work our society is based upon information that someone owns access too. So much so that in order to create a new innovation it almost certainly has to be based in part upon the creative or labour element of another person’s earlier work.
The great challenge of the information age is how to arrive at globally accepted protocol, similar to that we already have for physical property, which ensures a smoothly liquid market for intellectual properties.
00
Wes, “grey areas” are only for those people that do not take the time to separate the black from the white which can mean some effort if the granularity of the black and white is small. Let me go through your examples.
What if you sell that on to someone else? And what if they sell it on again to some else? Is this kind of third gen ownership of what is after all only “information” protected property?
Property can be transferred from party to party via sales transactions. Intellectual property is no different. It does not matter how long that chain is. The only limiting factor is that there is a concept that intellectual property has a limited life span which can put it in the “public domain” after a period of time.
But it is also true that there can be a “labour” element too. If someone builds a database of information …
It is the database that contains the creative element, the data relationships, the querying tool, the reports designed, etc. What you are paying for is the convenience of using someone else’s skill in presenting raw data in a useable format. Don’t want to pay? OK go get the raw data yourself, a point you make yourself which is entirely fair (to answer your question).
Satellite TV has creative content. Now “Free to Air” TV release it without charge so that they can sell the advertising time. Their choice. As far as YouTube is concerned, it is a public forum so breach of copyright applies but only if the “clip” is over a certain length and the source is not yet in the public domain (expiry of original intellectual property).
In all the examples you have given, there is creative or intellectual value being added. Even a reference book has copyright because of the effort to put the data in a format that can be more easily used. I really do not see the problem or complexity you are alluding to.
00
It is not greed at all. I’ve spent 15 years developing the software that runs much of my employer’s product line. We have competitors who would love to see how we do it. The copyright on that software along with patents on the unique aspects of the hardware are the only things that allow us to stay in business. Compromise all that and there is no more company.
There simply is no incentive to produce anything, much less innovate if you cannot profit from your own hard work.
Nearly a century of communist failure shows you that I’m right.
00
Roy – that’s probably true. However, much of the value you get from the software is from keeping it a trade secret rather than seeking IP protection (I’m guessing).
The thing is – IP protection is important for a society to prosper. But equally, innovation in protecting IP that doesn’t just rely on courts is important for companies to prosper.
The true winners in the future will find a way to work both aspects of this. If a law becomes unenforceable, and that law is designed to help the business succeed – then the winning business is the one that recognises this and works with how things are, instead of how things ought to be.
00
Wes. You say: “Political philosophy is like analogy clock.”
My analogy is the pendulum. Social management never seems to stop in the middle. It is always either too far one way or too far the other. In extreme cases it may flick from your 11:30 to 12:30, but mostly comes back the other way.
I do not dispute intellectual property rights. I may seek to limit the use of property rights to shut down competition. And I may seek to limit the use of property rights to extract exorbitant fees for an extended period.
It is my view that existing rights in the entertainment field already go too far. iTunes has shown us that consumers are willing to pay if the fee is reasonable.
And YouTube can be used as an excellent way of promoting a product. There should not be a rush to declare it as piracy.
As for PIPA, if it is too greedy it will soon fail. The notion that US legislation covers the world can’t last long.
00
In case anybody has difficulty with my reference to patenting the wheel. Extending by legislation the term of existing copyright is equivalent to granting a patent on the wheel.
00
I agree totally that this legislation is totally evil in intent. Although it looks like it will fail, what is really worrying is that they tried to get this through. That indicates more than anything how bad things have become. They will try again if given half the chance.
BTW On a completely separate point, anybody see ‘The People’s Supermarket’ last night? I was utterly shocked at the Big Supermarkets royally screwing over growers because 48 acres of broccoli were ‘too big’ & 5 acres of big granny smiths apples were no longer ‘in fashion’. Anyone notice that the supermarkets by their actions are selling smaller and smaller incremental sales – basically you need to buy more of the same stuff (at a higher profit point) to keep yourself fed! Now that is EVIL.
00
Kind of on topic, did you know that Ron Paul gas just introduced a bill to remove the section regarding the detention of American citizens from the NDAA bill.
What a crrrrraaaaaaaaaaaaaaaazzzzzzzzzzzyyyyyyyyyy nutjob moonbat Ron Paul is.
If the people of the USA want to keep their civil liberties (SOPA, PIPA, NDAA) then the choice is surely obvious right?
00
Ten minutes ago you compared the USA with North Korea claiming that:
Now you say the people of the USA do have civil liberties after all?
Maybe the USA is a dictatorship just like North Korea but with a Bill of Rights, Constitutional protections and free elections?
00
You really are stupid arent you Wes?
Here we go again…..me having to repeat what i said so you can actually grasp the content.
We are talking about SOPA and every one here is bitching about how a government has no right to take away what is effectively their freedom of speech, do you understand Wes?
Make sure you do because this is the really important bit OK.
Of all the candidates of the GOP and also Obama the ONLY CANDIDATE THAT EVEN MENTIONS THE WORDS CIVIL LIBERTIES AND THE IMPORTANCE OF KEEPING AND GIVING BACK WHAT HAS BEEN TAKEN AWAY IS RON PAUL.
I cannot make that point any clearer than that and if you are too stupid to comprehend it then so be it.
Ten minutes ago i did compare the USA with some of our well known dictatorships that is true because there are many similarities between them.
00
The USA Constitution usurped.
From a Resolution of the California Republican Assembly adopted on March 26, 1995 Number 395.1
“Resolved: The California Republican Assembly at the Annual Convention in San Diego, March 26, 1995 does hereby determine to inform members of State and federal elected and appointed offices that the United States of America is presently under War and Emergency Powers and has been for 62 [now 79 ] years; be it further resolved: That the California Republican Assembly will support only men and women who are willing to become aware of the usurpation of the power of the United States Constitution and who are committed to restoring our Constitution to its rightful place as the Supreme Law of the Land.”
00
Joe Lieberman on YouTube
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?38864-Lier-Lieberman-The-Secret-Behind-SOPA..-
Lieberman characterized fears that the US government would use such powers to censor political content as “total misinformation,” yet goes on to admit that the purpose behind the agenda is to mimic China’s ability to “disconnect parts of its Internet in case of war,” adding, “we need that here too”.
The United States of America is presently under War and Emergency Powers and has been for 79 years.
00
Liberty fast disappearing – Ron Paul
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=XeCpLcjxOq4#!
00
19 Jan: Wired: David Kravets:
The House version of the Stop Online Piracy Act, the proposed anti-piracy legislation that drew a planned and widespread internet revolt Wednesday, is likely to undergo a radical overhaul to muster passage…
On Wednesday, as thousands of websites blacked themselves out or altered their appearance in protest, Republican and Democratic lawmakers in both the Senate and House began distancing themselves from the non-partisan bills they had once supported.
Nowhere was that more apparent than in the House Judiciary Committee, which is headed by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), the chief SOPA sponsor.
Committee spokesman Brett Bettesworth said in a telephone interview Thursday that, when Smith brings SOPA up for a vote next month, he will have removed the most controversial provision that prompted the backlash. And Smith will be open for even more amendments, he said.
“He realizes there is going to have to be a lot of changes because of the opposition there has been to it,” Bettesworth said…
Meanwhile, Senate Major Leader Harry Reid’s office did not respond to inquiries Thursday on whether the Nevada lawmaker next week would bring PIPA to a procedural floor vote, the first step toward breaking a rarely used hold on the measure imposed by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon). That would require 60 votes. Given the rapid backpedaling in D.C. in the last week, Reid – a big supporter of the bill and a big receipeint of donations from Hollywood, may no longer have the votes needed to overcome Wyden’s hold.
Here are some of the remaining controversial provisions in both bills that could be up for amendment:…ETC
Complicating matters further, the Justice Department on Thursday seized the domains and bank accounts of Megaupload, a Hong Kong-based file sharing site, shutting down the site and arresting four of its executives overseas.
The men are accused of criminal conspiracy and copyright violations. The indictment of foreigners for violations of U.S. copyright law promptly led many SOPA critics to wonder why the government needs to mandate internet censorship, if criminal laws can already be used to go after alleged offenders.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/01/sopa-watering-down/
00
USA democracy at work … they take notice and amend the Bills.
Australian democracy — government takes no notice of its citizens and does exactly what it likes despite its promises to the contrary.
00
Indeed they do Jo, yet despite this being right at the beginning of your post, once again you hack directly at the branches. How do they manage to enact such legislation Jo? Is it because they control our money?
Why do they control our money? Is it some divine right? You won’t find out joannenova.com.au, despite the fact she’s smart enough to work it out.
00
Can somebody please catch JMDs dribble before it hits the floor.
00
You have no idea do you? I wonder why you would even frequent a ‘independent media’ website like this except to add your $0.00c. Why not turn on the TV & watch Masterchef or at least check out some porno on the net?, that’s more the taste of the ignorant masses.
At least Jo seems to have an inkling that “They control our money” is the most important point, otherwise she wouldn’t have put it at the start of her article. Shame she then ignores the root of the problem.
00
Ignorant is a guest who abuses their host.
00
It surely is because enough people vote for them. Jo has talked a bit about Ron Paul, and how the media have decided not to talk about him. I think he’s a nutter, but he is fairly popular, so you’d expect the media to do their job and talk about him. But they don’t.
So the media has a big say in who we vote for. And the media is largely Murdoch. And Murdoch uses his media to help him make more money. So in the US, he’d support tougher rules on intellectual property. In Australia, he attacks the NBN, because really fast internet is a threat to Pay TV, which he has a stake in. With Murdoch, its all about money…
00
There is hope for you yet, John. I agree with most of what you said there.
Except for the fact that the non-Murdoch press is equally biased, self serving and inclined to form public opinion rather than inform it. The press of ANY persuasion cannot be trusted to give balanced and unbiased perspectives on any subject, do not generally approach the topic with diligence and curiosity (too much cut and paste and plagiarism on the one hand, biased propagandised opinion pieces on the other)and so they are thus not doing the job that was ascribed to them in protecting our democratic freedoms and even-handedly informing Joe Public of the events around them.
Balance is only obtained now through polarised opinion, which at least allows all views oxygen, albeit in the echo chamber of preaching to the converted. As the journalism profession has evolved, there seems little chance of balance on either side of the fence any time soon, so for the present we have the Hatfields vs the McCoys and the public stuck in the middle dodging the bullets.
00
Yes John it is ALL about money, always.
Money IS. Why do you think the government controls it?
00
JMD,
Does the government control money? We can argue the toss. But who got bailed out with billions in late 08? Not Detroit.
Who owns the Fed?
PS: Indexes are wonderful things.
http://joannenova.com.au/tag/money/
http://joannenova.com.au/tag/money-base/
http://joannenova.com.au/tag/manufacturing-money/
PPS: which US candidate do I write about: is it the one who wants to disband the Fed?
00
No we can’t Jo. You should know that the $ is the obligation of its bank of issue, the central bank. ALL central banks, including the Fed, are monopolies operating under government charter, ONLY central bank obligations are ‘legal tender’. They are creatures of government no matter who are their ‘shareholders’. If commercial banks were manufacturing ‘money’ ($ denominated debt but NOT ‘legal tender’) pre 2008, it was with the blessing of the central bank & thus government.
And Detroit did get bailed out, it has received massive US government subsidies.
And Jo, a few articles amongst many does not prove you are hacking at the root, when everything you complain about sprouts from the root of government controlled ‘money’. (Does that mean you read them?) CTS
Your lack of curiosity is the key to their success… (with thanks to Jello Biafra, 1991, that’s right 1991)
00
JMD,
The federal reserve is not a government owned body. It’s owned by private banks. Detroit didn’t get bailed out, it got nationalized. Those shareholders got dudded. The shareholders of major banks got rescued from oblivion due to a crash caused by their own wild speculation, and the guys at the top of those banks got jobs running the treasury. Geddit? The US govt could issue it’s own fiat currency, instead it “lets” the banks profit from doing it. Who is in charge? … follow the money.
Do the banks serve the government or does the government serve the banks? Which police force ensures that only one group can “counterfeit” money and profit from that monopoly legally?
I’ve been writing on the large financial houses for three years. Sure, there is plenty to be angry about, but why not turn your anger towards a more useful target? I’m an unfunded person on your side, and you think it’s worth “hacking” at me? Hmmm. Now there’s a man with his priorities in order.
Having provided you with a free forum and information. It’s a tad bad mannered to demand I do anything and expect me to obey your command.
You can ask for a full refund eh?
(PS:a “lack of curiosity?” What are you drinking?)
00
Who benefits – private bankers or the people of the United States of America?
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_best_policy/2009/06/dont_get_fooled_again.2.html
00
Yes Jo, the Fed does have ‘private shareholders’ but it does NOT operate independent from government, at BEST it could be a government/private ‘partnership’ but I prefer government run banking cartel. The RBA is ‘wholly government owned’, according to its own website.
Bailed out or nationalised Jo, what’s the difference? The ‘money’ comes from the same place, the government. General Motors is still trading at USD25 a share as of friday, what’s so ‘dud’ about that, it has performed no worse than many of the banks since 2008.
And yes you provide a forum, so what? Do you expect all commentors to pat you continuously on the back? I don’t care what you write but I’ll point out you are hacking at the branches, because you are.
00
The Reserve Bank of Australia and the Australian constitution
The Reserve Bank is a foreign ADI. A “foreign ADI” means a body corporate that:
(a) is a foreign corporation within the meaning of paragraph 51(xx) of the Constitution; and
(b) is authorised to carry on banking business in a foreign country; and
(c) has been granted an authority under section 9 to carry on banking business in Australia.
Prior to 1959 the Commonwealth issued and printed its own money and had control of the printing of money. However after the 1959 Reserve Bank Act, the Reserve Bank was established as a stand alone independent foreign ADI, which took over the printing of money and lent the money it printed to the Commonwealth at interest. So instead of the Commonwealth printing its own money, we have a foreign body corporate printing our money and lending it to the Commonwealth which the Commonwealth needs to pay back!
“RESERVE BANK ACT 1959 – SECT 77
Guarantee by Commonwealth
The Commonwealth is responsible for the payment of all moneys due by the Bank” (The commonwealth of Australia is paying money is borrows back to the stand alone bank)
(Source: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/rba1959130/s77.html)
“RESERVE BANK ACT 1959 – SECT 27
Bank to be banker for Commonwealth
The Bank shall, in so far as the Commonwealth requires it to do so, act as banker and financial agent of the Commonwealth” (The reserve bank is the Commonwealths banker and lender and the Commonwealth must pay the money back to the Bank!)
(Source: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/rba1959130/s27.html)
EVIDENCE THE BANK IS A FOREIGN ADI WITH FOREIGN LINKS AND BRANCHES:
The below act shows how foreign coroporations have power of attorny over the Reserve Bank of Australia:
RESERVE BANK ACT 1959 – SECT 76
Attorney of Bank
The Bank may, by instrument under its seal, appoint a person (whether in Australia or in a place beyond Australia) to be its attorney and a person so appointed may, subject to the instrument, do any act or execute any power or function which he or she is authorized by the instrument to do or execute. (Source: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/rba1959130/s76.html)
Foreign Agents in control of the Reserve Bank of Australia:
RESERVE BANK ACT 1959 – SECT 75
Agents etc.
In the exercise of its powers and the performance of its functions, the Bank may:
(a) establish branches and agencies at such places, whether within or beyond Australia, as the Bank thinks fit;
(b) arrange with a person to act as agent of the Bank in any place, whether within or beyond Australia; and
(c) act as the agent of an ADI carrying on business within or beyond Australia.
00
Who is running the U.S.A.?
http://www.barefootsworld.net/usfraud.html
Did you ever hear of the Independent Treasury Act of 1920? No, you say…. Hmmmmmmm….?
The Independent Treasury Act of 1920 suspended the de jure (meaning “by right of legal establishment”) Treasury Department of the United States government. Our Congress turned the treasury department over to a private corporation, which when seen in its true light, is a fascist monopolistic cartel, the Federal Reserve and their agents. The bulk of the ownership of the Federal Reserve System, a very well kept secret from the American Citizen, is held by these banking interests, and NONE is held by the United States Treasury:
Rothschild Bank of London
Rothschild Bank of Berlin
Warburg Bank of Hamburg
Warburg Bank of Amsterdam
Lazard Brothers of Paris
Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy
Chase Manhattan Bank of New York
Goldman, Sachs of New York
Lehman Brothers of New York
Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York
The Federal Reserve is at the root of most of our present statutory regulations, “laws”, in the control and regulation of virtually all aspects of human activity in the United States, through successively socialistic constructions laid upon the Commerce clause of the Constitution. Basically, the Federal Reserve is the “STATE” of the United States.
See “Our Enemy, The STATE” by Albert J. Nock – 1935, his Classic Critique Distinguishing “Government” from the “STATE.”
See Also Charts in Text Format of Interlocking Directorships and Family Linkages taken from “Federal Reserve Directors: A Study of Corporate and Banking Influence. Staff Report, Committee on Banking, Currency and Housing, House of Representatives, 94th Congress, 2nd Session, August 1976.”
See Also Secrets of the Federal Reserve by Eustace Mullins.
00
Letter: “Does anybody care about the average American?”
http://www.heraldnews.com/newsnow/x1987748267/LETTER-Does-anyone-care-about-the-average-American
00
“None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.”
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
00
http://somehelpful.info/Articles/Running_US.htm
Re charts of interlocking directorships 1976 –
http://www.barefootsworld.net/docs/fedchart.txt
00
JMD – you’re getting out of your depth.
GM was refloated after being bought out. Existing shareholders and bondholders got basically nothing. The unions and employees were put ahead of the debtors in the queue when it came to being made whole. Which is against not only normal practice, but most of the debt agreements as well.
You can’t just look at the share price on day and say ‘well, it’s the same as it was before’ when billions of dollars worth of capital were wiped out. Is the market capitalisation the same? No. Is the book value of the assets the same? No. Did lots of people lose lots of money. Yes. Did a dangerous precedent get set? Yes.
As for the Federal Reserve – why would anyone try and defend this organisation? You can trace most of the financial woes of the USA back to three sources – 1. the politicians for endlessly borrowing – 2. the unchecked growth of government (see 1) and continual interference into things that should be left alone (ie, decisions on house buying) and 3. manipulation of the interest rates and currency by the Federal Reserve. They artificially lowered the price of money, created a phony boom, and gave themselves slaps on the back for being geniuses.
The plain fact is ; go back to an uncentralised currency, back to real money, and the Fed doesn’t have a role apart from co-ordinating transfers between the banks. And that can be done by some other type of institution.
The idea that you can control the entire dynamic function of an economy using one single price-fixing scheme is nuts and needs to go away.
00
Kevin, you forgot to mention that along with the RBA being a foreign owned corporation, the coporation of the Commonwelth of Australia is a foreign owned corporation. Both of these entities are owned by the corporation of The City of London. The partners of which, are private bankers. They also own the Vatican(city of) and the coporation of the District of Washington(the White House).
And about the ownership of the copyright of ‘public servants’. They are employees of the coporation of the Australian Commonwealth and all media release ownership is held by their employers, the City of London. Also, don’t forget that the ABC stands for Australian Broadcasting Corporation.
The third point is your legal identity is the property of the commonwealth(CoL) so you will not be able to take the government to court over an agreement which your legal fiction is not a party to.
00
Hi brc
liked that comment
00
Waffle,
You are spot on.
Yes, the Commonwealth of Australia is a registered corporation – registered with the US Security and Exchange Commission. So then the ‘ACTS’ of parliament are merely company policy enforced by company police officers. As well,registered all capital name is strawman – no heart and no brain.
The Crow House – Max Igan, has provided me with good info.
See also Basic Fraud.
“The Crown”
http://openeye.99k.org/The%20Crown.html
00
Waffle,
An extra thought – Who has the authority to rule,God or tyrants? There is in reality only One law.
The fact that no man can delegate or give away his own natural right of liberty, nor any other person’s natural right of liberty, proves that he can delegate no legislative power whatsoever – over himself or anyone else – to any man or body of men. Each man owns only himself – he owns no other. Nor can any other, or group of others calling themselves a “constituted authority,” own him.
00
http://www.theopensource.tv/the-money-masters/the-secret-of-oz-video_82fa50cc4.html
00
Unfortunately Kevin, we all make two fundamental errors. Firstly, we identify ourselves as our legal fiction. Secondly, we enter our legal fiction into agreements which override existing protections granted by the constitution of the Corporation of The Commonwelath of Australia(EG; registering for social security, getting a driver’s license, etc).
Thus, we willfully give away our freedoms without understanding how we have done such a thing. Our legal system is simply a series of agreements we have entered into. Modern slavery, the taxation and incarceration cycle, is a purely voluntary phenomenon. This is the only truth people need to understand to decouple themselves from the fascism which is creeping into our society. Being victomised by a large corporation? Then demonstrate negotiation in good faith. I guarantee the corporate dones will remove themselves from good faith negotion before you do, thus making them liable for all demonstable costs incurred by your legal fiction.
00
Those old enough to have been working with computing as the Internet was in its formative stages will agree that the essential ingredient that caused the success of the Internet was voluntary help and open cooperation. Many, many people wrote exquisite, free code and designed effective systems, many just because it was fun and exciting.
Then, along came the carpetbagges, largely in the form of ISPs like Telstra was in Australia. Blind Freddie could see that there were critical nodes in the Internet that could be exploited by control by someone greedier than the founders. We hoped that they would not dive in for a profit based on the work of others, but they did. I have no respect for them.
It has been abuses by organised money extractors that had led to the perception that controls like PIPA and SOPA.
It’s an imperfect world, but I do long so much for a return to that brief time when altruism trumped greed.
00
Geoff,
Please don’t give up on us.
Only in the halls of the parasitic entitlement reside the men of greed.
Here, amongst the common man, does altruism exist. Even warmists, like jonnyboy, are driven, for the advancement of humankind and our planet.
00
I marvel that no one has noticed that unless someone invested large sums of money into it the Internet would never be the ubiquitous thing it is today. Really — would altruistic volunteers set up and run (and pay for) the many huge nodes, domain name servers and other infrastructure needed to bring the Internet into every home? You can’t even run dialup without some server to handle the calls.
00
Wes,
What a walking contradiction that you are! Are you going to enjoy the embarrasment of voting for Obama or Romney when your army takes you away because you have more than 7 days of food in your house?
Remember you have a choice in November. You can choose to vote for continuation of endless wars, stricter NDAA conditions, censorship not telling you who to vote for but you waive the right to protest when (it appears) that you are not going to vote Ron paul.
By all means, support the censorship of the internet, support all of the legislation that takes away all of your liberties. However, please don’t vote for these things and then complain that your wife is groped at the airport. If you can be even bothered to vote one hopes that you won’t vote for the best haircut.
00
I used to think joannenova was home to some straight thinkers. But I was wrong. This and seveal other recent threads have been a big disappointment.
tellitlikeitis indeed!
00
With you all the way Roy Hogue. Conspiratorial nutters one and all with views that essentially are out of the hard Left catechism masked behind the Alice in wonderland libertarian views of Ron Paul.
00
tellitlikeitis,
I just looked again at what you said. You assume Wes George is American. I’ll bet anything that he’s Australian and therefore can’t vote for Ron Paul even if he wants to.
00
This process is as old as the hills, but it is the new Unified Theory of Climate. jonnyboy, they are my words, so are very unscientific.
Kinetic Energy is (forced) employed by Potential Energy until mass re-radiates the employed kinetic energy to space.
So Enhanced Energy is the kinetic energy plus the potential energy of mass. The mechanism of conjoining energies causes heating, the mechanism of decoupling causes cooling.
00
Sorry Markus, but you need to use words with the same meaning as others ascribe to them. Otherwise we can’t understand what you mean.
00
Which words do you mean John Brookes? Climate Change, Energy, Mass etc!
Who’s WE John Brookes? – who’s with you in your room John Brookes – maybe MattyB, KR, Temp etc?
You’re weird! Good-bye Mr. John Brookes et al!
00
WTF, do you ascribe to Kinetic, Potential, Radiation, Mass, Mechanism, heating, cooling.
jonnyboy, you really are as smart as a pet rock.
00
Good news, John! Every word that markus uses can be found in the dictionary. I would advise you to avail yourself of one but that would take you perilously close to doing research and we all know that is as likely to occur as the warministas winning a debate!
00
Jo,
If the internet was controlled…
Would we have had Climategate?
How about the information being posted of government wrong doing?
Would not the US make themselves look much healthier in the economic front for attracting investors and companies?
Natural disasters would still be hyped as AGW events considering the unprecedented precipitation that is currently occurring. Snow is cold not warm.
00
CAGW warmists are like fleas.
The are unable to extradite themselves from the rotting carcass of their host,the AGW theory.
They come in many sizes, big ones like jonnyboy and temp, and smaller ones, like indoctrinated teachers.
00
Big fleas have little fleas,
upon their backs to bite them,
Small fleas have smaller fleas,
and so ad infinitum.
00
and fleas bring plague & pestilence………………..
00
A flea train!
00
Wow Rereke, that was awesome! I hereby nominate you for the position of site poet emeritus! Can I get a second? JB, KR, Temp? 😉
00
I will be traveling for a few days, but I expect that we will finally start to see positive benefits coming from decades of data manipulation by world leaders and the consensus scientists they hired as fortune tellers.
1961: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOLld5PR4ts
1975: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQZe_Qk-q7M
1983: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLjQSSHIe6k
2001: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXNyLYSiPO0
2011: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3VIFmZpFco
Thanks to brave souls like JoNova, all is well today.
00
http://rt.com/usa/news/megaupload-shut-million-authorities-231/
“Megaupload finished: Feds shut down file-sharing giant without SOPA”
00
http://rt.com/news/megaupload-bail-anonymous-attack-269/
New Zealanders refused bail.
00
http://rt.com/usa/news/anonymous-barrettbrown-sopa-megaupload-241/
Hactivists fightback
00
http://rt.com/news/sopa-postponed-anonymous-piracy-337/
Hacker group Anonymous and its supporters celebrated after the bill’s postponement was announced, writing “This is victory!” in their Twitter account following the statement by Lamar Smith. However, they cannot but realize that the fight is far from over. “A small battle has been won with the death of SOPA, but the war has just begun. PIPA & ACTA are still alive,” they wrote in their feed, reminding followers of one more significant abbreviation, for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement. In October 2007, the United States, the European Community, Switzerland and Japan simultaneously announced that they would negotiate a new intellectual property enforcement treaty – the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, or ACTA.
00
Kevin,
You do understand, do you not, that copyright provides legal protection of the intellectual property of the copyright holder against unauthorized use of (read unauthorized profiting from) the copyrighted work? Copyright infringement is a crime in all western nations. Why do you think that the Internet gives some special dispensation to violate copyright laws with impunity?
The more I learn about you the more I believe you’re part of the problem rather than the solution. If you want rights then you also have responsibilities and your first responsibility is to respect the rights of others.
00
I don’t think you are paying attention to the conversation Roy. The argument is not about the protection of a person’s intellectual property. It is about the creation of legal loopholes which allow the governement to shut your business down without any proof whatsoever. The attack of Megaupload this week is the equivalent of prosecuting a telephone company for all crimes committed with the facillitation of their telephone service.
It’s like saying those who point out the ownership of money and their influence in society are conspiracy nutters. There’s a difference between understanding how our politics are being corrupted by rent-seekers and believing in aliens. Do you understand the difference?
00
Roy
You do understand, do you not, that the companies that distributed the file sharing software enabling the downloading of copyright material are the same companies suing people worldwide for downloading or even linking copyright material.
How insane is that?
The information has been in front of your nose at the beginning of this thread, but as usual you could only see red.
http://onecandleinthedark.blogspot.com/
“How CNET/CBS Interactive ignited & fueled the ‘Phenomenon of Internet Piracy’
http://thecrowhouse.com/sopa.html
“S.O.P.A. is Pre-Planned”
00
I find all this pretty thin considering that it works against their good interest. What have they to gain?
00
Roy,
You can’t really have a rational debate with someone who believes the Jewish bankers lead an evil conspiracy, which controls the global economy.
When the uncommitted public reads this thread and sees our lack of analytical reasoning skills on this topic, why should they should trust our analysis of the literature on global warming?
We need to decide whether we wish to shine the beacon of rational skepticism we use so powerfully against the CAGW theory on every argument we encounter or whether some arguments are privileged above others as articles of faith.
There are a few here on this thread and the Ron Paul thread who have revealed they are not capable of skeptically examining ideas they fancy, thus the fact that they are fellow travellers with us in our critique of CAGW was a mere coincident. They’re simply parroting the skeptical talking points without any understanding of how the underlying methodology of reasoning arrived at those points.
I hope we can approach every argument from a skeptical point of view and conduct a rational inquiry from the first causes forward. I especially wish to subject to testing those arguments I find naturally compelling or self-evident. These are the ideas, which we accept so often as unexamined assumptions that they escape scrutiny.
Out of the ~130 comments here the main themes have been irrational fear of impossible conspiracies, while there has been almost no examination of the real problems which inspired the idiocy of SOPA. The atmosphere thus created makes it unlikely anyone will dare suggest that maybe the Internet does have a few unresolved issues — that there really are pirates, thieves and terrorists online making a killing stealing stuff from people. Or that a goodly hunk of the money made from online property theft goes into criminal syndicates involved in gun-running, forced prostitution, drugs and other human miseries.
Like I said, I do not support SOPA, but some of us should be ashamed our inability to see past the tribal groupthink which prevents us from asking the hard questions of our cherished unexamined assumptions.
00
Wes,
This and a couple of other threads became hopeless a long time back. But you’re right of course…yet maybe wrong also. I think the readers of joannenova can distinguish between the nuts and the real meat. And those who can’t are probably not going to be moved by anything.
All I’m doing with Kevin is drawing him out so he’ll expose himself for what he is, a bigot (Jews are to blame for nearly everything), a conspiracy nut case (Senator Wellstone’s crash in Minnesota was a conspiracy to murder him) and generally incapable of real critical thinking.
Maybe I’ve gone too far. But in any case your position is sound so I’ll take your advice and drop this “debate”
I don’t like SOPA and I don’t like the failure of some to adapt their business model to changing times. I think that’s a lot of what is behind all of this foolishness. But just for the record — I don’t think we can simply throw copyright and patent protection to the dogs either.
Roy
00
Wes
While I disagree with you about climate science, the crux of your post is good advice.
00
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=NzS5rSvZXe8
SOPA & PIPA Horror Story Exposed in the UK – Extradition of Richard O’Dwyer
00
Never answer a question. That’s too much to ask. Kevin is on another roll and won’t stop until next Tuesday.
00
Roy
Here is one opinion –
The Real Reason for SOPA, PIPA, and the NDAA Provisions
DAILY PAUL
There is a very simple, and we think overlooked, reason why the abominations of SOPA and PIPA have appeared like cancerous growths in the House and Senate, and it has more to do than just censoring the internet. It goes deeper than that. It hits a nerve. The very idea of a bottom-up, people driven internet clashes violently with the ideological and political worldview that surveillance should only exist in one direction: From the top down.
You see, we’ve overlooked what it really means in terms of discomfort and career risk to those who normally bask and benefit from the art of statecraft.
You see, the ordinary, unwashed masses – that would be you and me – are in possession of one of the most powerful forces the earth has ever seen.
And you have learned to use it in a way that is indeed alarming.
Ordinary people, with little or no political knowledge or even education, are using it to keep their elected employees under surveillance 24 hours a day, seven days a week – like real hiring managers should.
You see, you’re all figuring out that your computer desk at home is now headquarters – it’s now the head office – and you’re acting like the boss, and these employees don’t like it one bit.
You’re calling them out for having a business on the side. For taking long lunches with your competitors. For using the company car and copy machine for their personal use without telling you. For improper conduct that would violate any employee ethics manual. For noticing that they exempt themselves from it, but not you, the boss.
In other words, you are finally (as the founders intended, and would be ecstatic to see) holding your elected Federal and State employees accountable beyond their wildest imaginations.
You’re watching “the help” like any good supervisor, manager or owner would and THEY DON’T LIKE IT.
Why? You’re tirelessly performing hourly, daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, and annual performance reviews. You are writing them letters of praise or reprimand. You are sending them the equivalent of performance improvement plans (“improve or remove” coaching letters). You are expressing your anger or disappointment for lying to you during presentations (i.e., debates on the floor of the House or Senate, during interviews with the press, or during campaign speeches) since you’re able to compare a report they delivered a year ago, or a month ago to one they gave today. And you can even post a clip of them lying that they cannot deny or hide from. You’re catching them lying on or padding their expense reports or catching them investing or accepting rewards or favors where it’s a conflict of interest to you personally as the real CEO of this country.
You have harnessed a resource at your fingertips – Google alone processes 24 petabytes of data alone per day – that you can use to micromanage them, in a way that they prefer to use instead to micro-manage you.
In other words, you are doing things that they prefer TO DO TO YOU INSTEAD, AND TO YOU ONLY, AND NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
SOPA and PIPA have been introduced (along with other abominable legislation of late) to keep you and the Constitution of the United States from activating at a level that they will never be able to suppress unless they act now. A tipping point in what they believe is the wrong direction is at hand. A tipping point that could restore the Republic to its original Constitutional form and end a 100 year reign of the kleptocracy.
You and your use of the internet have inadvertently leveraged an 18th-century Constitution, a Bill of Rights, the Privileges and Immunities clause, and powers reserved to the States or the people themselves, and raised them all to an unprecedented, almost astronomical power.
You have accidentally taken all the rights and powers in these old parchment documents to a level several orders of magnitude above the most basic objections against the divine rights of kings and despots that were so eloquently expressed, even in the Declaration of Independence, to a dizzying height never thought possible by the Founders.
You have arranged yourselves in direct competition to them, into virtual Senates, virtual Houses of Representatives, virtual Judiciaries, and virtual Inspectors General, all in a manner that redefines what consent of the governed will mean from now on. You can all now deliberate every decision, every move, every dollar, every law, beyond the mere vehicle of freedom of assembly and freedom of speech.
You have arranged yourselves into a neural net, or brain of the actual Republic, as originally intended, but never foreseen.
And it is from that height, that the internet has allowed the US Constitution and you as the owner to, almost without being fully aware of it, decimate the worldview – the philosophy of empire – that to this day would prefer that the nuisance of the cult of liberty vanish from the face of the earth along with its insufferable US Constitution once and for all.
You have it on the run.
And there you have the real reason for SOPA, PIPA, and the NDAA provisions and other laws that the House and the Senate have had the temerity to introduce while simultaneously flouting these words written by giants that will forever tower over them and cast long shadows over their dealings…
“Congress shall make no law…..”
HOLD ONTO THE INTERNET TIGHTLY AND DON’T LET GO.
STOP SOPA. STOP PIPA.
http://www.dailypaul.com/205980/the-real-reason-for-sopa-pipa-and-the-ndaa-provisions
00
Kevin, will you please go a get your on place on the blogosphere. I want to speak to people about what their positions on the JO Nova’s topic are. I’d rather you not introduce every news item that takes your fancy, It’s bloody distracting.
00
Hi Jo. I’m at it again hijacking a thread but this update might interest other posters here. With the kind help of others (you included) who have given me empowerment I’ve taken action in my own small way.
The Musselroe Wind Farm Travesty:KeithH
http://jennifermarohasy.com/2012/01/the-musselroe-wind-farm-travesty-keith-h
As usual in the wonderful world of blogging, commenters have come up with great links. One such is the Vesta link by John Sayers.
Apologies for the hijack but I’m spreading those “ripples”.
Cheers to all
00
124 comments and the most fundamental issue is still not addressed.
Copyright as a stand-alone business model is dead.
The photocopier dealt the first blow, followed by the cassette player, followed by the video recorder.
The internet is simply the final, devastating, obliterating coup de grace.
It is entirely irrelevant whether this is “good” or “bad”, “right” or “wrong”, “fair” or “unjust”.
It simply IS.
00
memoryvault,
The same thing could be said for burglary, murder, slavery, rape, and countless other violations of individual rights. Are OK as well?
The real question is do you want to live in a civilized rights respecting world or one that lives by the law of the jungle?
Which is it?
00
Apologies Lionell,
Somehow my reply ended up below at # 30.
00
Wow. That’s the neo-Marxist post-modern critique in a nutshell!
But I wouldn’t expect Memoryvault to be aware of the philosophical pedigree of the concepts he apes.
Basically, the post-mod philosophers (who were all neo-Marxist French academics) came up with the idea that all ideas are created equal, thus “de-privileging” Western Civilisation’s value system. The hope was to deconstruct all previous art, science and philosophy into components which could then be collaged back together again to form Frankenstein histories or narratives which validate whatever angry minority was doing the cutting and pasting.
Thus, the history, Poli Sci and literature department of universities degenerated into study groups. Queer Studies, Peace Studies, Gender Studies, Ethnic Studies, Food Studies etc. since there was no longer any overarching authoritative value system to measure reason with.
The Marxist part was suppose to work something like this: Since all ideas are equal in value they are also free. Free that is to be used by anyone for anything. The future was going to be a collage of things ripped (appropriated) from their historic contextual authority (owners) and used by the proles to validate a new world view.
Post-modernism really got going in the late 1970’s because clever Marxists saw by that stage the Soviet and Chinese communists were epic failures at building the socialist utopia. So if reality didn’t fit the Marxist model, then, by Jove, reality had to be levelled, deconstructed, distributed and pasted back together in a way that fit the socialist agenda.
Then comes the Internet Age which is the ultimate post-mod environment where ideas can be cut and paste at production rates orders of magnitude greater than the post mod philosophers could have ever dreamed.
So thoroughly has the Post Modern Marxist anti-property utopian ideal been assimilated as part of the creation myth of the net, the average Netizen owns it unconsciously in his memetic pool and will spontaneously self-combust if anyone suggests that all information is NOT going to be free.
Ironically, Post-modernism was the worst idea the neo-Marxists ever came up with because it reaffirmed capitalism’s supremacy. Since if all ideas are created equal, then even Marxism is stripped of its intellectual primacy. Ultimately, the only authority left standing is actual hard facts, such as the economy of wealth distribution in the real world, otherwise known as the free market of good, services, capital and ideas. Besides, the post-mod aesthetic is basically about inauthenticity, glossy surfaces and plastic, a huge boon to consumer capitalism driven by mass production and global marketing.
So we’re back to where we began. In the Information Age virtual property will ultimately be sold and traded guided by the same natural laws of supply and demand that commanded prices in a Roman bazaar 2,000 years ago.
00
Wes George
Gee, is that what I was doing?
And all this time I just thought I was an old guy who has done very nicely in the past writing non-fiction books, lamenting that the same level of profits just aren’t going to be there in the future.
And accepting the reality of it.
When all the while I was actually aping post-modern neo-Marxist philosophy while coming to grips with Queer Studies, Peace Studies, Gender Studies, Ethnic Studies, Food Studies etc, in an anti-property Utopia.
.
Who’d a thunk?
.
You might like to read and comment on my post below in answer to Lionel, within the precepts of your post-modern neo-Marxist philosophical anti-property Utopia paradigm.
Whatever that is.
00
Hmm, sounds an awful lot like Second Life, doesn’t it?
I have trouble getting the hang of one life, without having another as well.
00
Way to go Wes. On one thread to rail against another’s conspiracy world views and introduce another. The (Neo-)Marxist conspiracy theory. Yes, yes. The socialists have been plotting to not only take over the world but, reshape our very consccious human experience by subverting our education system.
Says the person who just wrote this:
So the internet is a marxist conspiracy to destory the creative economy?
00
Waffle,
No. I never said it was an organised conspiracy. You misunderstand completely.
I tried to describe how Marxism influenced epistemology since 1970, the history of post-modernism isn’t really disputed. That’s what happened. It’s not a conspiracy because it wasn’t organised, but rather occurred as a cultural zeitgeist.
Nor were all the effects of post-modernism undesirable. Architecture, art and music were all informed by post-modern aesthetic and sometimes the results were a liberation from the Modernist strictures of, say, the Bauhaus, “form follows function.” Or the minimalist ideas Mies van der rohe, allowing far more free and playful visual exploration of the world.
Post-modernism was an inevitable response to modernism just as current trends toward “authenticity” in architecture, food and art are responses to the synthetic, collage nature of post-modernism.
Don’t mistake the evolution of culture for a conspiracy.
00
Lionel,
For a man whose comments I usually admire, that was well below your mark.
I said, “as a business model”. With the exception of slavery, no “civilised society” has ever condoned the “wholesale violations of individual rights” as a day-to-day profit-generation mechanism.
Copyright as anything like what we know it, didn’t exist before the passing of the Statute of Anne in 1709. Prior to that, what laws existed, existed for the benefit of the State and the Church to control the flow (or lack thereof) of knowledge.
Shakespeare did not enjoy the benefit of copyright protection, but still appears to have managed to have made a bit of a name for himself as a writer.
Whaling was once critical to the survival and advancement of civilisation for over a thousand years. Wars were fought over whaling territories, enormous fortunes were made and lost. The “need” for whale oil died with the invention of the coal-fired power station, and the automobile (try explaining THAT to a greenie).
In the late-nineteenth and twentieth centuries enormously rich and powerful empires were forged out of the business of selling news – the mainstream media. The internet is now killing off that business model too (and I see little evidence of much lamenting in the comments here on JoNova).
And yet, even as the internet is killing the MSM, we find we have access to more news, and more diversified news, than ever before, courtesy of the very same internet. However, don’t hold your breath waiting for Jo to become a millionaire MSM Baroness. THAT business model is dead, too.
Of course if someone creates something they should have sole right to benefiting financially from it. If they discover someone has taken their work and reproduced it en mass and are selling it, then the artist should have full recourse to recovery of the profits in law.
However, for better or for worse, the internet has made it possible for people to copy and share works at an individual level, and they are going to, and no amount of draconian legislation is going to change that.
Business is simply going to have to adjust to the new paradigm. Movies will have to go back to measuring their profits from the box-office takings (as it always was up until 30 years ago). Performers will have to tour more and hold more concerts, just as it was before the recording industry came into being. And so on.
None of which, of course, has anything much to do with SOPA and PIPA, which are nothing less than a wholesale grab at control of the internet.
00
You’re right, Memoryvault. I totally missed the mark there.
So I apologise for calling you a post-modernist. 🙂
I think that both Lionell and I missed your point there. I read it in the context of Lionell’s remark that you believe intellectual property rights DESERVE the hammering they are getting due to modern information handling technologies…. Now it’s clear you seem to be saying you think that’s a lamentable fact of life on the Information Age.
00
No problems Wes.
Mind you, the entire “copyright as a business model” (as opposed to individual intellectual property rights) was a flawed, totally one-sided, money-grubbing exercise pretty much from day one, and probably DOES deserve a hammering.
Mark Twain once wrote he would know when he reached heaven, as there would be no publishers there. As a published writer, I fully concur. Publishers have been screwing over writers for two hundred years.
A couple of years ago ARIA (American Recording Industry Association) were caught out in two simultaneous court proceedings in the same court building.
In one courtroom they were arguing a civil case suing someone for breach of copyright for illegally downloading some music, on the basis that it reduced the artists’ rightfully-due income from their intellectual property, thereby impoverishing the poor artists.
In the adjoining court they were arguing a civil case to REDUCE the royalties they paid to the artists from legal downloads, on the basis that they were all greedy, over-paid money-grubbing scoundrels, who had already made more than enough from the sale of the original ‘hard-copy’ recordings.
And it’s not just original owner of the intellectual property who gets screwed over. Try going into a store and buying a new-release movie or music CD. Take it outside and leave it on the dash of your car in the sun for a while, until it is all buckled and useless.
Take the ruined item back to the store and ask for a replacement, and offer to pay a dollar or two for the actual CD or DVD and the case. See how far you get. Ditto if you mail it back to the recording or movie company.
Try it with a copy of Windows 7 and see how far you get with Microsoft.
00
But another takes its place. Our company, among others, takes that diversified news, and “repurposes” it into something that is uniquely relevant to each of our clients, based on what we know will be of interest to them.
Ours is a service/product that would have been impossible with the old print-media philosophy. That was one size fits all (or more correctly, half a dozen sizes fits the majority) mentality. it relied on the economies of scale on output for its profitability.
We rely on mass customisation for ours.
Murdoch could have done it, and in fact he might try, but it is unlikely because it will force him to give up control of his inputs, in order to control his outputs, and that is the exact opposite of the media model he knows and loves.
Notice: I have not, and will not, name our company, here. This is not intended as a marketing message, and I only mention it to explain one of the paradigm shifts that has occurred, thanks to the web.
00
Perhaps I didn’t make myself clear. Simply because it is EASY to copy and distribute something does not validate its doing without the permission of its creator. You might say nothing was taken. Yes something was.
The taker is gaining benefit of of the life of the creator that he expended in the act of creation. There was no asking of permission and no intent even to say thank you let alone to pay the creator’s asking price. THIS is a violation of the life of the creator of the property taken and used WITHOUT permission. To that extent it IS slavery.
It is exactly equivalent to someone walking through an unlocked door of your house WITHOUT your permission. Then taking something, however small and insignificant, and using it as if it were his. The principle is EXACTLY the same. That it was easy to do and the cost to you was minimal is IRRELEVANT. It was not his to take.
Again the whole issue rests upon living in a rights respecting civilization or in an environment following the law of the jungle.
00
This is what I have been trying to (mostly unsuccessfully) say.
While IP protection is important, practical IP protection for digital goods is mostly or completely dead.
A new business model is needed, and the ones that figure that out will make good. The ones that revert to ever-more legislation to re-create their old business model will die. Such is life.
The obvious cost is the loss of large companies that own music and movie IP. The non-obvious benefit is that more ubitiquous distribution of entertainment means more people get to enjoy it. Conversely this actually opens up a bigger market for entertainers but they haven’t figure it out yet.
Steve Jobs had a handle on it but sadly passed too soon. But Sony recording ads now run with Apple Branding in them. I have to quietly chuckle every time I see that. It would be like Holden being forced to sell Commodores in Ford dealerships, simply because they were too stupid to recognise the current business landscape for what it is, rather than what they wished it was.
00
The correct term is copyright infringement. “Piracy” is just Orwellian hyperbole to equate a petty “crime” (no actual loss occurs and it is unlikely that the copyright infringers would have otherwise bought the material) with murder on the high seas.
00
Excellent point – well spotted.
00
If the infringer would not have bought the material then why should he be entitled to download it for free? Copying copyrighted material without permission has been a crime for a very long time. Why should that change because of the Internet?
Note that I do not like SOPA. Existing copyright law should be sufficient to do the job.
00
Traditionally there was no punishment for mere copying – only for selling unauthorised copies. The punishments were typically nothing more than a modest fine and payment of compensation to the author.
Copyright also didn’t cover works for over 100 years as it now does in the USA.
SOPA demands prison sentences of up to 55 years – far more severe you would get for mass murder in virtually any Western country (except the USA).
00
The problem as I see it is not so much with existing laws as with the difficulties involved in existing means of policing those laws.
Seeking to solve this problem with extremely draconian legislation is still extremely draconian legislation. Designed to benefit an ever decreasing few against the rest.
There has to be a better way, and in this case the market should be able to move a long way towards solving the problem. That is, if the market is not excessively shackled by regulation.
The internet should be able to solve the problem that the internet created. Without new regulations.
00
Have you ever read a magazine at the dentist’s or doctor’s office?
Have you ever read a newspaper, book or a magazine that someone else purchased?
Have you gone to a friend’s house to watch a DVD?
If you have you are a copyright “pirate”.
00
It gets even more complicated BB. Let’s just take a simple real-life example:
Over the years I have bought not one, but four copies of Melanie Safka’s album, Candles in the Rain. Two copies as vinyl records (a girlfriend stole one), one copy as a cassette, and later, a copy on CD.
So, I have paid Melanie her royalty to enjoy the product of her intellectual property not once, but four times. I have paid the record company four times for originally recording and distributing the album. I have paid four times my share of the cost of promoting the album in the first place.
If I now download an electronic digital version, is it a “pirate copy”?
We actually went through all this once before, when cassette players became available to the public at large, and the recording industry started selling albums on cassette.
To maximise their profits, the music recording industry attempted to argue in court that someone who legally owned a vinyl copy of the music was not entitled to make a cassette copy of it. If they wanted it on cassette, they had to buy it again, in that form. They argued that the cassette version was a completely different and separate piece of “intellectual property”.
The courts slapped down that line, on the basis that any new “intellectual property” incorporated in the cassette version was inherent to the cassette and the player, not what was transferred to the tape.
Similar court battles were fought when the video player came out, first on people’s right to copy over commercial films from super 8 and 16 versions, then on people’s right to make a copy of an existing video as a backup, and more recently on the right of people to record programs directly from TV.
With each and every technological innovation ARIA (American Recording Industry Association) has had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the future, each and every time they have argued it “would be the end of the industry” and each and every time they have ultimately profited – much to their own surprise.
People forget, but the big movie houses even originally fought against the whole concept of the video business. Their attitude was, if you wanted to see the movie, you had to go to the pictures, or wait years until it played on TV. Then they realised they could profit by selling copies of the movie on video.
So then they spent a couple of years fighting the video hire business, until they realised they could profit even more from that, than just simply selling one copy to one customer.
Now both ARIA and the movie houses come down like a ton of bricks on anybody using part of their product on the internet – for instance using a piece of music as a soundtrack on a You Tube clip. The fact that it is all “free” advertising is somehow beyond their grasp.
As is pointed out in the article, the advent of iTunes made a significant dent in the illegal music business. A similar model would do the same for movies. It’s true, I CAN currently download a “legal” copy of a movie, but ONLY when the movie houses decide I can (to maximise box-office returns) and even then only for significantly more ($5.99) than what I would pay by going round the corner to Video Ezy and renting it (two overnighters plus four weeklies for $8.99).
“Copyright infringement” was only ever meant to be a matter for legislation or the courts, when somebody attempted to profit by copying and selling somebody else’s intellectual property. The advent of the internet means that is how it is going to be in the future, regardless of how “fair” or “unfair” that is perceived to be.
00
bananabender,
I disagree there since there is an implicit right to show the legitimately purchased copy to anyone and to transfer ownership of it to anyone else you please. Downloading of something illegally posted on the internet is a different animal.
I agree that copyright protection for 100 years is out of line and severe penalties for mere copying without intent to profit are also out of line. Remember, I said I do not like SOPA.
On the other hand I can’t agree with the apparent attitude of some that there should be no copyright protection.
memoryvault,
You point out another problem also, that the courts were never intended to be the arbiter of every petty dispute in the world. But that’s far wider in scope than copyright and patent protection.
00
If you believe that try selling secondhand legally purchased software on Ebay.
00
You did not purchase the software nor did you purchase a copy. All you purchased is the RIGHT TO USE something that was very costly to develop for a mere pittance. It was also a non transferable right to use BY CONTRACT. Check your license agreement. It sets the terms. If you did not like the terms, why did you buy the right to use it? THAT is your only legal option.
I have earned a living by developing and selling advanced software for almost 50 years. You do not have a right to use the product of MY life in any way without MY permission. That right WILL be enforced if by no other method than the software in question will never see the light of day!
I will deal ONLY with people who respect the right of contract and who hold to their part of the deal. Going outside the terms of the license is a gross violation of that contract. I respect the rights of others and I EXPECT/DEMAND the same it return.
THIS is what I mean by the choice of living in a rights respecting civilization or in a law of the jungle anarchy. If you want the law of the jungle, you are on your own without benefit of the products of my life.
00
Talk about failure of critical thinking…
If I give, or even sell the magazine to someone I do not retain a copy of it and no harm is done. If I make copies of my copy and give them away or sell them, then I have violated the copyright.
The software is the same. I can give away or sell my copy of it but I may not keep my copy and then sell as you suggest.
And by the way, Lionell is right. You don’t own the software, only the medium on which it’s delivered to you.
Never argue with someone who has a vested interest in copyrighted material. We know what we’re talking about.
00
Lionell @31.2.3.2.2,
You’ve mistaken the context. The quoted statement pertains to a copy of a magazine, not software.
————–
In my opinion (for what it’s worth) copyright isn’t sufficient protection for software. When copyright and patent laws were first conceived there was no computer and no Internet. The world needs to come to grips with the fact that software is not something you can hold in your hand. And yes I know the source code can be printed and held in your hand. But how much of yours is printed on paper? And none of mine is either.
So is the source code the program or is the compiled and linked result the program? Both…? It actually exists but what is it really? Patent protection is ruled out. I can carefully make sure that copyright notice is in every source file, every executable image and documentation that I can have any control or influence over. But there’s so much more that copyright doesn’t address like appearance of the windows and human interface design.
I think software needs to be recognized as a new type of entity, separate from hardware and separate from written communication that copyright was intended to protect. I don’t think this would be very hard. But like so many other things, lawmakers are loath to stick their necks out and actually solve a problem, preferring to leave it to the courts to untangle the mess.
00
Copyright protection is a very leaky abstraction of part of intellectual property rights protection. If one area of copyright protection is inadequately defended all areas are subject to degradation. Magazines, software, copyrighted material exposed on the internet are all part of the self same issue.
That something new comes along that people (basically intellectual savages) don’t see as property is irrelevant. The protection is precisely intended for the new and valuable no matter what its expression. If it were worthless, you couldn’t sell it anyway.
The protection of intellectual property is founded on the RIGHT of each individual to control his own life and that means his products as well. My product happens to be intellectual property that is the result of a life time of disciplined learning and effort. So yes I am very sensitive to that issue. I really do take such things very seriously as if my life depends upon it because it does.
To use someone’s life without permission is a violation of his right to life. Just because some dolt couldn’t produce intellectual property worth a dime does not authorize him to use the lives of his obvious intellectual superiors without their prior and continued permission.
As for critical thinking. Think again. By selling software for which you only paid for the right to use, is presuming you have a right to the procedural mechanism that permits that use. That is not one whit different from my leasing you a car for your use for payment and then you selling that car without my permission. The lease is simply permission to use according to the terms of the lease. To violate those terms is nothing but violation of contract and ultimately theft of what rightfully belongs to another.
Like I have repeatedly said. The issue is do you want to live in a rights respecting civilization or live by the law of the jungle. There is no long lasting middle ground. Start disrespecting rights no matter how easy it is to disrespect, you invite the law of the jungle to live and thrive.
The issue of the duration of protection is an area of discussion. Both no protection and protection for eternity are invalid. Twenty years, fifty years, life of the inventor/creator are open for discussion. But total disregard of the life of the inventor/creator is outside of rationality.
00
Software developers are in the fortunate position of being able to produce and sell utter crap without any real legal recourse from consumers. If the law was up to date software purchases would be provided with a warranty and allowed to return buggy software under warranty for a full refund. The average software company would be broke in a week if software was treated like a physical good by the courts.
The most annoying thing is that these purveyors of shit (software developers) have the temerity to call themselves engineers. Real engineers aren’t in a habit of making cars that explode on a daily basis and bridges that collapse at the first gentle breeze.
00
For these that might have a vote. Vote for Ron Paul, he will defend our rights and the constitution !
00
That is except for the fact he does not believe we have a right to defend ourselves unless directly attacked and then only during the attack. This especially applies in what is essentially a law of the jungle international realm. We are to disengage and can respond ONLY if attacked on our national soil and then only against the attackers. Foreign property and citizens in foreign lands are to be abandoned to whatever fate the thugs of that land decide.
Ron Paul talks a good game of liberty out of one side of his mouth but gives it away for free out of the other side. Liberty will exist only as long as it is strongly and actively defended WHERE and WHEN it is threatened. This means philosophical, economic, and physical threats and not merely physical attack on our nations soil.
I believe a good fraction of the middle east should have been turned into crispy critters and radioactive green glass within 72 hours of 9/11. Ron thinks we should have played nice nice and the Islamic thugs would then play nice nice too. That is an unrealistic expectation to the point of it being psychotic.
In spite of the above, I would agree that Ron Paul would be better than the Obama abomination. Even my pet dog would be better. My person would be much better defended by her.
00
Another spellbindingly stupid comment from Lionell,
Do you honestly beleive the USA should have strengthened its claim as the only nation on earth to use WMD against human beings within 3 days of 9/11.
I do remember Condalezza Rice claiming she had evidence Bin laden did it and would show the world within 3 days………sadly 10 years later we are still waiting for it. Based on your theory we dont need it, we should just nuke large swathes of the planet in a “kill em all and let God sort em out” strategy.
You belittle Paul over his policies by making up complete shit but then at the last minute you claim he would have handled this type of situation better than Obama, Obamam is merely and extension of G Dubya Booosch.
Never a more mindless post by a dithering idiot.
Its funny how when we finally step out of the AGW shadow most of you have nothing of importance to say.
00
Wes/Roy,
I had a pretty full weekend and sorry but i completely forgot about you two, it looks like you have both had plenty to say in my absence. I think i have made my point crystal clear on this subject however some comments by you both and others suggest the point is still being missed.
For the final time, SOPA is nothing more than a hand fisted government grab for more of your freedoms and rights, we know Obama wants SOPA but what of the GOP candidates? Which ones of those would support SOPA in what ever new form it appears in?
I think it is safe to say that Paul as President would not support it so maybe this is a good reason to vote for him? Unfortunately it appears this is not the case it looks like Romney or Newt will get the nod to take on Obama so in other words nothing will change in the states. So you Americans will get SOPA along with NDAA and the Patriot act and as the saying goes you made your bed now you have to sleep in it. So good luck to you all and all the best.
00
I haven’t missed the point. I was confident that SOPA would die a premature death — and it has. Will it or something like it be resurrected? Possibly so. But in the meantime the guy who said, “The price of liberty is eternal vigilance,” was right. We watch constantly and act when we should or we lose. Some of liberty’s enemies are within the gates but still we must fight them whoever and wherever they are.
I said Ron Paul had no chance to be elected and I’ve been right on that as well — witness New Hampshire and South Carolina if you don’t believe me.
Right now the job of anyone with any brains at all is to get rid of Barack Obama in November. In that context your opinion about the future may or may not be worth paying attention to so pardon me if I don’t.
Finally: I would never dream of telling someone in any other country how to vote. I don’t have that right. And I wonder why some in other countries are self-righteous enough to try it on us. To say the very least, it isn’t appreciated.
00
Roy,
I think if we were to agree on one thing it woud be that Paul will not get elected.
I am not *telling* anyone how to vote i am just stating the obvious differences between some of the candidates ie if you want more of the same then dont vote for Paul.
Is there anything else worth talking about?
00
Crakar24,
This and similar statements you and several others have made, when taken in context sound mighty like, “You better vote for Ron Paul if you know what’s good for you.” It doesn’t have to be in those words to convey that message.
00
fair enough
00
Crakar,
You claim that you have never visited the United States:
but can speak authoritatively about the people:
How would you know whether Jews and Americans are nice? You’ve never been to either country. Besides, the US and Israel are democracies where the people freely elected their governments of “blood thirsty murdering criminals” to represent their interests.
How could they be nice?
Would it be wrong to assume your views on America and Israel are simply regurgitations leftist anti-American and anti-Jewish media bias?
00
Wes,
Debating you is growing rather tiresome purely because you claim i say things that i never actaully said.
I have never mentioned one word about the jewish people but you claim i have.
I have never said a bad word about American people but yet once again you make claims to the contrary.
Why do i think they are nice? Well i have worked with both peoples over the years and they were nice, true i am talking about a very small sample of the population so i take your point maybe i just got lucky and they are (on average) not very nice at all.
Heres a conspiracy theory for you, you believe people think a certain and when they dont act that way you substitute reality with your own version and then make accusations against them based on this fantasy.
Why dont you peddle your bullshit somewhere else.
00
When you continually have to defend your statements perhaps it’s because they’re indefensible?
00
No Roy its because Wes cant follow the conversation and makes shit up
00
Crakar says…
Really? I recall you saying that the Jewish government is pack of bloody thirsty murdering criminals.
Oh, Really? what about this:
That’s a tad harsh.What about this?…
The dumb part of that statement is that the Yanks are a “dictatorship,” yet they are to blame for “voting in incompetent fools.” Must be a democratically elected dictatorship, eh?
What about this whopper:
So you think Ron Paul’s life is in danger while running for president of the blood thirsty American Dictatorship?
Why do I feel like not only do you not like Jews or the Yanks, but your pretty pretty bloody ignorant about America….
Well, maybe fly over and have a sticky beak, Einstein!
Of course, bloody minded ignorance does slow you from telling an American:
Crakar is under the spell of leftist, anti-Americanism, anti-semite propaganda untempered by any actual direct knowledge about the USA, or he wouldn’t be calling the USA a dictatorship ruled by a conspiracy of blood thirsty (mostly Jewish) criminals who routinely execute anyone who wants to “end the fed.”
That’s just nuts and it’s hard to have a rational conservation with some one whose arguments are based on these fundamentally flawed and arguably hateful assumptions.
00
By the way Wes you said
Firstly Wes when we voted for labor (well maybe not us but Australia) we voted for no carbon tax and yet we got one, when Americans voted for Obama they voted from among other things the end of Gitmo, the end of torture that contradicts human rights treaties but like us here in oz Obama lied to his people.
Just because a government is blood thirsty it does not mean the people who elected them are.
Now another history lesson Wes…………you would think a democratic government would support and recognise other democratic governments but not the US. The US and Israel decided they would not negotiate peace with the Palestinians until they had free and fair elections so the Palestinians had free and fair elections. One problem Wes, they elected Hamas as there democratic government, the US and Israel did not like this so the Israelis began a lockdown on the Gaza strip which is still in force today, they randomly blow people up with cluster bombs and phophorous bombs both banned by the geneva convention.
The US government supports this oppressive behaviour by Israel against another democratically elected government………i could go Wes but eventually you will get it through your thick skull that the Us government does not give a shit about the democratic process and are simply blood thirsty murderers.
00
The election of Hamas would have been just fine EXCEPT that rocket, mortar and suicide bomber attacks against Israel continued apace. Absolutely no Arab state in the region has forsaken the desire for the destruction of Israel. NONE!
When I look at Israel I see a nation that has exercised the most unusual degree of forbearance you can ever hope to find.
Here is your problem:
You cannot put yourself in the other guy’s shoes for so much as five minutes, much less long enough to gain any understanding of why they may be behaving as they do. Yet you can judge at the drop of a hat. How many more suicide bombers must Israel endure?
Israel has the means to have utterly destroyed both Gaza and the west bank many times over and no one would have stepped in to stop them (at least not until Obama took over). Yet they have not done so! How can you explain that, Crakar? How? I don’t think you can.
In spite of all that 1960s hippie BS about, “What if they gave a war and nobody came?” it only takes one side to give a war and the other side comes to it quite involuntarily. Two sides together can end it if they want to. But one side of this war doesn’t want to. There is another option though, It can also end when one side has utterly destroyed the other side’s ability to do any more harm. If that’s what Hamas, Hezbollah and the rest want then I vote for Israel to be the one left standing at the end.
What do you say?
00
Hi Crackar
It is true that Hamas was democratically elected.
When are they going to start governing their country.
There are several facts:
1. Rockets are being fired into Israel from the country Hamas governs?
2. Hamas has the capacity to stop these attacks from their territory.
3. They choose not to stop these attacks and so have effectively declared war on Israel.
4. There are some scarey looking Jewish people in black hats who may be extremists,but, I think that if Hamas had all of their citizens under the same level of control as Israel then there would be no cross border fighting.
5. The people who elected Hamas did so in the belief that after a “democratic” election the rest of the world would support their attacks on Israel.
6. The area under Hamas control is living on handouts, do they have an economy of their own.
Do any of the handouts come from Israel?
Things to ponder.
00
http://farmingunderfire.blogspot.com/
00
If the so-called Palestinians want to be able to farm without being in any danger then they can accomplish that easily. I think you know how and so does Crakar. So I shouldn’t have to tell you.
And now, instead of keeping your mouth shut when you should and leaving people to ponder for themselves whether you’re the bigot I said you were at 27.1.1.1, you’ve opened it and proved that you are.
00
Roy,
You obviously haven’t looked at the material posted,nor obviously do you know anything of the history of Gaza, nor did you look at the material I posted on SOPA PIPA,so remain in your stupid state of ignorant bliss.It is pointless arguing with ignorant and rude people such as you.
00
Hi Kevin
I know, I’ve seen TV footage of unpleasant Israeli “settlers near the border who make life difficult for local Palestinians. I think it was on the ABC here.
By contrast what you wouldn’t find is similar coverage of Palestinians harassing settlers. Is there some sort of political bias in parts of Australia’s media?
Palestinians who provoke and kill settlers and then look for international media coverage of the response would be well off looking to their own behaviour first.
At least if settlers misbehave they will be dealt with to some extent by Israeli police or army.
Does Hamas exert the same level of control over their own?
The only thing Palestinian leaders have ever done for their “people” is to feed the thirst for revenge against the Jews. This is a very negative thing and leads to a nation with no capacity to function in a modern world.
having said that, I am sure that there are many well educated, extremely decent Palestinians who would love to see the backsides of militant Palestinian leaders forever.
00
Roy,
How the F*&^%^K would i know moron.
Get a life you idiot, by the way did you know that the UN has just lambasted the US government because of the on going use of GITMO and also its terrible human rights record of torture and secret renditions and keeping people in a cell with no charge for years?
I doubt you knew that and whats more i doubt you care, you are the type of person who does not give a shit about human rights in fact you are so stupid your own government removes yours and you cant see it happening.
Please Roy do not speak to me again as your comments and attitudes make me sick. If you are serious about this topic i suggest you research the enermous amount of UN resolutions Israel has ignored and also the part the US has played in protecting poor wittle Israel from those nasty UN people. Go on Roy have a look.
You deserve the shittiest government money can buy……….oh sorry you already have that.
00
Crakar,
This seems to be the usual from you towards someone who disagrees with you. Name calling and character assassination are also the hallmark of another group we all know and
love.It apparently escapes you that cessation of attacks against Israel and an actually credible attempt at peace would accomplish it. So be it. You can stay a willfully blind man if you want to.
00
Hi Crackar
In your highly colourful post above you ask “did you know that the UN has just lambasted the US government”.
Is this the same UN that has overseen many tens or hundreds of thousands of deaths from war and famine through its ineptitude (at best) or “couldn’t care less about the poor people (at worst), attitude?
Or perhaps it’s the UN that we are all so critical of regarding the Global Warming Climate Change money-spinner.
There are heartrending individual stories I know, but there are many dishonorable politicians, many of whom live in “exile” (Geneva anyone) outside of Hamas controlled Palestine.
00
Crakar,
Thought you may like this –
An Arab Woman’s Blues – Layla Anwah
http://arabwomanblues.blogspot.com/2009/03/fuck-it.html
00
http://merryabla64.wordpress.com/2010/07/06/the-final-solution-extermination-by-layla-anwar/
00
Kevin
Most of us here are trying to express our own ideas for a better world and I mostly ignore links from others preferring to look at what they write themselves.
Constantly linking to other people’s thoughts tends to suggest that you have none of your own.
Why not summarise the material from the links in a few words?
00
Kinky,
Tell me how I could summarise the messages in the links @ 36 above after you have examined them.
To be informed you need to read the whole article.
Some people I guess just don’t want to know the real story.
00
Hi Kevin
I’m not going to look at them.
Nothing personal but I have seen enough of human nature to feel that the Palestinians have missed a gigantic opportunity over the last few years.
All they had to do was stop killing settlers and shoppers and Israeli citizens.
Then if Israel did attack or abuse them in any was they could rightly point the finger and Israel would be the subject of widespread Western condemnation.
They did not have the discipline or nous to do this. It’s called Jihad.
Unfortunately when you shoot up a carload of settlers heading home and kill men women and children indiscriminately you have NO MORAL BASE to stand on and accuse Israel.
If you did you might sound like a hypocrite.
I know they feel aggrieved at the “loss” of part of their land. There are many histories of the area. Do you just go back to 1948 or to 1920 or earlier.
Eventually we must live in the now and the sad fact is that Palestine is being used as a proxy by other nations to attack Israel. Who is Palestine’s enemy??
Think about it.
I sometimes think the Palestinians don’t want the war to stop because they would then have to face the reality and hard grind we all have of going to work every day and very slowly building a nation.
00
Hi Kevin,
Quote from a wise man: “Some people I guess just don’t want to know the real story.’
I guess he MUST know the real story, mustn’t he?
00
Kinky,
I don’t source my news from the ABC or any avenue of the MSM.
Has the ABC ever had anything to say that’s like the following?
Testimonies of Israeli Crimes in Gaza
On February 2nd 2009, two surgeons from the UK, Dr. Ghassan Abu Sittah and Dr. Swee Ang, who managed to get into Gaza during the Israeli invasion, released a statement describing their experiences, sharing their views, and conclusions that the people of Gaza are extremely vulnerable and defenseless in the event of another attack. Their statement was originally published in the magazine The Lancet Global Health Network .
Under the title “The wounds of Gaza”, the two surgeons described the Israeli genocide and war crimes against the Palestinian civilians in Gaza as they observed it. I received the statement of the surgeons from a reader from the Sabra Shatila Foundation in Lebanon. I expect that the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, will take in consideration the testimonies of these two surgeons from the UK, and I remind him of the precedent which was set when he signed an arrest warrant against the Sudanese president on 14 July 2008, despite the fact that the ICC does not have territorial jurisdiction in Sudan.
The full Article : The Wounds of Gaza
Two surgeons from the UK, Dr Ghassan Abu Sittah and Dr Swee Ang, managed to get into Gaza during the Israeli invasion. Here they describe their experiences, share their views, and conclude that the people of Gaza are extremely vulnerable and defenseless in the event of another attack.
The wounds of Gaza are deep and multi-layered. Are we talking about the Khan Younis massacre of 5,000 in 1956 or the execution of 35,000 prisoners of war by Israel in 1967? Yet more wounds of the First Intifada, when civil disobedience by an occupied people against the occupiers resulted in massive wounded and hundreds dead? We also cannot discount the 5,420 wounded in southern Gaza alone since 2000.
Hence what we are referring to below are only that of the invasion as of 27 December 2008,Over the period of 27 December 2008 to the ceasefire of 18 Jan 2009, it was estimated that a million and a half tons of explosives were dropped on Gaza Strip. Gaza is 25 miles by 5 miles and home to 1.5 million people. This makes it the most crowded area in the whole world. Prior to this Gaza has been completely blockaded and starved for 50 days. In fact since the Palestinian election Gaza has been under total or partial blockade for several years.
On the first day of the invasion, 250 persons were killed. Every single police station in Gaza was bombed killing large numbers of police officers. Having wiped out the police force attention was turned to non government targets. Gaza was bombed from the air by F16 and Apache helicopters, shelled from the sea by Israeli gunboats and from the land by tank artillery. Many schools were reduced to rubble, including the American School of Gaza, 40 mosques, hospitals, UN buildings, and of course 21,000 homes, 4,000 of which were demolished completely. It is estimated that 100,000 people are now homeless.
Israeli weapons
The weapons used apart from conventional bombs and high explosives also include unconventional weapons of which at least 4 categories could be identified.
•Phosphorus Shells and bombs
The bombs dropped were described by eye witnesses as exploding at high altitude scattering a large canopy of phosphorus bomblets which cover a large area.
During the land invasion, eyewitnesses describe the tanks shelling into homes first with a conventional shell. Once the walls are destroyed, a second shell – a phosphorus shell is then shot into the homes. Used in this manner the phosphorus explodes and burns the families and the homes. Many charred bodies were found among burning phosphorus particles.
One area of concern is the phosphorus seems to be in a special stabilizing agent. This results in the phosphorus being more stable and not completely burning out. Residues still cover the fields, playground and compounds. They ignite when picked up by curious kids, or produce fumes when farmers return to water their fields. One returning farming family on watering their field met with clouds of fumes producing epistaxis. Thus the phosphorus residues probably treated with a stabilizer also act as anti-personnel weapons against children and make the return to normallife difficult without certain hazards.
Surgeons from hospitals are also reporting cases where after primary laparotomy for relatively small wounds with minimal contamination find on second look laparotomy increasing areas of tissue necrosis at about 3 days. Patients then become gravely ill and by about 10 days those patients needing a third relook encounter massive liver necrosis. This may or may not be accompanied by generalized bleeding, kidney failure and heart failure and death. Although acidosis, liver necrosis and sudden cardiac arrest due to hypocalcemia are known to be a complication of white phosphorus it is not possible to attribute these complications as being due to phosphorus alone.
There is real urgency to analyze and identify the real nature of this modified phosphorus as to its long term effect on the people of Gaza. There is also urgency in collecting and disposing of the phosphorus residues littering the entire Gaza Strip. As they give off toxic fumes when coming into contact with water, once the rain falls the whole area would be polluted with acid phosphorus fumes. Children should be warned not to handle and play with these phosphorus residues.
•Heavy Bombs
The use of DIME (dense inert material explosives) were evident, though it is unsure whether depleted uranium were used in the south. In the civilian areas, surviving patients were found to have limbs truncated by DIME, since the stumps apart from being characteristically cut off in guillotine fashion also fail to bleed. Bomb casing and shrapnel are extremely heavy.
•Fuel Air Explosives
Bunker busters and implosion bombs have been used . There are buildings especially the 8 storey Science and Technology Building of the Islamic University of Gaza which had been reduced to a pile of rubble no higher than 5-6 feet.
•Silent Bombs
People in Gaza described a silent bomb which is extremely destructive. The bomb arrives as a silent projectile at most with a whistling sound and creates a large area where all objects and living things are vaporized with minimal trace. We are unable to fit this into conventional weapons but the possibility of new particle weapons being tested should be suspected.
•Executions
Survivors describe Israeli tanks arriving in front of homes asking residents to come out. Children, old people and women would come forward and as they were lined up they were just fired on and killed. Families have lost tens of their members through such executions. The deliberate targeting of unarmed children and women is well documented by human right groups in the Gaza Strip over the past month.
•Targeting of ambulances
Thirteen ambulances had been fired upon killing drivers and first aid personnel in the process of rescue and evacuation of the wounded.
•Cluster bombs
The first patients wounded by cluster were brought into Abu Yusef Najjar Hospital. Since more than 50% of the tunnels have been destroyed, Gaza has lost part of her lifeline. These tunnels contrary to popular belief are not for weapons, though small light weapons could have been smuggled through them. However they are the main stay of food and fuel for Gaza. Palestinians are beginning to tunnel again. However it became clear that cluster bombs were dropped on to the Rafah border and the first was accidentally set of by tunneling. Five burns patients were brought in after setting off a booby trap kind of device.
Death toll
As of 25 January 2009, the death toll was estimated at 1,350 with the numbers increasing daily. This is due to the severely wounded continuing to die in hospitals. 60% of those killed were children.
Severe injuries
The severely injured numbered 5,450, with 40% being children. These are mainly large burns and polytrauma patients.Single limb fractures and walking wounded are not included in these figures.
Through our conversations with doctors and nurses the word holocaust and catastrophe were repeatedly used. The medical staff all bear the psychological trauma of the past month living though the situation and dealing with mass casualties which swamped their casualties and operating rooms. Many patients died in the Accident and Emergency Department while awaiting treatment. In a district hospital, the orthopaedic surgeon carried out 13 external fixations in less than a day.
It is estimated that of the severely injured, 1,600 will suffer permanently disabilities. These include amputations, spinal cord injuries, head injuries,large burns with crippling contractures.
Special factors
The death and injury toll is especially high in this recent assault due to several factors:
•No escape: As Gaza is sealed by Israeli troops, no one can escape the bombardment and the land invasion. There is simply no escape. Even within the Gaza Strip itself, movement from north to south is impossible as Israeli tanks had cut the northern half of Gaza from the south. Compare this with the situation in Lebanon 1982 and 2006, when it was possible for people to escape from an area of heavy bombardment to an area of relative calm – there was no such is option for Gaza.
•Gaza is very densely populated. It is eerie to see that the bombs used by Israel have been precision bombs. They have a hundred percent hit rate on buildings which are crowded with people. Examples are the central market, police stations. Schools, the UN compounds used as a safety shelter from bombardment, mosques (40 of them destroyed), and the homes of families who thought they were safe as there were no combatants in them and high rise flats where a single implosion bomb would destroy multiple families. This pattern of consistent targeting of civilians makes one suspect that the military targets are but collateral damage, while civilians are the primary targets.
•The quantity and quality of the ammunition being used as described above.
•Gaza’s lack of defense against the modern weapons of Israel. She has no tanks, no planes, no anti-aircraft missiles against the invading army. We experienced that first hand in a minor clash of Israeli tank shells versus Palestinian AK47 return fire. The forces were simply unmatched.
•Absence of well constructed bomb shelters for civilians. Unfortunately these will also be no match for bunker busters possessed by the Israeli Army.
Conclusion
Taking the above points into consideration, the next assault on Gaza would be just as disastrous. The people of Gaza are extremely vulnerable and defenseless in the event of another attack. If the International Community is serious about preventing such a large scale of deaths and injuries in the future, it will have to develop a some sort of defense force for Gaza. Otherwise, many more vulnerable civilans will continue to die.
Dr Ghassan Abu Sittah and Dr Swee Ang
http://www.kawther.info/wpr/2009/02/04/testimonies-of-israeli-crimes-in-gaza
00
Kevin
As I said before, I am not going to read that stuff.
All of it is subjective and pointless.
OK if the UN does prosecute Israel will they also fix up all of the atrocities in Sudan and the rest of Africa or are they to be ignored because they are from a different religious grouping?
ps I don’t want to sound like an apologist for Israel but I think there is a lot of unidirectional analysis going on here.
00
I have tried very hard to remain cool, calm and polite while still saying what I think needs to be said. But this has reached the point where the plain unvarnished truth is required.
To be informed you have to understand all sides of an issue. You, sir, make no attempt to understand all sides. You are not informed. You’re just stroking your own ego.
You should not continue to insult the rest of us with your biased one sided world view and your conspiracy theories.
00
This is a big comment but i will not provide a link as some people will not bother to look at it so apologies to all but what else am i to do.
The following is a list of all UN resolutions (up to 2000) ignored by Israel
233 6 June 1967 Calls for an immediate cease-fire and cessation of all military activities.
234 7 June 1967 Demands a cease-fire.
237 14 June 1967 Calls upon the Government of Israel to ensure the safety, welfare and security of the inhabitants, facilitate the return of those inhabitants who have fled the areas since the outbreak of the hostilities and recommends the scrupulous respect of the humanitarian principles contained in the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949.
242 22 Nov 1967 Affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include: withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict; and termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.
248 24 Mar 1968 Deplores the loss of life and heavy damage to property. Condemns the military action launched by Israel in flagrant violation of the U.N. Charter and the cease-fire resolution. Calls upon Israel to desist from acts or activities in contravention of resolution 237 (1967). (This was an attack against Karameh, Jordan.)
250 27 Apr 1968 Calls upon Israel to refrain from holding the military parade in Jerusalem which is contemplated for 2 May 1968.
251 2 May 1968 Deeply deplores the holding by Israel of the military parade in Jerusalem on 2 May 1968 in disregard of the unanimous decision adopted by the Council on 27 April 1968.
252 21 May 1968 Deplores the failure of Israel to comply with General Assembly resolutions 2253 (ES-V) and 2254 (ES-V) of 4 and 14 July 1967. Considers that all legislative and administrative measures taken by Israel, including the expropriation of land and properties thereon, which tend to change the legal status of Jerusalem, are invalid and cannot change the status. Urgently calls upon Israel to rescind all such measures taken and to desist from further actions changing the status of Jerusalem.
259 27 Sept 1968 Deplores the delay in implementation of resolution 237 (1967) because of the conditions still being set by Israel for receiving a Special Representative of the Secretary-General. Requests the Secretary-General to urgently dispatch a Special Representative to the Arab territories under military occupation by Israel following the hostilities of 5 June 1967 and to report on the implementation of resolution 237 (1967).
267 3 Jul 1969 Reaffirms the established principle that the acquisition of territory by military conquest is inadmissible. Deplores the failure of Israel to show any regard for the resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council. Censures in the strongest terms all measures taken to change the status of the city of Jerusalem. Urgently calls once more on Israel to rescind all measures taken by it to change the status of Jerusalem and in the future to refrain from all actions likely to have such an effect
271 15 Sep 1969 Grieved at the extensive damage caused by arson to the Holy Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem on 21 August 1969 under the military occupation of Israel; calls upon Israel to scrupulously observe the provisions of the Geneva Conventions and international law governing military occupation.
298 25 Sep 1971 Deplores the failure of Israel to respect previous U.N. resolutions concerning measures and actions by Israel purporting to affect the status of the city of Jerusalem. Confirms that all legislative and administrative actions taken by Israel ? are totally invalid and cannot change that status. Urgently calls upon Israel to rescind all such measures?.
338 22 Oct 1973 Calls for an immediate cease-fire and termination of all military activity. Calls upon the parties concerned to start immediately after the cease-fire the implementation of Security Council resolution 242 (1967) in all of its parts….
339 23 Oct 1973 Refers to resolution 338 (1973); confirms its decision on immediate cessation of all military actions; and requests the Secretary-General to take measures for immediate dispatch of U.N. observers to supervise observance of the cease-fire.
381 30 Nov 1975 Expresses concern over the continued state of tension in the area. Decides to reconvene on 12 January 1976 to continue the debate on the Middle East problem including the Palestinian question, taking into account all relevant U.N. resolutions.
425 19 Mar 978 Calls for the strict respect for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon. Calls upon Israel immediately to cease its military action against Lebanese territorial integrity and withdraw forthwith its forces from all Lebanese territory. Decides to establish immediately under its authority a United Nations Interim Force in Southern Lebanon (UNIFIL).
446 22 Mar 1979 Determines that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East. Calls once more upon Israel, as the occupying power, to abide scrupulously by the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, to rescind its previous measures and to desist from taking any action which would result in changing the legal status and geographical nature and materially affecting the demographic composition of the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, and in particular, not to transfer parts of its own civilian population into the occupied Arab territories.
452 20 Jul 1979 Calls upon the government and people of Israel to cease, on an urgent basis, the establishment, construction and planning of settlements in the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem.
465 1 Mar 1980 Determines that all measures taken by Israel to change the physical character, composition, institutional structure or status of the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, or any part thereof, have no legal validity and that Israel’s policy and practices of settling parts of its population and new immigrants in those territories constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention and also constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East. Strongly deplores the continuation and persistence of Israel in pursuing those policies and practices. Calls upon the government and people of Israel to rescind those measures, to dismantle the existing settlements and in particular to cease, on an urgent basis, the establishment, construction and planning of settlements in the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem.
Calls upon all States not to provide Israel with any assistance to be used specifically in connection with settlements in the occupied territories; and requests the Commission to continue examining the situation relating to settlements, to investigate the reported serious depletion of natural resources, particularly water, with a view to ensuring protection of those important natural resources of the territories under occupation.
468 8 May 1980 Recalling the Geneva Convention of 1949 and expressing deep concern at the expulsion by the Israeli military occupation authorities of the Mayors of Hebron and Halhoul and of the Sharia Judge of Hebron, calls upon Israel as occupying Power to rescind these illegal measures and to facilitate the immediate return of the expelled Palestinian leaders.
469 20 May 1980 Strongly deplores the failure of Israel to implement resolution 468 (1968). Calls again upon the Government of Israel, as occupying Power, to rescind the illegal measures taken by the Israeli military occupation authorities in expelling the Mayors of Hebron and Halhoul and the Sharia Judge of Hebron.
471 5 June 1980 Expresses deep concern that the Jewish settlers in the occupied Arab territories are allowed to carry arms thus enabling them to perpetrate crimes against the civilian population. Calls for the immediate apprehension and prosecution of the perpetrators of these crimes and condemns the assassination attempts on the lives of the Mayors of Nablus, Ramallah and Al-Bireh. Expresses deep concern that Israel, as occupying Power, has failed to provide adequate protection to the civilian population in the occupied territories in conformity with the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Calls again upon the Government of Israel to respect and comply with the provisions of the Convention as well as with the resolutions of the Council, calls once again upon all States not to provide Israel with any assistance to be used specifically in connection with settlements in the occupied territories. Reaffirms the overriding necessity to end the prolonged occupation of Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem.
476 30 June 1980 Reaffirms the overriding necessity to end the prolonged occupation of Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem. Strongly deplores the continued refusal of Israel, the occupying Power, to comply with the relevant resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly. Reiterates that all measures taken by Israel which have altered the geographic, demographic and historical character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem are null and void and must be rescinded in compliance with the relevant resolutions of the Security Council. Reaffirms that all such measures and actions constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Reaffirms its determination in the event of non-compliance by Israel to examine practical ways and means in accordance with relevant provisions of the U.N. Charter to secure full implementation of this resolution.
478 20 Aug 1980 Censures in the strongest terms the enactment by Israel of the “basic law” on Jerusalem and the refusal to comply with relevant Security Council resolutions. Affirms that the enactment of the “basic law” by Israel constitutes a violation of international law and does not affect the continued application of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 12 August 1949 in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since June 1967, including Jerusalem. Determines that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, which have altered or purport to alter the character and the status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, and in particular, the recent “basic law” on Jerusalem, are null and void and must be rescinded forthwith. Decides not to recognize the “basic law” and such other actions by Israel that, as a result of this law, seek to alter the character and status of Jerusalem. Calls upon all members of the United Nations (a) to accept this decision, (b) and upon those States that have established diplomatic Missions in Jerusalem to withdraw such Missions from the Holy City.
484 19 Dec 1980 Expressing grave concern at the expulsion by Israel of the Mayor of Hebron and the Mayor of Halhoul, calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to adhere to the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Declares it imperative that they be enabled to return to their homes and resume their responsibilities.
508 5 June 1982 Calls upon the parties to the conflict to cease immediately and simultaneously all military activities within Lebanon and across the Lebanese-Israeli border. Requests all Member States which are in a position to do so to bring their influence to bear upon those concerned so that the cessation of hostilities declared by Security Council resolution 490 (1981) can be respected. (Beginning of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon.)
509 6 June 1982 Demands that Israel withdraw all its military forces forthwith and unconditionally to the internationally recognized boundaries of Lebanon and demands that all parties observe strictly the terms of paragraph 1 of resolution 508 (1982).
512 19 June 1982 Expressing deep concern at the suffering of the Lebanese and Palestinian civilian populations, calls upon all the parties to the conflict to respect the rights of the civilian populations, to refrain from all acts of violence against those populations and to take all appropriate measures to alleviate the suffering caused by the conflict.
513 4 Jul 1982 Expressing alarm at the continued sufferings of the Lebanese and Palestinian civilian populations in southern Lebanon and in west Beirut, calls for respect for the rights of the civilian populations without any discrimination and repudiates all acts of violence against those populations. Calls further for the restoration of the normal supply of vital facilities such as water, electricity, food and medical provisions, particularly in Beirut.
515 29 Jul 1982 Demands that the government of Israel lift immediately the blockade of the city of Beirut in order to permit the dispatch of supplies to meet the urgent needs of the civilian population.
516 1 Aug 1982 Confirms its previous resolutions and authorizes the Secretary-General to deploy immediately, on the request of the Government of Lebanon, U.N. observers to monitor the situation in and around Beirut.
517 4 Aug 1982 Confirms once again its demand for an immediate cease-fire and withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon. Censures Israel for its failure to comply with the above resolutions. Takes note of the decision of the Palestine Liberation Organization to move the Palestinian armed forces from Beirut and authorizes the Secretary-General to increase the number of U.N. observers in and around Beirut.
518 12 Aug 1982 Demands that Israel and all parties to the conflict observe strictly the terms of Security Council resolutions relevant to the immediate cessation of all military activities within Lebanon and, particularly, in and around Beirut. Demands the immediate lifting of all restrictions on the city of Beirut
520 17 Sep 1982 Condemns the recent Israeli incursions into Beirut in violation of the cease-fire agreements and of Security Council resolutions. Demands an immediate return to the positions occupied by Israel before 15 September 1982, as a first step towards the full implementation of Security Council resolutions.
521 19 Sep 1982 Condemns the criminal massacre of Palestinian civilians in Beirut; reaffirms its resolutions 512 (1982) and 513 (1982), which call for respect for the rights of the civilian populations without any discrimination, and repudiates all acts of violence against those populations. Requests the Secretary-General, as a matter of urgency, to initiate appropriate consultations and, in particular, consultations with the Government of Lebanon on additional steps which the Security Council might take, including the possible deployment of United Nations forces, to assist that government in ensuring full protection for the civilian populations in and around Beirut. (Massacre of Sabra and Shattilla refugee camps while eastern Beirut was under Israeli military occupation.)
573 4 Oct 1985 Condemns vigorously the act of armed aggression perpetrated by Israel against Tunisian territory in flagrant violation of the U.N. Charter, international law and norms of conduct; and demands that Israel refrain from perpetrating such acts of aggression or from threatening to do so. (Israeli raid against PLO Headquarters in Hammam Al-Shut)
592 8 Dec 1986 Strongly deplores the opening of fire by the Israeli army resulting in the death and the wounding of defenseless students at Bir Zeit University. Calls upon Israel to abide immediately and scrupulously by the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949. Calls upon Israel to release any person or persons detained as a result of the recent events at Bir Zeit University.
605 22 Dec 1987 Strongly deplores those policies and practices of Israel, the occupying Power, which violate the human rights of the Palestinian people in the occupied territories, particularly the opening of fire by the Israeli army, resulting in the killing and wounding of defenseless Palestinian civilians. Calls once again upon Israel, the occupying Power, to abide immediately and scrupulously by the Fourth Geneva Convention.
607 5 Jan 1988 Calls upon Israel to refrain from deporting any Palestinian civilians from the occupied territories; and strongly requests it to abide by its obligations arising from the Fourth Geneva Convention.
608 14 Jan 1988 Reaffirming resolution 607 (1988) of 5 January 1988, deeply regrets that Israel, the occupying Power, in defiance of U.N. resolutions, has deported Palestinian civilians. Calls upon Israel to rescind the orders and to desist from forthwith deporting any other Palestinian civilians from the occupied territories.
611 25 Apr 1988 Having noted with concern that the aggression perpetrated on 16 April 1988 in the locality of Sidi Bou Said (Tunisia) has caused loss of human life, particularly the assassination of Mr. Khalil Al-Wazir, condemns vigorously the aggression perpetrated against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Tunisia in flagrant violation of the U.N. Charter; and urges Member States to take measures to prevent such acts against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all States. (Al-Wazir (Abu-Jihad) was the Deputy Commander-in-Chief of the Palestine Liberation Organization.)
636 6 Jul 1989 Deeply regrets the continuing deportation by Israel, the occupying Power, of Palestinian civilians. Calls upon Israel to ensure the safe and immediate return to the occupied Palestinian territories of those deported and to desist forthwith from deporting any other Palestinian civilians. Reaffirms that the Fourth Geneva Convention is applicable to the Palestinian territories, occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem, and to the other occupied Arab territories.
641 30 Aug 1989 Deplores Israel’s continuing deportation of Palestinian civilians. Calls upon Israel to ensure the safe and immediate return to the occupied Palestinian territories of those deported and to desist forthwith from deporting any other Palestinian civilians. Reaffirms that the Fourth Geneva Convention is applicable to the Palestinian territories, occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem, and to the other occupied Arab territories.
672 12 Oct 1990 Reaffirming that a just and lasting solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict must be based on its resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) through an active negotiating process which takes into account the right to security for all States in the region, including Israel, as well as the legitimate political rights of the Palestinian people. Expresses alarm at the violence which took place on 8 October at Al-Haram Al-Sharif and other Holy Places of Jerusalem, resulting in over twenty Palestinian deaths and the injury of more than one hundred and fifty people, including Palestinian civilians and innocent worshippers. Condemns especially the acts of violence committed by the Israeli security forces, resulting in injuries and loss of human life. Calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention.
673 24 Oct 1990 Deplores the refusal of the Israeli Government to receive the mission of the Secretary-General to the region in violation of resolution 672 (1990).
681 20 Dec 1990 Expresses its grave concern over the rejection by Israel of its resolutions 672 (1990) and 673 (1990). Deplores the decision by the Government of Israel, the occupying Power, to resume the deportation of Palestinian civilians in the occupied territories. Urges the Government of Israel to accept the de jure applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention to all the territories occupied by Israel since 1967
694 24 May 1991 Declares that the action of the Israeli authorities of deporting four Palestinians on 18 May is in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which is applicable to all the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem. Deplores this action and reiterates that Israel refrain from deporting any Palestinian civilian from the occupied territories and ensure the safe and immediate return of all those deported.
726 6 Jan 1992 Strongly condemns the decision of Israel, the occupying Power, to resume deportation of Palestinian civilians. Reaffirms the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 to all the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem. Requests Israel to ensure the safe and immediate return of all those deported.
799 18 Dec 1992 Strongly condemns the action taken by Israel, the occupying Power, to deport hundreds of Palestinian civilians (on 17 December 1992). Expresses its firm opposition to any such deportations by Israel. Reaffirms the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention to all the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem. Demands that Israel ensure the safe and immediate return to the occupied territories of all those deported.
904 18 Mar 1994 Strongly condemns the massacre in Hebron committed against Palestinian worshippers in Al-Ibrahimi Mosque, on 25 February 1994, during the holy month of Ramadan, and its aftermath which took the lives of more than 50 Palestinian civilians and injured several hundred others. Calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to continue to take and implement measures, including, inter alia, confiscation of arms, with the aim of preventing illegal acts of violence by Israeli settlers. Calls for measures to be taken to guarantee the safety and protection of the Palestinian civilians throughout the occupied territory, including, inter alia, a temporary international or foreign presence, which was provided for in the Declaration of Principles, within the context of the ongoing peace process.
1073 28 Sep 1996 Expresses its deep concern about the tragic events in Jerusalem and the areas of Nablus, Ramallah, Bethlehem and the Gaza Strip, which resulted in a high number of deaths and injuries among the Palestinian civilians. Calls for the immediate cessation and reversal of all acts which have resulted in the aggravation of the situation and which have negative implications for the Middle East peace process. Calls for the safety and protection of Palestinian civilians to be ensured. Calls for the immediate resumption of negotiations within the Middle East peace process on its agreed basis and the timely implementation of the agreements reached. (The draft resolution was issued officially as a presidential text, which normally indicates unanimity prior to the vote.)
1322 7 Oct 2000 Reaffirms that a just and lasting solution to the Arab and Israeli conflict must be based on its resolutions 242 (1967) of 22 November 1967 and 338 (1973) of 22 October 1973, through an active negotiating process. Deplores the provocation carried out at Al-Haram Al-Sharif in Jerusalem on 28 September 2000, and the subsequent violence there and at other Holy Places, as well as in other areas throughout the territories occupied by Israel since 1968, resulting in over 80 Palestinian deaths and many other casualties. Condemns acts of violence, especially the excessive use of force against Palestinians, resulting in injury and loss of human life. Calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and its responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva. Calls for the immediate cessation of violence, and for all necessary steps to be taken to ensure that violence ceases, that new provocative actions are avoided, and that the situation returns to normality. Stresses the importance of establishing a mechanism for a speedy and objective inquiry into the tragic events of the last few days with the aim of preventing their repetition.
Under General Assembly Resolution 273, Israel was admitted on the condition that it grant all Palestinians the right to return to their homes and receive compensation for lost or damaged property, according to General Assembly Resolution 194, paragraph 11.
Suffice to say, Israel has never lived up to these terms.
Israel’s membership in the UN is therefore null and void.
00
Further to my last, here is a list of USA vetoes at the UN security council, once again apologies for the long comment but iflonks are not read????????
The convention is In favour – veto – abstain
1. 10/09/1972: Lebanon (and Syria)
The Council called on parties to cease military operations.
Votes[40]: 13 (members voting to adopt the resolution) – 1 (member using their veto) – 1; Panama (member that abstained from the vote)
2. 24/07/1973: Palestine
/…supported initiatives of special representatives and Secretary General, and deplored Israel’s continuing occupation of territories seized in the 1967 conflict and expressed conviction that a just solution could be achieved only on the basis of respect for the rights of all states in the area and the rights and legitimate aspirations of the Palestinians.
Votes: 13 – 1- China did not participate in the vote
3. 05/12/1975: Lebanon
/… condemned Israel for air attacks upon Lebanon
Votes: 13 – 1 – 1; Costa Rica
4. 23/01/1976: Palestine
Israel should withdraw from the Occupied Territories and the Palestinians right to establish an independent state in Palestine
Votes: 9 – 1 – 3; Italy, Sweden, UK. China and Libya did not participate in the vote
5. 24/03/1976: Palestine
/… called on Israel to respect and uphold the inviolability of Holy places and desist from actions designed to change the legal status of the city of Jerusalem and desist from establishing settlements in occupied Arab territories.
Votes: 14 – 1
6. 29/06/1976: Palestine
/…affirmed the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people to self-determination including the right to return and national independence and sovereignty in Palestine.
Votes: 10 – 1 – 4; France, Italy, Sweden, UK
7. 28/04/1980: Palestine
/… reaffirmed that Israel should withdraw from the occupied territories including Jerusalem and affirmed that the Palestinian’s right to self-determination included the right to establish an independent sate in Palestine.
Votes: 10 – 1 – 4; France, Norway, Portugal, UK
8. 20/01/1982: Syria (Golan Heights)
/… decided that all Member States should consider applying concrete and effective measures in order to nullify the Israeli annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights.
Votes: 9 – 1 – 5; France, Ireland, Japan, Panama, UK
9. 01/04/1982: Palestine
/… called on Israel as occupying power, to rescind decisions disbanding municipal of El Bireh and removing Mayors of Nablus and Ramallah and to cease contravening Fourth Geneva Convention.
Votes: 13 – 1 – 1; Zaire
10. 02/04/1982: Palestine
/… called on Israel to observe and apply the Fourth Geneva Convention and deplored acts of destruction or profanation in Jerusalem.
Votes: 14 – 1
11. 08/06/1982: Palestine
/… condemned Israel for not complying with resolutions on withdrawal and reiterated demand for unconditional Israeli withdrawal
Votes: 14 – 1
12. 25/06/1982: Palestine (refugee camps in Lebanon)
/… demanded immediate cessation of hostilities and immediate withdrawal of Israeli forces to ten kilometers from Beirut and simultaneous withdrawal of Palestinian forces to existing camps and requested UN Secretary-General to station military observers.
Votes: 14 – 1
13. 06/08/1982: Palestine
/… decided that Member States should withhold supplying military aid until Israel withdrew and strongly condemned Israel for not implementing SCRs 516 and 517 (1982)[41].
Votes: 11 – 1 – 3; Togo, UK, Zaire
14. 01/08/1983: Palestine
/… determined that Israeli practices and policies in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied in 1967, including Jerusalem, had no legal validity and condemned recent attacks against Arab civilian population.
Votes: 13 – 1 – 1; Zaire
15. 28/02/1984: Lebanon
/… called on Israel to respect the rights of the civilian population in the areas under its occupation in Lebanon and demanded that Israel lift all restrictions in violation of Fourth Geneva Convention.
Votes: 14 – 1
16. 11/03/1985: Lebanon
/… condemned Israeli measures against the civilian population in Southern Lebanon […] and demanded immediate and unconditional withdrawal of Israeli forces and the implementation of SCR 425 (1978) and SCRs 508 and 509 (1982)[42].
Votes: 11 – 1 – 3; Australia, Denmark, UK
17. 13/09/1985: Palestine
/… deplored repressive measures taken by Israel against Palestinian population in the Occupied Territories […] called on Israel to immediately stop all repressive measures including curfews, administrative detainees and refrain from further deportations.
Votes: 10 – 1 – 4; Australia, Denmark, France, UK
18. 17/01/1986: Lebanon
/… deplored Israeli acts of violence and measures against the civilian population in Southern Lebanon and reaffirmed the need to implement SCR 425 (1978) and SCRs 508 and 509 (1982) on Israeli military withdrawal to Lebanon’s internationally recognized boundaries.
Votes: 11 – 1 – 3; Australia, Denmark, UK
19. 30/01/1986: Palestine
/… strongly deplores provocative acts which violated the sanctity of the sanctuary Haram Al-Sharif in Jerusalem.
Votes: 13 – 1 – 1; Thailand
20. 06/02/1986: Libya
/… condemned Israel for its forcible interception and diversion of the Libyan civilian aircraft in international airspace, and its subsequent detention.
Votes: 10 – 1 – 4; Australia, Denmark, UK
21. 15/01/1988: Lebanon
/… strongly deplored the reported Israeli attacks, against Lebanese territory and civilian population and requested Israel to cease attempts to occupy or change the status of Lebanese territory and reaffirmed the need to implement SCRs 425 and 426[43] (1978) and SCR 509 (1982) on Israeli military withdrawal to internationally recognised boundaries.
Votes: 13- 1 – 1; UK
22. 29/01/1988: Palestine
/… calls on Israel to accept the de jure applicability of the Geneva Convention to territories occupied since 1967 and comply with obligations under the Convention, and requested continued monitoring by the UN Secretary-General.
Votes: 14 – 1
23. 14/04/1988: Palestine
/… urged Israel to abide by the Geneva Convention, to rescind orders to deport Palestinians, condemned policies and practices of Israel which violate the human rights of the Palestinians and affirmed the need for a settlement.
Votes: 14 – 1
24. 06/05/1988: Lebanon
/… condemned the recent invasion by Israeli forces of southern Lebanon, reaffirmed the urgent need to implement SCRs 425 and 426 (1978) and SCR 509 (1982) and requested the Secretary-General to continue consultations.
Votes: 14 – 1
25. 14/12/1988: Lebanon
/… strongly deplored the attack by Israeli forces on 9 December 1988 against Lebanese territory, and reaffirmed urgent need to implement SCRs 425 and 426 (1978) and SCR 509 (1982) and requested the Secretary-General to continue consultations.
Votes: 14 – 1
26. 11/01/1989: Libya
/… deplored the downing of two Libyan reconnaissance planes by the United States and called on the US to suspend its military maneuvers off the Libyan coast and on all parties to refrain from resorting to force.
Votes: 9 – 3 (France, US, UK) – 3; Brazil, Canada, Finland
27. 17/02/1989: Palestine
/… strongly deplored Israel’s persistent policies and practices against the Palestinian people in the Palestinian territories; called on Israel to abide by Security Council resolutions and comply with its obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention; and requested the UN Secretary-General to report to the Security Council.
Votes: 14 – 1
28. 08/06/1989: Palestine
/… strongly deplored Israel’s policies and practices in the occupied Palestinian territories; demanded that Israel desist from deporting Palestinians from the occupied territories; expressed concern about the prolonged closure of schools in parts of the occupied territory and requested the Secretary-General to report no later than
23 June.
Votes: 14 – 1
29. 07/11/1989: Palestine
/… strongly deplored Israel’s policies and practices against the Palestinian people in the occupied territories; called upon Israel to end such practices; requested Secretary-General to conduct on-site monitoring of the situation and to submit periodic reports, the first such report as soon as possible.
Votes: 14 – 1
30. 31/05/1990: Palestine
/… established a Commission of three members of the Security Council to examine the situation relating to Israel’s policies and practices in the occupied Palestinian territory; and requested the Commission to report to the Security Council by
20 June 1990.
Votes: 14 – 1
31. 17/05/1995: Palestine
/… confirmed that the expropriation of land by Israel, the occupying power, in East Jerusalem was invalid, and called upon the Government of Israel to rescind the expropriation orders and refrain from such action in the future.
Votes: 14 – 1
32. 07/03/1997: Palestine
/… called on the Israeli authorities to refrain from all actions or measures, including settlement activities, which alter facts on the ground pre-empting final status negotiations, and have negative implications for the Middle East Peace Process; and to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and responsibilities under the
1949 Geneva Convention
Votes: 14 – 1
33. 21/03/1997: Palestine
/… demanded that Israel immediately cease construction of the Jabal Abu Ghneim settlement in East Jerusalem as well as other Israeli settlement activities in the occupied territories, and requests a report on developments from the Secretary-General.
Votes: 13 – 1 – 1; Costa Rica
34. 27/03/2001: Palestine
/… Sending of an unarmed UN Observer force to the West Bank
Votes: 9 – 1 – 5; France, Ireland, Norway, UK, Ukraine
35. 15/12/2001: Palestine
/… Sending of a human rights monitoring force to the Occupied Territories and condemning all acts of terror, extra-judiciary killing, excessive use of force and house demolitions. Also expressed it determination to contribute to ending the violence and to prompting dialogue between Israeli and Palestinian sides.
Votes: 12 –1-2; Britain and Norway abstained
00
So now back to my original comment way back when, currently the US government is considered by most people around the world as a terrorist state. They travel the world invading countries ousting the government and then put in a puppet all under the dubious claims of WMD/Freeing people of tyranny etc (by the way 12,000 marines just slipped into Libya).
The trail of destruction they leave behind wil be felt by the people of these countries for many years and there is no end in sight, the gunsights of regime change have now turned on Syria and Iran.
Now my point was that IF americans are quite happy with this situation then they should not vote for Paul on the other hand if they are sick and tired of their government effectively walking away from every human rights treaty they have signed then they should vote for Paul.
The above comments complete with UN resolutions is in response to the ill informed comments from some about the Palestinian conflict, you can also see how the US has protected Israel at the UN many times. As this situation continues Israel and the US will become more and more isolated on the world stage.
For example Palestine put in a bid to join UNESCO and the vote was in their favour by 115 to 6 or something so most of teh world wished to regonize Palestine as an independant state and saw the UNESCO bid as a stepping stone in that direction.
Now how did teh US respond well they spat the dummy like the little children they are and they stop all foreign aid to Palestine well done to the big tough USA.
So as i said if you want things to change vote for Paul, thats it, that is all. I am done with the retarded morons that swollow the MSM bullshit on this issue.
It fascinates me how you can sit there in your ivory towers and crap on about AGW but when faced with a real issue you simply turn your backs and appeal to authority.
So no more from on this subject.
Good bye and good riddance
00
Wow, Look at all those UN violations. Way to go, Israel!
Crakar, everyone here, including YOU, has condemned the world government aspirations of the United Nations.
So your latest rant now reveals I was right all along. You’re a far left anti-American extemist who believes the UN should have the power to interfere in the internal affairs of sovereign nation states, starting with the illegal Zionist entity, right?
The United Nations has no right to tell any nation how and when it might defend itself against aggression or anything else for that matter.
I applaud the sovereign state of Israel’s resolute stand against the tyranny of the UN which is packed to the gills with anti-semites.
OH, come on! Now the Arab Spring Democracy movement is a Yankee/Jewish regime change plot!!!! LOL. Surprise, surprise.
I applaud the fall of the dictatorship in Libya… and cheer for the end of the Syrian and Iran regimes too.
Your comments stand as a monument to your mad evangelical bile.
00
I dont need to read any further, Wes next time you applaud the abuse of human rights somewhere in the world i suggest you join in, really i do.
Why dont you go and stand in line to grab your rifle in the next war which most likely will be against Iran you narrow minded simpleton.
00
Again,
People shoot at you from a hill they live on just above your home.
You ask them to stop but they just keep shooting.
What to do.
Push them off the hill – fair enough.
But wait – they want justice , they want their hill back so they can go on shooting at you and your family.
So you say no because you are not stupid or insane or totally dumb enough to believe their promises that they will never shoot at you again If they can go back home.
This is a chicken and egg thing and it will never be solved while ever Palestine refuses to stop shooting Israelis.
00
Last comment on this KK,
You are looking at this the wrong way around.
remember there was once a country called Palestine and then in 1948 the British under what was called the “Palestinian mandate” allowed Jewish refugees from Europe to settle in Palestine………..now i know Newt told you the Palestinians are an invented people but he was lying to you KK.
So Jewish people settle in Palestine and over the years they have slowly but surely wiped Palestine from the face of the Earth and to test the veracity of my words get an up to date atlas and try and find Palestine then get hold of some old maps and try and find the country Israel.
How would you react if bulldozers roared in and flatten you house and village so israeli settlements can be built?
How would you react if you go to the UN and a resolution is raised only to be ignored by Israel or vetoed by the US?
There is no chicken and there is no egg KK.
One more thing Palestine (Fatah) want the UN general assembly to vote on Palestinian statehood in other words they want to be recognised as a member of the united nations at the UN (hence the inclusion in UNESCO) but wait if they try the US will veto why would teh US want to veto such a move?
Your homework for tonight KK is to find out why the US will veto.
00
I understand what you are say Crackar:
Israel should just pack up and leave because they will otherwise be the subject of conflict from every Arab neighbour they have until they are wiped out.
That is what you are saying.
Israel must not exist.
Have I got that wrong?
00
“remember there was once a country called Palestine ”
and did you do your homework.
Were there any Jews in “Palestine” in the 1920s?
What was the “racial” composition of Palestine then?
How far back should history go.
When will bitterness be given up so that people can HAVE A LIFE?
00
No KK i am not saying that, remember before WWII there was no Israel the jewish people effectively did not exist because they had no country. Some Jewish people did live in the middle east during this time and some lived in Palestine where they lived peacefully with everyone else.
If you actually read something about this you will find that that was the intent of the British that they all lived together in Palestine, however certain elements were not happy with that (google the bombing of the King David hotel among others).
Do not think for a moment that either side can claim the victum here a lot of shit went down in the late 40’s and 50’s which brought about the state of Israel.
What the Palestinians want is simple……………they want Israel to return to the 1967 borders as per the UN resolution, Israel refuses and continues to build settlements on Palestinian land.
This is not a difficult situation to grasp, you draw a line on a map and you dont cross it, that line is marked clearly way back in 1967.
00
LOL, tell that to Moses!
Maybe the Arabs shouldn’t have started the 1968 war to exterminate Israel. Huh?
By the way, Crakar, the stated goal of Hamas, which represents most of the Palestinians, is nothing short of the wiping the Jewish nation off the map. There is no question that if Hamas could conquer Israel a new diaspora would occur.
But don’t take my word for it, read Hamas’ Charter:
http://www.mideastweb.org/hamas.htm
Nice people.
If I lived in Israel I would want a 5-meter high concrete barricade between me and al-Bukhari…Oh, wait…
00
Are you serious Wes?
Is this what pases for debate where you come from…tell that to moses….wtf.
As i said below i am shocked at how uneducated most of you here are.
Just to clarify your simple brain
….
BEFORE WWII THERE WAS NO ISRAEL LOOK ON A F^^%%$G MAP YOU MORON.
The people of jewish faith lived in Germany, Poland, Russian etc soooooooooooo they were German, Polish and Russian.
The word Jewish refers to their faith not where they live.
Wes i can supply you quotes of Israeli PM’s stating Palestinians are nothing more than bugs to be squashed………..hold on a second i think i will
“Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul; Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta; Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis; and Kefar Yehushua in the place of Tal al-Shuman. There is not a single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population.”
— Moshe Dayan, April 1969, Ha’aretz; quoted in Edward Said, ‘Zionism from the Standpoint of Its Victims’, Social Text, Volume 1, 1979, 7-58.
I could go on and on Wes so shove your stupid little quote where the sun dont shine grow up, wake up and get educated.
00
Crakar, you and Kevin Moore seem to have a really violent and, well, I hate to say, but hateful attitude. Like maybe there is something about your background that your not telling us?
Why do you hate Jews so much?
Sure, we all know the history of the Middle East is blood soaked and the Jews have blood on their hands as well, but dude, your view of history ignores that the Palestinians have daytime little children programs where cute little bunnies strap on suicide bomb belts and blow up Jewish school children. Mother’s are proud to see their sons blow themselves up in Jewish restaurants and shopping malls. People who die killing Jews are martyrs and famous heroes in Gaza and have streets named after them and monuments built to honour the memory of civilian slaughter.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzlFPm7bymY&feature=related
Children are indoctrinated from an early age to hate Jews and to understand the highest goal is to murder infidels for their God.
That’s pretty sick stuff, mate. I think your culture has some much more serious issues to confront then the elders of Zion.
(note the whacko-wing of the Greens are highly influenced by the hate memes of the Palestinians, as seen is this video .)
But, of course, this extraordinary level of hatred needs the support of a massive propaganda campaign in order to prove the Jews are worthy of extermination. The Nazis did the same thing in the run up to the Holocaust. Kristallnacht was one of the inspiration for the intifada.
After all, teaching small kids to want to kill their neighbours is so barbarically insane, it’s almost beyond comprehension. But there it is.
That’s what Crakar and Kevin Moore think they are doing here, proving that Jews are subhuman scum, worthy of extermination…. that when Judgement Day comes the Arabs led by Iran, Hamas and Hizbollah will attempt a second Holocaust, to exterminate the Jewish people of Israel.
And it will be God’s just will.
Oh, and btw, VOTE FOR RON PAUL! He’s our man! Hizbollah’s endorsed candidate for President of the United State.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gp8x92eQj0M&feature=related
00
Wes,
You cant comprehend the english langauge can you.
I will type this really slowly so you can keep up OK, i dont hate the jewish people but i beleive their government has a lot to answer for just the same as America. BTW we here in Oz are not squeaky clean we also have a lot to answer for.
Granted there are many examples throughout the world and throughout history that one could point to and say “but…but….they were no better”.
But lets try and focus on the present shall we, most of the leaders in the middle east are dictators and dictators are generally psycopaths and use religious dogma to explain their actions.
Yes i am sure the Palestinians are taught to hate the jews and in some way they should because of Israeli military action against them but why do israelis accept this military action? Well its because they are taught to hate the Palestinians.
There are many jews that hate their government and would rather live in peace with Palestine as there are many Palestinians that want to live in peace with the jews…..after all they did do this for thousands of years in the past.
Once again Wes it is not the people but governments that cause the confrontations.
Have a look at what Newton said the other day, he claimed the Palestinians are an invented people, this man is running for the office of the president of the USA and he makes this claim? Why would he make such a claim Wes?
Is he trying to buy the Israeli vote he is obviously bullshitting to the voters but why say something like this, this will not bring peace to the region but merely inflame it.
You talk about propaganda well there is some for you.
Santorum states that he will stop Iran from building nukes, but they are not building nukes so why does he say this? Once again is it to buy the Israeli vote. But he is lying to the voters, just more propaganda Wes not designed to bring about peace but merely to inflame the situation.
Why would you vote for someone that lies to you just to buy Israeli favour and start another war that you and/or your kids will die in? Why Wes?
So dont lecture me about propaganda Wes because you wil not win.
So now based on a handful of posts you claim due to my culture i have some serious issues to confront? Thats gold Wes pure gold please tell me more, enlighten me on *my culture* that you find so abhorrent.
00
Wes,
I failed English once, but it’s my native language. What’s your first language, Al Crakar?
Yes, you do. But if you admit you hate Jews and want to wipe Israel off the map you’ll blow your cover as a rational human being….Oh wait, too late, dude. Gigs up. Btw you hate the Great Satan too, right?
I know, I know.. We’re the Great Satan deputy sheriff. Right?
Yes, and you have already said that you support the theocracy in Iran and the dictator of Syria against the Arab Spring movement which you characterised as a Zionist “regime change” plot.
I’ll check youtube and see if I can find any videos of Israel school children practicing to be suicide bombers when they grow up….. Nope. Nothing.
Too bad you aren’t one of these peace loving people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etDb5tXPawc
Who’s Newton?
Oh, you mean Newt…the distinguished Professor of History, Newt? … Newt Gingrich said, “I think that we’ve had an invented Palestinian people who are in fact Arabs and who were historically part of the Arab community. And they had a chance to go many places, and for a variety of political reasons we have sustained this war against Israel now since the 1940s, and it’s tragic,” he said.
Of course, Iran is not building a bomb, because most their top nuclear scientists have been recently involved in a number of tragically fatal accidents. What a coincident. But they were trying…
“An Iranian former diplomat says Iran is working toward developing a nuclear bomb with the help of scientists from North Korea and other countries worldwide, the Daily Telegraph reported on Wednesday.Mohammed Reza Heydari, formerly of the Iranian embassy in Oslo, Norway, told the British newspaper that he had helped North Korean technicians and military experts enter Iran while he was working for the Iranian foreign ministry office in Tehran’s airport.”
VOTE FOR RON PAUL! …Hamas’ man in Washington.
Which civilisation do you represent, Al Crakar? I hail from the Western one.
00
Sorry Wes but i can no longer debate someone of your calibre, your thought process reminds me of a big bowl of spaghetti.
You laugh at the assassination of Iranian scientists
I would like to think that i represent the civilisation of the human race you on the other hand and people like you have a special place reserved in hell.
00
Hi Crackar
I think you know my opinion of the UN and therefore it’s resolutions.
Skimmed over the list. Yes, it’s unpleasant. War is always unpleasant.
I know of Vietnamese men who having escaped VN have been unable to accept the loss of their homeland and pined way – dying eventually of heart attacks.
The question Palestinians have to answer is one of direction.
Do they want to move forward as a self governing nation from 2012 onwards or do they want to remain trapped in the bitterness of the past and stay on as the stooges who act out every other Arab nations Jihad towards Israel?
You have recited a long list of Israels wrongs, but I grew up in this period and I remember an Israel constantly at war defending itself against heavily armed neighbours.
Would you be happy if Israel just bought Florida and moved there?
Would the Palestinians be happy if Israel moved, probably not because they would have no-one to blame for their disorganization community.
00
“One more thing Palestine (Fatah) want the UN general assembly”
Yes, another appeal to authority and it won’t work any better than the Climate Change appeals to authority.
00
Slowly working through the comments.
What are you talking about KK? THe UN general assembly has the power to admit or revoke a counties membership, no appeals to authority it is quite simple.
00
The UN general assembly is dominated by thugs and dictators addicted to foreign aid who oppress their people and then demand the world should be ruled by democratic vote where all countries have an equal say.
Here’s what the creeps at the UN Council for Human Rights had to say about Libya in Feb of 2011:
—from the Wall Street Journal
The fraudulent UN process corrupts everything and everyone that participates in it, including Western democracies which should know better then lend their support to such idiocy.
We should be ashamed to be a member of such an organisation.
00
Ah we can agree here Wes.
Why do you think Israel ignore every UN resolution thrown at them, the UN is useless in every form it takes.
00
No, Crakar, we will never agree on anything, ever, mate. Even if you are against the Cult of Warmism, you are no scientific skeptic, just a political fanatic whose hullicinations oddly intersects with our reasoned opinions on the state of the Earth’s climate. Pure coincident.
Heck, maybe you don’t believe in the CAGW theory because it’s not mentioned in the Koran? Who knows?
Everything you stand for is the barbaric antithesis of the values of Western Civilisation and it’s commitment to the values of The Enlightenment, not to mention the simple values of honesty, charity and good will to all people we learned as a childern in Sunday school.
Wrong, as usual….The UN is highly effective at funnelling billions of dollars into the pockets of unelected technocrats and brutal dictatorships worldwide.
00
Wes,
I have never read a greater collection of bullshitisms in all my life.
This comment by you is a perfect example of what i am talking about.
I have been sitting here for the past few days trying to explain to you and others that we as a people have allowed our morals, ethics and basic kindness to others to fall so low that we are now prepared to sit back and watch the human rights of others be trashed.
You have not a care in the world for the pain and devestation wrought upon the Palestinians, the Libyans, the Iraqi’s, the Afghani’s and possibly the Iranian’s. You have no concept of the devastation of cluster and phosphour bombs, no concept of unmanned drones blowing up innocent civilians in Pakistan, the deformed births in faluja due to depleted uranium weapons and the list goes on.
I say this is all due to psycopathic leaders behaving badly hidding behind religious dogma and you Wes claim i say these things because of my religous beliefs.
You sir are an idiot.
Allow me to digress a little, i will assume you have a good understanding of the bible but what do you know about the Koran? You mentioned it above so i should assume you are fullbottle but i am sure you know sweet FA Wes.
According to the Koran there are only two religions (well 3 i suppose but let me explain). The two religions are Islam and the jewish religion, Alah is God and the jews pray to the devil. The koran states that there was a John and there was a Mary (just like the bible) but Jesus or Isiah was not the son of god as a god in immortal and cannot bear children. Instead Jesus was a prophet just like Mohammed.
Also interesting to note the Koran states that Jesus did not die on the cross some other poor smuck did in his place, another interesting variation is that teh Koan states Jesus was born in June/July and not December something about plants that flower in June/July.
So as you can see the Koran is similar to the bible its as if we started with one story and somehow it became two, any in the end the Koran states that Alah will return and slay the devil (Jewish God) and all who pray to him. All Muslims will go to heaven (standard religious fare) then Alah will turn to all the christians and say “look you f%^&^d up, you were praying to a false god but how were you to know, all is forgiven and welcome back).
Not sure what will happen to all us athiests………i think we end up spending eternity with the Jews.
By the way i was wrong on the UN by a technicality
00
And a Happy Australia Day to you too Al Crakar!
00
Your mind is so spaghettiized you can even quote out of context well done moron.
00
You’ll be seeing a lot of your own quotes reappear in whatever the next geopolitical debate is about, Al Crakar
Meanwhile, I have to go throw another, uh, pork spare rib, on the barbie.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xn_CPrCS8gs
Gosh, I love Australia, we really are the luckiest country in the world. I’d rather live in Australia than any other country. Not that some other places aren’t nice. For instance I’ve had great times in California and Texas and in Europe too. I especially dig Amsterdam. Nice places to visit but there’s no place like Australia.
What do you say, Al Crakar! Three Cheers for Good old Australia on her big day!
Advance Australia Fair!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcMuf8wE52k
00
Oh please — please — please Mr. UN, revoke the USA’s membership! 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂
And along with it all those BS treaties too! 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂
00
Sorry, Roy 😉 NIce thought.
But it ain’t gonna happen. The US is funding pretty much the whole party but no one is sure what the bill really is.
Extremists, like Al Crakar, love to hate the “blood-soaked criminals” America and Australia, but they love our bloody money.
00
Roy
Could you perhaps organise for Australia to be kicked out of the United Nations too?
Please God.
00
Since 1975 the population of Vietnam has been under the control of the Communist Party.
There are probably 35 to40 million people who don’t like that out of a total population of 70 plus million.
There is not going to be another war over this, they have had enough of killing.
The next battle will be won by slow change and evolution of the society towards something better – we hope.
In the meantime some government people will get rich and do very well for themselves while the vast majority will educate themselves and be better able to demand better government, less corruption and perhaps even a democracy.
If you bash your head against a wall for 60 plus years and nothing happens, perhaps you should stop it and look for another way around the problem?
00
The people of Vietnam are still suffering the effects of agent orange, the Vietnamese government took the US government to court over its use (chemical weapon).
The US government wiggled out of having to pay compensation for the destruction of Vietnam and its people because the chemical was used as a defoliant.
Another pathetic excuse for a government, of course you could vote for Paul.
00
And the current Viet government allows Chinese mining interests or anyone who will pay the fee to mine anything unrestricted.
An example is bauxite being mined and pre processed with a caustic soda solution that is just dumped into the soils and local water table figure the damage.
There are no good guys – bad guys in the world , just perpetual vigilance.
00
So what do we do KK,
Do we say well you did a bad thing here , but you did a good thing here so on balance you are even?
If we hold a particular view or standard on one issue do you hold it on all others or does your view change depending on the subject.
I try (emphasis the word try) to maintain the same standard no matter what the issue.
A good example is:
We went into Iraq to get the WMD, when we got there there was none. Rest assured i am sure Saddam had them i am sure because we gave them to him.
So we bomb Iraq back to the stone age because of WMD……….but we gave him the WMD.
So are we any better than Saddam?
In my view no, in fact i would say we are worse because we gave them to him.
Just read your latest post and to answer your question i am not a muslim i am an athiest.
00
Crackar
You wont find any argument from me that what US did in Iraq was ugly and war crime stuff.
trying to off load enough weapons stocks to justify new replacement order from munitions factories run by mates of ?????.
I remember an Iraqi speaking about the invasion.
His only daughter had just been killed.
He was an amazing human being the likes of whom you would not see in any government anywhere.
If we were governed by people like that the world would be a better place.
Unfortunately we are governed by money and creepy crawly things, the current one has red hair.
00
An excerpt from “The Founding Myths of Israeli Politics” by Roger Garaudy
“….Thus the state of Israel places itself straight away above international law.
Imposed on the U.N. on the 11 May 1949 by the will of the United States, the State of Israel was only admitted on three conditions:
1 – Not to touch the status of Jerusalem;
2 – To allow Palestinian Arabs to come back to their homes;
3 – To respect the borders fixed by the partition decision.
Speaking about this U.N. resolution on “sharing”, taken well before its admission, Ben Gurion declares:
“The State of Israel considers the U.N. resolution of 29 November 1947 to be null and void.”
Source: “New York Times”, 6 December 1953.
Echoing the theories already quoted of the American Albright, on the parallel between American and zionist expansion, General Moshe Dayan wrote:
“Take the American declaration of Independence. It contains no mention of territorial limits. We are not obliged to fix the limits of the State.”
Source: “Jerusalem Post” 10 August 1967
Policy corresponds precisely to this law of the jungle: the “partition” of Palestine, in line with the U.N. resolution was never respected.
Already, the resolution on the partition of Palestine, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations (at the time composed of a massive majority of western states) on the 29 November 1947, indicated the designs of the West on their “forward stronghold” : On this date the Jews constituted 32% of the population and possessed 5.6% of the land : they would receive 56% of the territory, including the most fertile land. These decisions had been secured under U.S. pressure.
President Truman put the State Department under unprecedented pressure. Under-Secretary of State S. Welles wrote:
“By direct order of the White House American civil servants had to use direct or indirect pressure… To ensure the necessary majority in the final vote.”
Source: S. Welles, “We need not fail” Boston, 1948, p.63
The Minister of Defense of the time, James Forrestal, confirms:
“The methods used to pressure and to constrain the other nations within the U.N. were close to scandalous.”
Source: “Forrestal’s Memoirs”, N.Y., The Viking Press. 1951, p.363
The power of the private monopolies was mobilized : Drew Pearson, in the Chicago Daily of 9 February 1948, gives details, for example:
“Harvey Firestone, a rubber plantation owner in Liberia, used his influence with the Liberian government.”
From 1948 even these partial decisions were violated.
As the Arabs protested against and refused to accept such an injustice, the Israeli leaders took advantage and grabbed new territory, notably Jaffa and Acre, so that by 1949 the Zionists controled 80% of the country and 770,000 Palestinians had been driven out.
The method used was that of terror.
The most glaring example was that of Deir Yassin : On April 9, 1948, the 254 inhabitants of this village (men, women, children, old men) were massacred by “Irgun” troops (whose leader was Menachim Begin), by the same method as the Nazis’ at Oradour.
In his book “The Revolt: The History of Irgun”, Begin wrote that there would not have been a State of Israel without the “victory” of Deir Yassin (p. 162 of the English edition). He added:
“The Haganah carried out victorious attacks on other fronts… In a state of terror, the Arabs fled, crying,’Deir Yassin’.” (Idem p. 162 ; French edition p.200)
Any Palestinian who had left his home before 1 August 1948 was considered as “absent”.
In this way two thirds of Arab land (70,000 ha out of 110,000) was confiscated. When a law was passed in 1953 on property ownership, compensation was fixed on the value of the land in 1950, but in the meantime the Israeli Pound had dropped to a fifth of its 1950 value.
Besides, since the beginning of jewish immigration, and here again in the most classical colonial way, land had been bought from feudal, non-resident landowners (the “effendi”) so that were driven from the land which the poor peasants, the fellah, they cultivated by these arrangements between their former masters and the new arrivals without their involvement. Deprived of their land, all they could do was to flee.
The U.N. had appointed a mediator, Count Folke Bernadotte. In his first report, Count Bernadotte wrote:
“It would offend basic principles to prevent these innocent victims of the conflict from returning to their homes, while Jewish immigrants flood into Palestine and, what’s more, threatening to permanently replace the dispossessed Arab refugees who have been here for centuries.”
He described, “Zionist pillage on a grand scale and the destruction of villages without apparent military need.”
This report (U.N. Document A. 648, p.14) was filed on the 16 September 1948. On the 17 September 1948 Count Bernadotte and his French assistant, Colonel Serot, were assassinated in the part of Jerusalem occupied by the Zionists.
Source: For the assassination of Count Bernadotte see General A. Lundstrom’s report (who was sitting in Bernadotte’s car) which was sent to the U.N. the same day as the attack (17 September 1948). See also the book published by the same general for the 20th anniversary of the crime : L’assassinat du Compte Bernadotte, printed in Rome (pub. East. A. Fanelli) in 1970 under the title : ‘Un tributo a la memoria del Comte Folke Bernadotte’. Ralph Hewins’ book : ‘Count Bernadotte, his life and work’ (Hutchinson, 1948). And in the Milanese weekly Europa’, Baruch Nadel’s confessions (quoted in Le Monde, 4 and 5 July 1971).
It was not the first zionist crime against someone who criticized their deception.
Lord Moyne, the British Secretary of State in Cairo, declared on 9 June 1942 in the House of Lords that the Jews were not the descendants of the ancient Hebrews and that they had no “legitimate claim” on the Holy Land. In favor of limiting immigration into Palestine, he was accused of being “an implacable enemy of Hebrew independence.”
Source: Isaac Zaar: “Rescue and Liberation: America’s part in the birth of Israel”, N.Y. Bloc Publishing Cy, 1954, p115
On 6 November 1944 Lord Moyne was shot dead in Cairo by two members of the Stern Gang (Yitzhak Shamir’s group). Years later, on 2 July 1975, “The Evening Star” of Aukland revealed that the bodies of the two executed assassins had been exchanged for 20 Arab prisoners to be buried at the “Heros Monument” in Jerusalem. The British government deplored that Israel should honor assassins as heros.
On the 22 July 1946 the wing of the King David Hotel where the British military had set up their headquarters was blown up killing about 100 people – Englishmen,Arabs and Jews. It was Irgun, Menachem Begin’s group, who claimed responsibility.
The State of Israel replaced the former colonialists and used the same procedures. For example, agricultural aid for irrigation was distributed in a discriminatory way, such that jewish farmers were systematically favored. Between 1948 and 1969 the area of irrigated land rose, for the jewish sector, from 20,000 to 164,000 ha and, for the Arab sector, from 800 to 4,100 ha. The colonial system was thus perpetuated and even aggravated : Doctor Rosenfeld, in his book, “Arab Migrant Workers”, published by the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in 1970, recognizes that Arab agriculture was more prosperous during the British mandate than today.
Segregation is also a feature of housing policy. The president of the Israeli Human Rights League, Doctor Israel Shahak, a professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, in his book, “The Racism of the State of Israel” (p.57) tells us that there are in Israel whole towns (Carmel, Nazareth, Illith, Hatzor, Arad, Mitzphen-Ramen, and others) where non-Jews are forbidden by law to live.
In cultural matters the same colonialist spirit reigns.
“In 1970, the Ministry of National Education proposed two different versions to high school pupils of the prayer to ‘Yiskar’: one version declared that the death camps had been built by ‘the diabolical Nazi government and the German nation of murderers.'”
“The second version evoked, more globally, ‘…the German nation of murderers’ and both contain a paragraph calling on God ‘to avenge before our eyes the blood of the victims.'”
Source: “Ce sont mes freres que je cherche”, Ministry of Education and Culture. Jerusalem, 1990.
This culture of racial hatred has borne fruit:
“Following Kahana, an ever-growing number of soldiers steeped in the history of the Genocide imagined all sorts of scenarios to exterminate the Arabs”, declared Ehud Praver, an officer in charge of the Army teaching body. “It is very worrying that the genocide can thus legitimize a Jewish racism. We must henceforth know that it is not only vital to deal with the question of the Genocide, but also with that of the rise of Fascism, to explain its nature and dangers for democracy.” According to Praver, “Too many soldiers have started to believe that the Genocide can justify any dishonourable action.”
Source: Tom Segev. op. cit. p. 473.
The problem was posed very clearly even before the existence of the State of Israel. The Director of the “National Jewish Fund”, Yossef Weitz, was writing already in 1940:
“It should be clear for us that there is not room for two peoples in this country. If the Arabs leave it, there will be enough for us (…) There is nothing else to do but to remove them all; we mustn’t leave a single village, a single tribe… We must explain to Roosevelt and all the heads of friendly states that the land of Israel isn’t too small if all the Arabs leave and if the borders are pushed back a little to the north, as far as the Litani, and to the east, on the Golan Heights.”
Source: Yossef Weitz, “Journal” Tel Aviv, 1965
In the important Israeli newspaper “Yediot Aahronot”, of 14 July 1972, Yoram Bar Porath reminded us forcefully of the objective to be reached:
“It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The first of these is that there is no Zionism, colonialization or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their land.”
Here we are, once again, in the most rigorous logic of the zionist system: How do you create a jewish majority in a country populated by a native Palestinian Arab community ?
Political zionism provided the only solution in its colonialist program: Realize a colony of settlements by driving off the Palestinians and encouraging jewish immigration.
Driving off the Palestinians and grabbing their land was a deliberate and systematic undertaking.
At the time of the Balfour Declaration the zionists owned only 2.5% of the land and at the time of the decision to “share” Palestine, 6.5%. In 1982 they possessed 93%.
The methods used to dispossess the native of his land are those of the most implacable colonialism, with an even more marked racist coloring in the case of Zionism…..”
00
Yes – ugly and nasty and unpleasant.
The question still remains – what to do now that will be productive for Palestine?
While-ever Palestine obsesses about eliminating Israel and going back in time they are doomed to remain as they are.
I would love to go back in time and re-organise my life but am faced with the unhappy thought that I can only face what is happening NOW.
Best to make a list of every aggrieved Palestinian who lost land and property (or their heirs) arrange a compensation and force Israel to pay. Then get on with life.
life is not easy wherever you are. To waste it in bitterness with no hope of resolution is sad.
Let go of the idea of destroying Israel.
00
But sadly, they won’t.
00
For the last time go back to the 1967 borders thats all Israel has to do but it wont do it.
00
“Let go of the idea of destroying Israel”
What a pair of vicious and ignorant smart arses. You’ve made a statement based on an assumption, now validate it.
I maintain that those who call themselves Jews are not telling the truth. These same people have usurped the name Israel.
How does anyone know that they are Jewish? Can anyone trace their ancestry back to the patriarch Judah of about 1700 BC? Anyone who claims to be Jewish should provide proof.
In my opinion their claim to be Gods chosen people is a lie.
“By their fruits you shall know them” Matthew 7:20
00
“By their fruits you shall know them” Matthew 7:20
By YOUR fruits I shall know YOU! MarkD today.
As a “Christian” you shall not judge Matthew 7:1. You have no right to demean anyone based upon a pedigree and yet you suggest they “prove” their claim when you know it would be nearly impossible!
Shameful really, it is the Bible that says they are chosen by God. Anyone can make a claim to being Jewish, it will be up to God to judge the veracity of that claim.
Now live as a Christian, ask for forgiveness and love thy neighbor as thyself. Include ALL your neighbors.
00
Mark D,
Your rant is a bit of a laugh!
Can you quote the parts of the Bible that says that the people who call themselves Jews today are Gods chosen people?
“And I know the evil speaking of those saying themselves to be Judeans and they are not,but are a synagogue of Satan.” Revelation 2:9
Tell me how do you tell the difference between good and evil?
00
Hi kevin
What you say “How does anyone know that they are Jewish? Can anyone trace their ancestry back to the patriarch Judah of about 1700 BC? Anyone who claims to be Jewish should provide proof.” may be so but the comment I have been making is they are there now and I’m asking, what is the best way of moving forward for Palestine?
Every country surrounding Israel has had Internal Conflict between members of those states and are unstable; Lebanon was torn apart by its own internal mess.
How can Israel negotiate with state which have internal fighting?
00
KK,
The bloody and cruel misdeeds and the colonial agenda of Zionist myth makers have with the unconditional support of the United States caused numerous wars and while ever it continues poses a threat to world peace and unity.
The influence exerted by the Jewish lobby on the United States and,thus on the UN and world opinion offers no protection nor liberty for Palestinians on what is rightfully their own land.
00
Hi Kevin
Lots of countries cause wars not just the US.
Look I’m not even sure I would like being around Israelis. If I was forced to pick a country to live in in the middle east I would probably prefer Turkey over Israel.
I think I would probably feel more at home there. The only problem I would have is the fear of rising Islamisation in Turkey. It seems to be increasing and may cause damage.
Look at Africa. All black and 90% basket cases with dysfunctional “government”.
Colonialism was in Africa, for sure, but I don’t think it can lay claim to have caused the Current African shambles.
00
Name one KK
All in all i have never met a less educated group of people.
Heres a classic for you, here in Oz we are prepared to sell uranium to India when asked if they will use it to make bombs India assures us that *our* uranium will not go into bombs. Of course we have no way of knowing because like Israel India refuses to sign the NNPT.
However we are prepared to follow Europe like the stupid lap dogs we are and place an embargo on Iran, a country which has signed the NNPT, has been completely compliant with the rules of the NNPT and is not trying to build a bomb.
But i am sure in the simpled minded Iran are evil, Iran want to build a bomb etc am i right? Of course i am right, simple minded fools.
And no Roy its not because you disagree it is because *you* are simple minded.
00
Only a dumbass would make that demand.
Since you did, lets first define “war”. You go first.
00
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/01/25/jewish-imperial-news/
00
Kevin,
If you think Israel exerts any noticeable influence over the UN then it’s time to change what you’re smoking because it isn’t doing you a bit of good.
00
Keep it going Roy –
Sharon to Peres: “We Control America”
Congressional Pandering to Israel proves him Right
http://mediamonitors.net/khodr49.html
On October 3, 2001, I.A.P. News reported that according to Israel Radio (in Hebrew) Kol Yisrael an acrimonious argument erupted during the Israeli cabinet weekly session last week between Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and his foreign Minister Shimon Peres. Peres warned Sharon that refusing to heed incessant American requests for a cease-fire with the Palestinians would endanger Israeli interests and “turn the US against us. “Sharon reportedly yelled at Peres, saying “don’t worry about American pressure, we the Jewish people control America.”
“The Israelis control the policy in the congress and the senate.”
— Senator Fullbright, Chair of Senate Foreign Relations Committee: 10/07/1973 on CBS’ “Face the Nation”.
“I am aware how almost impossible it is in this country to carry out a foreign policy [in the Middle East] not approved by the Jews….. terrific control the Jews have over the news media and the barrage the Jews have built up on congressmen …. I am very much concerned over the fact that the Jewish influence here is completely dominating the scene and making it almost impossible to get congress to do anything they don’t approve of. The Israeli embassy is practically dictating to the congress through influential Jewish people in the country”
—–Sec. of State John Foster Dulles quoted on p.99 of Fallen Pillars by Donald Neff
The long history of bipartisan Congressional support for Israel led former Secretary of State James Baker to call the Congress “The Little Knesset” after Israel’s Knesset (parliament) in Jerusalem. Congress’s embarrassing and unpatriotic display of allegiance to a foreign country that is dependent on American largesse and support is the unknown scandal to the American people. With the media’s strong, biased and sympathetic portrayal of Israel while simultaneously denying any opposing view of Israel or human pictures and stories of the endless suffering of Palestinians, its no wonder that we the American people are so unaware of the true face of Israel. Thus shockingly but not surprisingly only 4 % of the American people are aware of Israel’s 34 year brutal military occupation of the Palestinian people.
THE ROLE OF THE HOUSE AND SENATE IS SERVING ISRAEL NOT AMERICA
00
Vietnam invaded Cambodia.
Rwanda didn’t even bother going outside its borders – it just ate itself.
China tried to invade Vietnam but failed.
The Balkans.
The Georgian attacks etc.
Can I ask a question?
Then I read the rest of your post and become confused.
Are you a Muslim?
00
Imposed on the U.N. on the 11 May 1949 by the will of the United States, the State of Israel was only admitted on three conditions:
1 – Not to touch the status of Jerusalem;
2 – To allow Palestinian Arabs to come back to their homes;
3 – To respect the borders fixed by the partition decision.
Speaking about this U.N. resolution on “sharing”, taken well before its admission, Ben Gurion declares:
“The State of Israel considers the U.N. resolution of 29 November 1947 to be null and void.”
Source: “New York Times”, 6 December 1953.
00
Latest news:
http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/article2758804.ece
Now one could argue it is propaganda from Russia.
http://www.therightscoop.com/santorum-either-iran-will-dismantle-their-nuclear-program-or-we-will-do-it-for-them/
Here is a comment i read in response:
Okay Rick, if you feel that way about it, here’s your rifle, and here’s your parachute. We ran out of the desert camo for you but here is a left-over bright orange jumpsuit from Abu Ghraib for you to wear. We’ll call Tehran and tell them you are on your way to kick their ass all by yourself. But you understand, given that IAEA has not found any evidence of a weapons program in Iran, and after that whopper you all told us about Iraq having nuclear weapons to get us to go along with attacking them, you will forgive us if we refuse to allow any more of our children to be blown to bloody bits in another war for Israel’s benefit. No government can serve two masters, and right now, in the midst of the greatest economic crisis in our history, brought down on us by the biggest financial crime in history, America needs leaders who will put America first, and you just failed the test.
00
With Obama demonstrating his weakness as a leader everyone is pushing at the U.S. to see what happens. But this is interesting.
Certainly Russia is no longer showing any restraint towards the U.S.
00
Roy,
Can you please expand on this a little more?
00
Crakar,
Your thoughts re Ron Paul are echoed here –
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/01/22/woe-unto-you-hypocrites-liars-oxymorons/
00
Roy,
You may wish to look into this –
http://noisyroom.net/blog/2010/09/23/u-s-land-oceans-and-coastlines-under-un-control/
“…….so here is the Cap and Trade/Climate part and job killing component of the legislation…”
00
Sorry, but I can’t see what any of the previous 75 (or so) comments have to do with online piracy.
I was hoping to read peoples opinions on issues like censorship, anti-piracy methods, plagiarism, legal issues relating to freedom of speech etc, which the internet has created.
For example, what might happen if someone quoted from a site which was behind paywall? Are we going to employ thousands of people to examine every comment on every site and in every email to find evidence of “piracy” or copyright violations or plagiarism?
Is legislation even remotely likely to be effective in stopping or reducing such things? Or is it more likely that the internet will be a jungle, where each user will choose which sites to visit and which to avoid?
I believe it was Emile Durkheim who said something to the effect that, the existence of crime is universal, normal and functional as long as it is maintained at a certain rate. Thus, any attempts to eradicate it are doomed to fail.
00
Well what happened max was that everyone was bitching about SOPA and loss of freedoms so i suggested to the American reader that if they want things to change then they should vote for Paul.
The obligatory “Paul is cccccrrrrraaaaazzzzzzyyyy” cries followed and it all went down hill from there. We are now at the point were Wes condones the slaughter of innocent civilians no matter what trace, creed or color and with all the bigotry he can muster has no connected this fact to “being Ustrayan”.
For my crime of speaking out for the victimised i am now considered an Islamic terrorist in the eyes of Wes.
But back on topic:
The problem with SOPA was all the hidden clauses, it gave the government power to shut down parts or all of the internet etc. Yes it has been withdrawn but is already back with a new name. The only way to stop it is to vote for politicians that dont support it.
00
Hi Crakar24,
Yes, I did read all the comments, and I realize that it’s very easy to get sidetracked in any conversation. I understand and appreciate that others will have viewpoints which contradict my own, a fact that I think makes forums like this fantastic.
It is because of that appreciation of differing views that has me worried about any political/legal right to silence those with dissenting opinions. I’m not aware of any legislation which has successfully stopped a crime from being committed.
I sometimes wonder if by making something a crime, that it actually entices some to set up methods to circumvent that legislation. If it’s a crime, then there is money to be made in either enforcing the law, or countering those who commit that crime and of course there may be money to be made in committing that crime.
I believe there may be some things the government should interfere with and others that government should leave up to it’s citizens to determine. We all have opinions on things like censorship, pornography, inciting others to commit crime, plagiarism, copyright, religion etc, but should such things be determined by government or by personal choice?
I choose not to visit gambling sites, porno sites and many other sites, so whether they exist or not is of no interest to me, other than to recognize that there are some seriously strange people out there.
The law, as I see it, is a guide to what we citizens should not do. Some comply, some will not. I suspect that SOFA is more than just about “piracy” and is more about control of the information on the internet and therefore censorship.
I know very little about politics overseas but the internet spans all political regions and I doubt that any local pollie or legislation will make one iota of difference to the new crimes made available by the internet. Well, not unless the entire world accepts one government and a police state of Orwellian proportions.
00
http://onecandleinthedark.blogspot.com/
“How CNET/CBS Interactive ignited & fueled the ‘Phenomenon of Internet Piracy’
http://thecrowhouse.com/sopa.html
“S.O.P.A. is Pre-Planned”
00
http://rt.com/news/acta-internet-censor-treaty-591/
As cyberspace turns its attention to the SOPA and PIPA bills in the US, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, or ACTA, has been quietly signed or ratified by most of the developed world and is arguably the biggest threat to Internet freedom yet.
ACTA has – officially – been in the works since 2008, and was signed by the US, Australia, Canada, Japan, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore and South Korea in 2011. All negotiations were held behind closed doors, and it is mostly thanks to Internet hacktivist groups like Anonymous that news of the potential damage ACTA could cause has spread.
Most recently, Anonymous turned their attention to Poland, where officials announced that they will sign the controversial treaty on January 26. A number of government website attacks has left them paralyzed for two days, and several Polish websites have since announced they will go dark in protest at the treaty, echoing recent unprecedented actions by Wikipedia, Redditt, BoingBoing and many others.
Thousands of people have protested both online and on the streets. However, Polish officials have said they will sign the agreement as planned. Government minister Michal Boni said “The ACTA agreement in no way changes Polish laws or the rights of Internet users and Internet usage,” after a meeting with Prime Minister Donald Tusk. The irony of that statement is that ACTA will do exactly that. It will surpass the sovereign laws of participating nations, especially in the matter of ISP monitoring.
ACTA’s reach is far more global, with countries like the US, Switzerland, Japan and all European Union members in its grasp. It is allegedly being introduced “to create new legal standards of intellectual property enforcement, as well as increased international cooperation, an example of which would be an increase in information sharing between signatory countries’ law enforcement agencies.” But in reality, the measures that have been worked on by behind-the-scenes politicians and media industry moguls are just shy of draconian.
Under this new treaty, Internet Service Providers will police all data passing through them, making them legally responsible for what their users do online. And should you do something considered “breach of copyright” like, for instance, getting a tattoo of a brand logo, taking a photo and posting it somewhere, you may be disconnected from the Internet, fined or even jailed.
This, of course, threatens the entire founding idea of the Internet – the free sharing of information. But ACTA doesn’t stop there. It goes beyond the Internet, bearing down on generic drugs and food patents. If passed, ACTA will enforce a global standard for seed patenting, which would wipe out independent, local farmers and make the world completely dependent on the patent owners (read “big corporations”) for supplies.
The agreement states that it must be signed and ratified by 2013, but the seemingly late deadline is no cause for celebration. And if the secrecy surrounding this latest censor tool continues to hold, it may be put into effect without anyone noticing.
00
The ACTA text was tabled in Parliament on 21 November 2011 along with a National Interest Analysis and Consultation document.
http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/acta/
00
I don’t know how this topic got to be a drawn out argument about events in the Middle East. However, in light of the reaction by some bookworms to the disgraceful behaviour we saw in Canberra yesterday, with physical threats to our political leaders, I should tell here of something that worries me about it all.
About 6 years ago, maybe a little longer, in the month of August, Benjamin Netinyahu visited Australia.
It was reported at the time that, addressing a gathering in Melbourne, he declared, speaking of the land of Israel: “This land has been ours for the last 3,000 years and will be ours for the next 3,000 years.”
If that is the rule, then on whose land do I live? How long will I be permitted to live here? How many other people are in the same situation asI under that rule? Each of you commenters here? Barack Obama? How many others around the world? Julia Gillard at least might get accepted back into Wales.
We cannot allow that this is the rule.
The strangest thing about this is that the nation of Israel is surely, if not the oldest, then one of the oldest nations on Earth. And they maintained their Nation for much of that time without land.
Israel’s land grabs in Palestine put at risk their very foothold on their land. At the present time they have a very sound foothold in other lands. They should be content with that.
00
Ted,
You are stretching Netanyahu’s words way beyond anything he could possibly have meant. Israel is no danger to Australia.
The modern state of Israel was conceived in the living hell of the Nazi death camps. What the Jews want is a piece of this planet they can call their own — just exactly what Australia wants.
The world seems to hide from the unpleasantness of the mass murder of millions just because they were Jews and many now don’t believe it happened, even deny that it happened. But I do not because when I was a teenager I had the privilege of watching about a half hour of actual U.S. Army combat photographer footage of the discovery and exploration of one of those camps. I have never forgotten what I saw…the living skeletons standing at the gate (yes, the Germans locked them in after they abandoned the place)…the hopeless blank stare on their faces…the bunks stacked up like cordwood with some still living but too sick to get out of bed…others dead in their beds…piles of corpses…piles of bones…a pile of teeth knocked out for the gold in them…an open trench with yet more corpses…a view through the open door of a furnace where there was a recognizable human skull. You cannot fake this stuff, not in 1945! And I have never forgotten those images. They are as vivid today as they were when I first saw them as a teenager.
This is what shaped the determination of the Jews to go back to their ancient homeland and to keep it at all costs. This is the foundation upon which Israel stands today. They want peace but they’re attacked from all sides so they fight — one tiny nation beset on every border with enemies who want their destruction; dependent on other nations for the wherewithal with which to fight; screwed by the fickle heartedness of world politics.
What would you do in such a situation?
Have they done everything right? Remember — English convicts established Australia and in the process walked all over the people who were already there; English colonists came here and did the same thing. The Jews went to Palestine and tried to live in peace with the “Palestinians”. I say let him among you who is without sin cast the first stone.
(Interesting.But you are way off topic.Please talk about SOPA instead) CTS
00
I did not say that Israel was a threat. My message was that the notion of exclusive possession from antiquity is a threat to a very great number of the world’s people.
As for the requirement for land to maintain a nation. The nation of Israel has survived those thousands of years while scattered far and wide.
(Please go back to the topic) CTS
00
PS: You can’t be a nation without land. You can’t be a nation without a recognizable leader. The Jews were scattered around with nothing in common but ancestry and faith.
00
Thats exactly right Roy you need land and a leader (among other things ) to be a nation.
Before i get back on topic let me say this re 53.1.
The Germans sent many people to the labour camps not just jews, there were Polish, Russian and gypsies (i think) and just to be clear there was no gas chambers, no soap and no lamp shades made of human skin. In fact 6 million jews did not die, the 6 million figure has religious connections. When 6 million jews die david (or however) will descend from heaven yadda, yadda, yadda.
This is the third time the jews have made the “6 million died” claim, even the math does not add up. The war lasted 6 years and lets assume most if not all deaths occurred during this time ergo two jews died per minute for 6 years straight. Now we must not lose sight of the way the Germans treated the Jews, polish etc as it was terrible but now we see the Jews treating the Palestinians in exactly the same way.
But back to the topic at hand, if *you* Roy beleive SOPA and PIPA are so bad and we both know it will return under another name would do *you* Roy beleive is the best way to stop it from ever being implemented.
00
Well I’m sure it will do good to remind people that 5 or 4 million dead (or whatever number you imagine) is much better than 6. Since Nazis treated other ethnic groups the same that makes it better? Further, mention that Jews are gassing and incinerating Palestinians “exactly” as the Nazi’s, that too will help stop SOPA and PIPA. In fact I think you should go on and on like you do, so that everyone reading here can understand how rational you are.
00
Mark D.
The written word is a powerful thing, however comprehension is even greater. I suggest you get better at it.
00
hi Crackar
I ticked your advice above because it is good advice..
Now some from another source.
FOLLOW YOUR OWN ADVICE.
Think carefully.
If you said those things in Europe you would probably end up in jail.
This is not reasonable comment.
00
How about you answer this question for me.
But back to the topic at hand, if *you* Roy beleive SOPA and PIPA are so bad and we both know it will return under another name what do *you* Roy beleive is the best way to stop it from ever being implemented. (minus the typos this time).
Care to answer KK?
00
Hi Crakar24,
I think we agree regarding the dangers of implementing SOPA and PIPA.
I stated earlier, that I suspect that SOPA is more than just about “piracy” and is more about control of the information on the internet and therefore censorship.
On the remaining part of your question, I would agree on the condition that I can add two words, try to. So, “…what do *you* … believe is the best way to try to stop it from ever being implemented[?]” (I apologize for my editing)
As citizens we can only vote for the policies that the politicians claim they will enact or oppose. (For some reason “There will be no carbon tax under the government I lead” seems an appropriate thought here).
I believe that even if such draconian laws were to be ever enacted,
1) They would be incapable of actually stopping the intended offences.
2) The costs would be horrific.
3) Eventually even the citizens who were unable to see the potential for the restriction on their freedoms would have the laws rescinded.
4) I suspect that on line copyright infringment and anti-piracy legislation is adequate at the present time, given the closure of “Megaupload”.
00
Hi MaxL,
Ok lets rephrase the question a little, but the answer is the same.
As you said
We can only go by what the liars say i agree and this is as far as we got before when it all went pear shaped.
Originally i said that between Obama, Romney, Gingrich (spelling) and Paul, Paul is the only one that opposes SOPA and PIPA the rest actually endorse it. But not only that restrictions of freedoms come in many forms so whilst these guys were either voting for NDAA or endorsing it Paul was fighting to stop it.
So i said would it not make sense for people opposed to SOPA etc in the US to vote for Paul the next thing we hear is that Paul is cccccrrrrraaazzzyyyyy.
So it would appear MaxL some people are happy to complain about loss of freedoms but yet fail to grasp an opportunity to keep it when it is presented.
The European parliament has just introduced ACTA which of course is SOPA and PIPA rebadged so it will not be long before the US gets its rebadged version. I am sure it wont be long before we here in Oz get a version as well. The Green Dullard is already trying to apply censorship to our media, if a company wishes to increase cost due to the carbon tax they can but they dare not tell us the increase is due to said tax.
Labor should rot in hell for eternity for breaking all their promises and i see the latest polls show Libs at 45% and Labor at 30% primary vote (i cannot understand why they are so high) hopefully people still remember how bad they are come next election.
They have the broken promise of the budget surplus to deal with yet and of course there is looming trouble on the horizon re the constitutional changes she wanted.
I dont think we can/will stop things like SOPA etc we only have the appearance of democracy both here and abroad i have said many times here we all live in our own versions of dictatorship.
Remember you are only truly free when you have the right to say NO.
00
Crakar24,
Read further article at 54.1.2.1.1.
http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/acta/
Australia to sign Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), 30 September 2011
Trade Minister Craig Emerson welcomes finalisation of ACTA text, 16 November 2010
Joint Statement on finalising ACTA text, 16 November 2010
00
Al Crakar,
So didn’t the Nazi death camps exists?
Please explain how you know they didn’t exist.
How many Jews were really killed?
Got links?
00
Got links, well kind of mor eto follow tonight if i can find them again.
http://whatreallyhappened.org/IMAGES/RedRedCrossRecords.jpg
We know that 1.5 million people (not all of them Jews) died at Auschwitz all you need to do is find out where the rest died.
I think you will find most people (of many nationalities) died from Typhus, is it possible Wes….even remotely possible that Slave labor camps became death camps, delousing became gassing and pesticide became poisoning?
If you wish to continue on this path the why dont you produce evidence to support your views?
Once again for the record many people died at the hands of Nazi brutality there is no doubt about that. But was there a mass genocide of the jews via gas chambers, lampshades made from skin and saop made from the rest?
View this as Agw for a moment you want evidence of AGW well its no different here Wes.
Anyway as ROY and KK wont or cannot answer this simple question why dont you have a go.
But back to the topic at hand, if *you* Roy beleive SOPA and PIPA are so bad and we both know it will return under another name what do *you* Roy beleive is the best way to stop it from ever being implemented.
00
Crakar24
http://www.whale.to/b/bacque1.html
What Really Happened # SOPA PIPA
00
You can’t forget this fact though –
Ishmael: son of Abraham – son of Hagah – father of the Arab nations.
Genesis 17:18 ….”And I will give to you and to your seed after you the land of your sojourning,all the land of Canaan for an everlasting possession.”
Present day Jews are a pot-pouri of every race of man.
00
Kevin,
You are, of course, qualified to tell the world who is a Jew and who is not? I doubt it.
The world has a long history and you cannot take just the part of it that supports your favored view of things without being part of the problem.
There is a view from both side of the fence. You talk as though the excesses of Israel justify the terrorism of the Palestinians, Hamas and Hezbollah, as if it justifies the 1967 war of Egypt against Israel. But it doesn’t.
You have dived into every cesspool you can find to make a case against Israel. Yet you cannot see that they are a wounded animal, cornered and afraid for their very existence. That is why they fight ruthlessly. That is why many of their leaders have given in to their anger at the world around them. But you can’t put yourself in Israel’s shoes for long enough to try to understand the view from the other side. No! You have a Bible verse that says Canaan belongs to the Arabs so that settles it.
It’s too bad that Genesis 17:18 doesn’t settle it because if there can’t be peace worked out in the Middle East the resulting war may drag us all into it. God help us then.
You are exposed, Kevin.
00
Conference by Rabbi Elmer Berger, ex-president of the “Jewish League” in the United States)
“It is inadmissible for anyone to plead that the setting-up of the present state of Israel has been the fulfillment of Prophecy and that therefore all acts performed by the Israelis in order to set their state up and to maintain it have been automatically ratified in advance by God. The present-day political Israel has, for all of us, obliterated or, at least, adumbrated, the spiritual Israel. I propose to examine two fundamental elements of the prophetic tradition.
“a – First when the Prophets evoked the restoration of Zion, it was not the land itself which was of a sacred nature. The absolute and indisputable criteria of the prophetic concept of the Redemption was the restoration of the Alliance with God, at a time when that Alliance had been broken by the King and his people.
“Micah spells it out clearly : “Hear, I pray you, O heads of Jacob, and ye princes of the house of Israel that abhor judgment and pervert all equity. They build up Zion with blood, and Jerusalem with inequity…Therefore shall Zion for your sake be plowed as a field, and Jerusalem shall become heaps, and the mountain of the house as the high place of the forest.”
Source: Micah III, 1-12.
” Zion is holy only if the Law of God reigns above it. And this does not mean that every Law edicted at Jerusalem is a holy one.
“b- It is not only the land which depends on the observance and fidelity to the Alliance : the people reinstalled in Zion have the same obligations of justice, uprightness and faith to the Covenant with God.
“Zion could not expect the restoration of a people resting on treaties, alliances, military balances of power or a military hierarchy seeking to establish its superiority over the neighbours of Israel. ….The prophetic tradition clearly shows that the holiness of a land does not depend on its soil, nor that of its people’s sole presence on that territory. The only thing that is sacred and worthy of Zion is the divine Covenant which expresses itself in the deeds of its people.
“The present State of Israel has no right whatsoever to claim the accomplishment of the divine project for a Messianic age…. It is pure demagogy of soil and blood. Neither the people nor the land are holy and deserving of any spiritual privilege in this world. Zionist totalitarianism which seeks to subject the entire Jewish people, even by violence and force, makes it a people among others and like others.”
Source: Rabbi Elmer Berger: “Prophecy, Zionism and the state of Israel.” Ed. American Jewish alternatives to Zionism. Conference at Leiden University (Netherlands) on March 20th 1968.
Shem,Ham and Japheth were the three race founding Sons of Noah.To be a Semite one must have been descended from Shem,just as to be a Jew, genealogically, one must descend from Judah.
Ham was the father of the abominating Canaan and Canaan’s descendants peopled the land of Canaan and had the same proclivities. Moses [a Levite] warned the people of the exodus to make no marriages or alliances with the Canaanites,or they may lose their faith and decency.
The people of the Exodus were warned in no uncertain terms that they could choose between life and death, blessing and cursing: “A blessing if you obey the commandments of the Lord your God…..and a curse if ye will not.” [Deuteronomy 11:26-8; 30:19-20]. The Israelites were to drive out the Canaanite abominators and make no marriages or deals with them. But the record shows they did not.
Judah married a Canaanite,
Only one of Jacobs twelve sons had “Jews” as decendants and that was Judah.
00
Are you a lawyer?
00
I’m not employed as such.
00
Too bad! Clearly all these little legal niceties mean more to you than solving today’s problem. So be it.
Now let me call your attention to one clear and obvious fact. God did not appoint you to be the judge of who is a Jew and who is not. In fact you are not appointed to be anyone’s judge at all.
I find your whole attitude to be disgusting. Get a grip on reality before it’s too late.
(You are way off topic) CTS
00
(Snipped)
(Completely irrelevant to the topic) CTS
00
and
You have difficulty with the “decend from” and the completely separate notion of “mixing” (ie pot-pouri).
Just because you are “mixed” does not preclude being a descendent of Judah.
00
Say No To ACTA Video – Disguised as a Trade Agreement, it goes much further.
http://thecrowhouse.com/acta.html
00
http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/acta/
Australia to sign Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), 30 September 2011
Trade Minister Craig Emerson welcomes finalisation of ACTA text, 16 November 2010
Joint Statement on finalising ACTA text, 16 November 2010
00