Obama's speech

Obama demands Israel pull back to the borders of 1967. Israeli PM Netanyahu rejects, by demanding "reaffirmation" of both congress and senate ruling from 2004, that 1967 borders are out of question, since those are indefensible(which is true-they live Israel just 8 miles wide). The truth is none of it matters. the game is much more complicated here and the bets are much higher.People, you need to start seeing larger perspective. It hurts. Obama doesn't really care about 1967 borders or any borders, he is just looking for a route to support declaration of palestinian state in September. He'll say to Netanyahu "sure, I'll give you any reaffirmation you want-don't go to 1967, but in that case, the second part of a deal, namely, vetoing the rise of Palestinian state-doesn't apply either" That way he'll fool everyone. This bombshell is just a diversion and he is an expert in it. Look, he is getting rid of every US traditional ally one by one, isolating America and making it weaker. And how does he do that? Covering it with "peace, love and rock n' roll", namely-"trying to get wider support for America" He sells what most gray masses (pardon me) and, regrettably not so gray top officials, want to hear. Now why would he do something like that, you'd ask. After all-it's his people he is targeting. Well the answer is in his books. You can see there he is either a muslim or sympathizer with radical muslims. And what a true muslim should do? Advance Islam anywhere he can. If he can destroy the only power, that stands for democracy and in the way of Islam-he does just that. Islam is his primary goal. Remember his approval of "victory mosque" over ground zero? Don't you see people, that you are being fooled? He is a clever sob. Beware. look at the larger perspective. Don't be narrow-minded. It's not about Israel or Palestinians-it's about Radicals against democracy and he is on the radical side. Expand

NATO, Lybia, Mass media and Israel

Today NATO had confirmed multiple civilian casualties, while targeting Cadhafi’s loyalists. What if we switch places and put instead of NATO Israel and instead of Cadhafi's "lybian loyalists"-palestinian terrorists? Today NATO had confirmed multiple civilian casualties, while targeting Cadhafi’s loyalists. As many as 11 were killed and it isn't the first time. NATO had released an "official regret" and what do you know? CNN, BBC, Reuters - none of them even mentions the attack, not to talk about dead civilians.
So, where are the articles about it? Where is stunning criticism? Where are urgent security council meetings with harsh resolutions? Where is international probe, appointed by Human Rights council? Where are human rights organizations, like Amnesty or HRW, with their massive protests? I bet all of that would come immediately, should Israel attack target Palestinian terrorists and accidently hit some civilians. I mean a death of a single palestinian terrorist immediately sparkles a storm. Should a civilian be killed along with the terrorist, the storm becomes a tornado.
Now let me give you a little home exercise, which will address events of past week-Bin Laden’s death:
Suppose, 4 helicopters land at Beirut suburbs under cover of the night. A group of Israeli commandos, brought by them, entered the very well-guarded building, and after 40 minutes
skirmish took away Nasrallah’s corpse.
DNA testing, performed at one of helicopters, right after they take off, confirmed corpse to be Nasrallah’s indeed.
Then, according to “Islamic tradition”, it was thrown into the Mediterranean Sea.
Another 3 men were killed along with Nasrallah and so was his 148 wife, which dedicatedly covered his body with hers. Benjamin Netanyahu, Ehud Barak and Sarah Netanyahu watched the scene from the TV screens through the broadcast of special forces combat helmets.
Later in the evening Benjamin Netanyahu made a statement on all channels and told about the victory of the world democracy over terrorism.
Homework: Briefly(no more than 10 sentences) picture the reaction of the international community, Mass media and UN.
Expand

Another example of double standart?

Cadhafi's son and grandchildren are reported to be killed in NATO bombing
While, I support NATO intervention in Libya, however, (and this is a huge "however") I don't understand what Cadhafi's son or grandchildren got to do with it? Are they are to blame for his deeds? Excuse me, why there is no all-over-the world international cry? Where are "human rights defenders"? When Israel bombarded and killed Salah Shhade-palestinian suicide bombing master mind and killed him and some members of his family, the whole world erupted in condemnation and international probe was formed. Same was done regarding operation Cast Lead. When Palestinians used civilians as human shield and fired rockets from the school roofs, bringing retaliation fire upon civilian's heads there was a wide condemnation. An accident (sad, but unavoidable) death of some civilians in Gaza resulted in judge Goldstone report(which now can be regarded as null, but back then it was top news). In that report Israel was accused of crimes war crimes. So, I wonder now, if there will be an international/UN probe against NATO forces in Libya or is it just Israel, that UN/human rights council in Geneva, hates so much and applies "double standard" for it? Expand

IE9

Well I have once again fallen a victim to a vicious Microsoft promotion and installed IE9. Guess what? It's a total crap.

A. I haven't seen any visually noticeable improvements of what they've promissed.

B. They have again mixed up all the bars and functions. For example the command bar is again from the left of the panel, that's after all IE users have already become used to it to be from the right in IE8. The address bar had become shorter and the search bar was merged with it. In addition if you use the menu bar, then you get an access to some functions twice. You can no longer control the size of your icons and buttons. For example the "back" button will now always be bigger then "forward" and there is nothing you can do about it.

C. Some dynamic applications in Facebook, like fishville, farmville, etc. freeze constantly while loading. That's due to some long script that IE9 can't handle. Now, Microsoft, as always, explains it like this "it's not us-it's them. They do not comply with our standards". Well, that's true, btw. The problem is THEY DON'T HAVE TO, you microsoft assholes!!!!!! This is not years 1998-2004, when you did whatever you wanted. In today's world you have to compete even for the OS market. And if OS is not good enough, no matter what you do-it will not work-Vista is a good example of it. So it is you, who need to adjust to the rest of the world too. It's got to be both ways, especially, since your previous browser had none of mentioned problems.


Bottom line - do not install it, at least noet yet. I have spent a night unrolling it back with an image of my system drive and installing some additional features, I have installed or reinstalled since the creation of that image a month and a half ago.

Expand

Dedicated to the operation Cast Lead

One of my friends, that posts in Live Journal under the nick “gentlemenka” once posted a great article. It was during Israeli operation Cast Lead in Gaza and, naturally, referred to it and the international reaction to the operation. However, I see, that today, even after judge Richard Goldstone publically stated, that he was totally wrong about all his “report”, that accused Israel of war crimes, killing women and children and usage of excessive force I still see the situation is no different -Hamas is firring an anti-tank rockets at a school bus, killing jewish children and no one cares. I believe everyone will suddenly start caring, when Israel retaliates.  So, I took care of bringing the issues, my friend have posted in Russian at 2009, to the English speaking audience.


The text is actually an explanation with an analogy. Ok Here goes.
Imagine, you’ve went out for a walk with your family: you, your wife, 2 children: 5 and 10 years old and your poodle-pretty stupid, but enormously sweet creature.

Suddenly, while you’re walking and enjoying the sun, the grass, the weather, you are being attacked by a dog pack. One of them starts a fight with the poodle, another one jumps on your son and stretches him on the ground and seems like going for your son’s throat. Your wife tries to help him fight the dog off, but it doesn’t help. Third dog makes your older son to seek hide in a bombs shelter on the nearest tree, and it jumps right underneath him, tearing the air with an aggressive barking.

A number of other big dogs with open, saliva dripping mouths, approache from different directions. The largest and most vicious bites your leg, starting to tear the flash off the bones.

You pull out your gun and start shooting. First round-into the dog that bites your leg, to take it out of the way, second-into the one that’s tormenting your child, aiming to kill him. Then into the one, that finishes off your poodle and finally into the one that barks under the tree. Others-run away, but not far-after a few steps they stop and look at you, menacingly groaning. You shoot another one. It falls down. Dogs run away. This time-for good.

You help your bitten child and your wife up, then you help your older child to get down from the tree. To poodle you can’t help already with nothing. You call for an ambulance, that arrives, places stitches on you, your wife and the bitten child and takes you to the hospital. There you and your family receive first of 40 injections in a stomach to come, to counter possible infections and rabies.

Then you return home. You turn on TV and you see the newsman, who tells: “Today in a city N a man, named M shot a number of wandering dogs” And you see the image-a puddle of blood, which was your poor poodle’s blood, as far as you remember.

Another news channel points out that one of the shot dogs –the one, that nearly took off your foot was, in fact, an 8-month old cub(a mastiff cub, but that’s not important, it’s still a cub), the second-the one, that had almost killed your child-is some very respectable man’s dog. The third-the one that was barking under the tree-harmless creature, that had never attacked anyone, although it was barking with and without reason. And the forth one-the one, that tore your poodle apart-that one was apparently infected with rabies.

Then, the news-men ask various guests the questions. And they comment, of course.

-Well, - says some fat, respectively looking guy – It’s totally illegal to kill dogs, especially in such a non-equal fight. I mean dogs don’t have guns, they fight fairly-with their teeth. In addition they were hungry, I can understand them.

-So, what do you suggest?-shyly starts next guest, a sweaty gentlemen with beard and mustache-Mr. M should have bitten them too?



-No!-answers the third, bold and passionate-Of course not. He should have shot the rabid dog, but why shoot the others too? The cub, for instance, was killed for nothing! So he bit his foot. Bid deal! Is that really the reason to kill him? The barking one-too. She wasn’t trying to hurt anyone! And, of course-the one, that belonged to a respectable man. He can sue now, by the way.

-All right, but how can you distinguish in such an extreme situation-says the newsman-which one is rabid and which is not?

-That’s why we’re called HUMANS, to see such a things- edifyingly answers the bold-we must not behave like animals. There was nothing extreme there! As far as I know-no one was killed but the dogs themselves.

-Wait,-says another one from WWF-How come that someone even thinks about shooting animals? They trust us! We should feed them, protect them and not to shoot them.

You listen to this nonsense in amazement, then you open the internet browser and see the headlines.

Shooting defenseless animals! - crying one web-site. And there are photos of a blood puddle on the asphalt.

Motiveless attack on dogs! - calls on the other. And the photo - with a cute puppy muzzles.

Let’s protect our pets! - screams the third. And the photos - the barrel of machine gun, aimed at the reader.

You open your blog and describe the events from your point of view. Naturally, you don’t have movie or pictures from the scene, but you take the camera and photograph your child with stitches in his arms and neck, and post photos as illustrations.

In the comments - a lot of sympathy, but there is also a lot of “home educated”(probably at their parents basements) investigators, experts of all kinds and moralists.

- Photoshop - they argue over the photo, with high confidence.

-Why do you carry a gun? - they ask. To an answer “if not for a gun, we would have already been dead”, should remark comes: "Well, and it would be better. At least, little, cute doggies would still be alive”. To the point “our little doggie was killed, too, you know”, they knowingly say: “It is still unclear who killed your dog. It’s likely you yourself hit him accidentally.

- You kill puppies!

- Don’t live where a danger is!

- Walk the other way!

- You’d better feed them, then they would not have touched you!

At the last slogan -"Death to the dog killers!", you're tiredly answer: “Fuck off, moron”.

The “moron” happily screams: “See how aggressive you are?! Why are you so aggressive? Huh? Doesn’t that prove something? Hah?”

Indeed. Why is that, that I am so aggressive?

Expand