--- Steve Vertigum
<utilitymuffinresearch2(a)yahoo.com>
wrote:
And can we consult a solicitor on the copyright
issue?
The central objection is to include "statistical"
data
on Israel, while there is not some similar data
dealing with "occupied territories" for refugees. To
add data about Israel irrespective of any date about
refugees would be to prejudice the argument-- it is
yet another small victory for those who want to
"legitimize" by propagation of information (like
MLP)
the Israeli side of the equasion-- this time on
Wikipedia. Go ahead and add it-- I still havent
heard
anybody challenge my principles here. Once again,
this would represent a way to establish legitimacy
for
a state which has violated more international
sanctions than any other, has legalized torture, and
still asks people to regard its behaviours as
sacrosact and saintly. There is every good reason
to
postpone any action on this -- the project has gone
along fine for years without them. Until some of the
more fluid concerns are dealt with -- siezed lands,
illegitimate territories, etc. I find it
disappointing that people her fail to have the
cajones
to adhere to basic principle. They are just numbers
after all.
With due respect,
~S~
The US doesn't have data on illegal immigrants, yet we
still allow its data to be on 30,000 pages. Should we
say that since the US doesn't have data on illegal
immigrants, by using their data, we are allowing their
argument of saying that illegal immigrants shouldn't
be counted is good? Of course not. And if you dispute
that, it has already been decided by precident and
changing that decision would require the deletion of
thousands of pages with the creation of a new bot
that's potentially destructive.
LDan
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com