--- Steve Vertigum utilitymuffinresearch2@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