I thought this was a discussion list for computer problems, specifically those related to Ubuntu flavor Linux. If it has now turned into foreign policy bullshit review please point me in the correct direction and I will go away and let you all continue to talk out of the evacuation end of your alimentary tract. <div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 3:45 AM, Basil Chupin <<a href="mailto:blchupin@iinet.net.au">blchupin@iinet.net.au</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"> On 31/08/11 02:02, Avi Greenbury wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"> Basil Chupin wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"> But then, I am more than disappointed in the Wikipedia which has now been sanitised to completely remove any traces of the truth of what happened to the Palestinians. If one only had the foresight at the time then one would have saved a copy of what was posted at the time. </blockquote> It's a wiki, you can view the history. <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"> What was posted there some years ago was that David Ben-Gurion, the first prime minister of Israel, was a leader of a *terrorist* *group* (the Zionists) </blockquote> It was a Zionist terrorist group, yes. Not all Zionists were, or indeed are, terrorists even by the loosest definitions of the word. <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"> who conducted their terrorist activities against the British armed forces in that region. No "ifs" or "buts" - but a specific statement that the Zionists were *terrorists* (and so was Golda Meir). </blockquote> The two more popular terrorist groups are still well documented on Wikipedia: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irgun" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irgun</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haganah" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haganah</a> They're still mentioned in the page on Ben Gurion and on Golda Meir. <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"> All refrences to the Zionists being a terrorist organisation has now been edited out. </blockquote> Haganah, the more moderate of the two, isn't branded a terrorist organisation, but it is mentioned that Irgun are perceived as a terrorist organisation. Anyway, I've no real intention of discussing that on here, I've only replied because I think you're missing the point of Wikipedia somewhat in a really common way. In order to qualify for inclusion on Wikipedia, information does not need to be *correct*, it needs to be *verifiable*. The point of Wikipedia is not to diseminate new and original research, or to push a new revolutionary viewpoint on something. It is supposed to be in agreement with the greatest number of works of reference, and only aim for correctness where those disagree. Even then, each commonly-held point of view should be included (since each is verifiable and it doesn't matter which is correct). Wikipedia's somewhat ambitios aim is to be a sum of current human knowledge, not the means for its advancement. If you feel that the general consensus that the term 'paramilitary' is apt for the Irgun and Haganah is incorrect, then you need to be convincing those sources from which Wikipedia seeks verification - other encyclopedias, historians etc. Yes, it doesn't help that Wikipedia has a culture that actively discourages contribution. </blockquote> Thanks for your response. I have always considered Wikipedia as not the Encyclopaedia Britannica but, al least years ago when I first started to use it, it did contain more "raw" information than it does now - as I mentioned. Now it is "sanitised" as far as I am concerned. There is so much bullshit being spewed out by governments who were considered, at some time in the past, to be "believable, "solid" and "responsible", but now whatever is being disseminated by same is simply not believed but considered to be works of fiction. Remember, for example, the public broadcast back in 1964 by President Lyndon Johnson (the one who flashed his genitals to the press corp here in Australia and told them he called 'it '"his baby elephant trunk" (or words to this effect)) and who told the world that American destroyers were attacked in international waters by the North Vietnamese in the Gulf of Tonkin and which was then used as an excuse to attack North Vietnam? Well, that was all bullshit as it came out much later. The Americans deliberately went in into Vietnamese waters to provoke an attack - and it was in North Vietnamese territorial waters. You remember the attack on Pearl Harbour by the Japanese on 7 December 1941? Well the Americans knew about it well before it happened but withheld the information so as to get the American population stirred up to get them to agree to get involved in WWII because at the time American population was isolationist and have had their gut-full after WWI. You remember the bullshit which Colin Powell presented to the United Nations in 2003 about Iraq's Saddam Hussein having "weapons of mass destruction"? (Even Powell is now ashamed of what he did.) Last Tuesday night there was a program called, "Top Secret America", produced in America, and aired on one of our independent TV channels. This coming Tuesday (next week) the "expose" continues with another American program called, "9/11 - The Day that Challenged the World" which presents scientific evidence to contradict the bullshit put out by the government about the 9/11 attack on America by America's enemies.<div> <div></div><div class="h5"> BC -- Bob Hope's wife: "Where would like to be buried when you die?" Bob Hope : "Why don't you surprise me!" -- ubuntu-users mailing list <a href="mailto:ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com" target="_blank">ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com</a> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: <a href="https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users" target="_blank">https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users</a> </div></div></blockquote></div> -- The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)