More on the British judge who hates Israel (Zvi)

Zvi does some research on Judge George Bathurst-Norman, who just essentially instructed a jury to acquit people from causing hundreds of thousands of pounds of damage - because the material might have gone to Israel:

---

It is impossible to run a society based on the rule of law if the courts refuse to enforce the law.

The Implications
Let's remove Israel from the picture for a moment and examine the implications of the judge's instructions.

War is always hell, and true anti-war activists have a valid, if often naive, cause. Suppose that anti-war activists have exhausted all democratic means and have been unable to stop the UK from fighting wars in Iraq or Afghanistan. Suppose that they have been unable to stop British arms manufacturers from selling weapons to third world countries. Apparently, anti-war activists are allowed to break into any munitions factory in the UK and do hundreds of thousands of Pounds worth of damage. Apparently, the rights of the factory owners are meaningless. The factories may be supplying the British armed forces and/or a variety of British partners and clients. None of that matters. War is always hell. British weapons are always designed to kill people.

There is, of course, another possible option. War might only be hell for Arabs who are fighting against Israel.

It is possible that war is not hell when Angola purchases 30 million Pounds worth of armored vehicles from the UK. It is possible that war is not hell when the UK sends 180 tons of arms to genocidal Sudan. It is possible that war is not hell when BAE alone sells 43 billion Pounds worth of arms contracts since 2005 to Saudi Arabia, which is currently fighting in Yemen and enforcing a strangling blockade through which no food or medicine is permitted to pass. It is possible that war is not hell when the UK sells weapons to Iraq, or when UK planes bomb Iraqi cities. It is possible that war is not hell when the UK sells weapons to Pakistan, and when Pakistan sought to acquire nuclear weapons (see below). It is possible that war is not hell when the UK sells weapons to Sri Lanka (thousands of Tamil civilians indiscriminately slaughtered by the Sri Lankan armed forces during the bombardment of the surrounded LTTE).

But to believe that war is only hell for those who are fighting against Israel, a person must not only ignore reality and objectivity; he must abandon all semblance of rational thought.  

Proof, Assertion & Recusal  
Next thought.

The judge made statements about the war in Gaza while instructing the jury. But I don't believe that any proof was offered up to demonstrate that these statements were factual. Is unsupported assertion the new standard of proof in the British courts? Or is this only true where Israel is concerned?
If a judge has political positions that lead to bias, then is he not required to recuse himself?

Who & Why?
Next thought. From the Elder's source:

We need not have worried! Perhaps the fact that His Honour was born in the Arab town of Jaffa opposite Tel Aviv might have something to do with it! Judge George Bathurst-Norman was brought out of retirement to hear the case.

I'm curious. Who "brought him out of retirement to try this case," and on what grounds?  

Double Standard?
In 2003, Judge Bathurst-Norman jailed a man for 3 months for decapitating a statue of Margaret Thatcher. In that decision, the judge said that although many people sympathized with the man, smashing up property deserved a custodial sentence.

Nuclear Weapons are not a Big Deal, Apparently
In 2001, Judge George Bathurst-Norman handed down a "remarkably lenient" sentence to  Abu Bakr Siddiqui, one of the procurement agents of the A.Q. Khan nuclear tech smuggling network(facilitating Pakistan's nuclear weapons program and the nuclear weapons programs of rogue states such as North Korea and Iran).

I guess "hell on earth" does not describe what would happen if Pakistani nuclear weapons were used against India, or Iranian nuclear weapons were used against Israel.

Read More

HRW and AI: Substituting Lex Ferenda for Lex Lata

In a brilliant monograph written by Asher Fredman for NGO Monitor and JCPA, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch's seemingly factual statements regarding the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) are examined - and found to be sorely lacking.

Fredman goes through the NGOs' writings concerning Operation Cast Lead and shows that their conclusions concerning the use of white phosphorus and UAVs do not reflect international law as it is (lex lata) , but rather how they would like international law to be (lex ferenda.)

Excerpts from the summary:

It is shown that the NGOs’ [1] descriptions of the means and methods of warfare contain numerous unwarranted assertions and unsubstantiated claims. In other cases, the NGOs present unrealistic depictions of the nature of modern combat, leading them to problematic evaluations of Israeli actions. It appears that these result at least in part from a lack of expertise in relevant areas.

From the legal perspective, it will be argued that the NGOs’ presentation of several key LOAC principles is inaccurate or incomplete. In other instances, AI and HRW present controversial interpretations of LOAC treaties as widely accepted customary law. This suggests that the NGOs may be engaged in “standard setting” [2] rather than in objective evaluations.

On white phosphorus (WP):

Among the findings are that:

LOAC, as reflected in state declarations and practice, recognizes the right of a commander to consider military needs, particularly force protection, when evaluating what actions and precautions are feasible in a given situation.

HRW’s claim that Israel could feasibly have used a different type of smoke obscurant to the same effect as WP is contradicted on several counts by military sources and weapons experts.

AI and HRW's arguments regarding the feasibility of using other means and methods to deliver WP are unsubstantiated and based upon information unavailable to the NGOs. Suggested alternatives may, in fact, have posed a greater danger to civilians.

Contrary to the claim that Israel’s use of WP was indiscriminate and hence unlawful per se, its use was “directed at a specific military objective” and therefore lawful under LOAC.

On the use of UAVs:

Among the findings are that:

The evidence AI and HRW present to establish their claims regarding the weapons platforms and munitions allegedly used is rendered questionable by military and defense industry sources. In a number of instances, the witness testimony relied upon heavily by the NGOs is contradicted by widely published media reports or the NGOs themselves.

AI and HRW present an unrealistic depiction of the factors influencing targeting decisions on the modern battlefield. They fall prey to the “allure of precision” that leads “those beyond the battlefield [to] impose unreasonable demands on the military or postulate norms that go beyond treaty or custom” (Schmitt, 2004, p. 466).

Israeli actions are judged based on hindsight, in contrast to LOAC standards as affirmed by the declarations of 13 countries when ratifying Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions.
The NGOs misrepresent LOAC definitions of legitimate military objectives. On the basis of this misrepresentation, they presume the absence of legitimate military objectives in the vicinity of a strike.

Once presuming the absence of legitimate military objectives, the NGOs assume that civilians injured in a strike were deliberately targeted. This allows them to ignore LOAC’s recognition of the possibility and lawfulness of proportional collateral damage in attacks on military objectives.

Conclusion:

The findings of this study indicate that at least in their reporting on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, AI and HRW’s reports contain many factual inaccuracies and problematic presentations of international law. It is therefore suggested that AI and HRW, as well as other NGOs dealing with similar issues, carefully evaluate their areas of competency, and ensure that factual and legal assertions are made with the proper degree of expertise. It is further suggested that the NGOs take steps to maintain standards of objectivity and ensure that ideological predilections do not color their analyses. When claiming to evaluate the lawfulness of a party’s actions, the NGOs must not conflate lex lata (the law as it exists) with their preferred lex ferenda (what the law should be).

As I showed in AI's contradictory and HRW's bogus definitions of "occupation."

Policy-makers, diplomats, and journalists should more carefully scrutinize NGO-generated information. Subjecting NGO reports and statements to careful analysis will help ensure that these documents are produced at the highest standards. This would enable NGOs such as AI and HRW to most effectively fulfill their mission of promoting and protecting human rights.

Don't expect HRW or AI to respond in any substantial way. As we have seen, NGOs tend to get very shrill and defensive when light is shined on them.

Read More

If Iran wants to boycott Israeli products... (Zvi)

As I mentioned yesterday, Iran has officially announced a boycott of either Israeli or Zionist or Jewish-owned companies, depending on the report.

Assuming that Iran's boycott is only for companies that have a significant presence in Israel, things might get a little hairy. From Zvi:

---

Among the top 20 non-oil companies in the S&P Global 100 list (not yet updated to reflect Apple's rise), the only companies that DON'T have research labs, joint ventures, strategic investments, subsidiaries, etc. in Israel are:  
 
* lung cancer purveyor Philip Morris  
* WalMart  
* BHP Billiton (diamond miner that does significant business with Israel and uses Israeli technology)  
* Banco Santander  
 
Every other company on the list has a direct presence in Israel. So the IRI would have to boycott the rest of the world's largest companies, including companies that they probably don't want to boycott (such as Samsung, Siemens and Toyota) as well as frequently companies such as Intel and Microsoft. They would also have to boycott most of the world's leading pharmaceutical and medical-device companies - but then, health care has never been the IRI's top priority, has it?  
 
Apple  

The iPad and iPhone 4 include components from Samsung and Micron, which have Israeli R&D centers. Apple's computers use Intel chips.  

 So sorry! Mahmoud, if you were hoping to buy an iPad on your next trip to Europe, you will need to reconsider.  

AMD and Linux  

Iran is on the US list of Embargoed Countries. AMD can't legally sell to Iran. Nevertheless, the IRI regime obtains AMD chips on the black market and has used them to build a 216-processor supercomputer and to conduct aerospace research (i.e. missiles), which Iran then bragged about. An AMD statement says that the company is investigating how the IRI could have obtained these CPUs and that it has alerted the US State Dept. to these reports.  

The IRI is using the SUSE distribution of Linux in its aerospace programs. This is the free distribution from Novell. Novell has a local office in Israel. Want to try again, Mahmoud?  

I'm not going to guess how many contributions to the Linux source come from "Zionists" (Israelis, Jews, Christians who support Israel, Muslims who support Israel, anyone whose country Iran has ever accused of being Zionists, e.g. all Americans, etc.) or from companies on the banned list. However, I definitely encourage IRI bureaucrats to immediately go through the source code and delete every line contributed by these pernicious Zionists, as well as by all companies on the "banned" list, e.g. IBM. The IRI can't possibly want to have evil Zionist code running Iran's computers. Furthermore, I encourage all Iranians who love the Islamic Republic to immediately content their leaders and tell them that it is unacceptable to be running the country using a crypto-Zionist operating system that might be secretly mocking Islam and which might deviously cause Iran's missiles to turn around and blow up Tehran. I do think this is a very reasonable fear for delusional paranoid conspiracy theorists to hold, and I am happy to warn them about this secret plot.  

Coke & Pepsi: failed again  

The IRI is boycotting Coke but not Pepsi; however, in 2008, Pepsi and Strauss formed a joint venture that acquired an Israeli company. Better luck next time, Mahmoud.  

Conclusion  

The whole boycott-Israel is an example of the IRI regime's badly skewed priorities. Instead of working pragmatically to create the greatest value for its people, the IRI regime continues to focus on attacking a country 1000km away and attempting to slaughter a people that has never, in thousands of years of recorded history, initiated military action against Iran/Persia. The Iranian regime will continue to operate in this obsessively destructive fashion until it collapses, because this psychotic obsession is quite literally the backbone of the regime.  

Read More

Britain decriminalizes vigilantism against Israel

In a mind-blowing verdict, a British jury acquitted people who admitted that they purposefully caused damage to an arms factory - because, they said, the arms were being used by Israel:

Five activists who caused £180,000 damage to an arms factory were acquitted after they argued they were seeking to prevent Israeli war crimes.

The five were jubilant after a jury found them not guilty of conspiring to cause criminal damage to the factory on the outskirts of Brighton.

The five admitted they had broken in and sabotaged the factory, but argued they were legally justified in doing so.

They believed that EDO MBM, the firm that owns the factory, was breaking export regulations by manufacturing and selling to the Israelis military equipment which would be used in the occupied territories. They wanted to slow down the manufacture of these components, and impede what they believed were war crimes being committed by Israel against the Palestinians.

They are the latest group of peace and climate-change activists to successfully use the "lawful excuse" defence – committing an offence to prevent a more serious crime – as a tactic in their campaigns.

They had decided to act last January after three weeks of Israeli military manoeuvres against Gaza in which many Palestinians were killed.

In his summing up, Judge George Bathurst-Norman suggested to the jury that "you may well think that hell on earth would not be an understatement of what the Gazans suffered in that time".

The judge highlighted the testimony by Caroline Lucas, the Green MP for Brighton Pavilion, that "all democratic paths had been exhausted" before the activists embarked on their action.

Meaning that the judge pretty much told the jury to acquit them. Unbelievable.

Hove crown court heard the activists had broken into the factory in the night. They had video-taped interviews beforehand outlining their intention to cause damage and, in the words of prosecutor Stephen Shay, "smash-up" the factory.

These statements were posted on the Indymedia website shortly after they were arrested.

Apparently, according to British law, Israel has no right to defend itself from Qassam rockets. Period.

I guess that synagogue bombings can be defended next, because Jews provide material and emotional support for Israel which does all of these war crimes. Then they can go after Melanie Philips.

It turns out that the judge was born in Arab Jaffa, and was brought out of retirement to hear this case, as  a jubilant anti-Zionist notes. Which would explain his directing the jury as to what their verdict should be.

(h/t My Right Word)

Read More

Abbas once called for Arab nations to naturalize Palestinians!

I was astonished to find this quote from Mahmoud Abbas in 2005:

In an unexpected move, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas called upon Arab countries hosting Palestinian refugees to give them citizenship, asserting that such action would not compromise the Right of Return. "I call upon every Arab government wishing to give citizenship [to Palestinian refugees] to do so.

The Palestinian Authority president insisted that obtaining citizenship in a host country would not compromise the refugees' right to return to their homeland. Palestinians have sought to assert this right since being forced from their homeland 50 years ago.

Abbas explained: "This does not mean resettlement [of refugees]. A Palestinian would return to his homeland whenever he is allowed, whether he carried an Arab or non-Arab citizenship."

In the interview, Abbas criticized claims that the Arab League had banned naturalization of refugees, calling these claims "mere excuses."

"There is no decision, as the Arab League only recommended [not to grant citizenship], but this was not a decision," he said, referring to the recommendation made in the early 1950s when hundreds of thousands of Palestinians became refugees following the creation of the State of Israel in 1948.

While Abbas boldly stated during his visit to Lebanon that he "speaks for all Palestinians," a number of Palestinian officials and refugees in Lebanon disagree with his push for citizenship. Some expressed great surprise over his statement.

Suhail Natour, a member of the Central Committee of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, said: "It comes as a great surprise, as this move is very dangerous."

Natour explained: "Once a Palestinian becomes a citizen of another country, he can't claim his right of return to Israel, as Israel can easily turn around and say, 'you now have a country and can't claim refugee status.'"

"Slowly, as more Palestinian refugees get naturalized, the Right of Return will turn from a national case to a mere personal case against Israel," he said.

According to Natour, naturalizing Palestinian refugees would add to what are "already" serious legal, political and social problems involved with the Right of Return.

Notice that they interview a leader of a terrorist organization as a representative of Palestinian Arabs in Lebanon to say they oppose the right to be naturalized citizens - but they didn't interview any real citizens. As usual, self-appointed "leaders" do everything they can to quash their people they are supposedly leading.

On the cached Lebanese forum page from which I found the rest of the Daily Star article, one of the members posted in reaction to this:

Do you think the 350,000 Palestinians in the refugee camps want to be here? Me and my buddies are a group of five guys. One of them is Palestinian who lives in Kfarchima. Four of us are not in Lebanon, scattered between the US, Canada and Australia. The only one left behind is the Palestinian guy, who is stuck in Lebanon with no future to look forward to, and not being able to leave Lebanon because he's not able to get either a travel document from the Lebanese authorities, or a visa to get out...

Abbas must have been pilloried for making his pro-naturalization statement, because he changed his tune pretty quickly after this rare show of true leadership. In 2008, he completely contradicted his 2005 statement:

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas was quoted Wednesday as rejecting the naturalization of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon. "We would never accept any settlement that leads to naturalizing Palestinians in Lebanon," Abbas told pan-Arab daily Al-Hayat.

And in 2009, he went even beyond that:

Palestinian refugees in Lebanon will not be offered Palestinian Authority passports, President Mahmoud Abbas said on Monday following his meeting with Lebanese President Michel Suleiman at the Republican Palace.

Abbas’ remark quashed recent rumors concerning the issuing of PA passports to Palestinian refugees in Lebanon...

Abbas could have acted as the conscience of the Arab world and pushed for his people to have the right to live in dignity - and he instead (apparently) caved to pressure and now advocates keeping his people in misery, as permanent second-class citizens in their host countries, without even the basic ability to leave their hellholes of "refugee" camps.

What a great leader the Palestinian Arabs have!

Read More

Another Lebanese politician against Palestinian Arab rights

Lebanese politicians continue to speak out against giving Palestinian Arabs equal rights - and some want them to have fewer rights than others.

Phalange Party leader Amin Gemayel criticized the way the issue of granting Palestinian refugees in Lebanon their rights was presented in parliament, saying that it was aimed at dividing people between those who are for and others who are against this issue.

He made his statements after holding talks with the head of UNRWA in Lebanon Salvatore Lombardo on improving the situation of Palestinians in Lebanon.

Furthermore, Gemayel stated: "Granting the Palestinians the right of ownership in Lebanon is a step closer towards naturalization."

"A number of legal matters need to be studied calmly in order to improve the Palestinians' humanitarian situation and maintain the Lebanese state's higher interests in a way that would prevent their permanent residence in Lebanon," he stressed.

He added that Lebanon does not have the funds to support presenting the Palestinians with their rights, saying that this is the international community's duty.

Arabs are all behind their Palestinian brethren - as long as all they have to do is talk. Once they are asked to actually do something, then the excuses start to fly.

Read More

Golda Meir, the UN, and "Palestinians"

One of the most quoted, supposedly racist sayings by an Israeli leader is Golda Meir's supposed 1969 statement that "There is no such thing as a Palestinian people." You can find it cited over 18,000 times in Google.

The quote is false.

Here is what Meir said, referring to when the bulk of Zionists returned to their land in the first half of the 20th century, quoted in the June 15, 1969 Sunday Times:

There were no such thing as Palestinians. When was there an independent Palestinian people with a Palestinian state? It was either southern Syria before the First World War, and then it was a Palestine including Jordan. It was not as though there was a Palestinian people in Palestine considering itself as a Palestinian people and we came and threw them out and took their country away from them. They did not exist.

Notice that she stated it in past tense, and given the timeframe that she was referring to, her statement is indisputable. (The correct statement is quoted much less frequently on the Internet.)

There is another interesting thing about the timing of her statement.

The first time that Palestinian Arabs were recognized as a "people" by the UN was not in the 1940s or 50s. It was in December, 1969, six months after Meir spoke on the topic. In GA Resolution 2628, it refers to the "people of Palestine" - the first time that this term was used by the UN to refer exclusively to Palestinian Arabs.

And the first time that the term "Palestinians" was used by the UN in reference to Palestinian Arabs was a year later, in A/RES/2628 in November, 1970.


Isn't it interesting that for over twenty years after the Palestinian Arab exodus, the UN never referred to them as a people? Only after the Six Day War, when the Arab world changed its tactics from bragging about "throwing the Jews into the sea" and into "Jews as tyrants, Arabs as victims" did the UN pick up on this new construct of recognizing a people and a state whose existence were denied even by Arabs only a few years beforehand.

Not to mention afterwards, as this (Hebrew) video shows, as Palestinian Christian politician Azmi Bishara says explicitly:


Or the famous quote from the PLO's Zuheir Mohsen denying the existence of a Palestinian people in 1977.




(I did not research the UN resolutions exhaustively; I came upon this in a footnote in this paper. H/t to Biodegradable and Jed for post-1970 quotes.)

Read More

Iran boycotting Jewish companies?

From YNet:

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad signed Wednesday a new amendment to a law in the Islamic Republic that forbids the airing of advertisements for "Zionist companies." The blacklist of prohibited companies is comprised mainly of international companies, mainly American, owned by Jews or that operate branches in Israel.

Among those on the list are Coca Cola, Nestle, Intel, and IBM.

The amendment obligates a number of government ministries to establish a committee to identify and locate products from "Zionist" companies being sold in Iran. In addition, this committee will be charged with finding the names of leading figures in the blacklisted companies so that they may be boycotted as well.

I cannot find any verification of the "Jewish-owned" part of this; Iran's PressTV merely says that the boycott was of Israeli companies:

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called for the implementation of a bill demanding major efforts to enforce a total boycott on goods with Israeli origin.

According to the website of the Iranian government, President Ahmadinejad ordered the implementation of the pro-Palestinian bill, which was ratified by the Iranian Parliament (Majlis) earlier in June.

Iranian lawmakers agreed to task a committee with identifying Israeli companies and institutions to step up efforts for imposing a ban on Israeli products.


The bill also demands the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting not to air television and radio advertisement for Israeli products.

Ahmadinejad's website does not have any such story, nor does the official Iranian government website.

It will be interesting to see the list of boycotted "Zionist" companies.

Read More

Today's deceptive Reuters photo caption

Reuters shows us an outpouring of grief at the funeral of a PFLP militant:

Palestinians carry the body of militant Bassam Badwan during his funeral in Gaza City June 29, 2010. An Israeli air strike on the Gaza Strip on Monday killed at least one Palestinian militant, Badwan, and wounded two other people, medical workers said. An Israeli army spokeswoman said a military aircraft had "targeted a Palestinian who fired a rocket-propelled grenade at soldiers" that struck inside Israel.

Look at all those outstretched hands, all from people trying to pay their last respects and yearning to be able to touch the militant hero before he is buried!

But Getty Images shows a similar picture, with a showing a wider angle and with a decidedly different caption:

Press photographers crowd around Palestinian mourners carrying the body of Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) militant Bassam Badwun duirng his funeral in Gaza City on June 29, 2010 after being shot dead by Israeli forces.

Hmmm...there seem to be more photographers there than mourners, and some of those outstretched hands were from journalists!

Reuters was not lying in this case, but it is always interesting to see what photos look like when they aren't cropped in order to make the story just a little bit better.

UPDATE: AP was as bad as Reuters (h/t Media Backspin)

 Associated Press:

 

Palestinian mourners carry the body of Bassam Badwan, a militant from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), out of his family house during his funeral in Gaza City, Tuesday, June 29, 2010. Badwan was killed Monday in an Israeli airstrike in Gaza. (AP/Khalil Hamra)

Read More

Beach open thread

On Sunday, Daughter of Ziyon and I played hooky from social obligations and headed to the beach:

Nothing clears your head quite like the ocean. I need to do this more often.

Anyway, besides spending time on creating an EoZ forum which may or may not become a permanent feature, here is some other meta-blog news:

The month of June shattered my previous record for monthly page views, with some 118,000 hits this month, beating my old record (of January 2009) by 35,000 and doubling my average volume from the past few months. It seems that a number of people who found this blog during the flotilla incident have stuck around, so thanks!

My quarterly numbers were also record breaking (for me, at least.)

In other EoZ news, posts on this blog have been nominated twice for the weekly Watcher of Weasels non-council awards:

The first, nominated by Snapped Shot, was for my post on Reuters' photo caption lies.

The other, nominated by the Watcher himself, was for Adam Levick's guest post "Mondoweiss: Hate as 'Progressive' Jewish Politics."

If anyone else has written a piece that they believe needs to get more attention, I would happily look at it for posting here. 

I also want to thank those who have been sending me links and ideas; I appreciate them all even if I don't always reply back. 

One last topic: as you can imagine, this is taking up a great deal of my time, far more than I comfortably have. If something is posted here that you think should be publicized more, or that should be brought to someone's attention, I would appreciate if you do that for me and let me know. This includes posting links in other forums or comment sections of newspapers, emailing to appropriate organizations or journalists, and placing them on bookmark sites like Yahoo Buzz, Reddit, Delicious or Newsvine.

Thanks again!

Read More

Turkey loses $400m from Israeli tourist cancellations

From Hurriyet Daily News (Turkey):

The Turkish tourism industry has been seriously affected by the recent tension between former allies Turkey and Israel. The Turkish economy has lost at least $400 million due to reservation cancellations from Israeli tourists, according to tourism agencies.

Some 50,000 Israelis have cancelled their reservations indefinitely. Furthermore, the Israel Travel Agents Association has announced that it cancelled 100,000 reservations out of a total of 150,000.

Levantin Tour, a tourism company has posted a 3.5 million Turkish Liras loss due to cancelled reservations, according to the owner of the company, Levent Güner. Levantin Tour has been bringing tourists from Israel to Turkey for the past 15 years.

“Our company’s main business channel has been cut,” Güner said. “Who will retrieve my 3.5 million-lira loss?”

Levantin Tour had aimed to bring 17,000 tourists from Israel to Turkey this year, said Güner, adding that until now the company was unfortunately only able to bring 200 tourists. The company has paid $1.1 million to hotels for cancelled reservations.

Turkey has suffered a minimum $400 million loss because of this situation, Güner said. “An Israeli tourist spends $650 on average. The number of tourists spending that much money is very low. Some tourism agencies have gone bankrupt due to this situation,” he said.

All together now: Awwwww.

(h/t Daily Alert)

Read More

Try out the EoZ message board

Because someone asked, and I aim to please, I just added a message board.

I did not spend much time looking for one; I am using free software from Aimoo. It looks like it has the features that people want in message boards. It seems customizable, although I cannot figure out how to turn off its sound, which might get very irritating after a while.

You would have to sign up for it. It also supports messaging between members, including private messages. It also supports a chat room although that is not up yet (supposedly tomorrow.) I don't know if there are enough people here to keep this interesting; we will see.

I really don't want to spend much time moderating it, but it might be a useful place for people to have side discussions or to place reference materials.

If it looks like it is being abused, or of it is more effort to maintain than it is worth, I'll simply delete it. So don't get too attached to it yet!

You can see a link to it on my left sidebar under "Pages."

Check it out.

Read More