Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: marcos who wrote (102430)	6/23/2003 8:16:11 AM
From: KLP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Yes, I've found that when someone is intentionally rude, it closes the eyelids to anything else in the post, or in the actual conversation. Too bad too...when someone is civil to others, even though he/she disagrees, then most probably the rest of us read the thoughts. Sometimes you actually engage someone, and have a fine discussion. For instance, I too think English should be the 1st language of this country, and obviously you don't. I think it should be for ALL sorts of reasons. After being a recruiter for over 20 years, I know first hand that if two candidates have the same talents, skills, and all else is equal, except one is more fluent in English than another, the one more fluent in English will get the job. Especially in small companies, where they don't have the funds and time to have an on staff interpreter...Mostly it's time today. I hate discrimination, and have worked hard to see that it doesn't happen. But companies are peopled by people, and all the baggage they bring with them to the job. That doesn't mean however, that people should ever give up their native language...It should be considered it a great asset, as well as their customs they share with others. Notice I said "share", not force upon others. That is where trouble starts, no matter where in the world it happens. If one doesn't like the laws of a country, then one shouldn't go there. BTW, I have done family genealogy for nearly 30 years, and descend from people from all parts of the world. And yes, some of them were discriminated against when they came here. Irish for instance. One was even a "white slave" dislocated by Cromwell in 1642 and sent to the Barbados as a slave. He did escape eventually, came to this country, and many of his descendants are folks that we see in the news on a frequent basis. You asked about "my standards". Golden Rule is my goal in nearly everything I do. In the header for this Board, FL posted the rules of the "road"...including this: Rudeness is considered Off Topic. Before you join the discussion please read (and heed) this article by Jane Gault: Message 18475463;

To: marcos who wrote (102430)	6/23/2003 10:56:08 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

The problem with Steven's question is this: what are we supposed to do about something that was done decades ago? The British promised that there would be a Jewish state, we know that from the Balfour declaration. They promised the Arabs that they would have their own country, at least so says T.E. Lawrence, who was there, although I think that was all rather vague. The idea of the British making such promises seems quite strange to us these days, but that's the way things were done in those days, and they were shouldering some of the burden of dealing with the breakup of the Ottoman Empire, the "sick man of Europe" and elsewhere. And now Israel and Palestine are fait accompli, just as Pakistan, India and Kashmir are fait accompli. The problems exist in the here and now. Going back to 1921 is not possible. We all know the Palestinians have been bitterly opposed to it from the beginning. However, at the time the land was partitioned, the UN was in charge of it, and the British were maintaining it. The UN voted for the partition, not the Brits. Great Britain abstained. On the other hand, the UN has voted, repeatedly, that Israel is supposed to go back to the status quo in 1967, so any settlements inside that line are in violation of the UN. Israel has been attempting to deal with the Palestinians directly, without going through the UN, and we all know where that's got them. Yes, it's a mess, but it's a mess in real life. Steven lives in his head. The world would be a lovely place if it was like the world in Steven's head, but it's not.