I've been on /. long enough to remember when most people here leaned libertarian. Ian Freeman would've been celebrated as a hero. I'm shocked at the current unquestioning acceptance of whatever the Establishment media says. Sad.

Here's a different take on this story and a deep dive into Ian Freeman.

The actual quote:

"The love of money is the root of all evil."

This is an important distinction. When a man loves money more than personal morals and ethics, only then does his business become unethical.

Stuff like this is why people are scared to install native apps for Windows. On iOS, you install apps safely, and with about 2 or 3 taps. On Windows, you get apps via 30 clicks, and you get your browser configuration screwed up, unwanted toolbars, and bonus adware for good measure.

This is the sick, sad state of Windows apps.

The Windows 8 app store promises to address these concerns. We'll see how they deliver.

Your last paragraph shows your true colors; you believe Israel has no right to exist and is a "made-up" state. That's anti-Semitism.

If you doubt this is anti-Semitism, step back for a moment and ask yourself this: do you apply that standard to any other nation? Do you deny any other nation in the world the right to exist?

If you don't, you're singling out the Jews: anti-Semitism.

There can be valid criticism of Israel without being anti-Semitic. However, the new anti-Semitism often hides behind the veneer of legitimate criticism of the Jewish state. The Sharansky Test has been formulated to distinguish between valid criticism of Israel and anti-Semitic rants:

The so-called “new anti-Semitism” poses a unique challenge. “New anti-Semitism” is aimed at the Jewish state. Since this anti-Semitism can hide behind the veneer of legitimate criticism of Israel, it is more difficult to expose. Making the task even harder is that this hatred is advanced in the name of values most of us would consider unimpeachable, such as human rights.

His test is simple:

I believe that we can apply a simple test – I call it the “3D” test – to help us distinguish legitimate criticism of Israel from anti-Semitism.

The first “D” is the test of demonization. When the Jewish state is being demonized; when Israel’s actions are blown out of all sensible proportion; when comparisons are made between Israelis and Nazis and between Palestinian refugee camps and Auschwitz – this is anti- Semitism, not legitimate criticism of Israel.

The second “D” is the test of double standards. When criticism of Israel is applied selectively; when Israel is singled out by the United Nations for human rights abuses while the behavior of known and major abusers, such as China, Iran, Cuba, and Syria, is ignored; when Israel’s Magen David Adom, alone among the world’s ambulance services, is denied admission to the International Red Cross – this is anti-Semitism.

The third “D” is the test of delegitimization: when Israel’s fundamental right to exist is denied – alone among all peoples in the world – this too is anti-Semitism.

First the status bar. Now the location bar!!

If Google made cars...

• Combine all dashboard widgets (speedometer, tachometer, fuel gauge, etc.) into one toolbar, which doesn't fully show anything, to maximize windshield real estate.
• Hide the steering wheel to free up yet more precious window pixels currently being blocked by its top arc.
• Eliminate sun visors since some users use them to block part of the windshield.

Ha'aretz is solidly in Left field and is outright anti-religious.

You first said that the JPost was "far, far right." I consider Avigdor Lieberman to be moderately right. His party is almost as compromising as Shas. Try Ya'akov Katz (Ketzaleh) for "far" (i.e. true) right. Baruch Marzel for "far, far" right. Not that there's anything wrong with being right...

The Jerusalem Post hosts a range of views, but overall, it is a secular, center-left mainstream media organization, complete with a Zodiac/astrology page. Israel's "far right" never reads JPost, except with dreading curiosity.

As for "Greater Israel," I did manage to find a JPost column from April entitled Keep Dreaming: The case for a greater Israel. Maybe this is what you're thinking of. But did you read the column? About midway, it reads, "The greater Israel [19th century Zionist visionary Theodor] Herzl envisioned had nothing to do with borders; it had everything to do with morals, ideals and behavior." Moreover, the bottom of the column notes that it was written by a representative of Conservative Judaism, which is a branch of Judaism that tends to be politically center-left. (The word "Conservative" here has nothing to do with politics.)

In their view, should Stuxnet not be handily around to embellish on, they would have to fall back on to their old standby canard of "God's finger" slowing the Iranian centrifuges directly to protect his Jewish children

Trusting in God's protection, in fact, has been a sturdy standby for the State of Israel. One could begin a study of this topic with Israel's victory in the 1967 Six Day War, a modern miracle by all accounts.

Nitpick: The phrase "finger of God" usually has to with one of the following subjects: astronomy (Hubble telescope picture), God's creation of the universe, or God's etching of the Ten Commandments. I'm pretty sure it's not a common phrase in JPost articles.

I wouldn't say "nicely." His rant has a load of f-bombs and other blatantly offensive language. He has a good point, but his manner of delivery makes it unlistenable. (Note to comedians: Cussing isn't funny. Or professional. You come off as a trashy low-life, demeaning both yourself and your audience.)

The point is that Aziz the "Christian" was helping to advance very anti-Christian goals (pro-Islamic or not), as is the case with the Ground Zero Mosque.