Random Thoughts (Political Edition)

phuckingduck

is awesome!
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
3,018
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Car(s)
'03 Volvo S60 AWD
Hey! You can thank the students at my school for that ban! Way to go kids-@-main-campus!!!

What did they think was going to happen? You're 17, 18 years old, in Roslyn efffing Washington (formerly the drug addiction capital of America as a function of per capita addiction), haven't really drank (drunk?) before, and you're being pressured by older guys to drink more! Stupid ass kids. Way to be champs!
 

British_Rover

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2006
Messages
4,293
Location
Torrington, CT United States
Car(s)
2005 Gr Cherokee, dealer demo
Last year, when asked if he believed in American exceptionalism, President Obama responded, "I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism."

Obama summed it up perfectly.

going back to an old post but thought I would post the whole quote from that speech instead of just the snipped bit.

I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism. I'm enormously proud of my country and its role and history in the world. If you think about the site of this summit and what it means, I don't think America should be embarrassed to see evidence of the sacrifices of our troops, the enormous amount of resources that were put into Europe postwar, and our leadership in crafting an Alliance that ultimately led to the unification of Europe. We should take great pride in that.

And if you think of our current situation, the United States remains the largest economy in the world. We have unmatched military capability. And I think that we have a core set of values that are enshrined in our Constitution, in our body of law, in our democratic practices, in our belief in free speech and equality, that, though imperfect, are exceptional.

Now, the fact that I am very proud of my country and I think that we've got a whole lot to offer the world does not lessen my interest in recognizing the value and wonderful qualities of other countries, or recognizing that we're not always going to be right, or that other people may have good ideas, or that in order for us to work collectively, all parties have to compromise and that includes us.

And so I see no contradiction between believing that America has a continued extraordinary role in leading the world towards peace and prosperity and recognizing that that leadership is incumbent, depends on, our ability to create partnerships because we create partnerships because we can't solve these problems alone.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/11/the-rights-accuracy-problem.html
 

tigger

Forum Addict
Joined
Dec 11, 2006
Messages
5,737
Car(s)
'88 Vic Wagon, '92 Honda VFR
It's probably easier than you think.
I'm not talking about any physical difficulty of sticking guns on a ship, but the legality of doing so. hajj has summed it up very nicely. When something goes wrong on an unarmed merchant ship the result is often a clusterfuck of competing jurisdictions. Adding mercenaries to the mix only further complicates things.

This government truly knows no bounds when it comes to stupidity. I legitimately feel angry about this, even though it actually affects me in no way.
Instituting a vague ban because a few minors drank themselves to death? I hate politicians.

... also a US vessel will only be liable in fewer countries, so it could make sense.
Only because we stick reservations on everything we sign that say we're not actually liable for anything. :lol:

I'm pretty sure we've signed almost all the UNCLOS agreements though. We're close to being on the same page as most other nations when it comes to law of the sea. Perhaps we could get away with a little more just because of the sheer amount of shipping we do, and the agreements we have because of that.
 
Last edited:

Interrobang

Forum Addict
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
8,151
1000 years in 5 Minutes - European Borders/Countries.


Gives a really good impression on how artificial and arbitrary countries (and the borders that come with it) are drawn. And also it should be pretty clear that everytime a line is drawn or moved in that animation ... blood was shed.
 
Last edited:

nomix

True Viking
Joined
May 26, 2005
Messages
7,293
Location
Norway
Car(s)
Tend do walk the 40 meters from my bed to lecture.
Instituting a vague ban because a few minors drank themselves to death? I hate politicians.
Just a pity they decided to make the second ammendment about guns, and not caffene/alcoholic drinks.

"A well liquered up people, shall be required for the happiness of the State. The Government shall not infringe on the citizens right to buy and mix drinks with caffene or alcohol."
 

nomix

True Viking
Joined
May 26, 2005
Messages
7,293
Location
Norway
Car(s)
Tend do walk the 40 meters from my bed to lecture.
It's probably the only piece of photojournalistic gold there. So they use it. I'd use it. Every journalist/photojournalist I know would use it. And we sure as hell would have taken that photo. Dog bites man isn't news, man bites dog is. Thing is, perhaps 'man bites dog' in this case is a generally speaking peaceful protest made by the majority of protesters?

I guess we are not to reason why.
 

Interrobang

Forum Addict
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
8,151
Why this looks so bad is the question - didn?t this happen because the photographers were there, don?t they promote such behaviour and glorificate it in the process? I think the blog-post I linked to isn?t too far of when it asks if this is a photo-op. An organized shoot if you will. With a crime happening in the middle of it. With the police not getting through it because a camera is in their way. That is how it looks.

I know that the truth (probably) is somewhere in the middle ... both pictures tell a story that might not reflect the reality of what happend there ... but - it?s one of the many examples that prove that Press-coverage (and specifically Pictures) should always been viewed very, very critical by the public as it may very well be not close to the truth.
 

Plissken

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
1,404
Why is the policeman just looking on?
 

Interrobang

Forum Addict
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
8,151
Why is the policeman just looking on?
There seems to be a row of them waiting to get passed the guy with the camera infront of them, blocking their path ... and you certainly don?t want to forcefully push press aside ... or all those cameras will be pointed at yourself in a heartbeat documenting "police brutality against the press" ...
They seem to have quite a nice area blocked free for that guy to just go nuts on the windows and for them to take pictures of it ...
 
Last edited:

Plissken

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
1,404
I very much doubt it, to be honest. There were plenty of cameras filming the police that day because of what happened last year to that newspaperman.

I've already posted the Charlie Brooker G20 thing here twice and it is exactly the same, one unidentified person smashing something up while twenty photographers and cameramen look on. The cynic in me says it is a about as staged a photo as you can get. The ultra-cynic in me says a guy was paid to do it. (How else do all these people with a vested interest suddenly show up in the right place at the right time and get in a nice semi circle so that they can all get a good shot?)
 

Plissken

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
1,404
It never actually was illegal to photograph the Police, but it was in their interests to make it appear to be the case. From memory, the Met were taken to court over the issue and the people bringing the case won, so the guidance was "clarified". (Not without some kicking and screaming from ACPO, IIRC).
 

Cobol74

Forum Addict
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
17,507
Location
The banana republic of Ukania
Car(s)
Honda Accord 2.2 i-Dtec Sport Estate.Hyundai Ix20
You try it and see what happens. ... You can let me know then.

I thought it funny when that Police mand got caught roughing someone up on one of their own cameras and was done for it. IMHO our Police seem to have gone downhill in the recent past - I bet they have cut the training.
 

tigger

Forum Addict
Joined
Dec 11, 2006
Messages
5,737
Car(s)
'88 Vic Wagon, '92 Honda VFR
Your cynicism might be well founded. Then again, photographers and journalists do have something like a spidey-sense for that sort of thing. :lol:
 

Plissken

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
1,404
Ha, all I need to do to photo a policeman is walk around the corner. I work for the Irish police! :)
 

nomix

True Viking
Joined
May 26, 2005
Messages
7,293
Location
Norway
Car(s)
Tend do walk the 40 meters from my bed to lecture.
Why this looks so bad is the question - didn?t this happen because the photographers were there, don?t they promote such behaviour and glorificate it in the process? I think the blog-post I linked to isn?t too far of when it asks if this is a photo-op. An organized shoot if you will. With a crime happening in the middle of it. With the police not getting through it because a camera is in their way. That is how it looks.

I know that the truth (probably) is somewhere in the middle ... both pictures tell a story that might not reflect the reality of what happend there ... but - it?s one of the many examples that prove that Press-coverage (and specifically Pictures) should always been viewed very, very critical by the public as it may very well be not close to the truth.
A couple of months ago, I was covering a music festival. Late one night, two guys started a fight. I started taking photos, but were accosted by angry people asking why I was taking photos of that, and not the concerts?

I'll say the same to you as I said to the woman. Madam, I've photographed pretty much every concert and artist the last four days, not to mention happy people having a beer and having fun. But this is happening. I document what happens, no matter what happens. Wether or not it's supposed to be published is not up to me. That is up to the editor or editorial staff. I just make sure I get the photo.

Of course these photographers took 500 photos of the demo itself. But this happened. And it's their job to document what happens at this demo, no matter what it is.

There seems to be a row of them waiting to get passed the guy with the camera infront of them, blocking their path ... and you certainly don?t want to forcefully push press aside ... or all those cameras will be pointed at yourself in a heartbeat documenting "police brutality against the press" ...
They seem to have quite a nice area blocked free for that guy to just go nuts on the windows and for them to take pictures of it ...
With respect to the British police and their actions towards photographers, that is a real problem and nothing to be joked about. British police have over the last years been very active in attacking, bullying and harassing photographers, especially during protests. There have been clear cases of police actively putting press photographers into registers for trouble makers because they cover demonstrations.

It's no joke, it's very serious business. As for this situation, the press has a right to cover it, however, they have a duty to let the police pass. Had they been asked, they would have moved.

Is it not illegal now, to photograph the Police?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/feb/16/protest-police-liberty-central

And I agree with you Plisskin - anything to sell papers, shape/manipulate public opinion. ...

Nope. It's not. It never was. It was illegal to photograph police within the confinds of planning a terrorist operation, or something like that. Photographing police officers has never been illegal in Britian, neither has it been illegal to photograph any public place per se in the last years. There has been trouble with regards to the police's (or perhaps the home office, I can't recall) ability to designate certain areas as areas where photographers are subject to stop&search. It's been a problem in the subway and in proximity of important buildings like parliament.

I love the response I got from a police officer at Trondheim Airport V?rnes a couple of months ago. I asked him if photography was alloved.

"You're alloved to bring your camera, so you're alloved to take photos."

My - o my how simple and perfect an answer!
 

nomix

True Viking
Joined
May 26, 2005
Messages
7,293
Location
Norway
Car(s)
Tend do walk the 40 meters from my bed to lecture.
Then you should challenge such silly-business.
 

British_Rover

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2006
Messages
4,293
Location
Torrington, CT United States
Car(s)
2005 Gr Cherokee, dealer demo
Top