Snapshots of Afghanistan - August 2009

Discussion in '35mm Cameras' started by Kulvinder Singh Matharu, Aug 26, 2009.

  1. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    tony cooper Guest

    News flash for you Chris: I haven't voted for a Republican for state
    or national office for decades. We have local elections for offices
    like "Seminole County Tax Assessor" where I might vote for a
    Republican, though.
    I'm not going to waste my time attempting to correct Bill's
    misstatements.
    Why would I be interested in uk.current-events.terrorism? If I was
    interested in conspiracy kooks, we have enough home-grown ones.

    "What has some local inter-party politics of a foreign country got to
    do with photography?" ChrisH - 13 September 2009
     
    tony cooper, Sep 13, 2009
    1. Advertisements

  2. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    Rol_Lei Nut Guest

    It's a very well-known fact that presence at demonstrations is usually
    somewhere between the (lower) police estimate and the (higher)
    demonstration organizer's estimate.

    The police figure is typically proportionately lower according to how
    much the demonstrators' goals are in contrast with the current government's.
     
    Rol_Lei Nut, Sep 13, 2009
    1. Advertisements

  3. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    tony cooper Guest

    It's not a fact. It's an assumption. A well-founded assumption, and
    one I wouldn't disagree with, but you can't establish a fact without
    some way to prove the fact.
    Any crowd estimation figure is likely wide one way or the other. This
    is especially true in a demonstration where people move around. The
    same people may be counted more than one time, or the method of
    counting may wrongly estimate this factor. It's not like the people
    are tagged and released.

    Another problem with crowd estimation is who releases the figures.
    The police may want the figure to justify the deployment of personnel
    and the expense of over-time and bringing in personnel from outlying
    areas. Government officials may want to minimize the figure to play
    down the problem. The organizers want to puff up the figures.

    My problem with Chris's statement is that he has jumped on the
    organizer's figure (and added to that) because it goes along with his
    biases. Simultaneously, there's a discussion about Fox News presenting
    biased news coverage with Chris condemning Fox News. Yet, he's doing
    the same thing.

    If Chris thinks "fair and balanced" is the right way to report events,
    then Chris should start being fair and balanced himself.
     
    tony cooper, Sep 13, 2009
  4. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    DRS Guest

    Indeed. You would *never* eat caviar with Chianti.
     
    DRS, Sep 14, 2009
  5. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Like any murderous sociopath, graham is quite willing to kill anybody
    that gets in the way of his selfishness. In that regard he is very
    much like al Qaeda terrorists.
     
    Ray Fischer, Sep 14, 2009
  6. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    stephe_k Guest


    Actually, he didn't believe it but was ordered to go anyway, so he did.

    I was trying to tell GWB to wait for the UN to finish their search of
    the country. Instead he told the world "Get the F out of our way, we're
    going in anyway!"
    Huh? GWB was claiming he DID see things no one else was seeing and you
    believed him!

    There is plenty of evidence he was TOLD there were NO WMD but he said
    their was as an excuse to attack. Him and Cheney MULTIPLE times said "We
    can't forget 9/11" trying to wind the public up behind his war. Now of
    course people forget or want to say "oh yeah, well of course it had
    nothing to do with 9/11" but that wasn't the sales pitch GWB used on the
    American people.

    Stephanie
     
    stephe_k, Sep 14, 2009
  7. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    stephe_k Guest

    Actually what has happened is they have allowed the insurance companies
    to do "price fixing" which is normally illegal to do. Insurance is the
    ONLY industry that this is legal.

    Insurance company lobbies paid enough money to gov officials so they are
    allowed to do this price fixing.

    The only way to stop lobbyists control is to end them being allowed to
    give "campain contributions", which those guys would never vote to stop.

    EVERYONE in government is to blame, dem or repub for this being like it
    is. Given the huge power and money the insurance companies have to buy
    votes for them to operate the way they do, the ONLY way to stop this
    now, it to just take it away from them.

    Stephanie
     
    stephe_k, Sep 14, 2009
  8. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    stephe_k Guest


    Well I consider myself learning towards liberal but I blame the
    congressmen for taking the money too. I sure don't blame the bribers,
    they are just doing their job, which I would also do if I was in their
    position. It is TOTALLY the people who take these bribes fault as the
    bribers wouldn't exist if they didn't take the money.

    That said, you didn't answer any of the points in my post about
    insurance companies -RIGHT NOW- are the "death panel" people blame Obama
    wants to create and IMHO would be much more likely to cancel your policy
    or limit what services someone can receive based on their interest in
    profits, than the gov would be. The gov is used to spending in the red
    with no thought to making a profit.

    Stephanie
     
    stephe_k, Sep 14, 2009
  9. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    Chris H Guest

    Bush also
     
    Chris H, Sep 14, 2009
  10. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    Chris H Guest

    MOST of the world did NOT believe it. They were proved right.
    You were wrong. This should tell you that your judgement in these maters
    is flawed.
    No, just see what most of us could see... it was OBVIOUS but his
    *political* aims required an invasion of Iraq no matter what the excuse.

    No they are not. G W Bush was more stupid than most.
     
    Chris H, Sep 14, 2009
  11. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    Chris H Guest

    No it is a fact in the UK.
    Equivocation....

    Http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2765041.stm

    says the police estimate of 750,000.... however that was for the march
    itself. But all other estimations put it higher.

    Due to the Police most people went direct to the rally at the end of the
    march. That is where the 2 million comes from. At the time *everyone*
    disputed the Police number and pointed out they did not count those at
    the rally, only on the march. It was quite a controversy in the UK.

    There were parallel marches and protests in 150 other UK cites at the
    same time, whilst these were only 10's of thousands it was estimated
    that nearly 3 million protested in the UK that day.

    BTW the figure for the world wide Anti War protests on that day was 350
    million.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_protests_against_war_on_Iraq_(pre-
    war)

    Says 3 million in Rome alone

    Lets face it most of the world knew it was a crock of shit and have been
    proved right. It is pathetic that some people in the US cling to the
    propaganda they were fed despite all the evidence to the contrary.
     
    Chris H, Sep 14, 2009
  12. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    Chris H Guest

    The BBC who said it was 2 million total ant eh met had only counted
    those on the march not at the rally
     
    Chris H, Sep 14, 2009
  13. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    Chris H Guest

    That is true. So it follows there could be film too.
    Yes and no. But there was a lot of film and pictures taken
     
    Chris H, Sep 14, 2009
  14. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    Ray Fischer Guest

    The question for the 9/11 commission: If the CIA was able to get
    that close to bin Laden before 9/11, why wasn't he captured or
    killed? The videotape has remained secret until now.

    Apparently graham is someone who thinks that murder is a good idea.
    Before 9/11 there wasn't justification for doing anything to bin
    Laden, and killing him would indeed have been murder and an
    international act of terrorism.
     
    Ray Fischer, Sep 14, 2009
  15. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    Ray Fischer Guest

    graham assumes that everybody is as scared and bloodthirsty as he is.
     
    Ray Fischer, Sep 14, 2009
  16. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    Rol_Lei Nut Guest

    And the audience chosen by Goebbels for his 1943 "total war" speech were
    happy & enthusiastic as well...

    Are you really as ignorant as your posts indicate?
     
    Rol_Lei Nut, Sep 14, 2009
  17. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    Rol_Lei Nut Guest

    Repeating (again!!!) what has been said over & over:
    Millions around the World saw through those lies and took part in vast,
    record-breaking marches against the war (I was one such march in Paris
    at the time).

    Just because *you* and your ilk are easily duped (as you make clearer
    with each post) doesn't mean that it takes a genius not to be...
     
    Rol_Lei Nut, Sep 14, 2009
  18. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    Chris H Guest

    That is strange
    No... Apparently apart from Fox all the reports say the same...

    So either Fox is the only one telling the truth and ALL the worlds press
    are in a conspiracy.... (strange how often that claim is made) or Fox is
    pushing propaganda as has been apparent so often before.
     
    Chris H, Sep 14, 2009
  19. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    Chris H Guest

    NOT and certainly not the intelligence services.
    As I have said many times unlike the Soviet population the average
    American has no idea when he is being fed propaganda. Your proposition
    seems to be directly supporting this. Thanks
    It was discussed very widely OUT SIDE THE US. Most of the world saw
    through it . There were (very large) mass demonstrations in virtually
    very capital city in the free world.

    In Most European countries the vast majority saw through it as
    propaganda.
     
    Chris H, Sep 14, 2009
  20. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    tony cooper Guest

    I'm a bit confused by all these reports about "Fox" being biased.

    I have cable-provided television. There are two Fox channels that
    carry a local affiliate that carries regular entertainment
    programming and news, and a channel called "Fox News" that carries
    mostly commentators (Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, etc.) and news
    segments.

    I have to admit that I don't watch the news segments on either channel
    very often, and I *never* watch the commentators like O'Reilly and
    Hannity. The local affiliate's news segment is partially local news
    and partially national/international news. The Fox News channel's
    news segment is all national/international news.

    The very few times I've watched the national/international news on
    either of these channels, I haven't noticed any particular bias. My
    exposure has been very limited, though.

    Now the commentators are a different story. O'Reilly, Hannity, et al,
    are screaming right-wing, conservative Republican blowhards. When I
    say "I never watch them", I mean I never watch their entire show.
    I've seen enough snippets of their bullshit, though, to know what they
    are all about.

    So what's this all about with the "Fox bias"? The Fox News channel
    shows bias by airing only the O'Reilly/Hannity crap, but these are
    commentators. Anyone with any sense knows that commentators are
    presenting opinions, not news. It's the difference between the
    editorial columns and the news stories in the newspaper.

    Who is being charged with bias at Fox? The news readers on the
    regular news or the commentators?

    Is Fox News and the commentators like O'Reilly and Hannity carried by
    some channel in the UK? Is Chris basing his comments on programming
    that he has actually watched, or is this another one of those things
    where Chris is accepting what he wants to believe?
     
    tony cooper, Sep 14, 2009
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.