DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> Transportation photos got me kicked out
Pages:  
Showing posts 51 - 69 of 69, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 12/31/2005 10:28:31 PM · #51
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

And, losing our freedoms is exactly what the terrorists want.


Actually, the stated mission on all Al Qaeda websites is to "Destroy all the infidels, and establish a one world Sharia Islamic Government."

I guess that includes the freedom to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness..." too.
 12/31/2005 10:30:05 PM · #52
Originally posted by wavelength:

Actually, the CIA did find a few of them. They couldn't do anything about it, or share info because of barriers that the Clinton admin put in place. It was called project Able Danger.


Which actually prove part of my point. Flagging, wire-tapping, whatever half ass measure we try to put in place will not work.

We either have freedom and live with the inherent danger of a free society or totally limit freedom and live in a totalitarian state where suspects are brought in and tortured until they give us the info.

Anything in between serves nobody....I know which world I want to live in.
 12/31/2005 10:30:05 PM · #53
Originally posted by wavelength:
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

And, losing our freedoms is exactly what the terrorists want.


Actually, the stated mission on all Al Qaeda websites is to "Destroy all the infidels, and establish a one world Sharia Islamic Government."

I guess that includes the freedom to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness..." too.


I know I said I was done but thats what they are taking away from you....
 12/31/2005 10:39:14 PM · #54
Originally posted by radionin:


I know I said I was done but thats what they are taking away from you....


Actually, i'd give up the rigth to photograph a bridge or whatever, get searched at the airport, to make sure some guys hijack a plane and kill my wife and kids, or blow up the bridge I'm driving across.

I have my life today, and so do you hokie, you're internet is impaired. You have legal recourse, but I'm not a lawyer so I can't advise you thre. I'm free to drive around, be with my family, practice my own religion without someone threatening my for doing any of those things. If the Islamo-facists were to take over, all this wiretapping crap looks like a cake walk.

Take a nude picture - dead.
Practice religion other than islam - dead.
Cross a mullah in any way - dead.
You wanna believe in Evolution or teach it? - Dead.

I think I see quite a few freedoms left thanks.

Message edited by author 2005-12-31 22:41:21.
 12/31/2005 10:42:28 PM · #55
Originally posted by wavelength:
Originally posted by radionin:


I know I said I was done but thats what they are taking away from you....


Actually, i'd give up the rigth to photograph a bridge to make sure some guys hijack a plane and kill my wife and kids.

I have my life today, and so do you hokie, you're internet is impaired. You have legal recourse, but I'm not a lawyer so I can't advise you thre. I'm free to drive around, be with my family, practice my own religion without someone threatening my for doing any of those things. If the Islamo-facists were to take over, all this wiretapping crap looks like a cake walk.

Take a nude picture - dead.
Practice religion other than islam - dead.
Cross a mullah in any way - dead.
You wanna believe in Evolution or teach it? - Dead.

I think I see quite a few freedoms left thanks.


Thats what you say until you get a flag on you when you didn't do anything wroung and your tourted for information that you don't know.
 12/31/2005 10:47:55 PM · #56
Originally posted by radionin:
.......Thats what you say until you get a flag on you when you didn't do anything wroung and your tourted for information that you don't know.


This is the kind of random generalization that irks me.... Could you perhaps be a tad more specific in your submission and give us concrete examples, replete with time and location of where these wonderful transgressions occured. Anything less mere speculation on your part.

Ray
 12/31/2005 10:51:36 PM · #57
Originally posted by radionin:

Thats what you say until you get a flag on you when you didn't do anything wroung and your tourted for information that you don't know.


Oh, wow.

Now the Bushie digital brownshirts are torturing people inside the US. That's rich.

If it did happen, I'd rather have someone rip up my bible, or throw it down the toilet than rape my wife in front of me like Saddams goons used to do. Oh, no, I might have to stand up until my legs can't hold me up. At leat they're not breaking them like they do in the Sudan.

The McCain law that just passed limited our version "torture" even further though. Call it "torture-light" which involves no pain that would actually

I got flagged last week. I was doing 38 in a 20. $185. If I had no insurance, they'd flag me some more and make me get some, and file an SR22 every month for a year.

hokie, you know why this came about, and it sucks, but that doesn't change the fact that these people are actually trying to protect you, not to secure their govermental power like a facist regime would. There's really no comparison at this point. The moment that changes, I'm all with you for revolting.
 12/31/2005 10:51:40 PM · #58
You will never, ever..as in never..get me to concede some freedom for security..that is a total mirage.

People in the United States must be living in some kind of dream fog to think that the kinds of behaviour our government has been involved in is a good thing.

10 million illegal aliens living in the United States, a number that is growing by half a million a year. Thus, the illegal-alien population in 2005 stands at at least 10 million. Included in this estimate are approximately 78,000 illegal aliens from countries who are of special concern in the war on terror. It is important to note that the 500,000 annual increase is the net growth in the illegal-alien population (new illegal immigration minus deaths, legalizations, and out-migration). In 1999 for example, the INS estimates that 968,000 new illegal aliens settled in the U.S.

Literally millions of people are here in the United States with little or no information on them.

We can't keep our borders patrolled..and we are gonna give up the freedoms of actual citizens for some supposed protection?

No..that argument don't fly for one minute.

Message edited by author 2005-12-31 22:53:31.
 12/31/2005 10:53:45 PM · #59
I have been here for a few years now (on this site) and the forums are getting more argumentitive all the time. Someone seems to always have a beef and whinning. It is too bad this was a very good site and I have learned so much from so many of you, but this is a long ways off track. There is still nothing wrong with dicussing things and having an opinion, but where do you draw the line ?

I was born in Canada as were my parents and their parents, and I like it here. I also like it in the states. The USA has many things going for it that I would love to be able to have here. Our hands are tied too , maybe Radionin just doesn't realize that yet because of his age(no disrepect intended) but the more you try to do here the more you are told no. At least in most of the USA if they did have a terrorist banging on the door you can fight back with your legal firearm.

So many contries are represented here and I am sure all of them have wonderful reasons for loving where they live and would defend it, and would also be pissed if they were the guy at the airport who was flagged, or the one who was asked not to take pictures of a train and such. Unbfortunately they randomly stop people for checks in the airports, yes I would be mad as hell too, but it happens. The trainseems over board, but I have not had the same problems with groups trying to harm us as they have, so I guess I can understand.

Starting to ramble must leave now!!

Anyway it will be 2006 very soon for all of us I wish you all the best.

Mike
 12/31/2005 10:55:31 PM · #60
Oh, speaking of facist regimes protecting their power.

The only reason it seems that Clinton via Jaime Garrelic ordered the CIA not to share any info at all with the FBI, is to keep anyone in the FBI from finding out about illegal foreign campaign contributions that Clinton recieved.
 12/31/2005 11:00:03 PM · #61
Originally posted by wavelength:
Oh, speaking of facist regimes protecting their power.

The only reason it seems that Clinton via Jaime Garrelic ordered the CIA not to share any info at all with the FBI, is to keep anyone in the FBI from finding out about illegal foreign campaign contributions that Clinton recieved.


Please don't let this very important discussion degrade into a "Clinton was worse than Bush" debate....Both were/are pigs...nuff said. The United States will never vote men like Bill Bradley or Bob Dole into office...no..it's always McDonalds over healthier fare.
 12/31/2005 11:05:25 PM · #62
When freedom is compromised, then it's reign is no longer strong. And the bad guy has won.
 12/31/2005 11:06:04 PM · #63
Originally posted by hokie:
You will never, ever..as in never..get me to concede some freedom for security..that is a total mirage.

People in the United States must be living in some kind of dream fog to think that the kinds of behaviour our government has been involved in is a good thing.

10 million illegal aliens living in the United States, a number that is growing by half a million a year. Thus, the illegal-alien population in 2005 stands at at least 10 million. Included in this estimate are approximately 78,000 illegal aliens from countries who are of special concern in the war on terror. It is important to note that the 500,000 annual increase is the net growth in the illegal-alien population (new illegal immigration minus deaths, legalizations, and out-migration). In 1999 for example, the INS estimates that 968,000 new illegal aliens settled in the U.S.

Literally millions of people are here in the United States with little or no information on them.

We can't keep our borders patrolled..and we are gonna give up the freedoms of actual citizens for some supposed protection?

No..that argument don't fly for one minute.


I can understand that, and don't disagree with you really, it think the line is a little more gray, you don't.

And I completely agree with you about the borders being too porus. The local republican candidate here ran on a "border security" platform. The people went with the same centrist democrat (who had done NOTHING in the senate BTW) yet again.

I believe you have to give up some things for total freedom. Look at the wild west, no security whatsoever. People had to change and give up some of those freedoms to attain security, and to actually attain the freedoms of lif, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Means more taxes, more government, more police watching everyone. But these are things the people put in place to protect themselves.

This is why gun laws are so important really. In the case of the goverment being too big-headed, and taking too much freedom away, the founding fathers knew that local militias would need to protect the people from the government. Same thing with the constitutional separation of powers, and all the other checks and balances they put in place.

There is a fine balance between freedom, anarchy, and fascism. You have to draw the line somewhere. I don't think we've crossed it yet.
 12/31/2005 11:07:03 PM · #64
Originally posted by hokie:
Originally posted by wavelength:
Oh, speaking of facist regimes protecting their power.

The only reason it seems that Clinton via Jaime Garrelic ordered the CIA not to share any info at all with the FBI, is to keep anyone in the FBI from finding out about illegal foreign campaign contributions that Clinton recieved.


Please don't let this very important discussion degrade into a "Clinton was worse than Bush" debate....Both were/are pigs...nuff said. The United States will never vote men like Bill Bradley or Bob Dole into office...no..it's always McDonalds over healthier fare.


agreed.
 12/31/2005 11:13:05 PM · #65
We can forget the idea of local militia protecting us against a corrupt government.

If anybody thinks for one minute that the federal and state government will stand for an armed public to "take back" the government people must actually be smoking something stronger than weed.

The only way we protect our rights is fighting against the gradual erosion that occurs as part of the way government promises greater security and safety for our "Family and Children".

Look...start with something we all can understand.

The standard response to illegal immigration has been increased border enforcement. And, in fact, such tightening of the border is long overdue. But there has been almost no attention paid to enforcement at worksites within the United States. Nor has there been any recognition that the networks created by high levels of legal immigration contribute to mass illegal immigration.

Even President Bush won't tackle illegal immigration because his constituents in Texas actaully need the spanish vote. Oh well..it' pointless to talk about it. The average voter can't tell you the policies of the people they vote for much less know some of the root causes of many of our problems in the U.S.

Message edited by author 2005-12-31 23:13:40.
 12/31/2005 11:26:50 PM · #66
Originally posted by hokie:
We can forget the idea of local militia protecting us against a corrupt government.

If anybody thinks for one minute that the federal and state government will stand for an armed public to "take back" the government people must actually be smoking something stronger than weed.

The only way we protect our rights is fighting against the gradual erosion that occurs as part of the way government promises greater security and safety for our "Family and Children".

Look...start with something we all can understand.

The standard response to illegal immigration has been increased border enforcement. And, in fact, such tightening of the border is long overdue. But there has been almost no attention paid to enforcement at worksites within the United States. Nor has there been any recognition that the networks created by high levels of legal immigration contribute to mass illegal immigration.

Even President Bush won't tackle illegal immigration because his constituents in Texas actaully need the spanish vote. Oh well..it' pointless to talk about it. The average voter can't tell you the policies of the people they vote for much less know some of the root causes of many of our problems in the U.S.


That's funny that you brought that up. I just heard some administration official say that they ARE doing those exact things. Cracking down on business owners and whatnot. They're not shutting down the border for a few reasons. You'd have to call out the National Guards of several states to do that right away. We could probably shut the sucker down in about 24 hours if we wanted to do that. Spend a couple years buidling walls and guard towers. Keep the national guard on tap until the Mexican goverment specail forces stop protecting drug runners and coyotes and shooting at border police. But at what cost? We'd turn the entire border red for months, and create a huge international stink.

What we're doing apparently, is to let them come in, monitor the communications that reach them from known bad sources, and then capture them on our home turf. Then we can interrogate them and see if we can find out how to get the big bosses. It's a huge fly trap right now. And the NSA actions have caught and convicted people of being Al Qaeda spies.

I agree about the militia thing. But I don't think anyone in the US army Marines, Navy, or whatever would accept a total facist state either. You'd have units across the country defecting into a civil war. That's why the recent attempts at mass base closures are also disconcerting. People are like "Why does the center of the country need military bases", to give us firepower that's why. Like I said, delicate balances are shifting.
 01/01/2006 12:07:36 AM · #67
Inaccurately attributed to Benjamin Franklin, but nevertheless very true:

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

Franklin (a printer) published this, but said he did not write it.

This statement was used as a motto on the title page of An Historical Review of the Constitution and Government of Pennsylvania. (1759) which was attributed to Franklin in the edition of 1812, but in a letter of September 27, 1760 to David Hume, he states that he published this book and denies that he wrote it, other than a few remarks that were credited to the Pennsylvania Assembly, in which he served. The phrase itself was first used in a letter from that Assembly dated November 11, 1755 to the Governor of Pennsylvania. An article on the origins of this statement here includes a scan that indicates the original typography of the 1759 document. Researchers now believe that a fellow diplomat by the name of Richard Jackson to be the primary author of the book. With the information thus far available the issue of authorship of the statement is not yet definitely resolved, but the evidence indicates it could well have been Franklin.

R.

Message edited by author 2006-01-01 00:07:54.
 01/01/2006 02:52:25 AM · #68
Originally posted by wavelength:
Originally posted by radionin:
I can't belive you guys down in the states allow that type of harsment.. I don't want to start a big political thread but man somethings need to change down there. Not ment to offened


it's not that big a deal, the cop probably didn't know what they were talking about anyways. as long as they didn't arrest him or something who cares?

That's no where near the story about they guy going into Canada and getting all the photo's on his laptop "examined" for hours on end by customs officers, including nudes of his significant other. Ya'll must have problems up there, I can't believe you'd accept that kind of harrasment.

I'd rather have a stupid cop trying to protect the country and it's citizens than a stupid cop looking for porn on my laptop.


I've learned to mostly ignore it wavelength. Anti-Americanism has been preached to Canadians for years. No matter what we do we are the devils to the south and have many more things to fear from our Government than they do theirs.

//www.canadafreepress.com/2004/main060704.htm

Not all Canadians of course. Many have learned to think for themselves and do realize that we all can be victims of our own politicians agendas. However, some seem to still think that whatever the Canadian government does is justified and whatever the American does is negative and bad for the world. The replies in this thread are a great case in point.


01/01/2006 04:18:54 AM · #69
Smile...

Tiger Woods practicing on the tee notices this pretty young lassy trying to hit a straight shot. But every one of her shots.... slice!
After a while he goes to her and offers some advise. Slice. He puts her hands in the correct position. Slice. Says a little frustrated Tiger, 'I see you are married, so I feel I may be more honest and forthcoming. Listen carefully, the best advise to you would be to see the shaft of the club as, and hold it like you would hold your husband's, ... uhm... well... penis'. Whack, straight shot, as straight as an arrow. 'Okay', says Tiger, 'now take it out of mouth and let's try it again..."

Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/27/2025 05:18:07 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/27/2025 05:18:07 PM EDT.