PDA

View Full Version : George W Bush



Alex H
04-20-2004, 05:35 AM
What an sad picture.
Image Resized
[img]http://www.michaelmoore.com/_media/images/special/war_president_high.jpg' width='200' height='120' border='0' alt='click for full size view'> ('http://www.michaelmoore.com/_media/images/special/war_president_high.jpg')

bucky
04-20-2004, 09:50 AM
Hmmmm. . . .I don't get what's sad about it. Who's the folks in it besides the moron himself?


This is sad. :P

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-4/703705/stupid.jpg

Alex H
04-21-2004, 01:13 AM
Those are all the faces of US soldiers who have died in Iraq.

George Bush has not been to one funeral of a US soldier killed in the war. You hope he would have made a bit of a effort.

Money Fist
04-21-2004, 01:20 AM
i h8 people who are PRO anti bush
just as buggy as road protesters

but hey
i dunno why he never went any funerals
seems odd
maybe he was scared of angry mothers

hobbes
04-21-2004, 01:24 AM
Originally posted by Alex H@21 April 2004 - 02:13
Those are all the faces of US soldiers who have died in Iraq.

George Bush has not been to one funeral of a US soldier killed in the war. You hope he would have made a bit of a effort.
Too bad you couldn't have used puppy dog faces.

Nothing but utter stock response tripe.

A point could be well made about the war, but to use those photographs to make some sort of sappy statement is just pathetic.

It is an attack on human emotion, nothing more, the basest type of exploitation to win people over. Just simply pathetic.

This coming from a person who has never liked Bush and will never vote for him.

I just hate crap like this. It is propaganda, nothing less. No integrity, just agenda driven emotional manipulation. You will definitely drive people away from your point, rather than towards it with shit like this.

More than that, it is disingenous, the matrix is 30x47 making it equal 1410 or so killed. This is wrong and you can see that the same faces are used over and over agian. Look at the far right row, count down to 29 and 34, same picture.

Thanks for this total piece of shit. I love those people who find some anti-Bush links and post them and giggle. No integrity, just agenda.

Alex H
04-21-2004, 01:48 AM
Originally posted by hobbes
It is an attack on human emotion, nothing more, the basest type of exploitation to win people over. Just simply pathetic.
Oh, like "These terrorists killed 3000 people and we have to avenge them by killing Afganis and Iraqis?"

Bush has used the emotion card and it worked on the American people, who gave him licence to go to war and put everyone under constant surveilance.

You'll have to forgive people who think that fighting back with the same tricks is the only way to get him out of office.

Oh, btw, I know there are doubles. I didn't create it, but it does include some UK soldiers as well.

Perhaps the artist should just wait a few more weeks until there are enough casualties for doubles to be unnecsesary?

hobbes
04-21-2004, 01:55 AM
Originally posted by Alex H+21 April 2004 - 02:48--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Alex H &#064; 21 April 2004 - 02:48)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-hobbes
It is an attack on human emotion, nothing more, the basest type of exploitation to win people over. Just simply pathetic.
Oh, like "These terrorists killed 3000 people and we have to avenge them by killing Afganis and Iraqis?"

Bush has used the emotion card and it worked on the American people, who gave him licence to go to war and put everyone under constant surveilance.

You&#39;ll have to forgive people who think that fighting back with the same tricks is the only way to get him out of office.

Oh, btw, I know there are doubles. I didn&#39;t create it, but it does include some UK soldiers as well.

Perhaps the artist should just wait a few more weeks until there are enough casualties for doubles to be unnecsesary?[/b][/quote]
Imitation is the most sincere form of flattery.

You accuse George of being a certain way, yet you counter him by mimicry, absolutely hypocrital and absolutely agenda driven.

And, btw, absolutely pathetic.

If you cannot make your point without attempting to manipulate or lie, then STFU because you are no better than the man you wish to denigrate.

Is that difficult to understand, at all.

Lead by example, lead with class and integrity, and you will reach your audience.

Post shit like this and you will alienate would-be allies.

Busyman
04-21-2004, 02:12 AM
Originally posted by Alex H+20 April 2004 - 21:48--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Alex H @ 20 April 2004 - 21:48)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-hobbes
It is an attack on human emotion, nothing more, the basest type of exploitation to win people over. Just simply pathetic.
Oh, like "These terrorists killed 3000 people and we have to avenge them by killing Afganis and Iraqis?"

Bush has used the emotion card and it worked on the American people, who gave him licence to go to war and put everyone under constant surveilance.

You&#39;ll have to forgive people who think that fighting back with the same tricks is the only way to get him out of office.

Oh, btw, I know there are doubles. I didn&#39;t create it, but it does include some UK soldiers as well.

Perhaps the artist should just wait a few more weeks until there are enough casualties for doubles to be unnecsesary? [/b][/quote]
There you go again with that "American people" shit.

I don&#39;t even like Bush but you Alex are screwed up.

You don&#39;t even have your fucking facts straight.

The American people can&#39;t vote on whether we go to war or not...or it wouldn&#39;t have happened. It almost sounds like Spain.

You had this in World News at first.
What was so Worldnewsworthy? "Ooo look, a picture&#33;&#33;&#33;" <_<

The difference between most Americans on this board and people like you Alex is that we do see both sides. When people say they like Bush it reminds me of folks in movies that blindly follow the anti-christ (yes...that bad). He is so inept, makes obvious budget decisions for the rich, and has started a war with bullshit proof.
I DON&#39;T LIKE HIM....probably more than you don&#39;t since him being in office affects me more than it does you.

You on the other hand are like a brainwashed Palestinian child, who runs into a crowded mall with a bomb on his back.

vidcc
04-21-2004, 02:26 AM
It is an attack on human emotion, nothing more, the basest type of exploitation to win people over. Just simply pathetic.


I&#39;m undecided on this point hobbes...if the families of those men agreed to the use of the faces then fair enough.


it is political fair game in my mind, after all Bush uses images from the events of 9:11 to help his campaign. I&#39;m sure somewhere pictures of the victims of the holocaust were used to make a similar picture of hitler....i am not saying Bush is anything like Hitler. But i do believe that as someone that sent these men to war and ultimately their deaths he should be reminded of the cost of his decisions..if a picture like this is the way to do it or not.

It is no secret that i don&#39;t like Bush, but it&#39;s because of his handling of things at home more than the wars. One thing that i find reprehensable and find hard to believe is his failure to attend at least one funeral, there is no excuse. Perhaps the families of these men should all send videos or photos to Bush to make sure he realises that these were living breathing humans with families that loved them.

hobbes
04-21-2004, 02:34 AM
Originally posted by vidcc@21 April 2004 - 03:26

It is an attack on human emotion, nothing more, the basest type of exploitation to win people over. Just simply pathetic.


I&#39;m undecided on this point hobbes...if the families of those men agreed to the use of the faces then fair enough.


it is political fair game in my mind, after all Bush uses images from the events of 9:11 to help his campaign. I&#39;m sure somewhere pictures of the victims of the holocaust were used to make a similar picture of hitler....i am not saying Bush is anything like Hitler. But i do believe that as someone that sent these men to war and ultimately their deaths he should be reminded of the cost of his decisions..if a picture like this is the way to do it or not.

It is no secret that i don&#39;t like Bush, but it&#39;s because of his handling of things at home more than the wars. One thing that i find reprehensable and find hard to believe is his failure to attend at least one funeral, there is no excuse. Perhaps the families of these men should all send videos or photos to Bush to make sure he realises that these were living breathing humans with families that loved them.
Deception is deception, that is my point, as clearly stated.

I don&#39;t remember a picture of Bin Laden with a picture of dead American comprising it, with an entirely larger scale, without repeats.

It is all about integrity. If there are repeats, let people know. Come totally clean.

I don&#39;t like Bush, did you see that?

I just oppose bullshit to fight bullshit.

It is fine to oppose Bush, but to use deceit to do so makes you no better than the man you oppose.

Alex H
04-21-2004, 03:29 AM
To hobbes - Fair enough, you made your point and I agree with it - again, I didn&#39;t create the picture, I just posted it here to see what other people thought.

To Busyman -
Originally posted by Busyman
You don&#39;t even have your fucking facts straight.

The American people can&#39;t vote on whether we go to war or not...or it wouldn&#39;t have happened. It almost sounds like Spain.

Check out what the opinion polls were saying after 9/11. Two days after 9/11 and Bush spouting off about his war on terror (and just happening to mention Iraq a lot), 34% of you guys thought Saddam Hussein was involved&#33;

Bush said he wanted a war and the American people backed him.

Don&#39;t call me stupid because the rest of the world thinks the American people are idiots. Steve Kull, director of the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland thinks Americans may be avoiding having an experience of cognitive dissonance, i.e. having their beliefs conflict with the facts.

Philadelphia Inquirer (http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/front/6085261.htm?1c)

vidcc
04-21-2004, 03:45 AM
Hobbes.
i didn&#39;t suggest you do like bush....perhaps someone here might find a picture in the same area with bin laden ..just because we haven&#39;t seen it doesn&#39;t mean it hasn&#39;t been done. that said there are millions of bin laden pictures that both revile and ridicule him.
As to the repeating of faces.....i would rather the faces needed to be repeated than have more dead faces on it :(

It was just the picture shown, i wonder what the original context in which it was placed was?

I don&#39;t think for one moment that this picture would have any changing effect on the general viewer....pro bush will poo poo it as a cheap shot..anti bush as a vivid reminder of his actions, i can&#39;t see anyone changing their mind and i give people the credit for knowing their own minds and being able to make up those mind for themselves. One could even argue that the picture is pro bush...making the statement that these people that gave their lives are on his mind..who knows with art?
Just a thought, would the same reaction occur if say j2k4 or busyman had posted the picture instead of Alex H (sorry for using your names but i needed a credible example and am not suggesting that you actually would post such a picture)

Alex H
04-21-2004, 04:03 AM
Originally posted by Busyman
You had this in World News at first.
What was so Worldnewsworthy? "Ooo look, a picture&#33;&#33;&#33;"&nbsp;

Are you suggesting that anything which isn&#39;t text-based is not newsworthy? I would say there are thousands of photojournalists out there who would disagree with you.

Were these pictures not "newsworthy"?
http://homepages.unl.ac.uk/~westwelg/fm318/resources/images/immolation.jpg

http://homepages.unl.ac.uk/~westwelg/fm318/resources/images/execution.jpg

http://homepages.unl.ac.uk/~westwelg/fm318/resources/images/kimphuc.jpg

http://www.gbkgraphics.com/digger/execution1.jpg


They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Next time, why don&#39;t you just post a hyperlink instead of writing a page of crap?

Busyman
04-21-2004, 05:29 AM
Originally posted by Alex H+20 April 2004 - 23:29--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Alex H &#064; 20 April 2004 - 23:29)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> To hobbes - Fair enough, you made your point and I agree with it - again, I didn&#39;t create the picture, I just posted it here to see what other people thought.

To Busyman - <!--QuoteBegin-Busyman
You don&#39;t even have your fucking facts straight.

The American people can&#39;t vote on whether we go to war or not...or it wouldn&#39;t have happened. It almost sounds like Spain.

Check out what the opinion polls were saying after 9/11. Two days after 9/11 and Bush spouting off about his war on terror (and just happening to mention Iraq a lot), 34% of you guys thought Saddam Hussein was involved&#33;

Bush said he wanted a war and the American people backed him.

Don&#39;t call me stupid because the rest of the world thinks the American people are idiots. Steve Kull, director of the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland thinks Americans may be avoiding having an experience of cognitive dissonance, i.e. having their beliefs conflict with the facts.

Philadelphia Inquirer (http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/front/6085261.htm?1c) [/b][/quote]
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Damn Alex you are funny&#33;&#33;&#33;

We Americans also know that polls are bullshit. It&#39;s a pure media tool.
No one asked me or anyone I know these "questions". It&#39;s worse than Nielsen ratings.

It also crossed my mind as well as others that Saddam might be involved. So what&#33;&#33; I still didn&#39;t support a war for something that "crossed my mind". I believe there are forces in Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iran, the UK, and others that are conspiring against us.

You sprout shit about Americans wanting a war with Iraq and it has no basis. We were always thinking OBL. The only time that Congress bought into the Iraq bit was with that bullshit CIA intelligence (or should I say stupidity).

Alex get your fucking facts straight. Even Bush pushed WMD as his reason for Iraq, not 9/11. He used the emotional momentum of 9/11 if anything.
Again STFU. You know not what you are talking about.

Stay jealous in your hovel. :lol: :lol:


edit: I said your photo is not Worldnewsworthy....and it isn&#39;t.

gungrave
04-21-2004, 06:00 AM
Originally posted by Alex H@20 April 2004 - 05:35
What an sad picture.
Image Resized
Image Resized
[img]http://www.michaelmoore.com/_media/images/special/war_president_high.jpg' width='200' height='120' border='0' alt='click for full size view'> (http://www.michaelmoore.com/_media/images/special/war_president_high.jpg)
:angry: i h8 him i cant wait till he dies :angry:

Alex H
04-21-2004, 07:29 AM
Originally posted by Busyman
I said your photo is not Worldnewsworthy....and it isn&#39;t.

Oh yeah? Lets look at some of the amazingly "newsworthy" posts in World News at the moment:

Last Crimean War Veteran Passed Away
at age 160 (The dead tortise topic)

Kill Mom But Don&#39;t Hurt Tv
Teen Tells Hitman

Poisoned Toilet Paper

The Pig Is A Pig
Cop wins donut eating contest

9 Yr Old Arrested (Pages 1 2 )
for stealing a rabbit

Caution
Look In The Oven Before Cooking (The gun hidden in the oven story)

If crap like this is "Worldnewsworthy", would a post on the colour of my phlegm be out of place?

FuNkY CaPrIcOrN
04-21-2004, 07:33 AM
:D Well I think it is time we got this Thread closed.And I will be the one to help with that.Brb with some Pictures worth a thousand words.You want it in the Lounge.Well you got it. :D

FuNkY CaPrIcOrN
04-21-2004, 07:45 AM
:P Ohhh fuck it.You all have fun.Going to bed. :P

:D

FuNkY CaPrIcOrN
04-21-2004, 08:57 AM
;) No I have not gone to bed yet.Do not ask why.









Ohhhh I know why.









:unsure:









:P Only 37 more to go. :P

100%
04-21-2004, 08:58 AM
If you had put the picture into context at the very begining (not later)
as in explain - what the pic is made of, and put into a more social political awareness context-as for the title of the thread.....

instead of a pic of bush and stating " What an sad picture."
(you sig is more "Worldnewsworthy" than the a your statement)

on opening this post-my reaction is -this is another oneliner anti bush meaningless statement - please search google for 10000000000000s of these.

hobbes
04-21-2004, 10:51 PM
Originally posted by vidcc@21 April 2004 - 04:45
Just a thought, would the same reaction occur if say j2k4 or busyman had posted the picture instead of Alex H (sorry for using your names but i needed a credible example and am not suggesting that you actually would post such a picture)
Vidcc,

The picture comes from Micheal Moore&#39;s web-site, you figure out the intent and see if it meshes with the one-liner in the first post.

And "no", I am here to discuss issues, not pick sides.

Perhaps you are unaware that Busyboy and J2 are people I argue with from time to time.

leftism
04-21-2004, 11:09 PM
Originally posted by hobbes+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hobbes)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>The picture comes from Michal Moore&#39;s web-site.[/b]

So you must have noticed the total number of dead underneath the picture then?

How can you say it&#39;s intended to deceive people about the number of dead soldiers in Iraq when the total number of dead is directly below it? Doesn&#39;t that count as "coming clean"?

<!--QuoteBegin-Busyman
We Americans also know that polls are bullshit. It&#39;s a pure media tool.[/quote]

So... the majority of the American people did not support the war when it started?

hobbes
04-21-2004, 11:41 PM
Originally posted by leftism+22 April 2004 - 00:09--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (leftism &#064; 22 April 2004 - 00:09)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-hobbes
The picture comes from Michal Moore&#39;s web-site.

So you must have noticed the total number of dead underneath the picture then?

How can you say it&#39;s intended to deceive people about the number of dead soldiers in Iraq when the total number of dead is directly below it? Doesn&#39;t that count as "coming clean"?

[/b][/quote]
No, because it is not there, even if I copy and paste the link.

link (http://www.michaelmoore.com/_media/images/special/war_president_high.jpg)



But even so, it doesn&#39;t change the point I was making one iota, thanks for quibbling details and not getting the concepts.

Michael Moore is not responsible for the Iraq body count, the number is easily available. The goal of the picture&#39;s size and resolution was an attempt to manipulate the viewers mind. Wow, that&#39;s alot of people&#33;. They had to repeat people pictured, not mentioned either, by the way, to keep it from looking blocky and small. This might be "unimpressive" to the intended victims.

I actually had a somewhat supportive post about Michael Moore and Bowling at Columbine, but the more he uses stock response emotional manipulation, the more his methods turn me off to his message.

He shoots himself in the foot if he is trying to come across as an "enlightener". He is just a liar/manipulator, just like the other side.

leftism
04-22-2004, 12:40 AM
When the picture was on the frontpage yesterday the total number of dead was directly underneath it.


The goal of the picture&#39;s size and resolution was an attempt to manipulate the viewers mind. Wow, that&#39;s alot of people&#33;.

I disagree. The point of the photo, clearly, was not to inform people of the number of dead soldiers in Iraq. The point the author was making (imho) is that Bush is responsible for all those kids dying in an unnecessary war based on false intelligence.

It makes me wonder though.. is 709 people not "alot" in your opinion? Does the actual number really matter to the point the author of the picture is making? I don&#39;t think so.

It&#39;s an emotional subject that is bound to produce an emotional response. It doesn&#39;t automatically mean the author is a "liar/manipulator". That would depend on the authors sincerity and their own emotional reaction to the subject.

Your criticism is so fierce I thought you were talking about Bush using images of 9/11 in his re-election campaign or the Holocaust... ;)

hobbes
04-22-2004, 01:52 AM
I still think puppy dogs would have been more effective.

I have got a few more gears before I achieve "fierce". Imagine if I were a Republican who actually even liked Bush.

Perhaps my new avatar and profile are a little intimidating?

leftism
04-22-2004, 03:11 AM
Originally posted by hobbes+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hobbes)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I still think puppy dogs would have been more effective.
[/b]

Ah, so any point that makes people react emotionally is automatically invalid?

The 3 photos that Alex H posted show that this isn&#39;t the case. What about photos of the Holocaust? Do you classify them as "emotional agenda driven manipulation" as well? That kind of philosophy will land you in hot water with the JDL :)


Originally posted by hobbes@
I have got a few more gears before I achieve "fierce". Imagine if I were a Republican who actually even liked Bush.

You sure you&#39;re not? ;)

<!--QuoteBegin-hobbes

Perhaps my new avatar and profile are a little intimidating?
[/quote]

Terrifying. :)

Seriously though hobbes, you were almost hysterical for a while there. I was considering asking the mods for your location so I could send a nurse over to check your blood pressure. :D

"pathetic", " utter stock response tripe", " sappy statement", " attack on human emotion", "exploitation", "propaganda", "agenda driven emotional manipulation", "shit", " hypocrital", "manipulate", "lie", "deception"

All that because they didn&#39;t have a big sign on the photo saying "WE USED REPEATS". All that because the photo intends to make people have an emotional reaction to an emotional subject?

A slight overreaction to say the least...

hobbes
04-22-2004, 03:47 AM
Nope, just pathetic emotional manipulation. I hate it from either side, it insults my intelligence.

And yes, emotional manipulation means that you cannot let the facts stand alone. We get this from those who are interested in propaganda and agenda.

Photos of the holocaust are "documentation" of what has occurred ,as people still say it never happened. The pictures were not used to create a picture of God crying or a puppy dog whimpering, in a photomontage. They depicted reality.

How come this is not obvious to you?

Are you sure you are not letting your agenda obstruct your ability to understand the obvious?

As for Bush, can you find anything, anything, anything, that would show me supporting the man? In fact, you will find the contrary, so why should you think otherwise, agenda boy? If you cannot support your accusations then STFU, as we are innocent until proven guilty. It is a ploy of the scoundral to make baseless accusations to undermine and opponent, put the suspicion of doubt in the eyes of others.


From Alex H:

To hobbes - Fair enough, you made your point and I agree with it - again, I didn&#39;t create the picture

I guess someone got the point.

Alex H
04-22-2004, 03:51 AM
Just to remind you all, I said "What a sad picture".

I made no comment on whether doubles were used, the resolution or anything like that.

Its obvious that the picture is made up of the faces of soldiers killed in Iraq.

Again, perhaps the creator will be able to make another one in a few months without doubles. Will that affect the emotional response any differently?

sampson
04-22-2004, 04:03 AM
Or maybe the families of the deceased didn&#39;t want their funerals to a media circus. Also, here&#39;s some food for thought. This email came from my parents next door neighbor.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

We received this from our El Paso friends who now live in San Angelo. They
had recieved it from their friend. Connie
>
>
> > :
> >
> >
> > This happened in Crawford, TX about 30 miles from here.
> >
> > I just wanted to pass this information along to each of you so you know
> > what a truly compassionate and caring man we have in President Bush.
> >
> > My first cousin, Shawn Kettler, and his wife, Suzanne, and daughter,
> > Laramie, lost their 6 year old son, Sam, in a drowning accident this
> > past Saturday (March 6th), outside Gatesville. They all live within a
> > few
> > miles of the President&#39;s place in Crawford TX.
> >
> > Sam and a young friend of his were walking around a tank when the mud
> > gave way and Sam fell in the tank. The tank is a spring fed tank, and
> > Sam was sucked under the water into a "sink hole" where the spring came
> > into the tank. His little friend tried to get him out but was unable to
> > reach him, so he ran about 200 yards to his house and told his
> > grandmother. The grandmother called 911 then went to the tank, but was
> > unable to even see Sam.
> >
> > Sam&#39;s father and a volunteer fireman arrived first and began diving
> > into the tank but were unable to locate Sam (I believe they said the
> > water was about 10 feet deep). The Deputy Sheriff that received the 911
> > call was at the entrance to President Bush&#39;s ranch when the call came
> > in. He told the Secret Service agents at the gate what was happening
> > and they, in turn, radioed the ranch house. President Bush told them to
> > "Go - take all the men and equipment you need and just go". He also
> > sent his personal physician and his helicopter over to the tank.
> >
> > Sam was finally located and pulled from the water by one of the Secret
> > Service agents (I believe there were 5 agents there all total). There
> > was a faint pulse but they could not revive little Sam. President
> > Bush&#39;s doctor began working on him and they loaded him into the
> > Presidential helicopter and took him to Hillcrest Hospital in Waco. The
> > doctors there worked on him for awhile, but he had been under water for
> > 45 minutes, so there was really no hope for his recovery. And, had he
> > survived, he would never have been the same.
> >
> > Sam was truly a unique little boy who lived life to the fullest. And
> > he loved the fact that "George Bush, the President" had chosen to live
> > so close to his house.
> >
> > When the family went to the funeral home in Gatesville on Sunday to
> > make the arrangements, they were told everything had been paid for by an
> > anonymous donor. After much "detective" work, it is believed that
> > President Bush is that anonymous donor.
> >
> > I just wanted all of you to hear this story so you know what a true
> > gentleman our President is. And I ask that you pray for my family as
> > they deal with this tragedy. And, lastly, please pray for our country
> > and President Bush as he attempts to hold it all in place.
> >
> > Don&#39;t ever forget to tell everyone close to you and possibly, some of
> > those not so close, how much you love them. Tell them everyday because
> > life is short and very unpredictable.

leftism
04-22-2004, 04:40 AM
Hobbes please... take a breather... I would hate to think I caused you to have an aneurysm just by posting on a forum.. :D

Through all the fury you made 2 points.

1. Any point that intends to affect peoples emotions is "pathetic manipulation" et al..
2. The author of the photo is attempting to deceive people about the number of soldiers killed in Iraq.

My reply is thus..

1. Any point that intends to affects peoples emotions is not automatically "pathetic manipulation".

Photos of the holocaust are not just meant to document a period in history in a non-emotional clinical manner. They&#39;re meant to make you feel emotion, they&#39;re meant to make you feel "Never again shall we allow this to happen".

That does not mean the point they&#39;re making is invalid does it? That does not mean the curators at the Holocaust Memorial Museum are "pathetic manipulators" does it?

According to your logic, if when someone makes a point they intend to affect your emotions, that point is either invalid or that "someone" is an evil manipulator.

2. The author of the photo is not attempting to deceive people about the number of soldiers killed in Iraq. That is not the point of the photo. The point, as I&#39;ve already stated, is to show that Bush is responsible for these deaths.


Originally posted by Hobbes+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Hobbes)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>As for Bush, can you find anything, anything, anything, that would show me supporting the man? In fact, you will find the contrary, so why should you think otherwise, agenda boy?[/b]

Agenda boy&#33; Ya gotta love this guy :rolleyes:

<!--QuoteBegin-hobbes
If you cannot support your accusations then STFU, as we are innocent until proven guilty. It is a ploy of the scoundral to make baseless accusations to undermine and opponent, put the suspicion of doubt in the eyes of others.[/quote]

Yeah I know, j2k4 does it all the time to me too :)

FYI "are you sure :)" does not equal an accusation, I believe it&#39;s known as a "question".

Next time I shall write [TONGUE IN CHEEK] Are you sure? :)[/TONGUE IN CHEEK] so we can avoid further confusion.

In case it escaped your attention that question was intended to sarcastically highlight your utterly hysterical response to a minor irrelevant detail. So what if its 709 or 1400? Is the former figure acceptable while the latter would be more worthy of note? They all died in an unnecessary war because Bush lied to the American people.

How come, when you exploded in a fit of rage over the "doubles" issue, this was not obvious to you?

Busyman
04-22-2004, 04:44 AM
That is very nice if the President did that....especially semi-anonymously.

I still want him out of office though. <_<


btw this propaganda your put forth does insult ones intelligence.

You, who like a terrorist, has obvious disdain for Americans and sprout insults.

Why the fuck do you even give a shit about American soldiers?

The truth is you don&#39;t and ......we don&#39;t care.

It&#39;s so sad. :(

brotherdoobie
04-22-2004, 04:58 AM
"Lead by example, lead with class and integrity, and you will reach your audience."
Isn&#39;t that what George Bush does?

Peace brotherdoobie

Alex H
04-22-2004, 06:24 AM
Originally posted by brotherdoobie
"Lead by example, lead with class and integrity, and you will reach your audience."
Isn&#39;t that what George Bush does?

Like deserting from the Texas Air National Guard? Great example for the troops.

Busyman - Yeah, the rest of the world cares about American soldiers. Dunno why, but maybe some of us feel bad for the men and women who go out and put their lives on the line while being manipulated and used as political pawns.

It doesn&#39;t matter which army you belong to, soldiers are soldiers because they believe in their country and want to keep their friends and family safe. People like Bush who abuse their service are scum.

shn
04-22-2004, 06:28 AM
Originally posted by Alex H@20 April 2004 - 19:48
Oh, like "These terrorists killed 3000 people and we have to avenge them by killing Afganis and Iraqis?"


NO

We have to avenge them by killing everyone that does not live in the U.S.&#33;

Including the Queen :)

vidcc
04-22-2004, 06:35 AM
Originally posted by hobbes+21 April 2004 - 14:51--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hobbes @ 21 April 2004 - 14:51)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-vidcc@21 April 2004 - 04:45
Just a thought, would the same reaction occur if say j2k4 or busyman had posted the picture instead of Alex H (sorry for using your names but i needed a credible example and am not suggesting that you actually would post such a picture)
Vidcc,

The picture comes from Micheal Moore&#39;s web-site, you figure out the intent and see if it meshes with the one-liner in the first post.

And "no", I am here to discuss issues, not pick sides.

Perhaps you are unaware that Busyboy and J2 are people I argue with from time to time. [/b][/quote]
just the first part of that post was for you directly hobbes..i should have put an @ everyone else after it. Thanks for pointing to the origin of the image...has to be an anti bush statement then :lol: I do also know that you aren&#39;t against the image because you are pro bush.. (meaning i know you are not pro bush)
i am very aware that you debate on the other side of the fence to the 2 named quite often...i was just looking for someone that wouldn&#39;t be seen as posting the picture as an "anti American" issue. Alex has been accused of this. (not by you i hasten to add)

@ everyone else :lol:
images like this are supposed to draw on the heartstrings, even if you disagree with the message. The arguement that they are just cheap shots is valid to a point but no more than any other "dirty" cheap shot that we see in public life...mudslinging and character assaination seems to be a higher priority in political campaigns than issues at times.
I don&#39;t find this image offensive at all and don&#39;t see it as anti american..bush is fair political game. it is supposed to convey a point and now i know what the context it was originally used in i believe it made that point....if i agree with it or not
@ alex..... i did note you said "what a sad picture" in the original post, but here you need to be clear...remember the rules of exam essays.....tell them what you are goin to say, then say it, then tell them what you said.... :lol:

Alex H
04-22-2004, 06:39 AM
I am going to say it is a sad picture.

It is a sad picture.

I said it was a sad picture.

:D

sampson
04-22-2004, 10:17 AM
I for one am a Bush supporter. Save your flack because I won&#39;t read it. I&#39;m only posting this comment because there are alot of posts that don&#39;t defend/oppose Bush. They are a little hazy. I think you should begin your post with either

Bush supporter

or

Bush opposer

Just a thought

Just a reminder.......Save your flack because I won&#39;t read it. :D

hobbes
04-22-2004, 02:10 PM
Don&#39;t have the the chance to read what has transpired overnight, mea culpea.

I just wanted to post a link to an old post which shows my balance in the setting of emotive manipulation. This is in response to Leftys accusation that I might be secretly pro-Bush. In this thread, I lash out at this manipulation, and it may appear to be to defending Bush. But I am a concepts guy and I think these links will back that up.

the mirror image rant (http://filesharingtalk.com/index.php?showtopic=31003&hl=)

Another example (http://filesharingtalk.com/index.php?showtopic=26819&hl=)

I would say I&#39;m pretty consistent.


Sorry about the typos, no time to proofread.

brotherdoobie
04-22-2004, 06:47 PM
Originally posted by Alex H+22 April 2004 - 01:24--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Alex H &#064; 22 April 2004 - 01:24)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-brotherdoobie
"Lead by example, lead with class and integrity, and you will reach your audience."
Isn&#39;t that what George Bush does?

Like deserting from the Texas Air National Guard? Great example for the troops.

Busyman - Yeah, the rest of the world cares about American soldiers. Dunno why, but maybe some of us feel bad for the men and women who go out and put their lives on the line while being manipulated and used as political pawns.

It doesn&#39;t matter which army you belong to, soldiers are soldiers because they believe in their country and want to keep their friends and family safe. People like Bush who abuse their service are scum.[/b][/quote]
I posted what I did...To see what kind of response it would generate.
I am not a supporter of Bush...Far from it. I have personaly seen what Bush
and his father are capable of. I served in Panama 1989-90.(The smart bombs
were not so smart back in the day ;) ...Lots of dead civilians during the inital invasion).

Why do so many of you feel like you have and unique perspective that demands
the total acceptance of your "peers" at face value without any debate?....They
are only opinions after all.

I am open to hearing others thoughts without turning it into a bitchy cat fight.
Could it be that there are quite a few "children" who post,that have not experienced enough of life to speak wisely on certain topics?

I feel it&#39;s a good idea to realy read a topic and all of the post before replying.
Mabey take a deep breath...Get your emotions in check before blasting
into one and another.

Relax its only opinions...and like my dear old Pappy use to say.."Opinions are like assholes we all have them.

Peace brotherdoobie :)

Busyman
04-22-2004, 08:04 PM
Originally posted by Alex H+22 April 2004 - 02:24--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Alex H @ 22 April 2004 - 02:24)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-brotherdoobie
"Lead by example, lead with class and integrity, and you will reach your audience."
Isn&#39;t that what George Bush does?

Like deserting from the Texas Air National Guard? Great example for the troops.

Busyman - Yeah, the rest of the world cares about American soldiers. Dunno why, but maybe some of us feel bad for the men and women who go out and put their lives on the line while being manipulated and used as political pawns.

It doesn&#39;t matter which army you belong to, soldiers are soldiers because they believe in their country and want to keep their friends and family safe. People like Bush who abuse their service are scum. [/b][/quote]
This seems to go against your anti-American posts in the past.

Hmm maybe I was wrong. <_< <_< <_< <_< <_< <_< :blink:

hobbes
04-22-2004, 10:49 PM
Dr. Lefty (a proctologist?), thanks for your concern over my need for blood pressure management to avoid developing a cerebral aneurysms.

Just read the overnight stuff.

Mad? I have only been mad once on this forum, and I conducted my discussion on that matter via PM. Annoyed "yes".

Since nothing I have ever said seems to make any sense to you and my points appear "morphed" into something other than intended, I will not bother clarifying, again.

Fortunately you are a singular example on this board, so the problem may not be entirely mine.

sArA
04-22-2004, 11:10 PM
I fear I come too late to this thread. <_<

So much interesting discussion, a little heated perhaps but intelligent and thought provoking. Far more stimulating than the telly&#33; :D

brotherdoobie
04-22-2004, 11:30 PM
Originally posted by sara5564@22 April 2004 - 18:10
I fear I come too late to this thread. <_<

So much interesting discussion, a little heated perhaps but intelligent and thought provoking. Far more stimulating than the telly&#33; :D
It&#39;s never too late&#33;
And yes it beats the telly hands down&#33;

Peace brotherdoobie

shn
04-22-2004, 11:30 PM
Originally posted by Alex H@20 April 2004 - 22:03
Were these pictures not "newsworthy"?

http://homepages.unl.ac.uk/~westwelg/fm318/resources/images/kimphuc.jpg

That one was just plain out disgusting&#33; :angry:

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6647/pedo2.gif :)

brotherdoobie
04-22-2004, 11:33 PM
Originally posted by shn+22 April 2004 - 18:30--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (shn @ 22 April 2004 - 18:30)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Alex H@20 April 2004 - 22:03
Were these pictures not "newsworthy"?

http://homepages.unl.ac.uk/~westwelg/fm318/resources/images/kimphuc.jpg

That one was just plain out disgusting&#33; :angry:

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6647/pedo2.gif :) [/b][/quote]
Just a little walk through the Napalm rain.


Peace brotherdoobie

shn
04-22-2004, 11:38 PM
Originally posted by brotherdoobie+22 April 2004 - 17:33--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (brotherdoobie &#064; 22 April 2004 - 17:33)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by shn@22 April 2004 - 18:30
<!--QuoteBegin-Alex H@20 April 2004 - 22:03
Were these pictures not "newsworthy"?

http://homepages.unl.ac.uk/~westwelg/fm318/resources/images/kimphuc.jpg

That one was just plain out disgusting&#33; :angry:

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6647/pedo2.gif :)
Just a little walk through the Napalm rain.


Peace brotherdoobie[/b][/quote]
I know what that pic is. It&#39;s been all over the net for some time. And for some reason people think it&#39;s ok to post it.

It&#39;s a NAKED LITTLE GIRL&#33; :)

vidcc
04-22-2004, 11:39 PM
Originally posted by shn+22 April 2004 - 15:30--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (shn @ 22 April 2004 - 15:30)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Alex H@20 April 2004 - 22:03
Were these pictures not "newsworthy"?

http://homepages.unl.ac.uk/~westwelg/fm318/resources/images/kimphuc.jpg

That one was just plain out disgusting&#33; :angry:

[/b][/quote]
i remember seeing the video footage on the news back then.....both were disturbing, but then what was more disgusting...the image or the events thet led to the image?...war is not a sanitised event even if the reasons one goes to war are honourable eg. to defeat hitler.
the horrors of conflict should be shown in case we forget or just don&#39;t take it seriously

shn
04-22-2004, 11:59 PM
hiroshima was a d34th trap.............

But you did&#39;nt see any nude children because they were all burnt up. :lol:


:)

leftism
04-23-2004, 12:08 AM
Originally posted by hobbes+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hobbes)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Mad? I have only been mad once on this forum, and I conducted my discussion on that matter via PM. Annoyed "yes".[/b]

I never said you were "mad". Since you have said you were annoyed I&#39;ll assume you mean "mad" as in "insane". I never questioned your sanity. :)

<!--QuoteBegin-hobbes
Since nothing I have ever said seems to make any sense to you and my points appear "morphed" into something other than intended, I will not bother clarifying, again.
[/quote]

I represented your points accurately and highlighted, what I think, are flaws in your logic. If you wish to respond and show me the flaws in my analysis of your points then please do.

Otherwise this is looking like a case of sour grapes to me. :)

vidcc
04-23-2004, 12:36 AM
Originally posted by shn@22 April 2004 - 15:59
hiroshima was a d34th trap.............

But you did&#39;nt see any nude children because they were all burnt up. :lol:


:)
you think that&#39;s funny?

hobbes
04-23-2004, 01:07 AM
Originally posted by leftism+23 April 2004 - 01:08--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (leftism &#064; 23 April 2004 - 01:08)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by hobbes@
Mad? I have only been mad once on this forum, and I conducted my discussion on that matter via PM. Annoyed "yes".

I never said you were "mad". Since you have said you were annoyed I&#39;ll assume you mean "mad" as in "insane". I never questioned your sanity. :)

<!--QuoteBegin-hobbes
Since nothing I have ever said seems to make any sense to you and my points appear "morphed" into something other than intended, I will not bother clarifying, again.


I represented your points accurately and highlighted, what I think, are flaws in your logic. If you wish to respond and show me the flaws in my analysis of your points then please do.

Otherwise this is looking like a case of sour grapes to me. :)[/b][/quote]
Accurately and "accurately in your mind" are two different things entirely. I tire of explaining the obvious because it boils down the fact that you either can&#39;t nor wish to understand them. I cannot be of service here.

Everything I have wanted to say is out there for the willing to read and it appears they have. You are left alone, twisting words and chasing windmills.

I am sorry that your grapes are sour.

The points:
1) A picture which was designed to elicit an emotional reaction for the purpose of political progangda. Apparently because the reality itself is not enough? :huh: And somehow, the picture condemns Bush for everything, without bothering to explain how it came to this conclusion. That&#39;s a bit of a cheap shot quite frankly.

2) A distortion of the actual numbers killed. Why did they use pictures more than once? Because those pictures alone somehow did not cut the mustard to meet the political goals of the poster. :huh:

As to why you think the posting of a black and white movie of starved corpses being bulldozed naked into a pit and the creation of photomontage of george bush using dead soldiers, or puppy dogs, or baby seal pups, are equivalent, is quite frankly beyond me. One is a depiction of grim reality, the other a foundless political statement. By making the picture, somehow we are to believe the point is true.

The point may very well be true, but it is like calling someone a racist, then making them disprove it. Once a label is placed on you, it is hard to shed.

Quite simply it was a cheap shot.

In addition, with the links provided earlier (you saw those right?), I have shown equal hostility when Bush and the media attempted to play that same card themselves.


I was afraid of this, hence my post, "Who cares about the people of Iraq?", which was to keep people focused on the justification of the war, not to be distracted by the "liberation of the oppressed" hype.

Troops returning home, fathers reunited with their children- stock response tripe. I&#39;m embarrassed for my country. You bunch of stupid hicks&#33; Check to see if there is a hand up your ass, because you are nothing but puppets. Don&#39;t let the prestidigitators fool you.



Accountability is essential. Freedom means the freedom to think for yourself, not parrot nationalistic propaganda.

I hate deception and manipulation. Plainly stated, clearly stated, and consistently stated.

leftism
04-23-2004, 01:32 AM
Originally posted by hobbes+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hobbes)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
1) A picture which was designed to elicit an emotional reaction for the purpose of political progangda. Apparently because the reality itself is not enough?&nbsp; And somehow, the picture condemns Bush for everything, without bothering to explain how it came to this conclusion. That&#39;s a bit of a cheap shot quite frankly.
[/b]

How would you suggest the photomontage "explain how it came to this conclusion"?

Just because a political piece of art causes you to respond emotionally does not automatically mean that it is propaganda. This is hardly the Nazi leaflet "The Poisonous Mushroom". Thats propaganda.

<!--QuoteBegin-hobbes

2) A distortion of the actual numbers killed. Why did they use pictures more than once? Because those pictures alone somehow did not cut the mustard to meet the political goals of the poster.
[/quote]

Although I can see and understand your perspective of your initial point, (although I don&#39;t agree with it in this instance), your second point is definitely unfair.

Why use the pictures more than once? Because there weren&#39;t enough to make up Dublyas face&#33;&#33; A simple practical matter I would have thought...

As I said before, the point of the photo is not to inform people of the number of dead in Iraq or to "distort the actual numbers killed" . Why host it on a website that has the precise number of dead in prominent view if thats the authors intention? Surely that would be counter productive?

Are the numbers killed really relevant to the point the author is trying to make?

According to your second point 709 would not "cut the political mustard" but 1400 would.

709 unnecessary deaths or 1400 unnecessary deaths.. that doesn&#39;t make much difference to me.

Chevy
04-23-2004, 01:47 AM
Originally posted by leftism@23 April 2004 - 01:32

How would you suggest the photomontage "explain how it came to this conclusion"?

By being a photomontage - an expressive peicce of art - tying ideas together



Just because a political piece of art causes you to respond emotionally does not automatically mean that it is propaganda. This is hardly the Nazi leaflet "The Poisonous Mushroom". Thats propaganda.
It is as propagandic as feck - if it was a photomontage "pro-war" what would we be talking bout right now?


Why use the pictures more than once? Because there weren&#39;t enough to make up Dublyas face&#33;&#33; A simple practical matter I would have thought...
It&#39;s a piece of art and should be seen as that - yes it&#39;s fair to repeat the faces to make the pic - did you present this as a piece of art or a statement?


As I said before, the point of the photo is not to inform people of the number of dead in Iraq or to "distort the actual numbers killed" . Why host it on a website that has the precise number of dead in prominent view if thats the authors intention? Surely that would be counter productive?&nbsp;
I first saw it here :huh:


Are the numbers killed really relevant to the point the author is trying to make?
So, he&#39;s making a point.........that George W Bush is responsible for the deaths???? It&#39;s put emotionally not factually or even via debate.


According to your second point 709 would not "cut the political mustard" but 1400 would.

709 unnecessary deaths or 1400 unnecessary deaths.. that doesn&#39;t make much difference to me.
I doubt anyone believes that




FTR.......I am anti-Bush but agree with Hobbes, there&#39;s a right way to do things


BTW - I saw this pic on my local board and it was slammed immediately


..

sampson
04-23-2004, 02:58 AM
Originally posted by shn@22 April 2004 - 17:59
hiroshima was a d34th trap.............

But you did&#39;nt see any nude children because they were all burnt up. :lol:


:)
Why someone put a laughing smily at the end there creeps me out

hobbes
04-23-2004, 04:12 AM
Originally posted by sampson+23 April 2004 - 03:58--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (sampson &#064; 23 April 2004 - 03:58)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-shn@22 April 2004 - 17:59
hiroshima was a d34th&nbsp; trap.............

But you did&#39;nt see any nude children because they were all burnt up.&nbsp; :lol:


:)
Why someone put a laughing smily at the end there creeps me out[/b][/quote]
I think that Shn was pointing out, that given the context surrounding that picture, the lack of clothing on a little child should be the least of our concern.

It reveals something a bit perserve about our priorities and indoctrination about nudity and sexuality, that we should even notice her lack of clothing given the stark terror and bewilderment on the faces of these children.

The point is not "girls gone wild- Vietnam edition", but rather "Everything you have ever known and trusted, distroyed in a moment and you are left running naked down the street." The nudity is part of the art, catastrophy does not wait for you to get dressed.

I think Shn was telling us not to let the nudity distract us from the real message here, but it may just add a punctuation mark to it.

Alex H
04-23-2004, 04:24 AM
Originally posted by hobbes
the picture condemns Bush for everything, without bothering to explain how it came to this conclusion. That&#39;s a bit of a cheap shot quite frankly.

You want an accompanying thesis with the picture?

The image stands by itself, without the need for an explaination, same as the other pics I posted.

hobbes
04-23-2004, 04:35 AM
Originally posted by leftism@23 April 2004 - 02:32
Although I can see and understand your perspective of your initial point, (although I don&#39;t agree with it in this instance), your second point is definitely unfair.

Why use the pictures more than once? Because there weren&#39;t enough to make up Dublyas face&#33;&#33; A simple practical matter I would have thought...

According to your second point 709 would not "cut the political mustard" but 1400 would.

Well, let me explain.

I saw a post about GWB by AlexH- We know exactly what he thinks of George, what is he up to?-Strike 1

Click on the picture- links to Michael Moores site- Strike2
Picture is comprised of dead soldier- Oh, I get.- Strike 3

Those 3 Strikes primed my bias, the scent of poltical bullshit was thick in the air.

I then looked at the picture and thought, "Damn, that is a lot more then I thought had died". So I did react to the total number of pictures.

I then decided to count the boxes and realized that the number was much higher than the actual count. While counting the right row, I noticed a picture used twice.

Given my bias and discovering this duplication, I concluded that it all part of the political game.

Now I have told others that a man who cannot recognize his bias is a fool and that applies to me as well.

I considered your point. Perhaps the composer figured out how many pixels the picture needed to contain to allow Bush to be clearly detailed and also allow the viewer to recognize the individual soldier photos. It was a legistic decision, not an overt attempt to distort or deceive (again I go back to my initial impression of the number of boxes).

I will not try to figure out if this is true, I will just say my bias was peeked by the author, site and content. You may be correct, on this point, I cannot say. Overall, even if I give you that point, without contention, it doesn&#39;t change the bottom line.

hobbes
04-23-2004, 04:45 AM
Originally posted by Alex H+23 April 2004 - 05:24--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Alex H &#064; 23 April 2004 - 05:24)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-hobbes
the picture condemns Bush for everything, without bothering to explain how it came to this conclusion. That&#39;s a bit of a cheap shot quite frankly.

You want an accompanying thesis with the picture?

The image stands by itself, without the need for an explaination, same as the other pics I posted.[/b][/quote]
No, it is an opinion, not a reality.

You really need to get the distinction.

Perhaps I could post a picture of George Bush comprised of smiling Iraqis toppling Saddams statue.

Just another piece of propaganda, from the other side.



As for the other photographs, you need not know anything about politics or even be able to speak the language of those being photographed, to understand exactly how they feel by their facial expressions and body languange.

In fact, the other photos are transcendant to the actual struggle, they reflect a pure emotion that we can all tap into.

A hundred years from now, that picture of Bush will need to be explained to people, 100 years from now, the impact of those terrified and disoriented Vietnamese kids will be as strong as the day it was captured.

shn
04-23-2004, 06:08 AM
Originally posted by vidcc+22 April 2004 - 18:36--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (vidcc &#064; 22 April 2004 - 18:36)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-shn@22 April 2004 - 15:59
hiroshima was a d34th&nbsp; trap.............

But you did&#39;nt see any nude children because they were all burnt up.&nbsp; :lol:


:)
you think that&#39;s funny?[/b][/quote]
I think it&#39;s hilarious

What I did not find amusing is when the japs bombed Pearl Harbor with their pitiful suicide missions.

I think they got what they deserved IMO. :)

vidcc
04-23-2004, 06:27 AM
Originally posted by shn@22 April 2004 - 22:08
I think it&#39;s hilarious

What I did not find amusing is when the japs bombed Pearl Harbor with their pitiful suicide missions.

I think they got what they deserved IMO. :)
let&#39;s ignore you not being alive when that happened and the fact that you find the use of the first atomic weapon on civilians..many of the children you spoke of being "burnt up" not being born untill after pearl harbour quote "hilarious"..... By your own standards did those people that lost their live on 9:11 deserve what they got because of american foriegn policy?...do you think that if an iraqi citizen planted a bomb in the USA and killed innocent people..they deserved it because we invaded iraq?...i think not.
The 2 bombs were dropped. Some might argue that it ended the war and saved more lives than it took. Some might say it was the darkest invention of mans will to destory man. Whatever side one sits only a complete moron would find such carnage funny.

Yogi
04-23-2004, 11:26 AM
WHAT AN AMUSING THREAD&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;

I see a great future for Hobbes as a stand-up comedian&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33; :lol:

With Leftism, Alex etc. as sidekicks&#33;&#33;&#33;

Please post more unfundamented anti-bush topics&#33;&#33;&#33;




Yogi

brotherdoobie
04-23-2004, 05:14 PM
Originally posted by shn+22 April 2004 - 18:38--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (shn &#064; 22 April 2004 - 18:38)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by brotherdoobie@22 April 2004 - 17:33

Originally posted by shn@22 April 2004 - 18:30
<!--QuoteBegin-Alex H@20 April 2004 - 22:03
Were these pictures not "newsworthy"?

http://homepages.unl.ac.uk/~westwelg/fm318/resources/images/kimphuc.jpg

That one was just plain out disgusting&#33; :angry:

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6647/pedo2.gif :)
Just a little walk through the Napalm rain.


Peace brotherdoobie
I know what that pic is. It&#39;s been all over the net for some time. And for some reason people think it&#39;s ok to post it.

It&#39;s a NAKED LITTLE GIRL&#33; :) [/b][/quote]
It originaly came from Life magazine...And it&#39;s pretty much an accepted fact that the photo was set up.

Which takes nothing from the intentions of the picture...which is to show the horrors of war.

However it probably doesn&#39;t do much for one who comes from such
a desensitized generation as yours.

Peace brotherdoobie