Photoshop How To Use: rec.photo.digital - 26 new messages in 8 topics

rec.photo.digital
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital?hl=en

rec.photo.digital@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Palestinians Under Attack
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/b67efe4fc4caba22?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 12:43 am
From: rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer)

Twibil <nowayjose6@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jan 23, 12:19 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
>> You accuse people of being anti-semitic and nazis for daring to
>> criticize Iraeli war crimes.
>
>Er, only problem is that you just undercut anything else you might say
>by labeling Israeli actions as "war crimes".

I'm not the only one. Amnesty International and the United Nations
are doing likewise.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net

== 2 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 12:46 am
From: rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer)

Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
> rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:

>>You claimed that the West Bank is part of Israel.
>
>You are a pathetic liar. I never said that.

The West Bank was legally won in the Arab-Israeli war of 1967. It is
just as much a part of Israel as California is a part of the U.S.
Stephen Bishop in <36rcn4h5k7k7g271u7oojn06q2gibpirga@4ax.com>

So clearly you DID say that and you are just lying your ass off.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net

== 3 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 1:07 am
From: Chris H

In message <rmshn4dhart7p7qigq0q4fssgjk687n67b@4ax.com>, Stephen Bishop
<nospamplease@now.com> writes
>>>>Well, all of that is nice, but it doesn't demonstrate that it wasn't
>>>>socialism. In case it has escaped your notice, socialism is an
>>>>economic system.
>>>
>>>
>>>Rightly or wrongly, in modern politics liberalism and socialism share
>>>the same bed.
>>
>>Then you have clearly no idea about the subject. It might help if you
>>took a course in politics.
>
>In your opinion, because you aparently share those same left-wing
>values.

I am very much right wing.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

== 4 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 1:06 am
From: Chris H

In message <f8shn4h39oesc2n7ugdkhjovdmj0ghkdt2@4ax.com>, Stephen Bishop
<nospamplease@now.com> writes
>On Thu, 22 Jan 2009 10:45:15 +0000, Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org>
>>>
>>>Virtually *everyone* who shares forums with you agrees with that
>>>assessment and considers you to be a cyberbully with trollish
>>>tendencies.
>>
>>Not in the slightest. Most of us in this forum would support Ray in most
>>of his comments and posts.
>
>Nonsense. His typical post is along the lines of, "You're an idiot,
>a**hole" when he doesn't agree with someone. That's hardly worthy of
>support unless one shares the same low-life tendencies.

Tendacies of truth which you don't seem to share.

>>On the other hand you seem to be a self righteous bigot spewing
>>propaganda and lies
>
>Only propaganda and lies according to your bigoted anti-Israel
>worldview.

Actually there was a documentary on last night about the Israeli
behaviour over Gaza

It bears out all ray and I have been saying about Israeli war crimes and
propaganda. They are trying to completely control the world press in
reporting the facts.

They have distorted and lied repeatedly so that now 90% of the worlds
press would not trust the Israelis if they said it was daylight and had
video of it.

The Utube videos of Hamas using UN schools to launch missiles are FAKE
It is video of a different school taken in 2005!

The IDF claiming the Washington Post and NY Times supported their cliams
was repudiated by the editors of both newspapers who are furious that
they have been misrepresented. In fact they said their stories disproved
the Israeli versions. Even the official Israeli spokesman has been
caught lying more than once

The Press core have been saying the amount of Israeli propaganda has
been enormous.

The net result is that Israel is seen as having committed war crimes and
tried to lie about it and smear the UN and Red cross (and others) as
well.

It has completely destroyed any trust any one had in Israel. The
Israeli actions have backfired completely and the backlash will be
enormous.

The Press have now started to get into Gaza and found it is worse that
it they thought for civilian casualties and other war crimes.

Israel is little different to Pol Pot's killing fields. Iseal is lilely
to face sanctions and war crimes trials just at the point where the US
will stop supporting them. The Sanctions could be the end of Israel

There is no way Israel will be seen as a European country by Europe.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

== 5 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 1:21 am
From: Twibil

On Jan 23, 12:43 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> Twibil <nowayjo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Jan 23, 12:19 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
> >> You accuse people of being anti-semitic and nazis for daring to
> >> criticize Iraeli war crimes.
>
> >Er, only problem is that you just undercut anything else you might say
> >by labeling Israeli actions as "war crimes".
>
> I'm not the only one. Amnesty International and the United Nations
> are doing likewise.

When Amnesty International and the UN begin loudly calling attention
to the actions by Hamas that invited the Israeli retaliation, when
they do so *before* there's retaliation, and when they begin labeling
them "war crimes" as well, perhaps people with more than three
functioning neurons will begin to take their statements seriously.

Fact is; if the Palistinians stopped shooting tomorrow morning there
would be peace in the middle east. If the Israelis stopped shooting
back tomorrow there would be no Israel -or Israelis- in a month.

Until something in that equation changes, it's pretty useless to try
pretending that the poor Palistinians are being unfairly singled out
for oppression.

== 6 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 1:52 am
From: rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer)

Twibil <nowayjose6@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jan 23, 12:43 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>> Twibil <nowayjo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Jan 23, 12:19 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>
>> >> You accuse people of being anti-semitic and nazis for daring to
>> >> criticize Iraeli war crimes.
>>
>> >Er, only problem is that you just undercut anything else you might say
>> >by labeling Israeli actions as "war crimes".
>>
>> I'm not the only one. Amnesty International and the United Nations
>> are doing likewise.
>
>When Amnesty International and the UN begin loudly calling attention
>to the actions by Hamas that invited the Israeli retaliation,

Such as violating the cease fire? No, actually, that was Israel.
Human rights violations? Israel again.
Violating UN resolutions and international law? Israel again.
Imposing an oppressive police state? Israel again.

>Fact is; if the Palistinians stopped shooting tomorrow morning there
>would be peace in the middle east.

In fact Palestinians in the West Bank have not attacked Israel in over
a year and nothing has changed. They're still subject to Israeli
military checkpoints, still have their land taken, still are kept
separate from Jews.

> If the Israelis stopped shooting
>back tomorrow there would be no Israel -or Israelis- in a month.

Good propaganda in that it is a complete lie that demonizs the victims.

>Until something in that equation changes,

Until people like you stop excusing Israeli war crimes nothing will change
and people will keep dying.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net

== 7 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 1:49 am
From: Chris H

In message <497983dc$0$1622$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, Ray Fischer
<rfischer@sonic.net> writes
>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>> rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
>>>You claimed that the West Bank is part of Israel.
>>
>>You are a pathetic liar. I never said that.
>
> The West Bank was legally won in the Arab-Israeli war of 1967. It is
> just as much a part of Israel as California is a part of the U.S.
> Stephen Bishop in <36rcn4h5k7k7g271u7oojn06q2gibpirga@4ax.com>
>
>So clearly you DID say that and you are just lying your ass off.

Given the amount of Israeli propaganda Stephen is pushing in just this
news group it is clear he is employed full time to push propaganda.

The Israelis have been doing a LOT of that. The Channel 4 (UK TV)
documentary last night showed proof that Israel is pumping out masses of
"propaganda" much of it downright lies and is using utube and people on
NG's and forums to do this.

We can safely assume that Stephen is as most sane people thought part of
the Israeli propaganda machine and never going to tell the truth.

This tactic has backfired on Israel as the Press don't like being
consistently lied to and stopped from getting at the truth. Now the
worlds media are getting into Gaza you can expect many more TV programs
on the Israeli war crimes in Gaza and how the Israelis tried to
manipulate the media. At the end of it no one is ever going to trust
anything any Israeli or probably even any Jewish source says.

The whole thing will have been VERY counter productive for Israel

I think we can expect Israeli War Crime trials and sanctions against
Israel .

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

== 8 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 2:05 am
From: Stephen Bishop

On 23 Jan 2009 08:22:56 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:

>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>> Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org>
>
>>>Not in the slightest. Most of us in this forum would support Ray in most
>>>of his comments and posts.
>>
>>Nonsense. His typical post is along the lines of, "You're an idiot,
>
>Your typical post is to deny, to accuse people of doing what you're
>doing, to call people anti-semites, and to lie your ass off in order
>to rationalize your murderous hatred of Muslims and Arabs.

Ray, you are so blind. Even in the above mini-lecture you do exactly
what I've pointed out: falsely accusing others of lying, ignorant
name-calling, and bigoted generalization.

You disagee with what I've said about Israel's right to exist and
defend itself. Therefore, in your little mind, I have "murderous
hatred" of Muslims and Arabs. That is utter nonsense.

>>>On the other hand you seem to be a self righteous bigot spewing
>>>propaganda and lies
>>
>>Only propaganda and lies according to your bigoted anti-Israel
>>worldview.
>
> The Israeli airstrikes on the Gaza Strip represent severe and
> massive violations of international humanitarian law as defined in
> the Geneva Conventions, both in regard to the obligations of an
> Occupying Power and in the requirements of the laws of war.
>
> Those violations include:
> - Collective punishment: The entire 1.5 million people who live
> in the crowded Gaza Strip are being punished for the actions of a
> few militants.
>
> - Targeting civilians: The airstrikes were aimed at civilian
> areas in one of the most crowded stretches of land in the world,
> certainly the most densely populated area of the Middle East.
>
> - Disproportionate military response: The airstrikes have not
> only destroyed every police and security office of Gaza's elected
> government, but have killed and injured hundreds of civilians; at
> least one strike reportedly hit groups of students attempting to
> find transportation home from the university.
>
> Earlier Israeli actions, specifically the complete sealing off of
> entry and exit to and from the Gaza Strip, have led to severe
> shortages of medicine and fuel (as well as food), resulting in the
> inability of ambulances to respond to the injured, the inability of
> hospitals to adequately provide medicine or necessary equipment for
> the injured, and the inability of Gaza's besieged doctors and other
> medical workers to sufficiently treat the victims.
>
> Certainly the rocket attacks against civilian targets in Israel are
> unlawful. But that illegality does not give rise to any Israeli
> right, neither as the Occupying Power nor as a sovereign state, to
> violate international humanitarian law and commit war crimes or
> crimes against humanity in its response. I note that Israel's
> escalating military assaults have not made Israeli civilians safer;
> to the contrary, the one Israeli killed today after the upsurge of
> Israeli violence is the first in over a year.
>
> Israel has also ignored recent Hamas diplomatic initiatives to
> re-establish the truce or ceasefire since its expiration on December
> 26.
> http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090112/falk?rel=hp_currently

That's one view, certainly. But that quoted source, unlike yourself,
has the honesty to note that what the Palestinians are doing against
civilian targets is unlawful.

Also note that what you quoted is an*opinion piece* in a left-wing
newspaper, and hardly to be considered factual. That same newspaper
has op-eds about impeaching the former vice president for high crimes,
and has links to AlJazeera.

Many people are upset at the intensity of the Israeli response, and
that is understood. But if you weren't such a bigot perhaps you'd
understand both points of view instead of just blindly judging one
side. Israel is an island surrounded by hostile neighbors who have
very clearly made their intent known that they will do everything they
can to remove them from the earth.

Why are civilian areas targeted? Because that is where many of the
attacks against Israel have been coming from, it's where the leaders
who order those attacks are hiding, and where weapons are stored. You
can't deny this and then shout "war crimes" when those targets are
attacked.

== 9 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 2:15 am
From: Stephen Bishop

On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 09:06:27 +0000, Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org>
wrote:

>In message <f8shn4h39oesc2n7ugdkhjovdmj0ghkdt2@4ax.com>, Stephen Bishop
><nospamplease@now.com> writes
>>On Thu, 22 Jan 2009 10:45:15 +0000, Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org>
>>>>
>>>>Virtually *everyone* who shares forums with you agrees with that
>>>>assessment and considers you to be a cyberbully with trollish
>>>>tendencies.
>>>
>>>Not in the slightest. Most of us in this forum would support Ray in most
>>>of his comments and posts.
>>
>>Nonsense. His typical post is along the lines of, "You're an idiot,
>>a**hole" when he doesn't agree with someone. That's hardly worthy of
>>support unless one shares the same low-life tendencies.
>
>Tendacies of truth which you don't seem to share.

And you seem to share his biased sense of self-righteousness in that
baseless accusation.

>>>On the other hand you seem to be a self righteous bigot spewing
>>>propaganda and lies
>>
>>Only propaganda and lies according to your bigoted anti-Israel
>>worldview.
>
>Actually there was a documentary on last night about the Israeli
>behaviour over Gaza

On the BBC? Or some other network which admits to its biased
reporting?

>It bears out all ray and I have been saying about Israeli war crimes and
>propaganda. They are trying to completely control the world press in
>reporting the facts.

Ah, yes, the Jews wanting to control everything .... the world has
heard that before.

>They have distorted and lied repeatedly so that now 90% of the worlds
>press would not trust the Israelis if they said it was daylight and had
>video of it.
>
>The Utube videos of Hamas using UN schools to launch missiles are FAKE
>It is video of a different school taken in 2005!
>
>The IDF claiming the Washington Post and NY Times supported their cliams
>was repudiated by the editors of both newspapers who are furious that
>they have been misrepresented. In fact they said their stories disproved
>the Israeli versions. Even the official Israeli spokesman has been
>caught lying more than once
>
>The Press core have been saying the amount of Israeli propaganda has
>been enormous.

Propaganda to some is factual reporting to others. You choose which
side's propaganda you wish to believe.

>The net result is that Israel is seen as having committed war crimes and
>tried to lie about it and smear the UN and Red cross (and others) as
>well.
>
>It has completely destroyed any trust any one had in Israel. The
>Israeli actions have backfired completely and the backlash will be
>enormous.
>
>The Press have now started to get into Gaza and found it is worse that
>it they thought for civilian casualties and other war crimes.
>
>Israel is little different to Pol Pot's killing fields. Iseal is lilely
>to face sanctions and war crimes trials just at the point where the US
>will stop supporting them. The Sanctions could be the end of Israel

If you weren't so biased, you'd see that what you wrote just reflects
your passionate belief that Israel has no right to exist regardless of
what spin either side puts on the events.

>There is no way Israel will be seen as a European country by Europe.

Why would Israel want to be seen as a European country? They are a
democracy, and I doubt they would want to adopt the socialist-leaning
characteristics of many European nations.

== 10 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 2:21 am
From: Stephen Bishop

On 23 Jan 2009 08:19:33 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:

>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>> rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>>>> rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>J. Clarke <jclarke.usenet@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>>> HEMI - Powered <none@none.giganews> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Such revisionist thinking, and even more so, the Liberal bias on
>>>>>>>> our college campuses, perverts the very notions of freedom of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fascists hate liberalism.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Name calling is a typical tactic of the intelletually bankrupt.
>>>>>
>>>>>Indeed HEMI is nothing if not intellectually bankrupt.
>>>>
>>>>Indeed Ray is nothing if not a name-caller in the best
>>>>self-righteously bigoted tradition.
>>>
>>>Whining about name-calling even as you call names isn't very smart.
>>
>>True, if that's all it is. I'm consistent in classifying you as a
>
>You accuse people of being anti-semitic and nazis for daring to
>criticize Iraeli war crimes. You're just a sleazy brat who blames
>others for your own filth.

Everytime you write something like that you just demonstrate that you
have no interest in the truth. You just characterize people so you
can dismiss them when they don't agree with you.

I don't accuse you of being "anti-semitic" or a "nazi" because you
"dare" to criticize Israeli "war crimes." If I call you those things
it is because you deny Israel's right to exist and you use nazi
tactics to try to shout down and belittle those who don't agree with
you.

"sleazy brat who blames others for your own filth.." What in the
world does that mean? That's just a mindless insult that would come
from someone who has lost any sense of reality and just responds with
childish rants.

== 11 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 2:22 am
From: Stephen Bishop

On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 00:34:38 -0800 (PST), Twibil
<nowayjose6@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Jan 23, 12:19 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
>> You accuse people of being anti-semitic and nazis for daring to
>> criticize Iraeli war crimes.
>
>Er, only problem is that you just undercut anything else you might say
>by labeling Israeli actions as "war crimes".
>
>If you were spinning any harder for Hamas you'd be a lathe.
>
>~Pete

Exactly !!

== 12 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 2:24 am
From: Stephen Bishop

On 23 Jan 2009 08:43:31 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:

>Twibil <nowayjose6@gmail.com> wrote:
>>On Jan 23, 12:19 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>
>>> You accuse people of being anti-semitic and nazis for daring to
>>> criticize Iraeli war crimes.
>>
>>Er, only problem is that you just undercut anything else you might say
>>by labeling Israeli actions as "war crimes".
>
>I'm not the only one. Amnesty International and the United Nations
>are doing likewise.

You mean the same United Nations whose troops have been caught raping
civilians and running the openly corrupt oil for food program ?

== 13 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 2:26 am
From: Stephen Bishop

On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 01:21:00 -0800 (PST), Twibil
<nowayjose6@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Jan 23, 12:43 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>> Twibil <nowayjo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Jan 23, 12:19 am, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>
>> >> You accuse people of being anti-semitic and nazis for daring to
>> >> criticize Iraeli war crimes.
>>
>> >Er, only problem is that you just undercut anything else you might say
>> >by labeling Israeli actions as "war crimes".
>>
>> I'm not the only one. Amnesty International and the United Nations
>> are doing likewise.
>
>When Amnesty International and the UN begin loudly calling attention
>to the actions by Hamas that invited the Israeli retaliation, when
>they do so *before* there's retaliation, and when they begin labeling
>them "war crimes" as well, perhaps people with more than three
>functioning neurons will begin to take their statements seriously.
>
>Fact is; if the Palistinians stopped shooting tomorrow morning there
>would be peace in the middle east. If the Israelis stopped shooting
>back tomorrow there would be no Israel -or Israelis- in a month.
>
>Until something in that equation changes, it's pretty useless to try
>pretending that the poor Palistinians are being unfairly singled out
>for oppression.

That is precisely the point.

But be careful about posting such obvious truth around here. The Rays
of the world will start calling you a murderous bigoted a**hole who
wants to see all Arabs and Muslims dead.

== 14 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 2:28 am
From: Stephen Bishop

On 23 Jan 2009 08:23:33 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:

>HEMI - Powered <none@none.supernews> wrote:
>>Stephen Bishop added these comments in the current discussion du
>>jour ...
>>
>>>>And if you think I'm the only one taking 'potshots' at him, them
>>>>you must not get around Usenet much at all.
>>>
>>> It seems like you are the ringleader of whatever vendetta you
>>> have against him, and I have yet to see you post anything
>>> relevent to any conversation other than to try to belittle that
>>> one person.
>>>
>>There's background to this that doesn't need to be aired here. I
>>leave it to YOU, Stephen, to decide for yourself if I do or don't
>>come across as reasonable and as an informed commentator.
>
>You come across as a far-right-wing extremist.

Ray, your history is that everyone who doesn't agree with you on any
subject is a neocon, a right-wing extremist, or a murderous a**hole.

== 15 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 2:31 am
From: Stephen Bishop

On 23 Jan 2009 08:25:21 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:

>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>> Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org>
>
>>>>>>I've taken several courses in political science and aced all of them,
>>>>>>thank you.
>>>>>
>>>>>Now we know you are lying.
>>>>
>>>>How could you possibly know that? Have you seen my transcripts?
>>>
>>>It is obvious from what you are saying in this NG that you are lying
>>>about these courses and that you "aced" them. It just does not match
>>>the propaganda and drivel you have been posting on this subject
>>
>> That's merely according to your narrow worldview and political
>>opinion, which makes that a circular argument.
>
>No, it comes from the fact that you don't know the difference
>between socialists and national socialists.

Of course I do. You are the one who twisted my words to say they are
one and the same.

That's why I say you are a self-rightous bigot. You spin and twist
facts to satisfy your own narrow worldview.

>
> Israel is facing growing demands from senior UN officials and human
> rights groups for an international war crimes investigation in Gaza
> over allegations such as the "reckless and indiscriminate" shelling
> of residential areas and use of Palestinian families as human
> shields by soldiers.
>
> With the death toll from the 17-day Israeli assault on Gaza climbing
> above 900, pressure is increasing for an independent inquiry into
> specific incidents, such as the shelling of a UN school turned
> refugee centre where about 40 people died, as well as the question
> of whether the military tactics used by Israel systematically
> breached humanitarian law.
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/13/gaza-israel-war-crimes

More people would take these kinds of reports seriously when the other
side is equally criticized for their war crimes.

== 16 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 2:42 am
From: Stephen Bishop

On 23 Jan 2009 08:27:32 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:

>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>>On 22 Jan 2009 04:01:54 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>
>>>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>>>>On 21 Jan 2009 05:04:33 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>>>>>> rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>>>HEMI - Powered <none@none.giganews> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Such revisionist thinking, and even more so, the Liberal bias on
>>>>>>>>our college campuses, perverts the very notions of freedom of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Fascists hate liberalism.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>In your self-rightous bigotry you miss the truth that Facism *is*
>>>>>>liberalism taken to its extreme.
>>>>>
>>>>>An outright lie, but just what I'd expect from a lying, bigoted
>>>>>asshole like you. I stated a fact. You don't like the fact because
>>>>>it shows that you are a fascist?
>>>>
>>>>Oh, Ray, what other response could have been expected from you?
>>>
>>>Changing the subject now?
>>
>>No, just making an astute observation.
>
>ANybody who thinks that fascism and liberalism are the same thing is a
>dishonest idiot.

You're not paying attention. NOBODY said they were the same thing.
Cerainly I didn't.

Learn to read, Ray. I said it is liberalism "taken to its extreme."
That doesn't mean that they are one and the same. I later explained
the context of what I was referring to.

>
>>>>You're wrong,
>>>
>>>Not usually, and not this time.
>>>
>>> Although fascist parties and movements differed significantly from
>>> each other, they had many characteristics in common, including
>>> extreme militaristic nationalism, contempt for electoral democracy
>>> and political and cultural liberalism
>>> Encyclopedia Britannica
>>
>>Yes, that's true.
>
>Thus, your claim was a lie.

No, which is obvious had you not dishonestly clipped away what else I
wrote.

>
>> But it (as well as you) misses the point that
>>fascism is indeed liberalism taken to its extreme.
>
>Even those the article above says that fascists have contempt for
>liberalism.

Yes, I noted that as well.

>
>So the question then become: How fanatical are you that you reject
>and lie about article which are right in front of you?
>
>> Although fascism
>>claims to hate liberalism, the end game is the same:
>
>Oh, so everybody in the world who disagrees with you must be wrong.

Wrong conclusion.

>
>You're insane.

You're definition of substituting accusation, misleading questions,
word-twisting, selective interpretation and name calling for rational
discussion.

== 17 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 2:43 am
From: Stephen Bishop

On 23 Jan 2009 08:28:25 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:

>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>> "J. Clarke"
>
>>>> German Nationalsozialismus , also called Nazism or Naziism
>>>> totalitarian movement led by Adolf Hitler as head of the Nazi
>>>> Party in Germany. In its intense nationalism, mass appeal, and
>>>> dictatorial rule, National Socialism shared many elements with
>>>> Italian fascism. However, Nazism was far more extreme both in
>>>> its
>>>> ideas and in its practice. In almost every respect it was an
>>>> anti-intellectual and atheoretical movement, emphasizing the
>>>> will
>>>> of the charismatic dictator as the sole source of inspiration of
>>>> a
>>>> people and a nation, as well as a vision of annihilation of all
>>>> enemies of the Aryan Volk as the one and only goal of Nazi
>>>> policy.
>>>> Encyclopedia Brittanica
>>>
>>>Well, all of that is nice, but it doesn't demonstrate that it wasn't
>>>socialism. In case it has escaped your notice, socialism is an
>>>economic system.
>>
>>Rightly or wrongly, in modern politics liberalism and socialism share
>>the same bed.
>
>So far you claim that liberalism, socialism, and fascism are all
>really the same thing.

That's your spin on what I said.

== 18 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 2:47 am
From: Stephen Bishop

On 23 Jan 2009 08:29:28 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:

>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>>On 22 Jan 2009 04:03:46 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>
>>>Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@now.com> wrote:
>>>> rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>
>>>>>National socialism is NOT THE SAME as socialism, you stupid asshole.
>>>>>Sheesh, take a introductory course in political science. Learn something.
>>>>
>>>>I've taken several courses in political science and aced all of them,
>>>
>>>Now we know, without a doubt, that you're a liar.
>>
>>How so?
>>
>>
>>>
>>> German Nationalsozialismus , also called Nazism or Naziism
>>> totalitarian movement led by Adolf Hitler as head of the Nazi
>>> Party in Germany. In its intense nationalism, mass appeal, and
>>> dictatorial rule, National Socialism shared many elements with
>>> Italian fascism. However, Nazism was far more extreme both in its
>>> ideas and in its practice. In almost every respect it was an
>>> anti-intellectual and atheoretical movement, emphasizing the will
>>> of the charismatic dictator as the sole source of inspiration of a
>>> people and a nation, as well as a vision of annihilation of all
>>> enemies of the Aryan Volk as the one and only goal of Nazi policy.
>>> Encyclopedia Brittanica
>>
>>Yes, and your point is?
>
>That you're a liar. Pay attention.
>
>>It's interesting that the cult of Obama-ism and his rise from nowhere
>
>And there is more of that political bigotry that has corrupted the
>right wing. You extremists have nothing but hatred to offer.

Ray, every time you write such nonsense to try to stereotype those who
disagree with you just reinforces why I refer to you as a
self-righteous bigot.

"Extremists... nothing but hatred..." Interesting words coming from
someone who shows nothing but hatred and contempt for those who don't
share his narrow worldview. You do that virtually everywhere you
post and with virtually every subject.

But I don't have to point that out to anybody. You're a legend.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: GONE FLYING WITH THE SUPERIOR D300 !!!
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/ef07b8822660449c?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 1:33 am
From: Noons

Focus wrote,on my timestamp of 23/01/2009 1:00 AM:
> "Focus" <not@nowhere.pt> wrote in message
> news:Yridnb6RIeWI7-XUnZ2dnUVZ8tfinZ2d@novis.pt...
> After the "GONE FISHING..." thread, I decided to put my money where my
> mouth is.
> So I dug up this old picture I made when I just had the D300.
>
> http://www.atlantic-diesel.com/Seagull.jpg
>
> Shot without compensation, no other changes then cropping.
> AND: shot with a cheap 18-135, not an expensive 400 mm...
>
> --
> Focus
>
> PS: no animals were hurt in this shooting...

Kindly remove aus.photo from your cross-posting.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Photosynth at the inauguration
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/382b1443f68b98a9?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 1:43 am
From: Noons

Annika1980 wrote,on my timestamp of 23/01/2009 3:00 PM:

>> What a poor suggestion. If he did it then every photo would have the wrong
>> focus, exposure, and color shift to them.
>
> I challenge you to produce a pic of mine with poor focus.
>

I don't think anyone has ever taken a picture of you,
in or out of focus, other than yourself?

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Obama enamored with Lincoln but he is WRONG
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/0d2e561b1e21dd5b?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 1:43 am
From: rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer)

HEMI - Powered <none@none.supernews> wrote:
>Ray Fischer added these comments in the current discussion du jour
>...
>
>>>Nope, not at all. I don't expect people drinking poison Kool-Aid
>>>to recognize it. But, since you seem anxious to talk about his
>>>messiah complex, remember that President George Herbert Walker
>>>Bush had a 91% approval rating after Desert Storm yet was
>>>defeated in his re-
>>
>> Bush 41's highest ever approval rating was 89%
>>
>That was really profound, arguing 2 percent.

And Bush 43 has the distinction of having the lowest-ever approval
rating.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 1:44 am
From: rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer)

HEMI - Powered <none@none.supernews> wrote:
>dwight added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...
>
>> I think that you're saying that the Liberal Media did its job,
>> but the Conservative Media didn't.
>>
>> Interesting.
>>
>Not quite. In the US today, there is almost NO "conservitive" media
>whatsoever.

Faux News and all of the "conservative" blowhards say you're
"confused".

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Repair or replace Canon S60?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/70166d2aa5b69f30?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 2:16 am
From: "Fred"

"BCDrums" <bcdrums@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:b31feb14-7570-4b0e-ba75-8fde0d5b0331@r37g2000prr.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 21, 9:10 am, "Fred" <fredap...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "BCDrums" <bcdr...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> news:cfab6ff7-27ca-44b0-a3ef-fd61f2f30f97@w1g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
>
> >I dropped my Canon S60 and it has a purple stripe in the viewscreen
> > and on the photos. A Canon repair (if they can make it) will be $149.
> > Should I repair this camera, or use the $149 toward something similar?
>
> > What I like about the S60: it has a wide angle lens (28mm equivalent)
> > and it uses the ubiquitous NB-5L Canon battery, same as our XTi DSLR.
> > This means all batteries fit each camera. Also, it has an optical
> > viewfinder, which I think is a must for outdoor use.
>
> > What I don't like: The S60 is large for a pocket-type camera, and has
> > dreadful shutter lag.
>
> > This camera cost about $500 new, and I won't spend that much on a
> > replacement. Can I get a Canon with a wide angle lens for $250-300?
>
> > Thanks!
> > BC
>
> You could always do what I did, and buy an unused S80 off eBay.
>
> I had an S30 and progressed to the S60, which I'm still using (I also
> bought
> an "as new" spare one). The S60 is still working, despite the beeper
> having
> packed up a couple of years ago in a heavy downpour. When the S60 finally
> gives up the ghost, I'll either use the spare one I bought, or the S80,
> which I'm loathe to use in case it gets damaged, as it's a classic in mint
> condition.
>
> I wouldn't contemplate a camera without an optical viewfinder (which is
> why
> I bought the spare S60 and S80), which pretty much rules out all modern
> compacts. Plus I'm not into the pixel war, resulting in ever more sensor
> noise and aggressive processing to smooth out the noise (and detail).
>
> AR

Getting an S80 sounds like a fine idea. There currently are no unused
copies on ebay. Do you recall how much you paid for yours?

I'm in the UK, so prices will be considerably higher over here anyway
(although I don't recall what I paid for the S80 now - it was nearly a year
ago). There was a company at the time selling brand new S80s on "Buy it
now"on eBay, but they were quite expensive. I purchased mine on an auction
from a private seller, but it had never been used, apart from a couple of
test photos to make sure that it worked.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Prototypes of future digital ultra-compact pocketable camera - Will
there be much improvement in the images?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/53af1a269344e11a?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 2:40 am
From: Chris Malcolm

In rec.photo.digital Alan Smithee <me@privacy.net> wrote:
> "Keith nuttle" <keith_nuttle@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:J0Gcl.13452$yr3.7923@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com...
>> aniramca@gmail.com wrote:

>> There are physical limits even in this day and age of change. A good Zoom
>> lens requires a lot of glass to bend the light rays on to the sensor. My
>> Olympus C-740 has 11 elements in 7 groups. Light passes through a glass
>> or any medium in very defined ways that can only be changed by changing
>> the properties of the glass or changing its shape. Someone could respond
>> that it could be done on the sensor but like the cpu (see below) there are
>> physical limits to the number of pixel that can be placed on a chip. So it
>> is unlikely that you will ever see an ultra thin zoom camera.
>>
>> One other physical limit that has been meet and can not be passed is with
>> cpu for computers. Physical laws state that at a certain size and speed
>> there will be electron tunneling where the pathway of the electrons can no
>> longer be controlled. This was a big topic in computer magazines in the
>> 1980's. That limit was hit Pentium 4 3.0 GHz chips. After that to
>> increase through put the manufactures started the duo, and quad processors
>> which all run at about half that rate 1.6GHz.

> What about the human eye? Although the CPU maybe big, the lens isn't.

It's difficult to make exact comparisons of sensor size, because the
human eye is in effect several different cameras simultaneously doing
different jobs, and some of them use a rather low res very wide angle
view on a very curved sensor. I suspect it's a fair approximation to
say that the lens is of roughly P&S dimensions because so is the
effective comparable sensor. The same optics and physics applies.

Many people don't appreciate that the apparently detailed view we get
from the eye is in effect a stitched panorama. There's only a rather
small high res portion of the retina, and our view of a view is
sampled at points of detailed interest by very high speed jumps of the
eyeball (saccades) to point at each item of interest. The brain
stitches these together into the impression of a much wider detailed
view. For example, when reading a book, typically only a word or two
on the line are in clear legible high resolution.

That's how the eye-brain has solved the data rate problem of
transferring and understanding images of the world at speeds high
enough to play ball games. (Our ball games exploit most of the high
speed capabilities of the human eye-brain complex to their limits.)

There's also a fantastic amount of crud and distortion in the basic
image as sampled by the retina. For example the "wiring" in the sense
of nerves and blood vessels are in front of the light sensing
elements. This casts a shadow of its detailed twiggery over every
image. The brain however does such a good job of cleaning up the image
that most of the time it looks as though our eyes are very much better
than they really are. Most of the time we don't even notice the large
blind spot where the frontal twiggery is bundled up and taken through
a hole in the retina to the back side.

The human retina is a is a highly tuned and ingeniously compensated
development of a really stupid original design. The designer managed
to get in right in the cephalopod eye, but the absence of bones in the
cephalopods has put serious constraints on how far that superior eye
can travel.

--
Chris Malcolm

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Film X Digital
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/0322663bf5744fd4?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 2:43 am
From: Bob Williams

Duram wrote:
>
> Now I think officially film is death, look
> http://www.robertphotoblog.com/2009/official-portrait-president-obama/
> and download the 14mb Obama's portrait see EXIF data.
> http://change.gov/page/-/officialportrait.jpg
>
> Why use film if digital works very fine and can be copied all over the
> world in seconds without loss.
>
>
Film's days are numbered......In years, not decades.
Kodak doesn't even sell 35 mm film anymore.
Can Fuji be very far behind?
I was a "hard core" film photographer (serious hobbyist) for over 50
years. Now all my sweet film cameras and paraphernalia are sitting
quietly on a shelf in my clothes closet....... Digital Rules.
Bob Williams

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Opinions: Can I use my old Nikon lenses on a new Nikon digital camera?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/46cacbbe3be835c7?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 2:49 am
From: Chris Malcolm

Twibil <nowayjose6@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 22, 7:43?pm, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>> if they're *very* old (non-ai) then they need to be modified before
>> mounting them on any recent nikon camera except for a d40/d60 which
>> does not need them to be modified.

> Bingo. *That's* the information I needed.

> Much grass.

>> they want you to buy new lenses. ?find a new camera shop, one which
>> gives you honest advice.

> So far I've heard variations on the same song and dance at three
> different places. (It's a plot, I tell you!)

But if they paid their assistants enough to be knowledgeable
photographic experts who would buy anything from them at the prices
they'd have to charge? The public has clearly told shops via the
market that they want to be served by the cheapest idiots employable.

--
Chris Malcolm

==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rec.photo.digital"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rec.photo.digital+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en

Photoshop How To Use

Categories

Blog Archive

About Me

Friday, January 23, 2009

rec.photo.digital - 26 new messages in 8 topics - digest

0 comments:

Live Traffic

Photoshop How To Use

Categories

Blog Archive

About Me

Friday, January 23, 2009

rec.photo.digital - 26 new messages in 8 topics - digest

0 comments:

Search

Live Traffic