idrankwhat

Spoken like participants on both sides of this conflict.

Have a nice day Jeanne. When you want to join the discussion with something astute or even remotely accurate, please do. Just please, no more michelle malkin referenced material. What's next, Limbaugh?

Did you read the article?

A quick search came up with this article. It's almost a year old and things have certainly not improved. Could you make a living for your family if you were locked in your house with the influx of power, internet and groceries as well as the outflow of your waste and any marketable product dependent on the whim of a neighbor who dislikes you? I'm willing to bet that you might take any weapon that you have in your arsenal to try to rectify the situation. Still sifting through this LONG thread, and it's interesting to see the mixture of responses, some expected, some surprising. The whole situation is depressing, especially since we will do nothing to help work towards a solution until after the 20th. Hopefully the 21st will bring some positive input. I'm sure it will be better than the last 8 years, I just don't know by how much. Talk about the audacity of hope!

Great composition! Did you use a polarizer for that sky?

I guess the beer rules are tougher in my neck of the woods. Simply getting your name in Parachutist is sufficient to get the beer hounds howling. If actual rules only apply to a first then I'm covered.

Nice shots, and page 59 on that last one. Which brings me to this question. Do beer rules apply to videographers? I thought flying camera was expensive enough!

And THAT is the sign of a good interviewer. And THAT is why I hate Hannity/Limbaugh/O'Reilly programming etc. An interviewer who talks more than his guests, constantly steps on the guest's answers and pigeon holes them with straw man tactics (or dumps their call when the other guy scores a good point) is a bad host. Those shows are nothing more than a platform for their loud and abrasive ideology with no room for respectful intellectual exchange. In the long run, they make people stupidererer and lower the national dialog to the bathroom stall level. I think they certainly have the right to be on the air but I wouldn't mind seeing FCC restrictions imposed on the use of the term "news".

As usual, Congressional Motors is already behind. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122928340145004821.html?mod=googlenews_wsj When this becomes available in the US do you think that WalMart will be the distributor?

Thanks, I'm all set up for now but when I want to go wider I may look you up. Right now I have to quit buying myself presents and get something nice for the wife! Cheers!

If you've never seen the movie "Boxing Helena" I suggest that you DON'T.

I was going to point out the mistake, but on second thought....I think you got it right the first time

Indeed, you have not. And I appreciate that. But others who are not nearly as in touch with the situation have. But that's expected and it only bothers me in it's attempt to negate my argument through ad hominem attacks. I'll not comment regarding Darius' arguments but as for my own, they're from the view of an unwilling third party financier of the perpetuation of the conflict. My views mostly stem from my anger after I dug deeper and found that I was being manipulated by my media through deliberate omission of the nature of both sides of the conflict, as well as my anger at my government for allowing Israel to pursue policies that are in direct conflict with the US' official stated position. I believe the apartheid label is appropriate. It's a social policy of segregation involving political and economic, legal discrimination between two societies in the West Bank. Generally yes, but here in the US we rarely hear about the settler violence in Hebron, the number of Palestinians who die while waiting to get through a check point on the way to a hospital. We NEVER see what's going on in Gaza. Hell, Israel wouldn't even let Jimmy Carter visit Gaza. I suspect I know why but as is often said here in SC, "if you have nothing to hide then you should have nothing to fear". We do hear about the missiles that leave Gaza. We DID hear about the Hebron settlers who were recently evicted however we heard nothing about the retaliation against the Palestinian residents (burned homes/murdered father and son, etc.). The IDF has a responsibility to protect ALL of the citizens of the west bank, not just the Israeli citizens. There you go, you got me started again.

Hey i am not lopsided, i am trying to balance out the lopsidedness Oh well. No matter what I say all they here is blah blah blah hatread for Jews. Have a good New Year as well.

For the same reason? Yes, regardless of location. (although I didn't vote in the poll)

Thanks, I just receive the 5050 that I ordered and was thinking about protecting it. I don't know that spending half the price of the lens so that I can add a filter that will likely interfere with the image is a good idea. I think I'll save the bux for now. Thanks for the input and happy holidays,

I can see that none of the lengthy and well cited discussions that we've had earlier have changed anything. I'm not about to re-hash the exact same arguments again. If anyone else is interested then I suggest you search this forum. However your earlier post in which you mentioned openness to some of the ideas laid out in the Geneva Accord, makes me think that there's an opening for some real progress. I hope that our new administration recognizes the value of a peaceful two state solution and will actively pursue an avenue such as the GA, in direct contrast to the hands-off policy of his predecessor. Now I leave you and Darius to your lopsided emotional exchanges of half truths. I'm sorry I got sucked into it again. Best of luck in the New Year. [celebratory vice of your choice]

DSE, do you have a link to any of the information on the test that you did with the wide angle HD lenses? I was curious as to whether or not you included any filters in the comparison and if they compromised the results at all. Thanks,

first of all, its not in Israel, its in the west bank (which was never annexed to israel). and just as they are "jewish" roads, there are "palestinian" roads where jewish israelis are not allowed. the reason is racism, its security. That's apartheid.

Correct, they are residents of their own land, which Israel occupies. Israel is responsible for them according to the Geneva conventions. YES, Israel DOES control gaza!!!! To not accept that fact is completely disingenuous. Again, collective punishment is a war crime.

And some of their leaders have also said that they were willing to work something out if Israel would retreat to the '67 border. The terms in 2000 were ridiculously lopsided in favor of Israel. I'm very glad to hear this. More of this sort of dialog and good things can happen. - Hezbollah continued its attacks across the border (one of which led to war 2 years ago) - Hamas is firing rocket DAILY at Israeli towns across the border (although officialy we should have a cease fire now). not to mention their declerations about not recognizing Israel's right to exist. This is true. But what's missing from the dialog are the daily atrocities at the hands of the IDF, the policy of apartheid, and the war crimes that contribute to the violence. That's what Darius and I have a tendency to point out. We don't condone the actions of either side but typically only half the story gets reported. Understanding why an oppressed population would resist and condoning the actions of fanatics that wish to destroy Israel is two different things. But I also understand that violent circumstances can turn the former into the latter. I look at our own anti-terrorism policies in the same light. Creating terrorists isn't a good way to fight terrorism. Just because one small segment wishes the absurd, a group that I do not believe includes Darius, is no reason to dehumanize and abuse an entire population. That's collective punishment and it's a war crime according to the Geneva convention. You can't allow the minority fanatical groups to derail the larger goals, unless you want them to.

We're a pretty simple bunch. Keep gas prices low, keep cheap stuff cheap at Walmart, keep mindless garbage on the TV, don't hold us accountable for anything and don't ask us any tough questions and we'll let you do anything. You forgot JFK.

I'll admit, it was a quick move. But I'd expect nothing less from someone who's spent his career dodging the consequences of his actions

You do see that you're using a small group's desire to see Israel gone as justification for war crimes against a larger population don't you? We've been through this before. If Israel would return to the green line and take its illegal settlers and occupying military forces with it, there could be peace. Will there be some on both sides who try to derail this? Of course there will. But that's where it's up to the more powerful party to insure that the road towards peace is built regardless of the skirmishes. And again, I know this is where we disagree but there is no disputed territory. None of the West Bank is for Israel's taking. And now that he's on his way out, Olmert is able to speak clearly about the reality of the situation. In holiday interview, Olmert adopts the principles of the Geneva Accord ... the decision we have to make is a decision that we have been refusing for 40 years to look at open-eyed. “We face the need to decide, but are not willing to tell ourselves, yes, this is what we have to do. We have to reach an agreement with the Palestinians, the meaning of which is that in practice we will withdraw from almost all the territories, if not all the territories. We will leave a percentage of these territories in our hands, but will have to give the Palestinians a similar percentage, because without that there will be no peace." Including in Jerusalem? “Including in Jerusalem,” said Olmert,

Nose grips count don't they?