Camera follow-up
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: Peter on 28 Jun 2010 21:17 "Robert Coe" <bob(a)1776.COM> wrote in message news:1tuf26p8rtuk7gcjq0jla2029rio5nrcuk(a)4ax.com... > On Sun, 27 Jun 2010 20:24:34 -0500, Jane Galt <Jane_G(a)gulch.xyz> wrote: > : Not to mention the pervasive communist-socialist influence in Hollywood: > : > : http://vivirlatino.com/2007/06/26/cameron-diazs-purse-pisses-off- > : peruvians.php > : > : Cameron Diaz's purse pisses off Peruvians > : > : 1:52 pm By Jennifer Woodard Maderazo � Celebrities|Fashion|Peru|Politics > : 26 Jun 2007 > : > : diazperu-cp-201618.jpgCameron Diaz is saying sorry today for a cultural > faux > : pas related to her choice of purses. Last week she was photographed at > Machu > : Pichu sporting a Maoist-themed bag which stirred up all kinds of > emotions: > : > : The voice of Princess Fiona in the animated "Shrek" films visited > the > : Incan city of Machu Picchu in Peru's Andes on Friday carrying an olive > green > : bag emblazoned with a red star and the words "Serve the People" printed > in > : Chinese, perhaps Chinese Communist leader Mao Zedong's most famous > political > : slogan. > : > : The bags are marketed as fashion accessories in some world capitals, > but > : in Peru the slogan evokes memories of the Maoist Shining Path insurgency > that > : fought the government in the 1980s and early 1990s in a bloody conflict > that > : left nearly 70,000 people dead. > : > : Not even to mention the fact that Mao killed 70 million chinese. > > I'm not sure what point you're making here, Jane, but as a committed > libertarian, you've gotta stand up for Ms D�az. Free Speech, ya know. I doubt Galt is committed. Perhaps it should be. -- Peter
From: Peter on 28 Jun 2010 21:22 "Jane Galt" <Jane_G(a)gulch.xyz> wrote in message news:Xns9DA4C5C455507JaneGgulchxyz(a)216.196.97.142... > Paul Heslop <paul.heslop(a)blueyonder.co.uk> wrote : > >> Pete wrote: >>> >>> On 2010-06-27 16:07:43 +0100, Dudley Hanks said: >>> >>> > "Robert Coe" <bob(a)1776.COM> wrote in message >>> > news:sune26h2rv3f817js8ropf52trhnc07gq4(a)4ax.com... >>> >> On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 21:56:54 +0100, Paul Heslop >>> >> <paul.heslop(a)blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: >>> >> : Jane Galt wrote: >>> >> : > >>> >> : > FYI, for the few friendlies here, I decided to order the >>> >> : > SD4000IS. >>> >> : > >>> >> : > But this group is too infested with communist types to have a >>> >> : > viable discussion about photo topics. >>> >> : > >>> >> : heh, communist types. >>> >> >>> >> Well, consider the source. Jane appears to have named herself after >>> >> a character in one of Ayn Rand's ultra-capitalist screeds. >>> >> Everything looks yellow to a jaundiced eye. >>> >> >>> >> Not that the group actually is infested with communist types, but >>> >> that wouldn't preclude a viable discussion about photo topics. After >>> >> all, the Exakta was made in East Germany. ;^) >>> >> >>> >> Bob >>> > >>> > To Jane, you have to be far right of a Republican to avoid the >>> > "communist" label... >>> >>> And agree with everything she says. >>> >> that's the magic answer! >> >> > > Very funny guys, but in fact it's the socialist left that's now pushing > for > the "fairness doctrine" so they can shut down the free speech of anyone > who > disagrees with them. ( like for example Glenn Beck ) > > 90% of the media leans socialist, yet Fox News having free speech is like > pouring water on the wicked witch to you types. > Free <> accurate As for the media, you are operating on the "repeat a big lie," theory. -- Peter
From: Jane Galt on 28 Jun 2010 21:30 Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote : > Why would I profess any personal agenda in a photo newsgroup? I can > shine a light on stupid rationalizing from time to time. Sometimes that > light falls on me, sometimes someone else. > > PLONK too. -- - Jane Galt
From: Jane Galt on 28 Jun 2010 21:31 Paul Heslop <paul.heslop(a)blueyonder.co.uk> wrote : > Jane Galt wrote: >> >> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote : >> >> >> Glenn Beck? The presence of "Beck" and "thinks" in the same sentence >> >> is oxymoronic. >> > >> > I should have said, deluded into pontificating. >> > >> > >> >> http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2541446/posts >> >> THE ANATOMY OF A SMEAR: >> How the Left is fighting to silence Glenn Beck >> ... >> >> Fascinating article, describes these guys to a T. > > I bet you hate Michael Moore You win that bet. -- - Jane Galt
From: Gill Collins on 28 Jun 2010 21:36
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 21:11:15 -0400, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >"Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message >news:2010062721102882188-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom... >> On 2010-06-27 20:21:18 -0700, Jane Galt <Jane_G(a)gulch.xyz> said: >> >><snip>> >>> http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2541446/posts >>> Smear on dude. >> >> Again, the source of your information certainly has its agenda, and has a >> bias which has you hanging off the right edge of the cliff. Your lack of >> original thought is telling. >> > >You definitely will get more accurate and pertinent information from Google. You're new around here, aren't you. Google presents those pages that get the most hits, whichever become the most popular go to the top of their food-chain. Google is not a wellspring of knowledge, it's a wellspring of whatever lame reasoning is the most popular with those who can't grasp simple concepts to begin with. The largest percentage of the population, which have lazy minds and lazy research skills, will accept whatever explanation seems the most plausible to them, with their limited powers of reasoning. These pages then become the most popular and are then presented as of top-priority on any Google search. Those who are equally afflicted with a lack of mental acuity and prowess will then tell others of those links, forming and perpetuating a fount of stupidity pandered off as some kind of truthful resource. The discriminating, intelligent, reasoning mind will reject all first 20 to 50 or so listed pages of hits that Google presents, and will instead dig deeper for any semblance of knowledge. Popularity of an answer does not a fact make. The thinking person often comparing the answers from a dozen or more resources before that information is deemed even the least bit worthy for consideration. If even one of those pages disagrees with 50 others, no matter how "professionally" they might all be presented, then that one page in disagreement must be researched to see if it is in fact the truth and the 50 others are just parroted squawkings of webpage-mimicking imbecility. I've even found pages hosted by universities and government research centers that have been in grievous error. Ignorance is duplicated and spreads exponentially on the internet. If only the same could be said for real knowledge. Google is your friend -- but only if you are a total idiot. |