This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Drop by and say hi! (Recycle Bin)
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
91278
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
donnymurph
Sad to say, but I downloaded an awesome app called Pano (on the Android platform) that lets you take multiple pictures with your smartphone / tablet and stitches them into a panorama for you. I've got a copy of Lightroom, but it's just so much easier to do it on the phone :P
Didn't notice this post. I'm well aware of the photography apps on the Android platform, but I much prefer to work on a computer. A phone or camera will never match the processing power of a computer.
Post by
91278
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
donnymurph
Whammy!
Post by
Patty
China and Russia voted against UN action to stop the bloodshed. In today's age, how are those governments still in power? In today's age, how does half the world get away with oppressing its citizens?
Would you want the UN clamping down on police during the UK riots the other year?
Intervening in any domestic conflict sets a very dangerous international precedent. The fact that the US has continually done this over last century is not necessarily something to be lauded.
Surely intervention in Libya has already set that precedent for international involvement in the 'Arab uprisings', no?
Post by
gamerunknown
Would you want the UN clamping down on police during the UK riots the other year?
There are no strict guidelines for UN intervention, each instance is taken into consideration individually. That said, there are informal considerations according to google:
1. A situation likely to endanger or threaten international peace and security.
2.Whether or not regional/sub regional organizations are ready and able to assist.
3.The existence of a cease-fire and the consent/commitment of the parties involved.
4.The need for a clear political goal and thus the ability to set out a precise mandate.
5.A reasonable assurance of safety and security for UN personnel.
The situation was not politically motivated and had no international effects or leaders. While it is upsetting that four people died as a result of the riots, it doesn't compare to Caracazo for example, which was also handled internally. It's also worth mentioning that when the US vetoes a bill it's rarely even mentioned in the US. For example, I think the US is partnered only with Somalia in its refusal to sign the Convention on the Rights of the Child and with Canada on the Kyoto Protocol. The US were with Russia and China in permitting the use of land-mines and the US vetoed a resolution condemning settlements on occupied territories.
It's deeply important that it stays, but it has to be a private fund -- if we just roll it into taxation, all of a sudden we have government interference.
The BBC has been funded by tax since its inception. It's left it open to criticisms for its pro-EU, pro-Israeli stance and historically ignoring the dangers of colonialism (such as reporting "no news" during insurrections in India). Can you think of any way to preserve its independence other than donations though? Wouldn't it be possible for the large donors to have an undue influence over programming?
Post by
91278
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
baradiel
Morning
Post by
gamerunknown
Is that so? I wasn't aware. I sort of assumed it must be free of tax funding given how much the previous government and this government want to hound it for being anti-government. I will admit to not really knowing the ins and outs of the BBC's funding outside of the Licence Fee (Which is what I meant by "Private"), so do enlighten me and I'll be able to give you a proper response.
Yeah, sorry, that's correct. Since the government sets the terms of the licence fee and has ultimate jurisdiction I just thought of it as a tax.
Post by
240140
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
gamerunknown
^ true
Also the BBC gets development cash from some EU bank thingy apparently.
Edit: I'm a supporter of both the BBC and the EU though, so it doesn't really bother me.
Post by
Azazel
Yall are nerds.
Post by
OverZealous
Yall are nerds.
I've never heard of this "Yall". What is it, some kind of funky alien race?
Post by
91278
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Interest
Morning all!
Post by
204878
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
gamerunknown
tabloids are useful when they happen to fight on the correct side rather than the bat!@#$ crazy side.
Err, the newspaper that supported the blackshirts? I'd say the Daily Mirror would be more useful.
Maybe we should start a thread on the EU? Might give MyTie a chance for debate.
Post by
Interest
tabloids are useful when they happen to fight on the correct side rather than the bat!@#$ crazy side.
Err, the newspaper that supported the blackshirts? I'd say the Daily Mirror would be more useful.
Maybe we should start a thread on the EU? Might give MyTie a chance for debate.
Don't enable him lol.
Post by
baradiel
I didn't drink coffee this morning -.-
Post by
Interest
I didn't drink coffee this morning -.-
I don't ;o
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.