Link to all the stories you want, your argument is essentially that you want to be able to use the images of dead soldiers, regardless of their wishes, or the wishes of their families.
No, my argument is that I think it is outrageous for governments to censor the news to further their own agenda. We're quick enough to criticise the Chinese for it, but can't/won't see it when it happens closer to home.
It's for the good of the dead soldiers, and their families, which you continue to discount as a reason to avoid displaying them in a fashion they would have issue with.
Of course it is, your politicians are very sensitive like that:
In that case, you are indeed lucky to have a Government that *you* can trust to apply censorship, with objectivity, for the good of you and all your fellow citizens.
Well, let's put it down to cultural differences. Here in the UK it is generally considered respectful to acknowledge our war dead - here's an example (don't click the link if you find the sight of coffins distasteful):
Tell me again why you have the right to take photographs of dead men?
Again? I didn't tell you that the first time. Just to clarify it for you: the dead men (and women) are inside the coffins - you can't actually see them. This is not about grieving families at all, this is about making sure the voters don't feel more uncomfortable. It is state censorship, and it is no less outrageous than what the Chinese Government is doing.
Sure - but I didn't say do one OR the other, just "why wait?". The reason such gestures don't have the weight of numbers behind them is precisely because the majority of people throw up their hands and say "what's the point", just like you.
For example - nations who fail their Kyoto obligations will find their exports subjected to higher taxation in the rest of the countries which have signed up to the son-of-kyoto.
Why wait for your government to act for you? Why not avoid buying products from countries that prefer to disregard Kyoto - sort of like "freedom fries" in reverse.
In England, people can be a bit funny about the terminology they use, which can be confusing for foreigners, especially those from the USA.
I'll give you an example - in English sports, there are several competitions involving teams from throughout the WHOLE COUNTRY, and not one of them is known as the 'World Series'.
More to the point, Miguel is convincing many other people he is right, even when he is not, and is thus detracting from the quality of my OS/Environment. It's not that he's wasting his time, it's that he's wasting my time.
Ever wonder how Miguel got into this position of being more convincing than you are?
And we all bow down before you in gratitude, because now we are all safe from Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.
You throw names at the French, but in fact Germany and Russia joined them in insisting that the weapons inspectors should have more time before resorting to an invasion. With hindsight (or even a little foresight, many would argue), it seems they were correct.
But let's just continue calling the French horrible names, shall we? In the name of freedom, of course, because that's what this is all about, right?
That was an excellent movie, but I wouldn't go so far as to call it an "accurate picture". I also read the book and I don't know if I'd describe Nash's experience as a "best case scenario" - maybe it is, for that particular disease, but it didn't sound too good to me.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, over here we use words in funny ways. Speaking of which, perhaps you could explain the term "World Series" to me...
No, my argument is that I think it is outrageous for governments to censor the news to further their own agenda. We're quick enough to criticise the Chinese for it, but can't/won't see it when it happens closer to home.
Of course it is, your politicians are very sensitive like that:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/story/0, 13918,1162151,00.html
In that case, you are indeed lucky to have a Government that *you* can trust to apply censorship, with objectivity, for the good of you and all your fellow citizens.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4245365.stm
In the USA, as I understand it, those pictures would be censored by the state.
Again? I didn't tell you that the first time. Just to clarify it for you: the dead men (and women) are inside the coffins - you can't actually see them. This is not about grieving families at all, this is about making sure the voters don't feel more uncomfortable. It is state censorship, and it is no less outrageous than what the Chinese Government is doing.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3652171. stm
I agree. It's unfashionable now that EVERYONE is doing it.
Well said. Did you feel a particular need to post anonymously?
Go out of the pub to the McDonald's across the road. Oh, wait...
No, it's not ironic. It's people hitting you over the head with a cluestick.
You can't oppose US bashing here -- This is Slashdot!
Why? The mods do.
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/index_html#G PLIncompatibleLicenses
If you take a look at the ChangeLog for GNU Classpath, you'll see a lot of work being done on javax.swing in recent weeks:
/ classpath/ChangeLog
http://savannah.gnu.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs/classpath
If you want javax.swing.* to be complete, why not join in and make it happen?
Have a nice weekend.
Why wait for your government to act for you? Why not avoid buying products from countries that prefer to disregard Kyoto - sort of like "freedom fries" in reverse.
I propose a "solution". Start slaughtering them! For every US soldier they kill, you should kill ten Iraqi "insurgents". Oh, wait...
I'll give you an example - in English sports, there are several competitions involving teams from throughout the WHOLE COUNTRY, and not one of them is known as the 'World Series'.
Ever wonder how Miguel got into this position of being more convincing than you are?
http://www.amnestyusa.org/abolish/listbyyear.do
What makes you think your name needs to sound "kind of Middle Eastern" to make it onto the "no-fly" list? Your predjudices, perhaps?
And we all bow down before you in gratitude, because now we are all safe from Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.
You throw names at the French, but in fact Germany and Russia joined them in insisting that the weapons inspectors should have more time before resorting to an invasion. With hindsight (or even a little foresight, many would argue), it seems they were correct.
But let's just continue calling the French horrible names, shall we? In the name of freedom, of course, because that's what this is all about, right?
That's right, only the communists could mess up something as important as nuclear safety.
Have you been reading "How To Win Friends and Influence People" by any chance?
That was an excellent movie, but I wouldn't go so far as to call it an "accurate picture". I also read the book and I don't know if I'd describe Nash's experience as a "best case scenario" - maybe it is, for that particular disease, but it didn't sound too good to me.