Odyssey of State Capitols and State Suspicion

I don't know how many could endure the persecution that Ramak Fazek went

through, and still complete his photographic project.

<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/20/arts/design/20shat.html?sq=ramak%

20fazel&st=nyt&scp=1&pagewanted=all">THE PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNEY AND ORDEAL OF

RAMAK FAZEL.</a>

<p>It is absurd how nobody takes responsibility for righting a wrong. We seem

to have a cumulative database, once you get in, you'll never get out.

Am I the only one who thinks that if we live in Terror, then the Terrorist have one? The

president is fond of saying that they hate us because of our freedoms, is losing our

freedoms going to make the terrorist go away?

 

Chad

Thanks, Vic. Quite a story.

I'm sure the little twin tower vignette, excited and pleased the otherwise bored postal inspectors....

<I>"The journey ultimately left him wondering what it means to be American ? and, more fundamentally, who he really was.</I>

<P>

Truly sad. Protection at the expense of everything else.

Wow. And think of the coincidence. All the outrage emerges not when it hapened but when his show opened.

 

Maybe when people stop taking over and crashing airplanes, others will be less nervous.

I was reading Michael Palin's Diary and he talks of living in London in the 70s when the

IRA was blowing up buildings on a regular basis. People went about their normal daily

lives and ate at restaurants even though they were targets.

 

I have also read some statistic that if every flight on a given day were to crash and kill all

passengers, it would still be less than the amount of people killed in cars on that day. I

think that was the statistic, it was the gist of it anyway.

 

What really can the terrorists do to incapacitate us? The way to fight terrorists is to not

be terrified.

 

Chad

Let's be careful; the self-appointed defenders of our rights probably have this thread bookmarked right now.

Craig Gillette, Nobody is condoning people crashing planes into buildings, but don't you think it is worth a few moments of our time to ponder what drives someone to give up their life for such an act.

 

We tackle everything the same way here. We try and suppress the symptoms, while ignoring the underlying causes. Look at the "war" on drugs. We go after the sellers, while not even thinking about what is it about our society that drives people to drink and drugs. The same way in the healthcare arena. Take a pill to lower your cholesterol, but continue having those Morton's steaks.

 

Here's a story that could never play on our TV stations. It's a German TV production from four years ago. It would wake us up to the reality on the ground.

 

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=m61elAh5F1c

 

Have we really learnt anything from all this? The upcoming elections should be interesting.

"The upcoming elections should be interesting." Obama and/or Hillary(they have both pledged secretly to be each others VP if they lose) will make the world a better place. Pestilence, war, famine and un-happiness will disappear in few years of their leadership. The US will then join the EU and we can live like brothers and sisters forever and ever. Osama will see the error of his ways say he's sorry for all the infidels that he blew up or be-headed. Vic, is correct, the elections will be interesting.

Thanks Tim for making Vic's point for him.

You are most welcome Roger!

LOL, let's not forget Ron Paul.

Do I wonder why fanatics kill themselves because they don't like us? Ponder that? Not at all. They've told us what they've got their knickers twisted about. If you give that any validity at all, then you are part of the problem.

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin

 

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin

>>> "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve

neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin

 

That quote *grossly* is incorrect. Why do people do that...

Well, Brad, I was there, and it sounded to me as though that's what Ben said.

 

In any event, it was close.

 

So I went to wikipedia, and the rest is history .... :-)

The Wikiquote site did say that there are many variations of the quote, so it doesn't match Brad's definitive one. :)

 

What's really sad is that the only candidate in the field who comes closest to Ben Franklin is Ron Paul, who can never get elected. What have we become.

Michael, Ben spoke of "essential liberty." Much much different than "a little liberty"...

I know. Ben just called :)<p>

 

By the way, the wiki entries I have looked at, in cases where I'm acquainted with the subject matter, have ranged from detailed and accurate all the way down to not even close.<p>

 

In this instance, one <a href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Those_who_would_give_up_Essential_Liberty>wiki entry</a> points out that the statement is often misquoted.

>>> The Wikiquote site did say that there are many variations of the quote, so it doesn't

match Brad's definitive one. :)

 

Not *my* definitive quote. I don't rely on wiki...