Passport photo of girl, 5, banned 'in case it offends Muslims'

[Mirorgate 0]

As a student of American history with an emphasis on American Indian history, I don't remember the Blackfoot, Sioux, Shoshone, Cherokee, or any of the other nations blowing themselves up and maybe taking 2 or 3 people with them. While the whites did horrible things to them (small pox laden blankets, anyone?), the various tribes fought with honour. I don't recall ever reading about a suicide Apache attack.

The Nations fought for a valiant and justifiable reason....to protect their lands against takeover from the whites. The terrorists blow themselves up because they don't like US policy. I don't like sharia, but I'm not about to blow myself up over it. What the hell good would that do?

About as much good as the terrorists are doing now. They thought they were abused and discriminated against before? I hope they realize that THEY are the ones who turned every American eye toward them with hatred. Before 9/11, I had no opinion about the middle east at all. Now I do. Thanks to the "terrorists".

Remember the Alamo??

Santa Ana of the Mexican army. they still didnt run in wearing bombs to self detonate in a crowd of civilians.

[Veiled Princess 1]

and the peace efforts of getting Israel to back out of Gaza west bank.. yep.. TOTALLY anti-arab there too.

But yet Palestine is still an occupied land....

[Mirorgate 0]

and the peace efforts of getting Israel to back out of Gaza west bank.. yep.. TOTALLY anti-arab there too.

But yet Palestine is still an occupied land....

notice the word effort. notice there is no word of accomplished in there. there are give n take in all negotiations... unfortunately when someone of the other side (HAMAS) decides to hurry the process up by detonating a bomb within civilians... it kinda makes the process take longer than actual hurry up.. dontcha think?

and palestine has been occupied by more than just Israeli buffer zone. forget about the ottoman empire? how about trans-jordan? did they use terror bombings then? no? why not? why only justify it now?

[godsavethequeen 0]

Remember the Alamo??

Santa Ana of the Mexican army. they still didnt run in wearing bombs to self detonate in a crowd of civilians.

I'm on about Crockett and Bowie, Suicide Death Wish Terrorists?? .... kinda. Fighting to the death the only way they felt they had left. Ain't saying it is right but you push people so far and eventually they react.

The American Revolution.... Terrorists???? Against Great Britian? Maybe!!

Edited August 18, 2006 by godsavethequeen

[Veiled Princess 1]

notice the word effort. notice there is no word of accomplished in there. there are give n take in all negotiations... unfortunately when someone of the other side (HAMAS) decides to hurry the process up by detonating a bomb within civilians... it kinda makes the process take longer than actual hurry up.. dontcha think?

and palestine has been occupied by more than just Israeli buffer zone. forget about the ottoman empire? how about trans-jordan? did they use terror bombings then? no? why not? why only justify it now?

Yes I do.

[Mirorgate 0]

Remember the Alamo??

Santa Ana of the Mexican army. they still didnt run in wearing bombs to self detonate in a crowd of civilians.

I'm on about Crockett and Bowie, Suicide Death Wish Terrorists?? .... kinda. Fighting to the death the only way they felt they had left. Ain't saying it is right but you push people so far and eventually they react.

The American Revolution.... Terrorists???? Against Great Britian? Maybe!!

guerilla warfare to start, granted... but we finally did gather an army together... and I dont remember the targets being other than british military (besides that whole tea incident.. they just didnt replace with coffee quick enough.. our bad )

and the alamo... well... when the choice is surrender and die or fight n die... at least death is an option. again... blowing up bombs amidst civilians wasnt done.

notice the word effort. notice there is no word of accomplished in there. there are give n take in all negotiations... unfortunately when someone of the other side (HAMAS) decides to hurry the process up by detonating a bomb within civilians... it kinda makes the process take longer than actual hurry up.. dontcha think?

and palestine has been occupied by more than just Israeli buffer zone. forget about the ottoman empire? how about trans-jordan? did they use terror bombings then? no? why not? why only justify it now?

Yes I do.

then now you know why palestine is still occupied, and we're in agreement. interfering with the governmental negotiated process slows it down.

[ceriserose 1]

No, but there is such a thing as sympathy. Just because you haven't lived through what I have and vice versa, doesn't mean that we can't relate to one another by virtue of the fact that (ostensibly) have the common human emotion of sympathy.

I'm not asking you to agree. I'm just asking you not to devalue something someone else says because you choose not to relate to it. The actions that occurred throughout history all bring us to this point; the actions you see now will affect the future just as surely as the past has. It is completely valid to look at the issues going on within the ME in the context of 'their' history and in the context of US history (in terms of foreign policy and relations). Why should it be less valid to view US current actions in the context of US history?

I'm not talking about sympathising with anyone. Sympathy and understanding are two different things.

It's easy to say I sympathise with somone but it's totally another thing to understand what drove them to behave in a certain manner because you yourself have experienced it. I hope you get my point.

What you're talking about is sympathy and empathy. I, a cauasian woman cannot empathize with a ME man because our paradigms are too dissimilar. However, I can sympathize with the difficulty they go through because I can imagine what it must be like.

Human beings can imagine what it would be like to have been a human being 150 years ago too. We can imagine (aka put ourselves in the place of for greater UNDERSTANDING of others) a variety of things we don't experience.

What you're saying, in essence, is that what happened 150 years ago isn't as relevant to you as what's happening in the ME today. Fair enough. Charles felt it appropriate to draw a parallel to 150 years ago, something that is relevant to him and possibly to others. And you not only negated it out of turn as irrelevant but insisted that because we don't live it, we can't possibly understand.

Personally I can't understand 150 years ago, nor can I understand the ME conflicts. I can, however, sympathize. That was where the 'sympathy' was brought in. You, a US citizen presumably do not live there full time. You can't even 'understand' fully what someone there goes through. You might have factors that mean you can sympathize more readily or have a greater understanding than someone else could.

I would hazard that if you determine things as irrelevant so will others and in the past you haven't seemed to appreciate when it's done to you.

[godsavethequeen 0]

guerilla warfare to start, granted...

Terrorism by any other name surely?

but we finally did gather an army together...

As is happening in the Palestine raising an army!!

and I dont remember the targets being other than british military (besides that whole tea incident.. they just didnt replace with coffee quick enough.. our bad)

I prefer coffee to watery tea any day. ...and you seriously trying to say no civilian died during that war??

and the alamo... well... when the choice is surrender and die or fight n die... at least death is an option. again... .

Which is the way certain minority around the world feel .....their last option

blowing up bombs amidst civilians wasnt done

........civilians have always died in war - Hiroshima, Dresden, London, Palestine, Israel, Vietnam, Staligrad..... every war has civilian deaths. the days of Armies fighting civilised wars?? On a civilised battle field (if such a thing ever existed) are gone and I do not think ever existed

[*Robert* 2]

Kamakazi's seem to ring a bell...

[Mirorgate 0]

guerilla warfare to start, granted...

Terrorism by any other name surely?

but we finally did gather an army together...

As is happening in the Palestine raising an army!!

and I dont remember the targets being other than british military (besides that whole tea incident.. they just didnt replace with coffee quick enough.. our bad)

I prefer coffee to watery tea any day. ...and you seriously trying to say no civilian died during that war??

and the alamo... well... when the choice is surrender and die or fight n die... at least death is an option. again... .

Which is the way certain minority around the world feel .....their last option

blowing up bombs amidst civilians wasnt done

........civilians have always died in war - Hiroshima, Dresden, London, Palestine, Israel, Vietnam, Staligrad..... every war has civilian deaths. the days of Armies fighting civilised wars?? On a civilised battle field (if such a thing ever existed) are gone and I do not think ever existed

no guerilla warfare <> terrorist activity as guerilla warfare is hit and run strategy. strapping on an explosive with nails/ball bearings in canisters to inflict high damage potential in civilian areas are different.

civilian casualties do regrettably happen. collateral damage I believe is the new hip term for it. armies train to fight armies... terrorists train to inflict pain and terror to the civilian people. suicide bomber preparedness camps...?

the alamo does not equate to "certain minorities" regardless of how they choose to justify their actions. Sorry, I do not see the correlation.

"civilised warfare" where two opposing armies met on the "field of honor" and blew each other up at about 100-200 yrds seperation. true enough... war is not "civilised" nor will it ever be. civilians die in warfare, that is also another truth, and sad one at that. the difference is... modern armies (key word .. and no.. palestine doesnt have one yet) do not strap explosive to their minions and send them purposefully into a mall or cafe. true or not?

Kamakazi's seem to ring a bell...

on military targets... Imperial Army of Japan with Bushido and Samurai in effect would abhore the needless killing of civilians.

[jezebelseven 0]

Hey Jezebelseven, outta curiosity...since your headband is so much 'a part of you' I'm curious as to whether or not you wore it for your photos for the visa app?

For my visa app, no, but I also had to remove my glasses, too, and they're a part of me as well-- I am legally blind without them. I initially had them on when I had my first round of visa photos taken at a local store, but they came out incredibly blurry and made my hair cast shadows, and my glasses were incredibly glared. Thanks, untrained employees who can't even work their own digital camera. Got a refund after having to actually point out the problems in it, as the workers were oblivious.

I went elsewhere as I was worried they would be rejected. For the second round, I went in and removed everything from my head, just to make it simpler. That was my choice. It's also in every single photo I sent in as proof, minus one where you can't see them as it's dark.

I went by the guidelines that the passport regulations state, that all headgear should be removed unless it is a religious thing. My ears are not my religion, and if they were, I wouldn't put that on my fiance to explain, as he is not a religious man.

To whoever made the thinly veiled attempted at calling me a teenager, that's fine, again, make your judgements based on how I look and what I said to Cian. I just hope you realize how ironic it is that you talk about respect, but then make a silly assumption of a person because of the way they look and one single offquoted line, rather than just ignoring it as it has nothing to do with you.

I work and see kids, teenagers, adults, some who just need to see something silly to make them smile. They're sick, they're scared, they're tired, they're poor, whatever. Even something as silly as a girl with pink hair and cat ears waving at them somehow makes them smile. All the children who stare at me with a huge smile on their faces, with wide eyes, those are the ones that make me happy to be me, and no number of people with their defeatist attitudes can cheapen that. It's just sad the negativist attitude has to come from an adult who claims to be all about the respect.

Out of all the forums I frequent and moderate, many of them filled with preteens, teens, and 20 somethings, they're less drama than this board which is filled with supposed adults who are getting ready to be married. No wonder there's a need for a divorce forum when people can't bother to pull themselves from the drama that is VJ and act like adults, versus bickering children. This place is like reliving high school, catty (pun not intended but still hilarious) girls, gossip queens, arguements over trivial things, name calling. I, meanwhile, am going to go take my recess and play on the monkey bars, cause I already had my fill of high school drama years ago.

[Fandango 1,439]

Hey Jezebelseven, outta curiosity...since your headband is so much 'a part of you' I'm curious as to whether or not you wore it for your photos for the visa app?

For my visa app, no, but I also had to remove my glasses, too, and they're a part of me as well-- I am legally blind without them. I initially had them on when I had my first round of visa photos taken at a local store, but they came out incredibly blurry and made my hair cast shadows, and my glasses were incredibly glared. Thanks, untrained employees who can't even work their own digital camera. Got a refund after having to actually point out the problems in it, as the workers were oblivious.

I went elsewhere as I was worried they would be rejected. For the second round, I went in and removed everything from my head, just to make it simpler. That was my choice. It's also in every single photo I sent in as proof, minus one where you can't see them as it's dark.

I went by the guidelines that the passport regulations state, that all headgear should be removed unless it is a religious thing. My ears are not my religion, and if they were, I wouldn't put that on my fiance to explain, as he is not a religious man.

To whoever made the thinly veiled attempted at calling me a teenager, that's fine, again, make your judgements based on how I look and what I said to Cian. I just hope you realize how ironic it is that you talk about respect, but then make a silly assumption of a person because of the way they look and one single offquoted line, rather than just ignoring it as it has nothing to do with you.

I work and see kids, teenagers, adults, some who just need to see something silly to make them smile. They're sick, they're scared, they're tired, they're poor, whatever. Even something as silly as a girl with pink hair and cat ears waving at them somehow makes them smile. All the children who stare at me with a huge smile on their faces, with wide eyes, those are the ones that make me happy to be me, and no number of people with their defeatist attitudes can cheapen that. It's just sad the negativist attitude has to come from an adult who claims to be all about the respect.

Out of all the forums I frequent and moderate, many of them filled with preteens, teens, and 20 somethings, they're less drama than this board which is filled with supposed adults who are getting ready to be married. No wonder there's a need for a divorce forum when people can't bother to pull themselves from the drama that is VJ and act like adults, versus bickering children. This place is like reliving high school, catty (pun not intended but still hilarious) girls, gossip queens, arguements over trivial things, name calling. I, meanwhile, am going to go take my recess and play on the monkey bars, cause I already had my fill of high school drama years ago.

Yeah, divorce is only an issure to VJers cos we're immature

[jezebelseven 0]

Yeah, divorce is only an issure to VJers cos we're immature

I didn't say it was the only reason, and I figured that would be your reply, but it certainly doesn't help when people can't learn to get along over things that don't even have to do with each other, like what I wear on my head. It doesn't mean people will or won't divorce, but it's not a good sign as far as my eyes see.

Edited August 18, 2006 by jezebelseven

[almaty 19]

allot of muslims recognize israel as a nation and a right to have their borders protected and be free from terrorism...and allot of islam nations have diplomatic realtions with israel.. so, what is the beef? i have no problem with israel... i do have a problem with terrorists though whether they be muslim influenced, christian, jewish, pagans, chopf##ks, hindus, commies or whatever.. deliberating killing noncombatants is wrong and criminal ..and sisters against the the teachings of the Qu'ram

Edited August 18, 2006 by almaty

[Fandango 1,439]

Yeah, divorce is only an issure to VJers cos we're immature

I didn't say it was the only reason, and I figured that would be your reply, but it certainly doesn't help when people can't learn to get along over things that don't even have to do with each other, like what I wear on my head.

One thing has nowt to do with the other....and I find it a complete olympic sized leap for you to even attempt a relation between the two. This is a marriage-visa forum. We have seen many of our friends here wind up in a mess of divorce with all the usual questions & problems. How that relates to you getting your knickers in a twist over someone giving you her opinion, is anyone's guess.

You didn't say it was the only reason..that is true...but it's NO reason whatsoever & completely and utterly irrelevant

Wanting to give support to those whose marriages have not wound up to be happily ever after is not because we're so 'juvenile'

Edited August 18, 2006 by LisaD