What's up with this photo?

A

AnthonyRoundtree

CAGiversary!
i was clicking through yahoo and i found this Photo of a bunch of Iraqi kids on a merry-go-round....

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...l_afp/050416075303_s0rrlwxf_photo0&e=29&ncid=

i think it looks either fake....

or its one hell of piece of dangerous playground equipment.


am i crazy?

here.

capt.sge.hjf95.160405075257.photo00.photo.default-307x384.jpg
 
It's a thing that spins in a circular motion and you're supposed to sit down on it, the seats are higher than the floor just like chairs (most of them are sitting like this). The three who are standing are hanging onto the rope in the middle, they probably aren't supposed to stand but that isn't stopping them. Hanging onto the rope prevents them from falling off. One of the girls is copping a feel hoping the other girl won't notice.

What's so unbelievable? Saddam wasn't exactly like kim jong il or the taliban, he didn't outlaw fun.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']

What's so unbelievable? Saddam wasn't exactly like kim jong il or the taliban, he didn't outlaw fun.[/QUOTE]



oh no its not necessarily a political question....

more of physics or even possible photoshop-ness....

i've never seen a merry-go-round suspended from a rope.... and it looked like it was on a metal pole... but at a 45 degree angle?

just looked fake. thought it might be some kind of weirdass hackjob wag the dog picture of iraqis having fun....just because it looks so fake....

not that i believe sadam was outlawing fun... but just because it popped out as strange.


i dunno.
i'm crazy...
 
Yeah, it looks like a swing they set up in their back yard, or some other private area on their household property. And if its in someone's backyard, Saddam might outlaw fun but he has to catch them first!
 
I think the oddest thing is the "resort town" part.

Look at the lovely sand covered in blood and dead bodies!
 
[quote name='Lina']A couple of them are actually cute.

Iraqi girls shouldn't be forced to cover up.[/QUOTE]

They aren't.

Iraq was before, and is still one of the most secular arab nations. Probably the only nation with more religious freedom would be Jordan.
 
They always show pics of women covered up, though.

Although, it is US news... and Saddam must be the evilest person ever.
 
[quote name='Lina']They always show pics of women covered up, though.

Although, it is US news... and Saddam must be the evilest person ever.[/QUOTE]

Well, US news does have it's own slant, and Saddam is evil. That is, if you believe in some sort of sliding moral scale that you can weigh one person's actions with and determine a single word description such as evil.

I believe you have to see the actions through the eyes of the person. You have to understand his motivations.

The women covered up is probably Iran, or Afganistan that you're thinking of.
 
[quote name='Lina']They always show pics of women covered up, though.

Although, it is US news... and Saddam must be the evilest person ever.[/QUOTE]

It may seem odd to you, but many women choose, 100% on their own, to wear hijabs. While it's true some government force people to wear them, they are not a sign of oppression. Some women even choose to wear burkas, though you don't see too many around here (I've only seen about 4 or 5 different people in these on my campus), a month or so ago there was a court case in the u.s., the woman wanted a drivers license but had refused to take off her burka for the picture, citing her religion. I think she won, though I'm not sure. But there are tons of women with hijabs around here. I love arab women, and I seem to have developed a hijab fetish (something I don't think they'd be too happy to hear).

The odd thing is burkas have no basis in the qu'uran, and even hijabs aren't really based on the qu'uran, but local customs, though there are references to coverings similar to the hijab, but not in a "you have to wear it" sort of way. Oddly enough, the bible actually says (think it's new testament) says it's a sin for women to pray without covering their head, but no one listens to it. One of mohamuds wives (or daughters, can't remember) didn't cover her hair either.

Though I doubt saddam would qualify as the "most evil", or even the worst of current rulers (Well, former now). Kim jong il and that guy in uzbekistan are pretty bad, then there's the people in sudan etc.

Though, as someone said, Iraq was a secular country, that's why terrorists such as osama hated him so much.
 
Someone in my English class wears one all the time, she doesn't have to but she chooses too.

And USA media isn't biased towards "Suddam is evil", CNN was on his side.
 
[quote name='David85']Someone in my English class wears one all the time, she doesn't have to but she chooses too.

And USA media isn't biased towards "Suddam is evil", CNN was on his side.[/QUOTE]

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

that was great
 
Well, this took a political turn. My two:

[quote name='Lina']They always show pics of women covered up, though.

Although, it is US news... and Saddam must be the evilest person ever.[/QUOTE]

If everyone recalls, Dubya went on his power trip as a consequence of 9/11. Who was the target? Afghanistan. So why was Iraq attacked as well? It was preemptive strike meant to dissuade nations that harbor terrorists (which Dubya accuses Iraq of) or have WMDs. I don't know whether or not that is the truth. Only Dubya knows that. Now if you get your news locally i.e. CBS, NBC, ABC, and FOX (and cable shows such as CNN), you're only seeing one half of the equation. Everything is about spin nowadays and so everyone is throwing their bias in what they report. Considering that these networks are primarily owned by Westerners, it's easy to see their one-sidedness. I always seek to find a counterbalance between what is fed to me from CNN and what I can find out through non-conventional newsources such as the Al-Jazeera network (to see what the Middle Easterners think... though to be honest, it's easy to see that they sometimes have their own propaganda as well) or the BBC (to see what our European counterparts are thinking). What does this have to do with women covering up? Simple, the US has propaganda too. When I went to college, I had the strange privilege of having a female Muslim as a partner in one of my classes. After we got bored of studying, I decided to ask her why she wears her get-up in the hot weather. I told her it's cool to respect her religion and all but isn't there an instance in which her god would forgive her for wearing such sweat-inducing clothes? And she told me, it's not that my god won't forgive me if I take them off, it is simply because it is my belief in modesty that I maintain such clothing. And for the record, she said, "The clothes I wear are actually quite loose and comfortable even in hot environments; why do you think a lot of people living in a hot desert area wear them?" That was another misconception that was blown away for me. Moral? Don't believe what you are fed. Find out more before making rash judgments.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']Though I doubt saddam would qualify as the "most evil", or even the worst of current rulers (Well, former now). Kim jong il and that guy in uzbekistan are pretty bad, then there's the people in sudan etc.

Though, as someone said, Iraq was a secular country, that's why terrorists such as osama hated him so much.[/QUOTE]

Well, Saddam killed millions, and certainly he's up there if not THE worst. Kim Jong Il has let millions die of starvation and his insane policies have even led to cannibalism in the streets of North Korean cities, not to mention all the usual authoritarian oppression, so obviously he's in the same category. The Sudanese thing is less one person and more a group of people. I don't know enough about Uzbekistan, but I don't think mass murder on the scale of millions has occured there. So I think you could reasonably say Saddam is the worst of those, or was thank goodness.

Iraq may have been fairly secular, but according to the 9/11 commission al Qaeda representatives met with Iraqi officials several times on friendly terms, one guy who escaped from the US after being involved in the WTC bombing in 1993 went to Baghdad and was harbored, not to mention Zarqawi. I don't think you can make a blanket statement that Saddam was anti-terrorist. He even was paying Palestinian suicide bombers, a well-known fact.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top