View allAll Photos Tagged LIBERTIES
A scene in the Northern Liberties section of Philadelphia PA, right after an afternoon rain.
**If you'd like to see Flickr's great photos of Philadelphia, please join this brand new group designed the showcase the city's best imagery: www.flickr.com/groups/philadelphiapa/
****
The General Charter of Jewish Liberties, known as the Statute of Kalisz was issued by Boleslaw the Pious, September 8, 1264. The Statute granted wide-ranging and unprecedented legal rights to the Jews of Poland, including freedom of worship, and the right to trade and travel. Arthur Szyk reminded both Poles and Jews in the 20th century of this historic precedent through his seminal work, a visual interpretation of the text Statute of Kalisz (published in 1932), executed in the style of a medieval illuminated manuscript; the 45 paintings were exhibited widely in Poland. This Polish and French title page or frontispiece shows Casimir III the Great enthroned.
Date
1927
Source
The Arthur Szyk Society, Burlingame, CA (www.szyk.org)
Author
Arthur Szyk (1894–1951) Blue pencil.svg wikidata:Q711673
Arthur Szyk
Alternative names
Artur Szyk
Description
American-Polish caricaturist, painter and illustrator
Date of birth/death
16 June 1894 Edit this at Wikidata
13 September 1951 Edit this at Wikidata
Location of birth/death
Łódź
New Canaan
Work period
1914 Edit this at Wikidata–1951 Edit this at Wikidata
you like the view, al?
it's ok I guess. a little. . . confining though.
get used to it. it's all you're gonna see for a few years.
whaddya mean?
I mean boss is stashing you here. for your own good. and his.
but I didn't do nothin'!
not how he sees it.
gee. can't I talk to him?
don't make it worse. you're lucky to be alive.
yeah? I don't feel like it. do I at least get a roommate?
sorry. it was supposed to be eddie. but he didn't make it.
why?
don't ask.
guess maybe I'm lucky after all.
compared to that loser, eddie, very lucky.
you sure?
positive.
Taking liberties with the actual wording on the door just to amuse myself. This is the defunct Knights of Pythian Hall in Weatherford, TX
I took some creative liberties with this image as these clouds were shot in the morning. I haven't spent much time out here and Saturday morning Walter and I got to spend the entire day exploring. Left the house at 3:30 am and didn't get home till after 10 pm. that night! We ran into NW Phototours while we were out there but I was a tad shy to introduce myself. The fruit loop is just so beautiful so please make some time for a visit while the fields are in bloom. Happy Monday and thanks for stoppin by :)
cool laid back bar in Northern Liberties... www.thriftbooks.com/w/the-druids-keep_terry-brooks/657599...
Like many restored trams, Sheffield 74 takes too many liberties to qualify as a faithful reconstruction of the original but it does recreate a vehicle that would not look, in anyway, out of place to the Sheffield public of its day.
Built in 1900 for the Sheffield Corporation tramways by the Electric Railway and Carriage Co of Preston, car 74 was one of a class of open top trams built between 1899 and 1904 by various manufacturers. As built 74 was fitted with a Brill 21E truck, 2 X25hp BTH GE25 motors and BTH B13 controllers. The short upper deck cover was added in 1909. In 1922 the Gateshead & District Tramways Company purchased five of the class including 74 which became their car 33 and was rebuilt with a normal canopied top deck cover. The car ran until 1951, the final year of the Gateshead tramways and the lower saloon sold to become a garden shed to be acquired for preservation in 1990. A top cover was added from Sheffield City Tramways built car 218 and a Peckham Cantilever truck fitted from Leeds. Although car 74 had never run on this type of truck, the almost identical trams of this class built by G. F. Mines had. The car is running with 2 X BTH GE52 27hp motors and BTH B18 controllers.
The car is a regular performer at Crich and one of the best cars to experience the 4-wheel bounce!
And with the sea you never take liberties.
You ask her, you don't tell her.
You have to remember always that she's the leader, not you.
You and your boat are dancing to her tune.
Michael Morpurgo
Image created in Stable Diffusion & Topaz Studio
© ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Use without permission is illegal.
Please, don't fave and run, you will get yourself blocked.
I took some liberties with this shot from the Star Wars Rebels Midseason trailer, but I just couldn't help it. Obi-Wan potentially facing off against Darth Maul was just too good to pass up.
Rebels has made Maul into a much more interesting character than Episode 1 ever allowed. I have a feeling there is going to be much more to this scene than a lightsaber battle. Can't wait.
The scene itself went through numerous build iterations until settling upon what you see above. Though the campfire is super subtle, it proved to be an immense pain in the ass to put it together. Hope you like.
Thanks for looking, and be sure to tune into Rebels every Saturday on Disney XD.... at least I think that's where/when it airs. I just watch it on iTunes since we don't have cable :)
Designed by James H. McGill and completed in 1875, the Northern Liberties Market and Convention Hall, seen on this early 20th century postcard, once stood at 5th and K Streets NW. Read more about its history here: www.streetsofwashington.com/2010/09/washingtons-first-con...
An apartment building in the Northern Liberties section of Philadelphia.
PCA - *REPETITION*
While working this week in Philadelphia, I've been keeping my eye out for some form of non-cliché repetition. This subject kinda took me by surprise, as it wasn't the kind of linear repetition I was imagining, but rather a burst if offset, multi-level patterns.
Taking liberties with the Galleria Italia at the AGO.
*** *** ***
(Press "L" to view in Lightboard mode with black background.)
I've taken some liberties, especially with Kodiak. My versions of these characters.
Golgotha, Magus, Onyx, Butcher, Kodiak
comicvine.gamespot.com/golgotha/4005-95168/
comicvine.gamespot.com/magus/4005-87522/
comicvine.gamespot.com/onyx/4005-3723/
L'Hemisfèric also known as the planetarium or the “eye of knowledge,” is the centerpiece of the City of Arts and Sciences.
Valencia, Spain.
I took PS liberties ;-)
SPNP Instruction #23 "There is a crack in everything - that's how the light gets in..." from 'Anthem' by Leonard Cohen - Frederic Lezmi
I wanted to explore this instruction via the contrasts and cracks in urbanity around us. The scene is from the garage-converted horse-stables just behind the main street of the liberties, in Dublin inner city west. Bob Tembo got his latte round the corner, horse is in for a shampoo.
I prize individual liberties and self determination above any other aspect of our society. It is hard to reconcile individual liberties with the need for society to act as a whole to bring this pandemic under control. I'm sick of the conspiracy theories and political motivations spinning this pandemic. The reality is inside the walls of the hospitals.
So many nurses have come out and painted the horrific situations within. I do not feel the need to add to that with my own stories. The fact is people will believe what they want to believe. But the reality is there. And perhaps the most ironic twist to the whole pandemic is the manipulation of those who do not want to be manipulated. The control of those who want to be free. You were sold a pack of lies. A false bill of goods. You believed the bullshit spread in the name of an agenda.
I encourage everyone to simply look at the numbers. If you do not believe the numbers, go to the hospital. Talk to nurses. A year ago nurses enjoyed a public trust that priests, police officers and journalists could only dream of. Yet today people want to believe politicians and nut job conspiracy theorists instead. The voice of those in health care is united and emphatic. Masking works. Social distancing works. Quarantine works. We have had the tools to defeat this pandemic all along. If you chose not to use them then you were manipulated and led like a sheep to the slaughter. And you probably took a few others with you. Reconcile that.
Louisiana
368,980 confirmed cases
8,203 deaths
National Death Toll
394,621
Becket, Aurelia and I went to Northern Liberties for the day. No one was out, so the city was ours. I really like Becket's expression in this one.
Those familar with the setting, will recognize the the liberties taken with editing, to squeeze the marquee into the frame.
On 6 September 2025, Parliament Square was transformed into a stage for a rare act of mass civil defiance. Beneath the gaze of Gandhi’s statue, an iconic symbol of non-violent resistance, hundreds gathered in silent protest against the British government’s decision to outlaw Palestine Action.
في يوم 6 سبتمبر 2025، تحوّل ميدان البرلمان إلى مسرح لفعل نادر من العصيان المدني الجماعي. وتحت تمثال غاندي، الرمز الأيقوني للمقاومة السلمية، اجتمع المئات في احتجاج صامت ضد قرار الحكومة البريطانية بحظر حركة "بالستين أكشن
("Palestine Action")
They stood with cardboard signs, each one hand-lettered with the same simple message: “I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.” Every participant knew the risk. Under Britain’s terrorism laws, even this quiet declaration could mean arrest, prosecution, and a lengthy prison sentence, as the state now brands peaceful dissent and protest as terrorism.
One man quietly handed out information leaflets to onlookers which cut through the mainstream media narrative: Israel has killed over 63,000 Palestinians in Gaza, driven 90% from their homes, and deliberately starved children by cutting off food and medicine.
International genocide scholars, the United Nations, Amnesty, Human Rights Watch, and even Israel's human rights group B'Tselem all agree: this is genocide, not “conflict.” Britain, by arming Israel and silencing its critics, is complicit in genocide.
These protesters acted with selfless courage to protest that. They acted because silence would mean complicity and because a crime of this scale cannot be ignored.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Protest and the Price of Dissent: Palestine Action and the Criminalisation of Conscience
Parliament Square on Saturday, 6 September 2025 was a scene of quiet, almost solemn defiance. The air, usually thick with the noise of London traffic and crowds of tourists, was instead filled with a palpable tension, a shared gravity that emanated from the quiet determination of hundreds of protesters, many of them over 60 years old, some sitting on steps or stools and others lying on the grass.
They held not professionally printed banners, but handwritten cardboard signs, their messages stark against the historic grandeur of their surroundings. This was not a march of chants and slogans, but a silent vigil of civil disobedience, a deliberate and calculated act of defiance against the state.
On that day, my task was to photograph the protest against the proscription of the direct-action group Palestine Action. While not always agreeing entirely with the group’s methods, I could not help but be struck by the profound dedication etched on the faces of the individual protesters.
As they sat in silence, contemplating both the horrific gravity of the situation in Gaza and the enormity of the personal risk they were taking — courting arrest under terror laws for holding a simple placard — their expressions took on a quality not dissimilar to what war photographers once called the “thousand-yard stare.” It was a look of weary but deep and determined resolve, a silent testament to their readiness to face life-changing prosecution in the name of a principle.
This scene poses a profound and unsettling question for modern Britain. How did the United Kingdom, a nation that prides itself on its democratic traditions and the right to protest, arrive at a point where hundreds of its citizens — clergy, doctors, veterans, and the elderly — could be arrested under counter-terrorism legislation for an act of silent, peaceful protest?
The events of that September afternoon were the culmination of a complex and contentious series of developments, but their significance extends far beyond a single organisation or demonstration. The proscription of Palestine Action has become a critical juncture in the nation’s relationship with dissent, a test of the elasticity of free expression, and a stark examination of its obligations under international law in the face of Israel deliberately engineering a catastrophic humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
To understand what is at stake, one must unravel the threads that led to that moment: the identity of the movement, the state’s legal machinery of proscription, the confrontation in Parliament Square, and the political context that compelled so many to risk their liberty.
Direct Action and the State’s Response
Palestine Action, established in 2020, has never hidden its approach. Unlike traditional lobbying groups, it rejected appeals to political elites in favour of disrupting the physical infrastructure of complicity: factories producing parts for Israeli weapons systems, offices of arms manufacturers, and — eventually — military installations themselves.
Its tactics, while non-violent, were disruptive and confrontational. Red paint sprayed across buildings to symbolise blood, occupations that halted production, chains and locks on factory gates. For supporters, these were acts of conscience against a system enabling atrocities in Gaza. For the state, they were criminal disruptions of commerce.
That clash escalated steadily. In Oldham, a persistent campaign against Elbit Systems, a key manufacturer in the Israeli arms supply chain, culminated in the company abandoning its Ferranti site. Later actions targeted suppliers for F-35 fighter jets and other arms manufacturers.
These were no random acts of mindless vandalism but part of a deliberate strategy: to impose costs high enough that complicity in Israel’s war effort would become unsustainable.
The decisive rupture came in June 2025, when activists infiltrated RAF Brize Norton, Britain’s largest airbase, and sprayed red paint into the engines of refuelling aircraft linked to operations over Gaza.
For the activists, it was a desperate attempt to interrupt a supply chain of surveillance and logistical support to a state commiting genocide. For the government, it crossed a line: military assets had been attacked. Within days, the Home Secretary announced Palestine Action would be proscribed as a terrorist organisation.
Proscription and the Expansion of “Terrorism”
Here lies the heart of the controversy. The Terrorism Act 2000 defines terrorism with unusual breadth, encompassing not only threats to life but also “serious damage to property” carried out for political or ideological aims. In this capacious definition, breaking a factory window or disabling a machine can be legally assimilated to mass murder.
By invoking this law, the government placed Palestine Action on the same legal footing as al-Qaeda or ISIS. Supporting it — even symbolically — became a serious offence.
Since July 2025, merely expressing support for the organization can carry a maximum prison sentence of 14 years.
This is based on Section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000. The specific offense is "recklessly expressing support for a proscribed organisation". However, according to Section 13 of the Act, a lower-level offence for actions like displaying hand held placards in support of a proscribed group carries a maximum sentence of six months imprisonment or a fine of five thousand pounds or both.
Civil liberties groups and human rights bodies have denounced the proscription move as disproportionate. Their concern was not primarily whether Palestine Action’s tactics might violate existing criminal law. One might reasonably argue that they did unless they might sometimes be justified in the name of preventing a greater crime.
But reframing those actions as “terrorism” represented a dangerous category error. As many pointed out, terrorism has historically referred to violence against civilians. Expanding it to cover property damage risks draining the term of meaning. Worse, it arms the state with a stigma so powerful that it can delegitimise entire political positions without debate.
The implications go further. Proscription does not simply criminalise acts. It criminalises expressions of allegiance, conscience and even speech. To say “I support Palestine Action” is no longer an opinion but technically a serious crime. The state has moved from punishing deeds to punishing expressions of solidarity — a move with chilling consequences for democratic life.
Parliament Square: Civil Disobedience on Trial
It was this transformation that brought nearly 1,500 people into Parliament Square on 6 September. They knew what awaited them. Organisers announced in advance that protesters would hold signs reading: “I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.” In doing so, they openly declared their intent to break the law.
The crowd was strikingly diverse. Retired doctors, clergy, war veterans, even an 83-year-old Anglican priest. Disabled activists came in wheelchairs; descendants of Holocaust survivors stood beside young students. This was not a hardened cadre of militants but a cross-section of society, many of whom had never before faced arrest.
At precisely 1 pm, the protesters all sat or lay down silently, cardboard signs raised. There was no chanting, no aggression — only a quiet insistence that they would not accept the criminalisation of conscience.
The police response was equally predictable. Hundreds of officers moved systematically through the crowd, arresting anyone displaying a sign. By the end of the day, nearly 900 people were detained under counter-terrorism law. It was one of the largest mass arrests in modern British history.
Official statements later alleged police were met with violence — officers punched, spat on, objects thrown. Yet independent observers, including Amnesty International, contradicted this. They reported a peaceful assembly disrupted by aggressive policing: batons drawn, protesters shoved, some bloodied.
www.amnesty.org/zh-hans/documents/eur45/0273/2025/en/
Video footage supported at least some of Amnesty's report.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZQGFrqCf5U&t=1283s
The two narratives were irreconcilable, but only one carried the weight and authority of the state.
The entire event unfolded as political theatre. The government proscribed a group, thereby creating a new crime. Protesters, convinced the law was unjust, announced their intent to commit that crime peacefully. The police, forewarned, staged a vast operation. Each side acted out its script. The spectacle allowed the state to present itself as defending order against extremism — while in reality silencing dissent.
The Humanitarian Context: Why Protesters Risked All
To see the Parliament Square protest as a parochial dispute over free speech is to miss its driving force. The demonstrators were not there merely to defend abstract principles. They were responding to what they, and a growing body of international experts, describe as a genocide in Gaza.
By September 2025, Gaza had descended into almost total collapse. Over 63,000 Palestinians had been killed, the majority of them women and children. More than 150,000 had been injured, many maimed for life. Entire neighbourhoods had been flattened.
Famine was confirmed in August, with Israel continuing to impose and even tighten deliberate restrictions on food, water, and fuel, a strategy condemned by human rights groups as a major war crime. Hospitals lay in ruins. Ninety percent of the population had been displaced.
It is in this context that the term genocide has been applied. Legal scholars point not only to mass killings but also to the deliberate infliction of life-destroying conditions, accompanied by rhetoric from Israeli officials dehumanising Palestinians as “human animals.” In September 2025, the International Association of Genocide Scholars declared that Israel’s actions met the legal definition of genocide.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cde3eyzdr63o
Major NGOs, UN experts, and even Israeli human rights groups such as B’Tselem echoed that conclusion.
For the protesters, then, the question was not abstract but immediate: faced with what they saw as a genocide, could they in good conscience remain silent while their own government criminalised resistance to it? Their answer was to risk arrest, their placards making the moral connection explicit: opposing genocide meant supporting those who sought to stop it.
The Price of Dissent
The mass arrests in Parliament Square were not an isolated incident of law enforcement. They were the product of a broader trajectory: escalating tactics by a direct-action movement, a humanitarian catastrophe abroad, and a government determined to suppress dissent at home through the bluntest of instruments.
The official line insists that Palestine Action’s campaign constituted terrorism and thus warranted proscription. On this view, the arrests were simple enforcement of the law. Yet this account obscures the deeper reality: a precedent in which the state redefined non-lethal protest as terrorism, shifting from punishing actions to criminalising expressions of solidarity.
The cost is profound. Once speech and conscience themselves become suspect, dissent is no longer tolerated but pathologised. The chilling effect is already evident: individuals weigh not just whether to join a protest, but whether uttering support might expose them to years in prison. Terror laws, originally justified as a shield against mass violence, are recast as tools of political management.
The protesters understood this. That “thousand-yard stare” captured in their faces was not only the weight of potential arrest, but the knowledge of Gaza’s devastation, the famine and rubble, the deaths mounting daily. It was also the recognition that their own government had chosen to silence them rather than address its complicity.
In a functioning democracy, the question is not why citizens risk arrest for holding a handwritten cardboard sign. It is why a state finds it necessary to treat that act as a terror offence. The answer reveals a narrowing of democratic space, where conscience itself is deemed subversive. And that narrowing, history teaches, carries consequences not just for those arrested, but for the society that allows it.