View allAll Photos Tagged answer
More pics from my first year as a photo journalist for a local paper. I picked a good time to start. A presidential election year was full of interesting moments to capture including this stumping of Bill Clinton for his wife Hillary's Presidential campaign. Sadly, I did not get any assignments to catch Hillary in action. Mostly because her campaigning in New York was limited and mostly announced and planned at the last minute. A result most likely because she was already expected to win New York but I felt most of her campaign was run in that manner which eventually cost her dearly as far as being out of touch with what was happening at the ground level.
Read more on: lakitgum.wordpress.com/2008/03/08/my-hero-bishop-macleord...
--------------------------------------------------------
"If he calls me, I will answer,
I’ll be somewhere working for my Lord."
Bishop Ochola is the retired bishop of Kitgum Diocese in the Church of Uganda. Kitgum is in the heart of Acholiland, in the northern part of Uganda, a region wracked by a devastating and ongoing war between the Lord’s Resistance Army (a cult-like insurgency group without apparent political aims) and the Uganda defense forces, with violence directed by both armies against the civilian population of northern Uganda. The northern Ugandan conflict, which has created what is currently the worst and deadliest civilian crisis that has as yet escaped the attention of the international community (several hundred people die daily in the Internally Displaced Persons’, or IDP, camps scattered across northern Uganda), cannot be understood without understanding both the religious origins of the Lord’s Resistance Army (as an African traditional religion cult with Islamic rituals and a Christian veneer of Scripture quotations and references to the “Holy Spirit”, though likely misunderstood through a misnaming of God in the Luo language to suggest an evil river spirit who twists human beings through tuberculosis of the spine) and the ethnic nature of what can only be termed the slow extinction - or genocide - of the Acholi, a Luo people of northern Uganda.
In that earlier essay I wrote (once again giving my caveat that adequate discussion of this conflict lies beyond the scope of my own understanding and ability to convey the truth about it),
The political situation with regards to the conflict in northern Uganda, both politically and ecclesiastically, is complicated and fraught with misunderstanding and grievous errors in judgment and action…
The northern Uganda conflict has largely been ignored not only by the international community but also by the government in Kampala, largely because of the ethnic division that has existed in the nation of Uganda for many years, an ethnic division between Luo (largely northern) tribes and Bantu (largely southern) tribes that existed in precolonial times but which was exacerbated by British colonialism. About half of the archbishops of Uganda have been Luo (and the other half Bantu), but the ethnic divide plagues Ugandan Anglicanism as well (though not violently).
This ethnic divide means that the Bantu majority in the southern part of Uganda enjoy rights and privileges that the northern Luo tribes do not, from education to local infrastructure and business to the simple need for people to be able to live quietly in the own homes without the constant threat of pillaging, kidnapping, rape, and murder. It seems likely that the Museveni government in Kampala has little current interest in ending the conflict with the Lord’s Resistance Army, as it allows the continuation of a situation in which the Luo people of Acholiland are slowing dying off. That this lack of interest is intentional - specifically, that the intent is the genocide of the Acholi - seems likely from the available evidence. President Museveni’s animus for the Luo people is known to many, though not apparently on an international scale such as would produce action to end this humanitarian crisis.
As bishop of the Kitgum Diocese, Bishop Ochola is intimately - on a daily basis - familiar with the privation, fear, and death that mark the lives of the people of northern Uganda.
A Ugandan expatriate friend recounted a bit of Bishop Ochola’s history in a paper he wrote last year:
Bishop MacBaker Ochola has personal experience of the violence in his own family that began at the onset of the war with the rape allegedly by rebels (it could have been the military) of his nearly 19-year old daughter. Bishop MacBaker and his wife, Winifred Ochola were away in Canada on the verge of their return to Northern Uganda when their daughter died. Ten years later, Winifred Ochola was blown to pieces and died instantly when the church pick-up truck she was traveling in hit a landmine allegedly planted by rebels (it could have been the military)! Bishop Ochola often speaks of how he felt on getting the news of the sudden death of his wife, Winifred, even before both of them had fully recovered form the loss of their daughter. “I felt like a tree split by lightning from top to bottom!” Yet today without bitterness, resentment or hatred against the rebels or the military, Bishop Ochola has become one of the most active soldiers for peace in the Northern Uganda Conflict.
Bishop Ochola continues tirelessly to work for an end to the conflict, including serving as Vice-Chairman of the Acholi Religious Leaders Peace Initiative to bring the government, the LRA, and the people of northern Uganda to the table in reconciliation talks. In this capacity, Bishop Ochola authored a statement in 2004 that addressed “The Crisis in Northern Uganda - Issues of Grave Concern“.
I now know and understand his lack of bitterness and hatred, even as I have caught a glimpse of the depth of his grief both for his daughter and wife and for the people of northern Uganda, after hearing Bishop Ochola preach this morning and after listening to his stories and his impassioned pleas for the people of northern Uganda while spending much of the day with him today (we were graced with his presence at table for Sunday dinner - remember that for us Southerners dinner is the midday meal). I was delighted and heartened by the many stories and Luo proverbs he shared with us. Our youngest daughter particularly enjoyed the rooster imitation the bishop rendered while telling us the story of how cows and chickens came to dwell with human beings. Bishop Ochola is a captivating story teller and has that gravitas that many older African men possess. On the way home from a concert earlier this evening, Bishop Ochola was recounting various “love names” (pet names) that the Luo people give their children, and I found myself entranced by the cadence and rhythm of his voice. It was nothing less than bardic.
But more than just storyteller and bard, Bishop Ochola is an apostle, a bishop in the succession of the apostles whose heart is on fire for Jesus. Before regaling us with the story of the cow and the cock, he told us a bit about his three years of exile in Bunia, Zaire, during the Idi Amin regime, after the martyrdom of Archbishop Janani Luwum (whose grave lies - unhonored by the Church of Uganda, though not by the local Acholi people - in dangerous territory in northern Uganda). He spoke of the great eucalyptus trees at a mission station in that part of Zaire, planted nearly a century ago by the Ugandan Anglican priest Apolo Kivebulaya, apostle to the Bambuti, or Pygmies of the Congo forest.
As the meal drew to a close, and as he was encouraging the young academic couple who joined us for dinner to follow where the Lord would call them, the bishop broke into song, with one of the verses of the gospel song, “In the highways and the hedges”. We all joined our voices with his by the time he reached the second line of the verse.
If he calls me, I will answer.
If he calls me, I will answer.
If he calls me, I will answer;
I’ll be somewhere working for my Lord.
It is my heartfelt prayer and hope that Bishop Ochola will be able to meet with government leaders and administration officials during his time in the United States, such that current United States policy toward Uganda, initiated under the Clinton administration and continued under the Bush administration (though there are some hopeful signs of change), will alter in the direction of ceasing support for the government of President Museveni until he deals with the Northern Ugandan conflict in a productive and just manner.
And it is also a heartfelt prayer and hope that Bishop Ochola would find his time among us a time for reflection, for discovering new friendships and renewing old ones, and for the grace of Jesus Christ to heal and to refresh him.
For more information about Bishop Ochola, see Nancy Cobbey’s article in the Church Mission Society’s Yes Magazine from 1999, “When order triumphed over grace“, concerning the episode when Bishop Ochola was not allowed to speak to the 1998 Lambeth Conference about the Northern Uganda conflict. See also the mention of Bishop Ochola and the Northern Uganda conflict in this sermon at Winchester Cathedral, preached by Bishop Michael Scott-Joynt, earlier this year.
The Church Mission Society’s Northern Uganda subsite, including more statistics on the displaced persons and the hardships they face daily, may be found here.
Note: the photograph with which this entry begins is of Bishop Ochola standing next to the wreckage of the pickup truck in which his wife, Winifred Ochola, was killed after the truck struck a landmine (photograph courtesy of the Rev’d Christopher Carey, from the Church Mission Society’s website).
Lynn Frank (right), a consultant for the solar highway project, answers questions from the France 2 news team. A reporting team from France 2 TV visited Oregon's Solar Highway for a news story.
In honor of Gracie finishing up her fantastic 365 today, FGR invades Evildog. So we decided to copy this picture from day 324 of her project.
Cyndi (Bethechange21) was one of my very first contacts here on Flickr when I started Basil's 365. We often ended up next to each other in the FGR stream with very similar ideas. LOL!
And Basil is madly in love with Gracie - he doesn't think she is evil at all!! He loves her so much that he agreed (although a bit reluctantly) to let me put these googly eyes all over his face.
Thank you for all the guffaws, laugh out loud funny shots, collaborating with me, and for graciously answering my idiotic questions on F-mail - you two have been a great inspiration to Basil and me, and we hope you won't be strangers!!! I hope that Basil and I can meet the two of you one day in person!
Congratulations Cyndi and Gracie!!
AND HAPPY NEW YEAR, FRIENDS!!
365 days of Basil: Day 170.
"37 Cluster"
Thought to do a short video of a still image I posted back on 3rd November, highlighting open cluster "37 Cluster" after a few folks were struggling to see the number 37 formed in this fascinating open cluster.
"Deep Thought" wasn't far off with 42 but I guess it should have spent a few more million years to get the right answer! ("reference to Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy for those of you of the younger generation!)
This is an open cluster nesting in the Orion constellation known as the "37 Cluster" (NGC2169). The brightest stars in this cluster align as the number 37 by pure chance...or is it chance?!?
Video done in Adobe Effects, using glow effect to highlight the cluster.
Music is called "Red Giant" by the awesome Stellardrone from their album Light Years.
stellardrone.bandcamp.com/track/red-giant
Process and Equipment Info:
Light Pollution Bortle grade (1 darkest sky, 9 highest light pollution) : 8-9
Telescope: 80mm Equinox APO refractor with a field flattener
Mount: Nexstar 6/8SE Alt Az on a sturdy table but on rickety floor boards!
Camera: Canon 650D unmodded
No light pollution filters used.
Focussed using a Bhatinov mask and 10X Live View
Capture using Canon EOS Utilities on a Dell XPS 13 Laptop
10.2 minutes worth of exposure made up of 4 Sec Light frames
at ISO 1600
50 Dark frames.
Stacked with DSS (Deep Sky Stacker).
White balance adjusted with Camera Raw
Light pollution reduced via native curves and level components in Photoshop.
The community board meeting took place in order to discuss the proposed mosque to be built next to ground zero. While the project is usually referred to as the “mosque at ground zero”, the project’s official name is the Cordoba Initiative. The Imam and the developers were in attendance to present the project, and many politicians (or rather their representatives) were on hand, along with many of those in favor or opposed.
First spoke the elected officials, who—in the typical New York political elitist fashion— slandered and insulted their opposition. Councilwoman Margaret Chin spoke before a single opponent of the mosque ever came up to the microphone to state their position, but that didn’t stop her from accusing those against it of “bigotry”.
And while Margaret Chin chose to offend the opposition to the mosque (most of whom present were families of 9-11 victims and first responders) in person, other local figures sent their cronies. A representative of Scott Stringer, President of the Borough of Manhattan, handed out a letter to everyone prior to the meeting in which he refers to the mosque as a “multi-faith community and cultural center” and claims that this “center has been the subject of bigoted attacks that contain a strain of religious and racial hatred more extreme than anything we have seen in NYC for some time.” I guess an attempt to kill hundreds of New Yorkers and tourists at Times Square by an Islamist Faisal Shahzad less than a month prior was not extreme enough for Stringer and, instead of jihadism, Stringer seems to have identified the enemy as a TEA Party leader whom he rips apart throughout this unsolicited letter. While the TEA Party’s opposition is referred to as a “bigoted agenda”, the mosque itself is referred to as a “vibrant and world-class facility in NYC which will promote tolerance and pluralism”. Of course he fails to provide any example of mosques in NYC or in the world that have EVER promoted tolerance or pluralism, but perhaps he didn’t think that any attendee would dare question his superior judgment in the matter. Please be sure to read his disgusting letter
After the political cronies spoke, Feisal Abdul Rauf', the Imam in charge of this “community center” was given time to present his proposal. He started his speech with “for many years I’ve had a dream…” (I wonder what Dr. King would have thought of a ‘grand wizard’ proposing to build a “community center” at the site of the bombed 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, Alabama). The Imam also claimed that this “community center” would promote multi-culturalism; he was so sure of it that his speech was sprinkled throughout with that deceiving phrase. But his presentation brought with it an unexpected turning point. Not because of anything he planned to share with us in his carefully prepared PC jargoned speech, but because of a question by one of the board members who wanted to know if the proposed “community center” would hold prayer. The Imam said “yes”, to which the board member replied, “then it is a house of worship, not a community center”.
Without any objection to that by the Imam or speakers that followed, the term “community center” began to very gradually disappear. But don’t think that anyone’s opinion actually changed as a result. The supporters of the project “formerly” known as a “community center” still believed that it was somehow related to diversity and that it would in no way be an insult to those who died due to Islamist ideology, nor would it serve as a monument of jihadist victory.
But neither the councilwoman nor the Imam were the most offensive or distasteful of the proponents of the mosque. Daisy Khan of the American Society for Muslim Advancement, who also happens to be Imam’s wife, blew their insults and lies out of the water. (I don’t recall her being introduced as Rauf’s wife at the meeting, but I can’t be sure.) She lectured and she yelled – yes, yelled – at the families of victims, the first responders, and her fellow New Yorkers. She yelled that she is “tired of bearing the cross [and will do so] no longer” because apparently she and the Muslim community were the real victims of the 9-11 attacks—not the families who lost their loved ones, not the cities that lost their monuments, and not the country that lost its feeling of security.
Without a single mosque destroyed and with very few anti-Muslim incidents, hearing from this woman about her supposed victimization in that auditorium was absolutely sickening. It didn’t help when for weeks after (and prior) she dominated the time on television appearing calm and together and claiming among other nonsense – I kid you not – that the reason they chose the ground zero site to build a mosque is to provide a “blow to the extremists”. I’m sure radical Muslims would just hate it if New York built a mosque on the ground where American buildings were destroyed and thousands of Americans were murdered by jihadists … right? READ HER RIDICULOUS QUOTE AGAIN. Now listen to it for yourself from the horse’s mouth because I wouldn’t have believed it either. (starts at 1:10) www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7WbTv_gsx4&playnext_from=TL&...
Other supporters of the mosque included two priests and a rabbi (no, it isn’t a start to a joke – although I wish it was) of the leftist “co-exist” variety all of whom supported the mosque. And while there were some clergy present that (judging by applause and reactions) opposed the mosque, they did not come up to the microphone. The supporting clergy seemed to have gone to the same rhetoric school as the Imam, using terms like “multi-culturalism”, “tolerance”, “community relations and understanding”, and other jargon that had no actual relevance to the topic.
There was also a Caucasian woman with a baby who introduced herself as someone who had converted to Islam … in 2006, if I’m not mistaken. She lied about how difficult it is to find information and resources on Islam in NY. I say she lied not only because there are hundreds of mosques in the 5 boroughs, but also because as a recent convert she is a prime example of someone who was able to find and act on this information. Of course, she didn’t specify why ground zero is a better location than any other for this apparently “valuable to the city” information about the religion all 911 hijackers belonged to.
Now that I have gone on and on about the supporters of the mosque (aka “community center”) and the temple’s money changers, let me talk about the opponents of a mosque being build at ground zero ... Not a single one of them opposed a mosque being built; the prevailing request was simply “build it somewhere else”.
First opponent to speak was the celebrated publisher, editor, and columnist Pamela Geller. She was the one to point out what Cordoba means to the Muslim world. Cordoba is a city in Spain that was the first major city to fall to Muslim conquerors and become an Islamic caliphate and a symbol of Islamic conquest of the West. She also called the mosque “a shrine to the very ideology that inspired 9-11”. Sure seems a lot more plausible than Daisy’s explanation for why the mosque has to overlook ground zero.
A gentleman who lost his brother in WTC and represents the largest ‘families of victims of 9-11’ groups introduced some of those present who lost loved ones at ground zero. He protested the lectures and the labels that were bestowed on these families for their “legitimate, legal opposition to this Muslim ‘multi-cultural center’”. He pointed out that while there is proposed building of this mosque at ground zero, the committees have refused to allow monuments to the tragedy of 9-11, including the WTC sphere which was heavily damaged during the terrorist attack and has become an iconic symbol of the tragedy. At this time the sphere is temporarily housed at Battery Park. “If we should honor multi-culturalism and diversity at ground zero, we should honor and remember victims of 9-11,” he concluded.
Tim Brown, a former NYC firefighter who lost dozens of his friends and colleagues, fellow first responders, to the jihadist terrorist attack, has been a tireless voice for memories of victims and their loved ones. He questioned where the money for the mosque was coming from. He had received “5 different answers on 5 different occasions from them”, which included my favorite “we don’t have to tell you, talk to our lawyers”, as well as “three different organizations, but [the Imam] refused to name them” and “from American taxpayers”. Mr. Brown also pointed out that Cordoba Initiative has been very deceiving in other ways, such as removing the word “mosque” from their web site despite the fact that they explicitly wrote initially that there will be a mosque at the top of the building (overlooking ground zero).
Questions were also raised about the Imam Rauf, his public statements, and his pro-Sharia stance as described in his publications and interviews. His travels to countries that openly support terrorism and forced Islamization of the West were also questioned and may indicate where funding from the mosque could be coming from.
Follow up note: Listening to the Imam Rauf speak to various news organizations in the days following the meeting, he offered even more non-specific answers to where the money comes from, such as it comes from people who “want to see peace between Muslims and non-Muslims”. Again, nice politically savvy keywords… but no actual answer to a rather direct question he obviously knows the answer to. Trying to hide something, Faisal Abdul?
One of the many victim’s families present was a woman with a photo of her son who was murdered by the Islamic terrorists. She didn’t yell like Daisy, the Imam’s wife, and she did not dish out insults like Congresswoman Chin. Her voice trembled as she mentioned her son’s name and held his photo towards the committee, “this is my son”, she said, “this is firefighter George Kane.” She held back tears as she spoke. She said that “the location [of the mosque] is insensitive to families. It is also insensitive to the voiceless victims the possibility that anyone who supports Islamic extremism could walk on graves of the victims … [it is] an outrage.”
Another woman spoke with a similar shaking voice about her 23-year-old son who “was murdered on September 11th”. She also wasn’t a bigot, but wanted to know “why are you suggesting that it be two blocks from ground zero?”
Mrs. Kane and the others who spoke through tears and with photos of their murdered children in their trembling hands, made me think of what they were being asked to do. Nine years later, they were being asked to “move on” or “heal”, as mosque supporters were suggesting. I can’t even begin to imagine what that ignorant request could do to an eternally grieving mother.
A sweet elderly couple’s last conversation with their son was via cell phone while he was on a hijacked plane… just before he was murdered. They mentioned that there were 20 mosques that located around the area where they lived, and that they would be ok with another one being built close to them, but they also asked for “understanding and sensitivity” when it comes to building one near ground zero.
Yet from the comments of NYC politicians and supporters of the mosque, we know that understanding and sensitivity will not be shown to the victims’ families nor reflect the wishes of voting New Yorkers. They will instead be shown to others who are apparently deemed more – not even equally but more – crucial to the future of NYC and the memories of those who perished in the terrorist attacks.
Here are a few youtube links on regarding this meeting:
Pamela Geller's full 2 minute speech from the meeting
a firefighter and first responder Tim Brown speaks A MUST SEE
ROD: PLAISIR ANSWER PA-B80 SOPMOD / zenaq
REEL: SALTIGA BJ 200SHL / daiwa
LINE: Avani CastingPE SMP#5号 / VARIVAS
SHOCK LEADER: VEP Shock leader50lb / VARIVAS
LINKING PARTS: Cross Lock SNAP70lb / YARIE
LURE: A.C.mag shad7in/ A.C.plugs
HOOK: 7554#1/0 / VMC
It was this soapstone carved Elephant, with a little Elephant inside.
Oh, ref the clue, memory, well they never forget.
Naupaka kuahiwi or Chamissos' scaevola
Goodeniaceae
Endemic to the Hawaiian Islands (Molokaʻi, Lānaʻi, Maui, Hawaiʻi Island)
Hawaiʻi Volcanoes National Park, Hawaiʻi Island
Early Hawaiians used the fruits of naupaka kuahiwi to produce a purplish black dye. The fragrant flowers were used in lei making.
The Legend:
In ancient times, one version goes, there was a beautiful Hawaiian princess known as Naupaka. One day, the villagers noticed that Naupaka looked very sad. They told her parents, who approached Naupaka and asked her what was troubling her.
“I have fallen in love with a man named Kaui,” replied the princess. “But Kaui is not of noble birth—he is a commoner.” According to Hawaiian tradition, it was strictly forbidden for members of royalty to marry people from the common ranks.
Distressed, Naupaka and Kaui traveled long and far, seeking a solution to their dilemma. They climbed up a mountain to see a kahuna who was staying at a heiau (temple). Alas, he had no clear answer for the young lovers. “There is nothing I can do,” he told them, “but you should pray. Pray at this heiau.”
So they did. And as they prayed, rain began to fall. Their hearts torn by sorrow, Naupaka and Kaui embraced for a final time. Then Naupaka took a flower from her ear and tore it in half, giving one half to Kaui. “The gods won’t allow us to be together,” she said. “You go live down by the water, while I will stay up here in the mountains.”
As the two lovers separated, the naupaka plants that grew nearby saw how sad they were. The very next day, they began to bloom in only half flowers.
There are different versions of the naupaka legend, but all carry the same unhappy theme: lovers that are separated forever, one banished to the mountains, the other to the beach. www.aloha-hawaii.com
View Naupaka kahakai or Beach naupaka www.flickr.com/photos/dweickhoff/5187929027/
NPH00004
What does it feel like to fall in love?
You are free to:
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material
for any purpose, even commercially.
You must give appropriate credit and provide a link to the www.personalcreations.com home page.
FIELD TESTER：Mr.KINUGAWA(フィールドテスター衣川氏)
ROD：PLAISIR ANSWER PA-B80SOPMOD(プレジールアンサーソップモッド)
REEL：RYOGA SHRAPNEL（改）(リョウガ シュラプネル)
LINE：PE4号＋leader40lb（PE4号＋リーダー40ポンド）
LURE：Johnny Rat（ジョニーラット）
Remember the "floaters" I shot and posted in winter? I thought they were coneflowers, but I was mistaken. THIS is the flower that becomes the empty floater! Just look at the flower head where the petals aren't covering it and compare it to the winter shot posted below. Looks like the same flower head to me.
Thanks to Laura/rowrlm for the ID!!
The Baltimore/D.C. regional International Action Center, ANSWER Coalition, CODEPINK and others called on all concerned organizations and individuals to take a stand and protest against any US intervention and aggression towards Syria.
We called for an immediate emergency demonstration the day of any missile attack on Syria in Baltimore, Frederick, Columbia and Washington D.C. and a regional protest the day after in Washington D.C. at the White House.
The U.S is poised to open another war. This one, the latest in a long series of aggressive wars, would target Syria. Four U.S. destroyers, each with 90 cruise missiles, are moving into place in the eastern Mediterranean to be able to launch these death-dealers at the Syrian people.
The pretext for this escalation is the assertion that the Syrian government has used chemical weapons in the conflict that has been raging for more than two years. Like their predecessors, President Obama and other top U.S. officials pretend to be concerned about “democracy” and “human rights” in Syria, but their closest allies in the campaign against Syria are police-state, absolute monarchies like Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Once again the so-called ‘Responsibility to protect’, R2P, is used as a pretext for NATO to dominate this region.
Just as the false claim of “weapons of mass destruction” was used as justification for the invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003, the allegations that chemical weapons were used by the Syrian military is meant to mask the real motives of Washington and its allies. Their aim is to carry out “regime change,” as part of the drive to create a “new Middle East.”
The invasion of Iraq in 2003, the U.S.-backed Israeli war in Lebanon in 2006, the 2011 NATO bombing of Libya, the now-escalating war in Syria and the growing threats against Iran are part of a coordinated regional effort by the United States, Britain and France to dominate this oil-rich and strategic region.
The U.S. government cuts basic services and has eliminated hundreds ofthousands of workers jobs in the name of austerity while they have spent unlimited billions on wars of aggression and NSA surveillance.
Workers and the poor have nothing to gain by supporting US military action against Syria. The US isn't concerned about human rights in Syria or for that matter right here at home where racism is on the rise with attacks on voting rights, increased police brutality and mass incarceration.
As Dr. King Jr. pointed out, “The greatest purveyor of violence in the world today – my own government” spoken in New York’s Riverside Church on April 4, 1967 – exactly one year before his assassination in Memphis.
Top view of the main chassis. There are 2 capstans and pinch rollers. The one in the middle of the chassis is for the incoming messages, the tape reels are carried on the 2 spindles at the top. This unit has 3 heads (erase, record, play). The tape counter in the top left is coupled to the supply spindle of this unit.
Between the spool spindles are the motor pulley and the tape out sensor switch.
The capstan in the bottom right is for the endless loop announcement tape. This unit has 2 heads to replay the 2 tracks (announcement and signalling) of this tape.
At the bottom are the operating keys. Above them is an SRBP strip carrying 3 lampholders.
CINEASTE365: MADE IN U.S.A. - Jean-Luc Godard (December 16, 2019 - Day 138)
In 1966, Jean-Luc Godard was asked by producer Georges de Beureagard if he can create a film quickly. The answer was yes and that the can film two at the same time: “Made in U.S.A.” starring Anna Karina and Laszlo Szabo and “2 or 3 Things I Know About Her” starring Marina Vlady. It’s important to note that “Made in U.S.A.” is the final full-length film he created with his ex-wife and muse Anna Karina and the first film of singer Marianne Faithfull (a popular singer in the ’60s and also the steady girlfriend of Rolling Stones vocalist Mick Jagger at the time). While “2 or 3 Things I Know About Her” stars the woman that rejected him for marriage. So, needless to say, these two films are rather significant.
“Made in U.S.A.” is the final goodbye between Karina and Godard and “2 or 3 Things I Know About Her” is a film that shows him angered by the rejection. And also two films that mark the end of the cycle of Jean-Luc Godard who has become more of a political person and wanted to use his films to deal with internal conflict that he felt about cinema and politics.
“Made in U.S.A.” is a loose adaptation of the the book “The Juggler” by Richard Stark. The film stars Anna Karina as Paula Nelson, a Bogart-like detective who travels to Atlantic City to visit her boyfriend Richard Politzer. When she arrives, she realizes he is dead. While she investigates Politzer’s death, she runs into a few people who live and then later die. Meanwhile, she is being followed by a group of gangsters which include Laszlo Szabo as Richard Widmark and Jean-Pierre Leaud as Donald Siegel.
While the film is a noir film about Paula looking for her lover’s killers. The film has many film, literary and pop culture references but also politics and storyline that features an adaptation of the real-life murder Moroccan politician Mehdi Ben Barka and Frenchman Georges Figon (known for arranging the meeting with Barka and others before his kidnapping and torture).
Figon who left audio reels to his girlfriend/actress Anna-Marie Coffinet was a friend of Godard and thus Godard used Politzer to be a Georges Figon but Godard using the character and supplying the voice for his political message that is shown throughout the film. Within this tangled web of politics, Paula gets caught up in it and the question is of all people tangled in the web, who will be the last person standing?
“Made in U.S.A.” is definitely not a film for those not familiar with Jean-Luc Godard’s work. Although there is a main story about the character of Paula investigating her lover’s murder, the film is not only heavy with references but there are a good number of political dialogue which was more or less Godard’s platform for him to get out on what was on his mind.
Although many Jean-Luc Godard films show signs of politics being used in the storyline, “Made in U.S.A.” tries to balance the film utilizing Anna Karina as this sexy, stylish detective but then using the film as a platform for politics but most importantly, for Godard to use two characters that define how he was back then as a filmmaker and then having Anna Karina taking care of the men in order to show that Jean-Luc Godard as we knew him in the past in his Anna Karina films is now no more.
“Made in U.S.A.” is the final swan song between both Jean-Luc Godard and Anna Karina. Despite being divorced at this time, she would no longer be his muse and the director would no longer be the director that many people have respected him and loved him for. His next films “La Chinoise” and “Week End” would truly mark the end of Godard’s narrative and cinematic period of his filmmaking career and from then on, Godard would be a different director focusing on revolutions and his interest in Maoist ideology and would only return to mainstream films in 1980.
This is not a film for those who are not familiar with Godard’s work or Anna Karina. I’ve met many who have watched this film solely for the purpose of the beautiful shots of Anna Karina and didn’t like the film at all. For me, my appreciation was because it was a fitting goodbye to his ex-wife. After watching this collaboration between Karina and Godard, you knew it had to end someway and “Made in U.S.A.” was the way to do it.
As incoherent this film may be to many people, I enjoyed the film in fragments. As a “noir” film, it’s not my favorite. As a Godard film, I was impressed. The cinematography by Raoul Coutard was absolutely beautiful, the awkward randomness of certain scenes was an interesting way to see a perspective of Godard as a filmmaker and as a person who faced conflict and needed an outlet to let his emotions out. Both “Made in U.S.A.” and “2 or 3 Things I Know About Her” are two different types of films made at the same time but are enjoyable in their own way.
Do I recommend “Made in U.S.A.”, yes…that is only if you have seen a good number of Jean-Luc Godard films. This by no means is a film you should start out with if you want to learn about Godard’s filmmaking style. Overall, a fantastic Criterion release and a film that I definitely enjoyed!
STOP THE KILLING - STOP TEARING APART FAMILIES ! In support of ending BREED SPEIFIC LEGISLATION www.ddawatch.co.uk
RESCUERS ANSWERING MACHINE
Hello: You have reached which ever rescue! Due to the high volume of calls we have been receiving, please listen closely to the following options and choose the one that best describes you or your situation: Press 1 if you have a 10-year-old dog and your 15-year-old son has suddenly become allergic and you need to find the dog a new home right away. Press 2 if you are moving today and need to immediately place your 150 pound, 8-year-old dog. Press 3 if you have three dogs, had a baby and want to get rid of your dogs because you are the only person in the world to have a baby and dogs at the same time. Press 4 if you just got a brand new puppy and your old dog is having problems adjusting so you want to get rid of the old one right away. Press 5 if your little puppy has grown up and is no longer small and cute and you want to trade it in for a new model. Press 6 if you want an unpaid volunteer to come to your home TODAY and pick up the dog you no longer want. Press 7 if you have been feeding and caring for a "stray" for the last three years, are moving and suddenly determine it's not your dog. Press 8 if your dog is sick and needs a vet but you need the money for your vacation. Press 9 if you are elderly and want to adopt a cute puppy who is not active and is going to outlive you. Press 10 if your relative has died and you don't want to care for their elderly dog because it doesn't fit your lifestyle. Press 14 if you are calling at 6 a.m. to make sure you wake me up before I have to go to work so you can drop a dog off on your way to work. Press 15 to leave us an anonymous garbled message, letting us know you have left a dog in our yard in the middle of January, which is in fact, better than just leaving the dog with no message. Press 16 if you are going to get angry because we are not going to take your dog that you have had for fifteen years, because it is not our responsibility. Press 17 if you are going to threaten to take your ten year old dog to be euthanised because I won't take it. Press 18 if you're going to get angry because the volunteers had the audacity to go on vacation and leave the dogs in care of a trusted volunteer who is not authorised to take your personal pet. Press 19 if you want one of our PERFECTLY trained, housebroken, kid and cat friendly purebred dogs that we have an abundance of. Press 20 if you want us to take your dog that has a slight aggression problem, i.e. has only bitten a few people and killed your neighbour's cats. Press 21 if you have already called once and been told we don't take personal surrenders but thought you would get a different person this time with a different answer. Press 22 if you want us to use space that would go to a stray to board your personal dog while you are on vacation, free of charge, of course. Press 23 if it is Christmas Eve or Easter morning and you want me to deliver an eight week old puppy to your house by 6:30 am before your kids wake up. Press 24 if you have bought your children a duckling, chick or baby bunny for Easter and it is now Christmas and no longer cute. Press 25 if you want us to take your female dog who has already had ten litters, but we can't spay her because she is pregnant again and it is against your religion. Press 26 if you're lying to make one of our younger volunteers feel bad and take your personal pet off your hands. Press 27 if your cat is biting and not using the litter box because it is declawed, but you are not willing to accept the responsibility that the cat's behaviour is altered because of your nice furniture. Press 28 if your two year old male dog is marking all over your house but you just haven't gotten around to having him neutered. Press 29 if you previously had an outdoor only dog and are calling because she is suddenly pregnant. Press 30 if you have done "everything" to housebreak your dog and have had no success but you don't want to crate the dog because it is cruel. Press 31 if you didn't listen to the message asking for an evening phone number and you left your work number when all volunteers are also working and you are angry because no one called you back. Press 32 if you need a puppy immediately and cannot wait because today is your daughter's birthday and you forgot when she was born. Press 33 if your dog's coat doesn't match your new furniture and you need a different color or breed. Press 34 if your new love doesn't like your dog and you are too stupid to get rid of the new friend (who will dump you in the next month anyway) instead of the dog. Press 35 if you went through all these 'options' and didn't hear enough. This press will connect you to the sounds of tears being shed by one of our volunteers who is holding a discarded old dog while the vet mercifully frees him from the grief of missing his family.
-Author Unknown-
Kamera: Nikon FM
Linse: Nikkor-S Auto 55mm f1.2 (1970)
Film: Rollei P&R 640 @ box speed
Kjemi: Rodinal (1:25 / 13:30 min. @ 20°C)
-Friday 23 February 2024: Even more countries speaking on the legality of Israel’s occupation of Palestine in the International Court of Justice in Den Haag today. Namibia, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Indonesia, Qatar, United Kingdom, Slovenia, Sudan, Switzerland, Syria and Tunisia.
I have to say, the UK’s presentation was just abhorrent.
Instead of focusing on that, today I would like to highlight and remark on the supreme eloquence of Pakistan and also the strong and morally impressive presentation by Namibia.
I also want to share a personal note. If you did not see yesterday’s presentations in Den Haag, then you should see - and feel - the most emotional address to the court by Ali Ahmad Ebraheem S. Al-Dafiri of Kuwait.
Yesterday, I too held a lecture but for international students; touching on the german occupation of Norway. As I was lecturing, even I could feel it when I was mentioning that during the 5 years of nazi occupion that we had to endure, Norway suffered ’only’ 12.000 war-related deaths - 600 of whom were jews. Compare that to the 57 years Palestine has endured Israeli occupation and the 30.000 Palestinians that Israel has killed in Gaza in the last 4 months alone.
I was really struggling to keep my composure at this point.
International Court of Justice: Day 5 hearing on the legal consequences of Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories (publ. 23 February 2024) [Video]
International Court of Justice: Legal Consequences arising from the Policies and Practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem [Transcripts and Documents]
Mr AL-DAFIRI: [KUWAIT] (22 February 2024)
I. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
1. Mr President, honourable Members of the Court, it is a great honour to appear before you as the Agent of the State of Kuwait in these proceedings. Kuwait deeply appreciates the extraordinary efforts taken by the Court to allow this hearing to proceed smoothly, in light of the great number of participants. The current advisory proceedings are of extreme importance to the Palestinian people, Kuwait, the international legal order and the international community as a whole.
2. Kuwait has always advocated that peace fosters the observance of law and vice versa. Adherence to the UnitedNations Charter is an indispensable prerequisite for the definitive establishment of international peace. Indeed, peaceful relations are founded on accepted rules and as such, peaceful relations among States are based on the provisions of the United Nations Charter. These include, notably, the principle of non-use of force and the peaceful settlement of disputes. These rules apply to all States. Respect for these fundamental rules contributes to the consolidation of international peace.
3. Regrettably, the above-mentioned foundational rules have not been upheld in the case of Palestine. The conflict between Palestine and Israel, hereafter referred to as the “occupying Power”, is an illegal occupation conflict, involving on one side an occupying Power equipped with all military means, and on the other side an occupied nation without defensive capabilities, facing daily expulsion, human rights violations and all sufferings associated with any occupation situation.
4. Over the past decades, the situation between the Palestinians and the occupying Power has been extremely tense, resulting in serious human rights law and humanitarian law violations committed by the latter. Various intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations have documented these violations by publishing comprehensive reports. This climate of violence compromises any possibility of reasonably discussing the issues at stake. This is further exacerbated by the recent developments in Gaza. The occupying Power has waged an illegitimate war on the Palestinians in Gaza characterized by numerous international law violations. The ongoing flagrant violations have been highlighted in a series of statements issued, amongst others, by the United Nations Secretary-General, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Special Procedures of the United Nations Human Rights Council.
5. The unprecedented violence in Gaza is a result of 57 years of illegal occupation of the Palestinian territories and it must stop.
The late Emir of the State of Kuwait, His Highness Sheikh Sabah Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah (1929-2020) summarized this situation in 2018 by stating:
“We ask the whole world, why the Palestinian people plight continues? Why do we ignore and do not implement Security Council resolutions? Why is the international community incapable of resolving this cause? Why does the victim continue to be portrayed as the killer according to Israel’s norms? Why does Israel always escape punishment? Why have all these souls been lost amid absence of the world conscience?”
6. Mr President, distinguished Members of the Court, it is in this context that Kuwait appears for the first time before the Court, following the adoption by the United Nations General Assembly of resolution 77/247, requesting the Court to deliver an advisory opinion on two legal questions. The first question asks the Court to evaluate the legality of the occupying Power’s specific policies and actions within its occupation of the Palestinian territories, while seeking the Court’s determination of the corresponding legal ramifications. The second question addresses a core issue: has the occupation become illegal? Kuwait will demonstrate the illegality of this occupation, underscoring the necessity of its cessation.
7. Mr President, honourable Members of the Court, my distinguished colleagues will now address these issues in greater depth.
[…]
The PRESIDENT: I shall now give the floor to the representative of Namibia, Honourable Ms Yvonne Dausab. You have the floor, Madam.
Ms DAUSAB: [NAMIBIA] (23 February 2024)
1. Mr President, Madam Vice-President, Members of the Court, it is a special honour to appear before you today on behalf of the Republic of Namibia.
2. With your kind indulgence, I wish to first pay tribute to our late president Dr Hage Geingob (1941-2024), who passed away on 4 February 2024 and will be laid to rest this weekend. President Geingob was a key figure in our struggle for independence. He was a committed anti-apartheid and anti-colonial freedom fighter, who stood up against injustice and oppression wherever it occurred. It is therefore fitting that, in one of his last public statements, he said that “[n]o peace-loving human being can ignore the carnage . . . waged against Palestinians in Gaza”.
3. President Geingob was the representative of the South West Africa People’s Organisation (SWAPO) and its petitioner to the United Nations from 1964 to 1971. It was during this period that the General Assembly condemned and declared “the policies of apartheid and racial discrimination” as a “crime against humanity”. Consequently, the General Assembly also appropriately terminated the Mandate in South West Africa.
4. Mr President, Members of the Court, I stand before you as a representative of a country where Germany brutally carried out the first genocide of the twentieth century against the Herero and the Nama peoples. A country that has known only too well the pain and suffering of occupation, colonialism, systematic discrimination, apartheid, and their entrenched consequences. It is because of this history that Namibia considers it a moral duty and sacred responsibility to appear before this Court on the question of the indefensible occupation of Palestine by Israel.
5. The parallels between Namibia and Palestine are striking and painful. Both were integral parts of the mandate system established after World War I. And in both cases, the so-called “sacred trust of civilisation”, which aimed to guide these nations towards self-determination and independence, was utterly betrayed. Instead of achieving self-government, both Namibians and Palestinians suffered the loss of human dignity, life, liberty and the outright theft of their land and natural resources. Hundreds of thousands of their people were violently expelled from their homes or forced into exile, joining the ranks of the world’s refugees.
6. Upon the dissolution of the League of Nations in 1946, the white minority South African régime refused to place Namibia (then South West Africa) under the United Nations Trusteeship and sought to illegally annex our territory as a fifth province, implementing racist homeland policies and apartheid laws targeting Black Africans.
7. Today, Palestinians have had to endure the seizure of their land and property, illegal settlements, unlawful killings, forced displacement, drastic movement restrictions, the denial of refugees’ right to return and of equal nationality and citizenship. The lived reality of the people of Palestine evokes painful memories for many Namibians of my generation. Namibians still experience the entrenched and structural impact of inequality, as a direct consequence of colonialism and the prolonged unlawful occupation.
8. Mr President, Members of the Court, this Court’s four Advisory Opinions on South West Africa played a vital role in our liberation struggle. In its 1971 Opinion, the Court confirmed the right of self-determination as a legal imperative with decisive consequences for States, paving the way for our independence 19 years later in 1990.
9. It is because of Namibia’s experience with apartheid and its long fight for self-determination that we cannot look the other way in the face of the brutal atrocities committed against the Palestinian people.
10. Mr President, Members of the Court, we ask you not to look away, either. Rather, we appeal to you: once again, end a historic and ongoing injustice by upholding the fundamental rights of a dispossessed people who have endured 57 years of a suffocating occupation. Today, Palestinians are enduring collective punishment in the besieged Gaza Strip, with civilians being killed in continuous and indiscriminate bombardments at a scale that is unprecedented in recent history. This state of affairs — this “hell on earth” — represents a stain on the collective conscience of the world.
11. Civilized nations cannot, and must not, accept images of children covered in blood with gaping wounds; of men and women crying in despair because of the helplessness they feel.
12. However, in the midst of the ongoing tragedy, I wish to say the following to the people of Palestine: this advisory opinion is an important moment in your long fight for independence. And I leave you with the words of our Founding President and Father of the Namibian Nation, Dr Sam Nujoma (b. 1929): “a people united, striving to achieve a common good for all members of society will always emerge victorious.”
13. Mr President, Members of the Court, I thank you, and I now respectfully ask that Professor Phoebe Okowa be called to address the legal questions before the Court.
The PRESIDENT: I thank Ms Dausab. I now give the floor to Professor Phoebe Okowa. You have the floor, Professor.
Ms OKOWA: [NAMIBIA] (23 February 2024)
I. INTRODUCTION
1. Mr President, Madam Vice-President, Members of the Court, it is a great honour for me to appear before you in these proceedings, and a special privilege to do so on behalf of the Republic of Namibia. Our presentation is in three parts.
2. First, I will make two general observations on why the Court should answer the request in its entirety, and why Israel’s occupation is illegal.
3. Then, I will focus on Israel’s policies and practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory that grossly violate its obligations under international law, specifically the prohibition of apartheid and racial discrimination, and the principle of self-determination.
4. Finally, I will address the legal consequences that arise for Israel, for third States and for the United Nations on account of these violations.
A. The Court can and should answer the request in its entirety
5. As a threshold matter, Namibia reiterates, as do the overwhelming majority of States in these proceedings, that the Court has jurisdiction to render the requested advisory opinion, and that there are no compelling reasons for the Court to decline the request.
B. Israel’s occupation is illegal under international law
6. Namibia notes that there is also wide consensus among the participants on “the legal status of the occupation”. Namibia makes only four brief observations.
7. First, in so far as the law of occupation envisages any belligerent occupation as a temporary measure, immediately following military operations, Israel’s prolonged— or permanent— occupation breaches the law of occupation. It is a de facto annexation in all but name.
8. Second, Israel’s occupation, in and of itself, is unlawful under general international law. This is because it violates the Charter of the United Nations and peremptory norms; specifically, the prohibition on territorial acquisitions through illegal use of force, the principle of self-determination, and the prohibition of apartheid.
10. Finally, the continuation of the illegal occupation does not absolve Israel of its obligations and responsibilities under international law. This is consistent with your own conclusions in the Namibia Advisory Opinion that “[p]hysical control of a territory, and not sovereignty or legitimacy of title, is the basis of State liability for acts affecting other States”.
II. ISRAEL’S POLICIES AND PRACTICES IN THE OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORY VIOLATE THE PROHIBITION OF APARTHEID AND THE PRINCIPLE OF SELF-DETERMINATION
A. Israel is bound by the prohibition of apartheid under international law
11. In both its written and oral submissions, Namibia focuses on the prohibition of apartheid and of racial discrimination. This is, in part, on account of Namibia’s history, as one of the few countries that were subjected to this egregious form of systematic and institutionalized racial discrimination.
12. We also do so on account of the fundamental importance of the Court’s 1971 Namibia Opinion, where this Court declared that the policies of apartheid “constitute a denial of fundamental human rights” and are “a flagrant violation of the purposes and principles of the [United Nations] Charter”.
13. But above all, we do this because, notwithstanding the egregious nature of apartheid — as a State delict, as a violation of a peremptory norm and as a crime — it has received virtually no clarification beyond the specific circumstances of southern Africa. An advisory opinion on threshold questions of apartheid will therefore assist the General Assembly in respect of its own action, in identifying the key elements of the illegality and in formulating appropriate responses to Israel’s discriminatory practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
14. Specifically, we invite the Court to clarify three aspects of the obligation.
15. First, we respectfully ask the Court to make it clear that the prohibition of apartheid is not limited to southern Africa in the last century. It extends to Israel’s policies in the Occupied Palestinian Territory today. Article 3 of CERD places all States parties, including Israel, under an obligation to prevent, prohibit and eradicate apartheid “in territories under their jurisdiction”. This is also the conclusion of the CERD Committee. The 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, negotiated after the end of apartheid in South Africa, also recognized apartheid as a crime against humanity without temporal or geographical restriction16.
16. Second, the Court should also confirm that the prohibition of apartheid binds all States as a peremptory norm. In your decision in the case under CERD brought by Qatar against United Arab Emirates, you acknowledged the “universal character [of CERD] is confirmed by the fact that 182 States are parties to it”. The International Law Commission and its Special Rapporteur on jus cogens (as Judge Tladi then was) have also expressly recognized the peremptory character of the prohibition of apartheid.
17. Finally, Namibia invites the Court to clarify the definition of apartheid. Namibia aligns itself with other participants that the definition in Article 2 of the Apartheid Convention incorporates the three key elements of the delict under international law.
18. First, the State must engage in one or more “inhuman acts”. Crucially, these take the form of violations of fundamental human rights within an institutionalized framework of systematic oppression and domination.
19. Second, these inhuman acts must be directed against a “racial group” or its members.
20. Finally, the State must commit these inhuman acts “for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination” by one racial group over the other and “systematically oppressing them”.
B. Israel’s policies and practices constitute apartheid
21. Other participants have already made extensive statements on the discriminatory and inhuman acts carried out against the Palestinians as a racial group. These policies and practices are too many to enumerate in the time available. They include laws that discriminate in matters of citizenship, ownership and transfer of property, and freedom of movement. The systematic and excessive use of force against Palestinian civilians, the arbitrary killings and mass incarceration of Palestinians, including children; the illegal settlements; the discriminatory residency regulations; and, crucially, the denial of a Palestinian identity by refusing to recognize them as a people with a right to determine their own political destiny and to pursue social, economic and cultural development.
22. Namibia’s submission will focus on the final requirement: the purpose of establishing, maintaining domination and systematic oppression.
First, the term “domination” signifies a pervasive, all-encompassing, serious form of control over a group.
Second, “oppression” implies prolonged cruelty, reflecting a sustained violation of human rights.
Third, “systematic” implies the organized nature of violent acts and the improbability of their random occurrence.
23. Namibia shares the view of other participants that Israel’s policies and practices meet the evidentiary standard for establishing the State delict of apartheid. The Israeli Government’s openly articulated aim is to ensure Jewish Israeli control of all facets of Palestinian life, as evidenced by legislation affirming Israel as the nation State of the Jewish people, with unique self-determination rights reserved for Jewish individuals only.
24. It is clear from all the available evidence that these discriminatory practices are not accidental or fortuitous but are designed for the specific purpose of privileging Jewish Israelis over Palestinians. The fact that the practices in question may have other collateral objectives, such as maintaining security, is irrelevant. It will suffice if the primary motive is discriminatory, even if it also serves ancillary purposes.
C. Israel’s apartheid practices violate the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination
25. It follows in Namibia’s submission that Israel’s policies and practices are inconsistent with the prohibition of apartheid as a State delict under international law. Furthermore, these discriminatory practices, in the context of prolonged occupation of the Palestinian territories, violate the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination.
26. As other Participants have highlighted, these discriminatory policies and practices are directed at fragmenting the Palestinian people. These elaborate systems of administrative controls undermine group cohesiveness by dividing the Palestinian people into a number of administrative “domains” or groups, with varying degrees of rights. This strategic fragmentation of the Occupied Palestinian Territory into Bantustans makes Palestinian life burdensome and in many cases unbearable, forcing them to leave their homes.
27. Perhaps the epitome of discriminatory laws negating the Palestinian right of self-determination is the 2018 Basic Law, passed with constitutional status, which boldly declares that Israel is the nation of the Jewish people and that Jewish settlement is a national value.
III. LEGAL CONSEQUENCES OF ISRAEL’S VIOLATIONS OF ITS OBLIGATIONS UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW
28. I will now turn to the final part of my submission. I will first examine the legal consequences of Israel’s violations, irrespective of the status of the occupation. Second, I will examine the legal consequences arising out of the illegal status of the occupation.
A. Legal consequences of Israel’s violations of its obligations under international law
29. First, Israel must bear consequences for its violations. This is the most elementary requirement of the law on State responsibility. As others in these proceedings have highlighted, this includes the obligations of cessation and the duty to make reparation for more than five decades of harms inflicted on the Palestinian people.
30. The Government of Israel has a legal duty to dismantle all the vestiges of systematic racial discrimination and oppression that permeates all aspects of Palestinian life in the occupied territories.
31. As the State of Palestine itself said on Monday, Israel must bring to an end the annexation of Palestinian land, dismantle existing settlements and recognize the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination in a viable State of their own.
32. Second, States are under an obligation not to recognize Israel’s breaches of peremptory norms of general international law vis-à-vis the Palestinian people. At the same time, the obligation of non-recognition is matched by a parallel and positive duty of recognition — of the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination realized through a viable and independent State of Palestine.
33. Here we ask the Court to pay particular attention to the historical context of these proceedings. Admission to the United Nations, unlike the League of Nations, was not automatic. It was conditioned on the State accepting to uphold the values and principles contained in the Charter, including self-determination. The admission of Israel was no exception.
34. In the Wall Opinion, you observed that when Israel proclaimed its independence, it did so “on the strength of” the partition plan resolution of the General Assembly. As is well known, that plan envisaged two States, one Arab and one Jewish. The Israeli Declaration of Independence makes this plain, by recognizing “the natural right of the Jewish people to be masters of their own fate, like all other nations, in their own sovereign State”. If that logic applied to the self-determination and statehood of the Jewish people, it must by the same token also apply to the self-determination and statehood of the Palestinian people.
35. We further ask the Court to consider whether there may be circumstances where political discretion in matters of recognition gives way to a positive duty of recognition, especially when it is necessary to safeguard a peremptory norm. And here, Namibia aligns itself with Jordan’s Written Submission that all States are also under an obligation to recognize the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, including by exercising that right within a viable and independent State of Palestine.
B. Legal consequences of Israel’s illegal occupation
36. Since Israel’s policies and practices violate peremptory norms of international law, the occupation itself is unlawful. This entails consequences for Israel, for third States and, for the United Nations.
37. In the Namibia Opinion, you already set out the legal consequences of unlawful occupation. There, you said that, once the Court is faced with an illegal situation, “it would be failing in the discharge of its judicial functions if it did not declare that there is an obligation, especially upon Members of the United Nations, to bring that situation to an end.”
38. In that Opinion, you recognized the clear obligation on South Africa to put an end to the illegal occupation and withdraw its administration from the territory. The same consequences must of necessity attach to the illegal occupation by Israel of the Palestinian territories.
39. Cessation cannot be contingent on external factors such as the successful outcome of negotiations, as pointed out by some participants in these proceedings. A withdrawal contingent on the outcome of political negotiations effectively gives Israel a veto over the future of the Palestinian people.
40. Namibia invites the Court to set a strict time-limit within which Israel must be asked by the General Assembly to bring the occupation to an end, without conditions. Failure to set a strict time-limit has the perverse effect of being treated as acquiescence in the present occupation, and permission for it to continue indefinitely.
41. Of course, Israel has defied this Court and ultimatums issued by the United Nations organs many times. But it is precisely for this kind of egregious violations of peremptory norms that a régime of countermeasures was contemplated in the now widely accepted International Law Commission’s draft Articles on State Responsibility. Equality before the law is a cardinal principle of the Charter of the United Nations. No State — not Israel — should be exempt from the comprehensive régime of sanctions.
42. Moreover, Namibia reaffirms the position held by the majority of participants that all States are under an obligation not to recognize, assist, support, or contribute to the continuation of the unlawful occupation. This is also in line with your own settled jurisprudence.
43. In the Wall Opinion, you confirmed that the obligations of third States include the “obligation not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the [illegal] situation”. That all States must refrain from all forms of assistance, including transfer of arms, and political support that de facto perpetuates the occupation.
44. In Namibia’s view, this means, in particular, that all States are under an obligation to ensure that companies under their jurisdiction or control do not trade in Israeli goods or with Israeli companies originating from or linked to Israel’s illegal occupation.
45. Mr President, Members of the Court, I thank you for your kind attention. This concludes Namibia’s oral submissions. Thank you.
[…]
The Court adjourned from 11.20 a.m. to 11.40 a.m.
The PRESIDENT: Please be seated. The sitting is resumed. I now call upon the delegation of Pakistan to address the Court and invite His Excellency Mr Ahmed Irfan Aslam to take the floor.
Mr ASLAM: [PAKISTAN] (23 February 2024)
PART I
1. INTRODUCTION
1. Mr President, Members of the Court, it is an honour to appear before you on behalf of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan in these most important of proceedings. These proceedings take place as a whole people struggle to survive through relentless bombardment, the very people who have endured daily persecution for over half a century. And yet, these proceedings inspire hope. They inspire hope because they present an opportunity. They afford this Court an opportunity to develop jurisprudence to advance essential principles of international law that preserves and advances the very basic human right of liberty and dignity.
2. Pakistan has always been a defender of the Palestinian people and their right to self-determination. It was Pakistan that proposed the General Assembly’s first resolution, on the first day of the Six-Day War, relating to Israel’s invasion of Jerusalem and the measures taken by Israel to change the status of the city. Since then, Pakistan has continued to engage on these important questions of international justice and it remains committed to contribute and play its part.
3. Against this background, I will deal initially with five points and then make some technical legal arguments that Pakistan considers to be of particular importance in these proceedings. First, the question of self-determination. Second, the question of occupation and annexation. Third, systematic racial discrimination and apartheid. Fourth, the question of the City of Jerusalem and its holy places, and finally, the two-State solution.
2. SELF-DETERMINATION
4. Mr President, Members of the Court, I come to my first point. The Palestinian people have, as the Court itself has recognized, the right to self-determination. This right, which is codified in the two United Nations Human Rights Conventions, is “one of the essential principles of contemporary international law”. All States have a legal interest in protecting that right, which has the status of jus cogens. Israeli measures that severely impede the exercise by the Palestinian people of the right to self-determination are in breach of Israel’s obligations to respect that right. Pakistan strongly believes in the inherent right of people to live freely and in the justice of struggle for freedom from alien subjugation under the right of self-determination.
3. OCCUPATION AND ANNEXATION
5. I turn to my second point: the question of Israel’s occupation and annexation. It has always been the position of the United Nations that it “cannot condone a change in the status juris resulting from military action contrary to the provisions of the Charter. The Organization must, therefore, maintain that the status juris existing prior to such military action be re-established by a withdrawal of troops, and by the relinquishment or nullification of rights asserted in territories covered by the military action”.
6. Thus, after the Six-Day War, the Security Council determined in resolution 242 (1967) that Israel must withdraw its armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict. In resolution 476 (1980), the Security Council reaffirmed “the overriding necessity for ending the prolonged occupation of Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967”.
7. Israel’s occupation is no longer, if it ever was, a military occupation; it is annexation. In East Jerusalem, the annexation is de jure; in the rest of the territory, it is de facto. But the formal characterization matters little. To use the words of the Court in the Wall case, the occupation is today, “notwithstanding the formal characterization . . . tantamount to de facto annexation”. This now applies to the entire territory. This may have been the intention all along. Prime Minister Ben-Gurion affirmed in 1950 that “the Israeli Empire must comprise all the territories between the Nile and the Euphrates”, and this was to be achieved as much by invasion as by diplomacy. More recently, Prime Minister Netanyahu has declared that his Government will be “applying Israeli sovereignty over all the communities formed through the transfer of Israeli settlers and not one residential community will be uprooted”.
8. Through its settlement policy, Israel has sought to create “irreversible facts on the ground”. It has aimed to create physical facts which in practical terms make it as difficult as possible to bring an end to its prolonged occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Notwithstanding, the Security Council has reaffirmed that the settlements constitute “a flagrant violation under international law”.
9. As this Court said in the Namibia case: “A binding determination made by a competent organ of the United Nations to the effect that a situation is illegal cannot remain without consequence.” As in that case, in answering the legal questions now referred to it, the Court is not concerned with the question of what practical steps would be required to cease the occupation.
10. It is worth recalling, however, that even greater practical issues have been overcome in other contexts, such as when the French Government withdrew a million settlers from Algeria in 1962. The French settlers were more numerous than the Israeli settlers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem taken together. France’s settlements in Algeria were not only more numerous: they were also “far older and better established than Israel’s West Bank colonies”.
4. SYSTEMATIC RACIAL DISCRIMINATION AND APARTHEID
11. I come to my third point, regarding systematic racial discrimination. Israel’s policies and practices amount to systematic racial discrimination and apartheid. Israel has imposed a system of racial discrimination against the Palestinian people since 1967. It is a system that distinguishes - deliberately and systematically — along ethnic and religious lines between the Palestinian population and Jewish Israeli settlers illegally transferred into the territory. The purpose of domination and oppression may be inferred from Israel’s pattern of conduct against the Palestinians.
5. THE HOLY CITY OF JERUSALEM AND ITS HOLY PLACES
12. I turn to my fourth point: Jerusalem and its holy places. The Holy City of Jerusalem is unique in that it is sacred to all three Abrahamic religions. Under the historic status quo, it is the right of Christian, Jewish and Muslim communities freely to access and worship at their holy places in the city. Ottoman decrees set out these rights in the nineteenth century. The régime was later confirmed in multilateral and bilateral instruments. The historic status quo has today developed into a so-called “objective régime”, which captures the point that it is characterized by a permanence which the instruments that established it do not themselves necessarily enjoy. Every State interested therefore has the right to insist upon compliance with this régime.
13. Under Israel’s prolonged occupation, Christians have not been free to access or worship in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and Muslims have not been free to access or worship at Haram al-Sharif and in the Al Aqsa Mosque, to name only some prominent sites. The rights under the historic status quo must immediately be restored. This issue is of great importance to Pakistan, which is home to the second largest Muslim population in the world.
6. THE TWO-STATE SOLUTION
14. And now I come to my final point of the first part of my statement. Pakistan believes that the two-State solution must be the basis for peace. In the Wall case, this Court observed that the two-State solution was to be encouraged
“with a view to achieving as soon as possible, on the basis of international law, a negotiated solution to the outstanding problems and the establishment of a Palestinian State, existing side by side with Israel and its other neighbours, with peace and security for all in the region”.
Pakistan supports this call.
15. On 26 October 2023, Pakistan was pleased to vote in favour of the General Assembly resolution which reaffirmed that: “a just and lasting solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict can only be achieved . . . in accordance with international law, and on the basis of the two-State solution”. Two months later, on 22 December 2023, the Security Council reiterated its unwavering commitment to the vision of the two States, consistent with international law and relevant United Nations resolutions.
16. And these— and numerous other— resolutions by the political organs of the United Nations make clear, a two-State solution, and negotiations leading to it, must be consistent with international law. “Negotiations”, Judge Al-Khasawneh of this Court observed in the Wall case, “are a means to an end and cannot in themselves replace that end”. He continued to say that the discharge of fundamental international obligations cannot be made conditional upon negotiations.
17. In this regard, the Court’s advisory opinion in these proceedings will be most important. Far from impeding negotiations and the achievement of a just and lasting two States, the Court’s advisory opinion will further assist such efforts, by making it possible for the parties to make progress on the sound basis of international law and international legitimacy.
PART II
ISRAEL CANNOT BE ALLOWED TO BENEFIT FROM ITS OWN WRONGS
18. Mr President, Members of the Court, I now turn to more technical legal arguments of my submissions.
19. The Court has heard various competing submissions this week with respect to question (b) of the request, but there can be little doubt as to the central importance of three matters:
(a) First, the role of the rules on the use of force in governing the unlawfulness of a given occupation itself.
(b) Second, the series of General Assembly and Security Council resolutions that have consistently and expressly called for Israel’s withdrawal and referred to “the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war”, which is a corollary of those rules.
(c) Third, the Court’s Advisory Opinion on Namibia is a helpful reference point for the Court.
20. Pakistan hopes to assist the Court by suggesting a slightly different way of looking at things, which leads to the conclusion that Israel’s occupation is unlawful and unlawfulness must have consequences.
A. The principle that no State can profit from its own wrong
21. In this respect, Pakistan considers that a useful touchstone for the Court is the general principle that no State can benefit from its own wrong.
22. As Sir Gerald Fitzmaurice (1901-1982) explained:
“The general principle is that States cannot profit from their own wrong . . . and similarly that rights and benefits cannot be derived from wrong-doing. This admits of no doubt. It is a wide general principle having many diverse applications under international law . . . of course these principles apply not merely as regards treaty obligations but to general international law obligations also.”
23. Notably, in the Wall case, Israel accepted that this principle is “as relevant in advisory opinions as it is in contentious cases”. The principle is particularly important where, as here, the wrongs at issue are of the most serious kind.
B. The principle in the context of the applicable law
24. Second, the principle in the context of applicable law. This principle is one of the underpinnings of the prohibition on the acquisition of territory either by force or through the denial of self-determination. The wrongs are obvious and no benefit in terms of lawful possession or a legal entitlement to administer the territory could be derived.
25. As to this case, if the Court agrees with Pakistan and with many other States that Israel is in continued breach of these fundamental primary obligations, it cannot allow Israel to benefit from its own ongoing wrongs by somehow avoiding the natural consequences that must follow under this law of State responsibility. These include the obligations of cessation and non-repetition which require immediate and unconditional withdrawal, as well as the obligations of non-recognition and non-assistance for all other States.
26. As to the applicable primary rules, it is customary international law and the Charter that govern the illegality of a given occupation at any point in time. As a separate matter, international humanitarian law governs the conduct of an occupying Power with respect to the occupied population.
27. But if the occupation itself is unlawful, that carries legal consequences for Israel and for all States under the secondary rules of State responsibility. Those legal consequences are in no way displaced by separate consideration of the lawfulness under international humanitarian law of particular conduct in the course of the occupation, much less by hope for a negotiated solution. Any other approach would effectively permit Israel to benefit from its own wrongdoing.
28. For the same reason, there is no scope for an argument that other States, in their dealings with respect to Israel or the Occupied Palestinian Territory, could somehow put to one side the question of the unlawfulness of the occupation itself. They could not, for example, elect instead to focus exclusively on the different questions of whether specific Israeli measures were absolutely necessary to meet legitimate security requirements such that those measures are not unlawful under international humanitarian law.
C. The principle in the context of the Namibia Advisory Opinion
29. Mr President, Members of the Court, any conclusion could not be reconciled with the Court’s Opinion on Namibia. There are certain clear parallels with the present case. The General Assembly had condemned South Africa’s occupation of Namibia, characterizing this as an “occupation” that engaged the Geneva Conventions, and the Security Council had expressly called for South Africa’s withdrawal.
30. In a later resolution, after condemning South Africa’s non-compliance with the earlier resolutions, the Security Council had also declared that “the continued presence of the South African authorities in Namibia is illegal”. This is to be understood as a reference to illegality under the rules on the use of force. Notably, the United States voted in favour of this resolution. With respect to Palestine, however, it now appears to wish to limit those rules to governing the lawfulness of “the initial resort to force” “leading to an occupation” only. Of course, that could not be correct, including because it would allow an aggressor to benefit from an ongoing attempt to acquire territory through annexation.
31. Indeed, in its 1971 Advisory Opinion, the Court itself concluded that, “the continued presence of South Africa in Namibia [is] illegal”. The Court held that South Africa was under an obligation to withdraw immediately and that all States were under an obligation to recognize the illegality of the occupation.
32. In reaching this conclusion, the Court found that South Africa’s application of the apartheid régime to occupied territories amounted to disowning the Mandate. In this connection, the Court relied on a context specific expression of the general principle that no State can benefit from its own wrong, stating “[o]ne of the fundamental principles governing the international relationship thus established is that a party which disowns or does not fulfil its own obligations cannot be recognized as retaining the rights which it claims to derive from the relationship”.
33. South Africa had claimed it had an independent right to administer the territory by reason of its “long occupation”. Evidently, the Court disagreed. Three points follow from this.
34. First, the Court in Namibia case implicitly recognized that neither the fact of an occupation nor the law of occupation confer upon the occupying Power any legal entitlement to administer the territory. Any contrary view would allow an occupying Power to benefit from its unlawful use of force.
35. Second, the Court made a positive finding that South Africa’s occupation was unlawful. In Namibia, there was a binding Security Council decision to that effect. The Security Council has made no such Security Council decision with respect to Palestine. But this in no way displaces or impedes the Court’s judicial function in determining this legal question for itself.
36. Third, the Court plainly did not consider that South Africa’s continued status as an occupying Power made any difference.
37. As Judge Greenwood has explained, the basic position under the law of occupation is that an occupying Power has the “liberty to govern within certain limits without being guilty of a violation of the ius in bello”. The occupying Power is required to administer the territory as a temporary conservator or trustee for the benefit of the occupied population. Acting in that capacity, the occupying Power has certain liberties to take measures in good faith in the best interests of the occupied population or, where absolutely necessary, to meet its own legitimate security interests. This, of course, is a separate question to the unlawfulness of the occupation itself.
38. As to the position under the law of occupation, again, it is helpful to recall the Namibia case. The Court’s context specific expression of the principle was that “a party which disowns or does not fulfil its own obligations cannot be recognized as retaining the rights which it claims to derive from the relationship”. Pakistan considers that this has relevance when considering whether an occupying Power should be recognized as retaining liberties to administer the occupied territory. In this case, if one were to zoom in exclusively on Israel’s conduct as an occupying Power, the only conclusion could be that Israel has disowned its basic duties. Its policies and practices of occupation deny the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and amount to systematic racial discrimination and serious violations of international humanitarian law and human rights. Plainly, they cannot be said to be absolutely necessary to meet Israel’s own security interests. They serve Israel’s other interests, including its goal of acquiring the territory.
D. Conclusion
40. Mr President, Members of the Court. I conclude. With the general principle that no State can be benefit from its own wrong firmly in mind, it cannot be right that, as some States have suggested, the Court should refrain from finding that the occupation itself is unlawful or that there is no obligation to withdraw. This would be to allow Israel to profit from its own continued grave wrongs. And, to adopt the Court’s words in Namibia, the Court “would be failing in the discharge of its judicial functions”. Such abdication of responsibility would not encourage or facilitate the achievement of a negotiated solution on the basis of international law. More generally, the Court would be sending out a clear signal to other States that they too might be allowed to benefit through the prolonged unlawful occupation of the territory of another State.
41. Mr President, Members of the Court, these proceedings are a great moment in law, they are a great moment in history. We all have a collective opportunity to develop jurisprudence in a way that advances the cause of humanity. I wish you good luck in your deliberations. Thank you.
The PRESIDENT: I thank the delegation of Pakistan for its presentation.
FIELD TESTER：Mr.KINUGAWA(フィールドテスター衣川氏)
ROD：PLAISIR ANSWER PA-B80SOPMOD(プレジールアンサーソップモッド)
REEL：RYOGA SHRAPNEL（改）(リョウガ シュラプネル)
LINE：PE4号＋leader40lb（PE4号＋リーダー40ポンド）
LURE：CD9/Rapala（カウントダウン9）
His 10th anniversary gift may have been the new haircut from me, but Ezra also asked for a very special gift - it just took a little time to set it up :)
“You might as well answer the door, my child, the truth is furiously knocking.”
inspirationalquotes.club/you-might-as-well-answer-the-doo...
This is a photograph from the Athlone 10KM and 5KM road races were held in Clonown Village, Co. Roscommon, Ireland on Sunday 26th of April 2015 at 14:00 and 14:30. Clonown is a small townland on the west bank of the River Shannon and is situated about 3 miles south of the town of Athlone. Whilst the townland is almost completely rural it is accessed easily from major routes and towns by the M6 motorway. The weather was perfect for today's race and participants enjoyed very warm spring sunshine. There was a slight breeze on certain parts of the course but overall it was a beautiful day for running. Over 200 people took part in both events.
Reading on a Smartphone or tablet? Don't forget to scroll down further to read more about this race and see important Internet links to other information about the race! You can also find out how to access and download these photographs.
We have an extensive set of photographs from today in the following Flickr Album: www.flickr.com/photos/peterm7/sets/72157651739578427/
Timing and event management was provided by Precision Timing. Results are available on their website at www.precisiontiming.net/result.aspx?v=864 with additional material available on their Facebook page (www.facebook.com/davidprecisiontiming?fref=ts) See their promotional video on YouTube: www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-7_TUVwJ6Q
This race was the fourth annual running of the vent. Every aspect of the organisation was professional: from stewarting, registration, start of races exactly on time, car-parking, and post race refreshments. The 10KM route followed an anti-clockwise loop. The race started on the L2035 Togher Road (about 100m from Clonown Centre - see here on Google Streetview goo.gl/maps/xWj3i) and heads towards the old Ballinasloe Rd (emerging here - see on Google Streetview goo.gl/maps/P6rE8) and back via Creggan (turning off the main road at this point - see Google StreetView goo.gl/maps/wCHT0) with the finish at the Clonown Community Centre. The course turns at this point [goo.gl/maps/7sa6u] to return to the finish. The stretch from the exit off the Old Ballinasloe Road to the Creggan turn off brings the race through wide open bogland areas used in the peat extraction industry.
The 5KM race route follows a different route around the townland. The race starts at the church in Clonown and head clockwise around the Ballinaculla townland which offers lovely views of the River Shannon. The route then goes to the Drumlosh road and runs for 1.5 km before the roundabout which is the 3km mark. The race then turns around and returns back to the village and finish at Clonown Community Centre. Both races share some of the race route for the Flatline Athlone Half held annually in September (www.athlonehalfmarathon.com/) which makes the race routes very fast and flat.
Location Map: This is the start/finish area on Google StreetView [goo.gl/maps/W0Hxc]
Some Useful Links
Pictures from 2014: www.flickr.com/photos/peterm7/sets/72157644370027053/
Pictures from 2013: www.flickr.com/photos/peterm7/sets/72157633350511183/
Garmin Connect GPS Trace of the 2013 10KM Route: connect.garmin.com/activity/306782605
The Clonown area on Google Streetview [goo.gl/maps/W0Hxc]
Facebook Page for the Athlone 10KM Race 2015 www.facebook.com/Athlone10krun?fref=ts
USING OUR PHOTOGRAPHS - A QUICK GUIDE AND ANSWERS TO YOUR QUESTIONS
Can I use these photographs directly from Flickr on my social media account(s)?
Yes - of course you can! Flickr provides several ways to share this and other photographs in this Flickr set. You can share directly to: email, Facebook, Pinterest, Twitter, Tumblr, LiveJournal, and Wordpress and Blogger blog sites. Your mobile, tablet, or desktop device will also offer you several different options for sharing this photo page on your social media outlets.
BUT..... Wait there a minute....
We take these photographs as a hobby and as a contribution to the running community in Ireland. We do not charge for our photographs. Our only "cost" is that we request that if you are using these images: (1) on social media sites such as Facebook, Tumblr, Pinterest, Twitter,LinkedIn, Google+, VK.com, Vine, Meetup, Tagged, Ask.fm,etc or (2) other websites, blogs, web multimedia, commercial/promotional material that you must provide a link back to our Flickr page to attribute us or acknowledge us as the original photographers.
This also extends to the use of these images for Facebook profile pictures. In these cases please make a separate wall or blog post with a link to our Flickr page. If you do not know how this should be done for Facebook or other social media please email us and we will be happy to help suggest how to link to us.
I want to download these pictures to my computer or device?
You can download this photographic image here directly to your computer or device. This version is the low resolution web-quality image. How to download will vary slight from device to device and from browser to browser. Have a look for a down-arrow symbol or the link to 'View/Download' all sizes. When you click on either of these you will be presented with the option to download the image. Remember just doing a right-click and "save target as" will not work on Flickr.
I want get full resolution, print-quality, copies of these photographs?
If you just need these photographs for online usage then they can be used directly once you respect their Creative Commons license and provide a link back to our Flickr set if you use them. For offline usage and printing all of the photographs posted here on this Flickr set are available free, at no cost, at full image resolution.
Please email petermooney78 AT gmail DOT com with the links to the photographs you would like to obtain a full resolution copy of. We also ask race organisers, media, etc to ask for permission before use of our images for flyers, posters, etc. We reserve the right to refuse a request.
In summary please remember when requesting photographs from us - If you are using the photographs online all we ask is for you to provide a link back to our Flickr set or Flickr pages. You will find the link above clearly outlined in the description text which accompanies this photograph. Taking these photographs and preparing them for online posting takes a significant effort and time. We are not posting photographs to Flickr for commercial reasons. If you really like what we do please spread the link around your social media, send us an email, leave a comment beside the photographs, send us a Flickr email, etc. If you are using the photographs in newspapers or magazines we ask that you mention where the original photograph came from.
I would like to contribute something for your photograph(s)?
Many people offer payment for our photographs. As stated above we do not charge for these photographs. We take these photographs as our contribution to the running community in Ireland. If you feel that the photograph(s) you request are good enough that you would consider paying for their purchase from other photographic providers or in other circumstances we would suggest that you can provide a donation to any of the great charities in Ireland who do work for Cancer Care or Cancer Research in Ireland.
Let's get a bit technical: We use Creative Commons Licensing for these photographs
We use the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License for all our photographs here in this photograph set. What does this mean in reality?
The explaination is very simple.
Attribution- anyone using our photographs gives us an appropriate credit for it. This ensures that people aren't taking our photographs and passing them off as their own. This usually just mean putting a link to our photographs somewhere on your website, blog, or Facebook where other people can see it.
ShareAlike – anyone can use these photographs, and make changes if they like, or incorporate them into a bigger project, but they must make those changes available back to the community under the same terms.
Above all what Creative Commons aims to do is to encourage creative sharing. See some examples of Creative Commons photographs on Flickr: www.flickr.com/creativecommons/
I ran in the race - but my photograph doesn't appear here in your Flickr set! What gives?
As mentioned above we take these photographs as a hobby and as a voluntary contribution to the running community in Ireland. Very often we have actually ran in the same race and then switched to photographer mode after we finished the race. Consequently, we feel that we have no obligations to capture a photograph of every participant in the race. However, we do try our very best to capture as many participants as possible. But this is sometimes not possible for a variety of reasons:
►You were hidden behind another participant as you passed our camera
►Weather or lighting conditions meant that we had some photographs with blurry content which we did not upload to our Flickr set
►There were too many people - some races attract thousands of participants and as amateur photographs we cannot hope to capture photographs of everyone
►We simply missed you - sorry about that - we did our best!
You can email us petermooney78 AT gmail DOT com to enquire if we have a photograph of you which didn't make the final Flickr selection for the race. But we cannot promise that there will be photograph there. As alternatives we advise you to contact the race organisers to enquire if there were (1) other photographs taking photographs at the race event or if (2) there were professional commercial sports photographers taking photographs which might have some photographs of you available for purchase. You might find some links for further information above.
Don't like your photograph here?
That's OK! We understand!
If, for any reason, you are not happy or comfortable with your picture appearing here in this photoset on Flickr then please email us at petermooney78 AT gmail DOT com and we will remove it as soon as possible. We give careful consideration to each photograph before uploading.
I want to tell people about these great photographs!
Great! Thank you! The best link to spread the word around is probably http://www.flickr.com/peterm7/sets