Domini Guild’s gilded dome.
In keeping with the equally young tradition of photographic blog I present you with the latest addition to the urban panoramic series. The picture you’ll see, if you care to look, is a panoramic shot taken by a close friend of mine with his brand new, dear and trusted 10mp4xoz Canon PowerShot A640 which you can see impeccably displayed below. Yes, I too drooled for a long time over it. Alas, “thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s” Canon.
Click the banner for the fullsize download. And remember: patience is a virtue.
Or just settle for the cropped zoom.
Truly a house of worship worthy of the Lord. In stark contrast with the unsightly littered background or the concrete behemoths obscuring the view and ominously bordering into the distance the ubiquitous vibrantly colourful foliage.
To this I humbly add another two urban scenery shots, as per my predilection, and of my own advent that I may retrieve proud authorship of the snaps hence forth.
And…
Also, of course, a genuine and heart felt ‘thank you’ to both imageshack.us and freewebs.com for graciously putting up such numerous and enormous files as are the pictures that constitute this blog permitting flamboyant galleries with no regard for such capricious trifle details as the huge storage space consumed (except for imageshack which enforces an upper limit of 1.5 megabytes for any single image file uploaded) or requesting hosting fees as remuneration.
Cheers.
And enjoy. Albeit selectively.
- Coldplay - Clocks
November 29th, 2006 at 9:46 pm
Please excuse Wordpress for framing the images and forcing a crapola style pixelated resize on the part of the browser. I should have linked thumbnails instead. However, as it is, I beseech you to open in a new tab yourselves, before endeavouring a hasty opinion.
- Blue - Fly By II
December 7th, 2006 at 12:31 pm
Hey, is that the mosque?
December 7th, 2006 at 12:39 pm
Yes. We behead tree-huggers there. Wanna come see?
- Trio Hellenique - Pai pai (zamneta)
December 7th, 2006 at 1:33 pm
I am only laughing cause Ive just watched my Idol, Jon Stewart. Truly.
Whats the fashion like in downtown Bucharest? Takes some pics of peeps!
December 8th, 2006 at 12:56 pm
Er Sonyad. The pill is to prevent pregnancy, condoms are to prevent sexually transmitted diseases.
December 9th, 2006 at 9:21 pm
Yes. Female. Let me attempt and break it down for you.
The crotch… of the matter were male contraceptive methods… What a man can do to prevent, circumvent possible bad faith on the part of the woman. As in getting hooked to someone else’s kid or lying about being on the pill? I know this must seem awful complicated, but read me out.
Diamatik suggested the humble condom. But in view of the original post that detailed how the father has to keep supporting someone else’s kid even after a period of, now unveiled, successful deceit and fraud because of court legal coercitive ruling in full knowledge and in spite of this.
I understand how this might sound cold and uncaring, though. Especially since women have far less qualms about imposing a bastard on a man than that same man rightfully declining any legal and financial responsibilities.
- BRAN VAN 3000 - Love Cliche
December 9th, 2006 at 9:31 pm
A condom allows you near certainty of knowledge of when you’re being taken for a ride. But that’s all it does. It’s inadmissible in court, and rightfully so. Due to the impossibility of proving you actually used it successfully when conception occurred. Which in itself is another chronological unknown. But at least you’re safe in the knowledge that you’re almost certainly paying for a bastard. Of course, the woman, even if she will admit to a condom having been used, will certainly maintain in court that it broke or smth. along those lines. Just as the lady in question maintained she had had no sexual relations with other men in the ‘relevant timeframe’. Proven afterwards to be a lie by the DNA test…
I would be grateful if you were to stop assuming such crass ignorance and cognitive ineptitude of my person and show me the due consideration if only in sofar as my intellect and knowledge are concerned.
- BRAN VAN 3000 - Love Cliche
December 9th, 2006 at 9:39 pm
That condoms also hinder the exchange of bodily fluids during sexual intercourse was besides the matter of discussion. Which was how nice it is to have a deceitful ‘lady’ practically ruin your life by imposing responsibility over a bastard on your person, as a man. And what a man is to do, outside of cautiously restricting his sex life or refraining from sex entirely, to protect himself from such wonderful surprises.
- BRAN VAN 3000 - Love Cliche
December 10th, 2006 at 2:09 am
When was the law ever fair? When were courts ever sane? I don’t agree with the ruling, it is ridiculous, unfortunately it is logical within the mandate of the court, which is, that every ruling must be made “in the best interests of the child.” Hear me again, that is the COURT MANDATE. Therefore, neither facts, nor innocence matters, only the child matters and all rulings must serve the child, nobody else.
Now, according to the rules of this game, I don’t see why the man couldn’t lodge an appeal suggesting that if he were to continue to pay for his non-biological “offspring”, then this would harm and NOT BE IN THE BEST INTERESTS of his actual biological children.
The court will then have to decide which children’s interests to put first, which should prove to be an interesting little trick for them to be able to do, morally.
Re the condoms. I just felt you forgot their extremely necessary function, in your intellectual considerations about legislation. Thought it best to mention before you went out on the town.
December 10th, 2006 at 2:11 am
Shit. Look, I don’t know what kind of funny you are trying to pull with changing my name like that. Can you fix that? Thank you.
December 10th, 2006 at 11:13 am
There you go. All done.
- Grave Digger - Dolphin’s Cry
December 10th, 2006 at 12:06 pm
Yea thanks.
December 10th, 2006 at 9:00 pm
Female, changing your name posting on one mabtw blog, you change your name posting on all mabtw blogs. Just cause you’re undercover on wolfe.mabtw.com, it don’t mean you’re not undercover here as well. They’re all in the same blog network and hosted by your cherished mister Masterson.
Got to hand credit where credit is due. It’s a mantastically manly counter-manipulative hindrance.
Cheers.
- BranVan3000 - Astounded
December 11th, 2006 at 11:07 am
Well it seems my cover is blown thanks to you and your exposé. Also, I most definately do not cherish the Dicktator, so maybe you should try and hide your adoration for him a tad more. And, if you continue to refer to me as a marsupial, then I shall have no choice but to christian you, batty-boy.
December 11th, 2006 at 4:03 pm
Content to have assisted. However, your crafty covertness being exposed has little to do with me or what I’ve said.
And I’m afraid I miss what you mean by that last choice you mentioned.
- Audioslave - Shadow On The Sun
December 12th, 2006 at 12:09 pm
You’ve forced me to consider some new sockpuppet pseudonyms. I quite like, post sex wars pro-sex feminist sexual theorist. What do you think? Like it?
December 12th, 2006 at 12:32 pm
Shall we talk about misogynist pornography now? Maybe everythings already been said.
http://blogs.theage.com.au/lifestyle/allmenareliars/archives/2006/12/whos_got_the_po.html
Gomez - Here Comes the Breeze
Ciao