On Thu, 13 May 2004 08:08:51 -0700 (PDT), Christopher Mahan
<chris_mahan(a)yahoo.com> wrote (order changed at replier's whims):
* Medical procedures
* slaughterhouses
Sure. Blood gore internal organs ick yuck.
* Diseases
Depending on the effects? I suppose,
yeah, possibly.
* Bioagents
* Chemical Agents
What's to see here? A vial or barrel of the stuff? Or the
effects on humans?
* Cracking (in the computer cracking sense)
We
have images of this? Let me post a screenshot of nmap, eh? :)
* WWII-era paraphenalia (France/Germany especially)
* Drug paraphenalia
Hmm. This bears some thought, but if you're looking up an
article
about the Nazi party, I don't know why you shouldn't expect a Nazi
flag/insignia/thing.
* Weaponry/bombmaking
* Nuclear and Atomic Manufacturing / Processing Equipment
* Religious symbols
* Demonstrations
* American Presidents (it seems to really chafe some people to look at GW)
* Elections
These proceed from mildly facetious to utterly facetious. :)
I'm not being facetious, unfortunately. I see and
read a lot of
non-US media (mostly really) and it's amazing the number of things
people find offensive.
There's a difference between an image of a thing someone finds
offensive and an image which someone finds offensive. I'm offended
by... hmm, how about [[Kim Il Sung]]? I am not offended by his image,
particularly in a place such as an article about the guy. On the other
hand, I may be in for shock and surprise if I happen onto an article
about, say, [[Ebola]] and see the results of the disease.