777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Human Rights Law Is An Ass

Sun Dec 19, 2010 4:22 pm

Human Rights legislation is a fantastic thing which such be supported and expanded.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
skidmarks
Topic Author
Posts: 6614
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 7:51 pm

RE: Human Rights Law Is An Ass

Sun Dec 19, 2010 5:37 pm

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 50):
Human Rights legislation is a fantastic thing which such be supported and expanded.

A bit like political correctness then.

Lets have more so that all law abiding citizens abide by legislation that the criminal fraternity, along with the legal profession regularly abuse, manipulate and twist.

Lets make it impossible for anyone to retaliate against someone who hurts, steals and generally abuses them so that the people who only use the Human Rights Act to hide behind, can continue to get away with murder, to steal, to maim.

I'm sorry, but human rights are impossible to enforce without a big stick. It's a marvelous idea, but it requires everyone to abide by any legislation, not the law abiding few who believe.

Andy   
Growing old is compulsory, growing up is optional
 
Danny
Posts: 3742
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 3:44 am

RE: Human Rights Law Is An Ass

Sun Dec 19, 2010 6:12 pm

Quoting 474218 (Reply 49):
The real problem boils down to the fact that there are people that refuse to believe:

o That there are people so evil they do not deserve "human rights"

o That some crimes are so heinous, like taking a life, that the person convicted of that crime should have their "human rights" suspended or ended.

Hitler did not believe that Jews or Eastern Europeans deserved human rights so he took them away.
 
RussianJet
Posts: 5983
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 4:15 am

RE: Human Rights Law Is An Ass

Sun Dec 19, 2010 6:43 pm

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 50):
Human Rights legislation is a fantastic thing which such be supported and expanded.

Yeah, so that we end up in a situation where anyone can do anything they like to anybody with no serious repercussions. Splendid.

Quoting simonriat (Reply 46):
probably not worth sending him back because If he really does love his family then all he going to do is try and get back

Sorry, that kind of defeatist attitude is precisely what makes our country a laughing stock.

Quoting simonriat (Reply 46):
However you could argue that the sentence handed to him was unfair and not long enough.

One certainly could. And, one should certainly argue on top of this that any foreigner who repeatedly and seriously transgresses our nation's laws should forfeit the privilege of being here.
✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
 
474218
Posts: 4510
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: Human Rights Law Is An Ass

Sun Dec 19, 2010 6:55 pm

Quoting Danny (Reply 52):
Hitler did not believe that Jews or Eastern Europeans deserved human rights so he took them away.


Yet there are people that have posted on this very site that Hitler deserved his "human rights"?
 
NoUFO
Posts: 7397
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 7:40 am

RE: Human Rights Law Is An Ass

Sun Dec 19, 2010 10:37 pm

Quoting mham001 (Reply 39):
You will not say that deporting an illegal immigrant engaging in criminal behavior is NOT a human rights violation. Pure double-speak.

It is not necessarily a human rights violation, but it can be exactly that depending on the circumstances of each individual case. Are you familiar enough with this case to boldly say that his deportation would not be a human rights violation? Note that I never said he should not face justice. But facing justice includes that his deportation doesn't merely base on a gut feeling.
This isn't "doing double-speak" but "being less arrogant".

Quoting Asturias (Reply 47):
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is for all intents and purposes irrelevant and quite worthless. .. and human rights are being broken every day all over the world, in serious and less serious manner.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is worthless because human rights are broken every day? Wow. How can you say that human rights are being infringed every day if there isn't a declaration that defines what human rights are in the first place?

Quoting Asturias (Reply 47):
You're right that there is a UN declaration of human rights, but you're quite wrong in its value, legality and authority (none, none and zero)

The enforceability is zero.
Value, legality and authority do exist. Not to dictators and some fringe groups on the net, though.

Quoting Asturias (Reply 47):
Human rights have begun to deteriorate a lot and a huge reason for that is actually that many people consider them to be an unalterable fact of life. They become diluted and meaningless - not the least because people take them for granted and don't know the value of the most basic ones. The only ones that really matter - life, liberty and property. Without extrapolating that - because the terms life, liberty and property can be applied to anything. So you have to understand them, protect them and fight for them - not just claim that there is some "magic" international law that decrees that "human rights" are forever and ever amen. Because that's not how the world works.

What you say here is a series of unsubstantiated claims.
"Human rights have begun to deteriorate a lot" - when, what does "a lot" mean - which rights?
"a huge reason for that is actually that many people consider them to be an unalterable fact of life" - you cannot take human rights from a human. This is the very essence of human rights, the very first sentence of the Preamble says exactly that. If you don't even understand this part, we don't need to discuss human rights, nor do you need to lecture me.
"The only ones that really matter - life, liberty and property." - Who says they are the only one that matter - you? What a huge value, legality and authority comes with it because you said it! And how less "werstern" this sort of human rights that would be.
Would you at least be willing to say that those rights are inalienable or would you say that it would be wrong if "many people consider them to be an unalterable fact of life"? I really look forward to reading your answer.

Quoting Danny (Reply 48):
That's the whole point. No one - every human has them from the moment they're born.

  

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 53):
Yeah, so that we end up in a situation where anyone can do anything they like to anybody with no serious repercussions.

Hogwash.
This has about as much to do with human rights as a piano with a nuclear bomb.

Quoting 474218 (Reply 54):
Yet there are people that have posted on this very site that Hitler deserved his "human rights"?

"Deserved" is the wrong term, no one said "deserved". But depriving him of his human rights would take you closer to his actions of depriving others of their human rights.
I support the right to arm bears
 
RussianJet
Posts: 5983
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 4:15 am

RE: Human Rights Law Is An Ass

Sun Dec 19, 2010 10:58 pm

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 55):
Hogwash.
This has about as much to do with human rights as a piano with a nuclear bomb.

No, not hogwash. Like it or not, human rights is the touted reason for allowing this evildoer to remain in our country and denying us the sensible option of removing him from our society. And this is hardly the first such case.
✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
 
Danny
Posts: 3742
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 3:44 am

RE: Human Rights Law Is An Ass

Sun Dec 19, 2010 11:19 pm

Quoting 474218 (Reply 54):
Quoting Danny (Reply 52):
Hitler did not believe that Jews or Eastern Europeans deserved human rights so he took them away.


Yet there are people that have posted on this very site that Hitler deserved his "human rights"?

Because the moment you accept that only some humans deserve human right you open padoras box of war crimes, torture, etc. Proper way of dealing with evil people is to capture them, put them on trial, serve them a sentence, enforce it.
 
L410Turbolet
Posts: 6147
Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 9:12 am

RE: Human Rights Law Is An Ass

Sun Dec 19, 2010 11:54 pm

Quoting Danny (Reply 57):
Because the moment you accept that only some humans deserve human right you open padoras box of war crimes, torture, etc.

Mixing together Hitler, war crimes together with discussion on how to handle an illegal immigrant who tries to abuse the system will get us nowhere.

Quoting Danny (Reply 57):
Proper way of dealing with evil people is to capture them, put them on trial, serve them a sentence, enforce it.

... which I believe was the case in question. Whether deportation of someone who is in the country ILLEGALLY to begin with and who has a notoriety of breaking the law, yet he claims he yearns for "family life", should be part of enforcing the law.
 
mham001
Posts: 5668
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

RE: Human Rights Law Is An Ass

Mon Dec 20, 2010 2:58 am

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 55):
It is not necessarily a human rights violation, but it can be exactly that depending on the circumstances of each individual case.

There's that double-speak again. Classic.
I can't think of one circumstance in which a country deporting a criminal illegal immigrant is a legitimate human rights violation. Can you provide an example?
 
User avatar
Asturias
Posts: 1977
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:32 am

RE: Human Rights Law Is An Ass

Mon Dec 20, 2010 9:46 am

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 55):
The enforceability is zero.
Value, legality and authority do exist. Not to dictators and some fringe groups on the net, though.

Authority and enforceability go hand in hand, obviously. It's not just empty words, though you are fond of them.

Value is zero because they hold no authority because they cannot be enforced (except haphazardly and sporadically) - and legality is only applicable for sovereign states and within them - take the USA for instance. The UN charter of human rights is slightly less useful there as a roll of toilet paper.

I do believe they have the death penalty over there. A "law" that has no authority nor enforcability is nothing. And it's quite sad to see that some people are under the delusion that it is some sort of "universal" or "law". It's a nice text, that's all.

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 55):
What you say here is a series of unsubstantiated claims.

Pot, kettle, black - you've made your entire argument on unsubstantiated claims. Like claiming human rights are a constant, based on some treaty and cannot be changed. That's quite unsubstantiated and blatantly wrong.

I said human rights have been on a losing streak the last decades, and indeed they have. In western societies the human rights of privacy are being deteriorated every year and the right of property is questionable in light of the western economic crisis where actual real property has been taken away from normal people and replaced with intangibles and vaporous ideas.

In the Middle East, human rights are few and far between. Most countries are indeed some sort of dictatorships, but even the democracies are horrible such as Egypt, Iraq and some would say Israel.

Saudi Arabia. Do I need to go into that?

China and Russia don't quite have the same "universal" lala-land concept of human rights as you're spouting is some holy law. This is just our concept. Our post-renaiscance post revolution concept of human rights. It's neither universal, nor enforced universally. It's enforced on country-by-country basis.

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 55):
you cannot take human rights from a human.

Hahahaha tell that to all the wrongfully imprisoned, executed and punished people in the world. Tell that to the people who are tortured, driven from their homes and violated every which way.

The easiest thing in the world is to take human rights from a human. The hard part is giving the human any human rights. Which should be self evident, seeing as human rights are a concept from the 19th/20th century - or the last 200 years of the 10 000 years or so of civilization.

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 55):
the very first sentence of the Preamble says exactly that.

Oh the unenforceable preamble says so. Well then. That's pretty meaningless.

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 55):
If you don't even understand this part, we don't need to discuss human rights, nor do you need to lecture me.

I don't need to lecture you, you're clearly way beyond salvaging being in your self-imposed bubble in human-rights lala-land. However, it's more important pointing out to others who might be curious, that you (and by extension "international law" and the UDHR) are quite wrong.

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 55):
Who says they are the only one that matter - you?

Nah some smarter people than I. But it is again self evident, it is the right to be, to act and to protect. If those rights are not infringed, then you enjoy the basic human rights.

Pretty much any "human right" can be derived from the three above.

asturias
Tonight we fly
 
NoUFO
Posts: 7397
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 7:40 am

RE: Human Rights Law Is An Ass

Mon Dec 20, 2010 9:30 pm

Quoting mham001 (Reply 59):
There's that double-speak again. Classic.
I can't think of one circumstance in which a country deporting a criminal illegal immigrant is a legitimate human rights violation. Can you provide an example?

Perhaps you should look up the meaning of "doublespeak". When somebody says "usually it might not be the case but in some others cases perhaps it is", that's not doublespeak.
As for the example: Would you send a political refugee who turned criminal in the country where he was seeking for asylum back to his homeland where he may face torture or could "disappear", then the deportation would be a human rights violation.
That doesn't mean he shouldn't see justice.

Quoting Asturias (Reply 60):
Authority and enforceability go hand in hand, obviously. It's not just empty words, though you are fond of them.

Hence human rights should become integral parts of each countries' constitution and therefore be enforceable.

Quoting Asturias (Reply 60):
A "law" that has no authority nor enforcability is nothing.

It is not a "law" to begin with, but a declaration. If you are going to say that declarations you signed are meaningless unless they are enforceable: okay.
If a country signs a declaration it is only reasonable to remind the country of exactly that.

Quoting Asturias (Reply 60):
you've made your entire argument on unsubstantiated claims. Like claiming human rights are a constant, based on some treaty and cannot be changed.

Trouble is: I never said so. Nor did I say it was a "law" which you wrongly accused me of.
What I do say, however, is that human rights are universal (= independent of ethnics, religion, sex ...) and inalienable (= they cannot be taken away from a human).

You still did not explain the difference between your set of human rights and the actual one, nor where the authority of yours is supposed to come from.
You know, those who drafted the original Universal Declaration of Human Rights were probably smarter then the two of us as well.

Quoting Asturias (Reply 60):
Quoting NoUFO (Reply 55):
you cannot take human rights from a human.

Hahahaha tell that to all the wrongfully imprisoned, executed and punished people in the world. Tell that to the people who are tortured, driven from their homes and violated every which way.

*Violated* is exactly the right term. You can only violate rights that you have not taken away before.
Would it be possible to deprive individuals of their human rights, human rights violations would no longer be violations.
Hence I said, in accordance with the founding fathers (and mother) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that human rights are inalienable. You said I was living in "lala-land" - without knowing me and apparently without much knowledge about the topic at hand.

[Edited 2010-12-20 13:34:42]
I support the right to arm bears
 
RussianJet
Posts: 5983
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 4:15 am

RE: Human Rights Law Is An Ass

Mon Dec 20, 2010 10:23 pm

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 61):
back to his homeland where he may face torture or could "disappear"

That was NOT the issue. It was right to a family life that was the matter in question. As it is, we already deem it 'safe' enough to remove failed asylum seekers back to northern Iraq. In either matter though, it is he who chose to break the laws of his host country and he who is responsible for any problems he might face on his return to his own country, and likewise HE who placed his precious right to a family life in jeopardy by doing what he chose to do. Nobody who takes the very sensible step of booting out such an unwelcome 'guest' should be held responsible for those issues.
✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
 
NoUFO
Posts: 7397
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 7:40 am

RE: Human Rights Law Is An Ass

Mon Dec 20, 2010 11:17 pm

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 62):
That was NOT the issue. It was right to a family life that was the matter in question.

I did NOT say this was the issue at hand for crying out loud!
I was merely providing a general example AS REQUESTED by mham001 here:

Quoting mham001 (Reply 59):
I can't think of one circumstance in which a country deporting a criminal illegal immigrant is a legitimate human rights violation. Can you provide an example?
I support the right to arm bears
 
Stealthz
Posts: 5555
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 11:43 am

RE: Human Rights Law Is An Ass

Mon Dec 20, 2010 11:39 pm

Having read the UDHR (it is still on my 2nd screen as I write this) I fail to see where the process of law taken resulting in a deportation would violate anyone's Human Rights... except the poor folk in Northern Iraq who would gain another criminal to cope with.

What I do see reading between the lines of the article linked above is a callous attempt to manipulate the system likely at the behest of some highly paid geezer in a wig!
Ibrahim was probably instructed by his lawyer to head straight from prison, find a nice English girl and knock her up! Hey I could be wrong they might be a committed and caring couple who will together lovingly raise their children into responsible adults... the cynic in me doubts that though.

Back to the UDHR that Mr Ibrihim and hes legal team hold so dear, there are several Articles that over time he as the father of a daughter and his cultural background will likely break!!
If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
 
Acheron
Posts: 1851
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:14 am

RE: Human Rights Law Is An Ass

Mon Dec 20, 2010 11:52 pm

I hope this guy's lawyers' kids gets run over by an illegal immigrant, to see how they like it and how much they will care about human rights then.
 
mham001
Posts: 5668
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

RE: Human Rights Law Is An Ass

Tue Dec 21, 2010 12:00 am

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 61):
As for the example: Would you send a political refugee who turned criminal in the country where he was seeking for asylum back to his homeland where he may face torture or could "disappear", then the deportation would be a human rights violation.

The human rights violation in theory occurs in the homeland. The idea that he "may" face some retribution in his home country does not place the burden of a human rights violation on the deporting country. His ultimate fate rested in his hands when he broke the rules of the host.
 
NoUFO
Posts: 7397
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 7:40 am

RE: Human Rights Law Is An Ass

Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:05 am

Quoting mham001 (Reply 66):
The human rights violation in theory occurs in the homeland.

Certainly. But the deporting country would be some sort of accomplice of the offending country.
I support the right to arm bears
 
Stealthz
Posts: 5555
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 11:43 am

RE: Human Rights Law Is An Ass

Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:34 am

Quoting Acheron (Reply 65):
The idea that he "may" face some retribution in his home country does not place the burden of a human rights violation on the deporting country.

Well it does actually, there is an article in the UDHR that precludes the deportation if one is going to be persecuted(or prosecuted) for political actions.
Why would Mr Ibrahim's human rights be violated by deporting him as an illegel(and undesireable alien)?
As far as can be determined from the information I have seen he does not face that kind of action if returned to Iraq, he may face prosecution for criminal acts he committed there but that is not an hissue of human rights.

My opinion, send the bastard home... if someone chops off his hands for crimes committed there.. so be it!
If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
 
RussianJet
Posts: 5983
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 4:15 am

RE: Human Rights Law Is An Ass

Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:46 am

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 63):
I did NOT say this was the issue at hand for crying out loud!

Apologies - I see what you meant. I incorrectly assumed that 'the example' referred to the story here.

My other points still stand though.
✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
 
User avatar
Asturias
Posts: 1977
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:32 am

RE: Human Rights Law Is An Ass

Wed Dec 22, 2010 1:39 pm

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 61):
Hence human rights should become integral parts of each countries' constitution and therefore be enforceable.

Should they indeed? Well, in most European countries they are. Human rights as defined by the European Convention of Human Rights have in many cases been integrated into the written law of European states, on a constitutional level or similar.

However that's not something you can expect of every nation everywhere because these human rights you are so fond of speaking about are indeed *not* universal. You may wish them to be, signified by your stated desire that they 'should becom integral parts of the constitutions of countries', but they aren't in the Real World. In lala-land however, they are universal and holy. (sarcasm)

Interestingly the consititution of the Soviet Union contained some of the most beautiful passages on human rights ever seen in a constitution - that, however, didn't mean they followed it in the old USSR. Though they probably paid it more heed than the utterly worthless UN declaration.

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 61):
It is not a "law" to begin with, but a declaration. If you are going to say that declarations you signed are meaningless unless they are enforceable: okay.

It seems you don't grasp what the term "law" entails as it is much more than what is written down by some politicians in a parliament (or say a dictator in Saudi Arabia where the universal human rights are clearly demonstrated to be universal!) - a declaration is a law as any other, and a country that ratifies a declaration is honor bound to abide by it where and when it can. It's a pinky-promise and as is expected, non enforcable. Some countries abide by treaties or declarations like this as if it were higher than their own constitution (e.g. Norway) and some prefer this over toilet paper.

But they are laws, these ratified declarations, but just not on the highest level - as it were. But as with ANY law that has no authority or enforcability, it is worthless... but it can serve as a somewhat basic benchmark on what the signatories of said treaty would, in a perfect world, like to have things. But it's not a perfect world and sovereign countries aren't all that happy about submitting to international treaties that actually oblige them to do something.

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 61):
If a country signs a declaration it is only reasonable to remind the country of exactly that.

Go right ahead, send them a reminder. Watch as they don't care. Because they shouldn't nor do they have to, but you're right. You could send them a sternly worded letter.

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 61):
Trouble is: I never said so. Nor did I say it was a "law" which you wrongly accused me of.
What I do say, however, is that human rights are universal (= independent of ethnics, religion, sex ...) and inalienable (= they cannot be taken away from a human).

Again, the term law is defined only by the artifact or device that a court finds applicable to use to create a rule - it can be just about anything. So if I accuse you of anything it's only that you don't understand what the definition of "law" is.

And that you're incredibly, fantastically and amazingly naive to think "human rights" (as defined by the UN apparently) are universal, inalienable and thus cannot be taken away in light of the fact that humans have almost never had any rights - it's a new invention in the history of humankind. Since it is universal, where was it before? Since it is inalienable, it must have always been there (dismissing the obvious question, where did human rights come from? God? )

And I also accuse you for cheapening human rights to no end, by claiming they are universal and eternal. If you could only travel back in time to notify the people who fought for human rights with their lives that there's no need for that. They already have human rights! Great!

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 61):
You still did not explain the difference between your set of human rights and the actual one, nor where the authority of yours is supposed to come from.

There is no "actual set" of human rights. That's insane. There is however a consensus among European nations about what human rights entail. Shockingly these differ from other continents. (despite our values are obviously universal!!)

My 'authority' is thus consensus. It is the consensus of European nations that we abide and uphold the European Convention of Human Rights. In every single country of Europe it is way WAY more important and influencial than the pathetic UN charter of human rights (which basically nobody abides by, because... (wait for it) ... human rights are not universal .... excepting lala-land where they obviously are)

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 61):
You know, those who drafted the original Universal Declaration of Human Rights were probably smarter then the two of us as well.

I have no doubt, but even they knew (as we should too) that naming something a "universal declaration" doesn't make it so. When the Americans win the World series of baseball and declare themselves world-champions, they aren't really. Even if they'd get all other countries in the world to sign and ratify a declation that agrees with them - simply because the rest of the world doesn't care one iota about baseball. Much like human rights, really.

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 61):
*Violated* is exactly the right term. You can only violate rights that you have not taken away before.

No, they feel violated. I was not referring to vialation of rights or laws. That's putting words in my mouth, and I'm sure you can form a better argument than that. I'm sure.

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 61):
Would it be possible to deprive individuals of their human rights, human rights violations would no longer be violations.

That's a circular argument if I ever saw one. If you could be deprived of a rigth, then violations of that right would no longer be violations?! If you could be deprived of owning a gun, then violations of that right would no longer be violations. ... aiaiai.

Yes it means that you can be deprived of any right. Your right to freedom. Your right to life even. Your right to dignity. It can all be deprived from you and yet as long as you hold those rights, they can be violated. Though not when you've lost them.

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 61):
Hence I said, in accordance with the founding fathers (and mother) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that human rights are inalienable. You said I was living in "lala-land" - without knowing me and apparently without much knowledge about the topic at hand.

I don't have to know you to see that you live in lala-land when it comes to human rights and the fact that you claim to know a lot on the subject is quite disconcerning. However, the founding fathers of the UN declaration of human rights can clearly go happy to their graves and their politcally correct Kingdom come, because they've obviously achieved what they set out for! That on Earth human rights are inalienable and universal. /sarcasm again.

Human rights are well and good and indeed enforced quite well here in Europe, but it is quite naive and myopic (not to mention amazingly quite ballsy) to claim that they are universal and just like envisioned by us.

Though this clearly begs the question: why just human rights as universal and inalienable? What of the animal rights? Plants? Rocks? Planets?

Who died and made humans so special? (just playing the devil's advocate)

asturias
Tonight we fly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dutchy, einsteinboricua, ElPistolero, flyguy89, JJJ, SheikhDjibouti and 28 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos