Consie

Just an FYI - that rumor is utter nonsense, the news has not been met with great protest in the US. Not even the fringe, right wing media has given the topic much attention. The US doesn't agree with the decision, but no one's sovereignty is being challenged and no one is suggesting Scotland doesn't have the right to act within its own law. As for "butting in," let's wait for the sanctions and the invasion (which of course won't happen). Do I think Americans have the right to comment as private citizens on the matter due to the fact that 180 Americans died in the bombing? Yes. But it's just commentary at this point (as it should be).

It was Libya, the Libyan embassy in Germany was involved in the attack. As for the rest of your post, I don't disagree in the least bit. Here's my point: Libya started the altercation by bombing a West German nightclub frequented by Americans, in the end if I recall it was a Turkish woman and a German who were killed. The US (using UK air bases and resources) took retribution by indiscriminately, illegally and shamefully bombing Tripoli and killing far more civilians than soldiers. It was reprehensible and yet it does NOT justify blowing up a Pan Am jumbo jet. Just as the American retribution was shameful and illegal and utterly wrong, so was Ghaddafi's revenge. You can't say they it was a justified act of revenge, but the American bombing of Tripoli wasn't. They were the same mistake, the same crime.

Interesting... if so then of course it is a perfectly normal, legal action.

I'm conflicted. The guy himself is likely innocent and was used to take the blame from the Libyan government. The air raids in Tripoli were indeed barbaric, but it has yet to mentioned in this thread they were in retaliation (on a much larger scale) for Libya's bizarre and unwarranted bombing of a German nightclub. Libya also hijacked an American jumbo jet in Pakistan in the 80s. Anyway what concerns me most is the precedent it sets. Granted I don't know how Scottish law works (in the US, law is set by precedence), but is it customary for judges to override sentences to let people out of jail on such grounds? To say nothing of the guy personally, I think when you sentence someone to life in prison... they're supposed to die in prison... isn't that the very idea?

Agreed, at least we can't complain that their dominance of the Hot 100 is due solely to airplay. They've legitimately been the #1 seller all summer...

BSB and Cascada are showing that the electro-pop/GaGa sound is filtering down to the mainstream. Tons of new music popping up in the top 100, too. Anyone notice this?: 18. Whatcha Say - Jason DeRulo It's an R&B/pop song that heavily samples, get this, Imogen Heap's Hide and Seek.

She's... 11! She's almost too young to be like that. She probably barely understands, if at all, what her mother is doing for her. Wait till this girl is 16 and we'll see if she's bratty and demanding. Wait till she starts to comprehend that most people can't afford designer bags and clothes, but she "can." Only THEN will the attitude change to bratty, demanding, pompous, etc. When she starts to believe she's better than everyone else.

And even more daft to buy expensive clothes for a growing child who will outgrow them within months. If you can afford an expensive item and want to own it for many years and one day pass it down etc., then ok. But to spend that kind of money on a kid?? utterly stupid. Well, stupid to someone who can afford it. Since this family obviously cannot, it's beyond stupid. Totally laughably, pathetically ludicrous.

The best song of 2009 returns to the itunes chart!! hope it climbs!

Very true, which was right in the middle of the 20th century. Which means we seem to make the same mistakes once every couple generations or so. All the more reason why it is important to be a student of history. See above.

Interesting how many parallels can be drawn between WWI and our recent disaster in Iraq. WWI was started by a few crazed, unstable, inbred morons who saw war as grand and romantic and used a vague system of alliances and a few regional tensions to engage in a spectacularly horrific and devastating war. Combing modern killing technologies with medieval strategies and delusions of romance and other such nonsense, millions of men died for virtually no reason. How was Iraq different? Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and company see a rascal of a dictator lording over a large country, full of oil, just dyyyyyyyying for a McDonalds and other American investment, and strategically placed at the center for the Middle East. With no plan beyond waltzing in, dropping a couple bombs here and there and setting up a fabulous democracy within months, they made good use of American fear, sadness, anger and confusion following 9/11 and dropped a bunch of young men and women to die in the desert.

This bothers me tremendously. Safe sex should never, ever be excluded or de-emphasized from any sex education campaign, regardless of its underlying assumptions about the motivation for sex (pleasure vs. love). Safe sex is pleasurable sex, safe sex is loving sex, safe is is the ONLY sex that should ever be encouraged or taught to children. Have people been lulled into a false sense of invincibility regarding STDs? HIV/AIDS continues to ravage the globe, killing millions in every country and in every region on earth and yet there are still some ignorant enough to suggest sex education can be "too concentrated" on safe sex? The kiddies can f*** like rabbits for all I care, just USE A CONDOM EVERY TIME.

You're right, I guess I was just going off the Nytimes, WashPost and Chicago Trib reviews I read. Robert Ebert liked it a lot, though!

Pretty mediocre reviews so far... sounds like it's mostly shock-laughs without much context or much of a punchline.

Man in the Mirror is now #1.

I feel like if Guetta/Rowland could just break into the top 100, the exposure on that list could help the song out a lot. Oh well, David Guetta is sitting at #1 right now with the BEP track anyway.

I suppose there isn't much discussion here since, well, what can really be argued? I can't imagine anyone here supporting the "other side" (an undemocratic, radical Muslim dictator and his crony who denies the holocaust and the very existence of gays in his country)! What can we do in the West? It's troubling because much of the reason for the anti-Ahmadinejad support has been the fallout from years of brutal sanctions from the West (economic and social). So we can't just punish them with further sanctioning, it's hurting the people who support reform. But what else can the West do? If leaders speak out against the Islamic Republic, it will just further their claim that the West has instigated the whole problem from the outside.

And I just found a fantastic article basically repeating what I said but in a much more articulate manner :lol: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/...threw-away.html

The elections were a sham, they have been for YEARS. In fact, most Iranians boycotted elections in years past, which is why what occurred this year is so astonishing. And after the result was announced, I was worried that they'd all become jaded and boycott elections again in the future and nothing would ever change. But I was wrong - Iranians have taken to the street in the most inspiring way. I honestly wish I could go there and march with them. It's remarkable. Iran is so little-understood in the West. In '79 a myriad of different groups all united against the corrupt Shah - the Marxists, the intelligentsia, the clerics and everyone in between. But in the power vacuum that occurred afterward, Khomenei took power and instituted a draconian, horrendous and backward theocracy that most of the revolutionaries never wanted. Brain drain has been the biggest threat to Iran, most of the young and educated left and continue to leave in astonishing numbers. But it's a country with enormous potential, a rich culture of science and philosophy and the arts. Until these Muslim clerics banned dancing, music, and everything else traditionally Persian. Don't get me wrong, the majority of the country is Muslim but there is a culture and history that predates Islam by centuries and Iranians have always been worldly, tolerant Muslims (much like Turks)... however the medieval, backward theocracy that governs them has tried again and again to regress the country back to the stone age to further their own political and pseudo-religious interests. This is a perfect example of PEOPLE taking back what is rightfully theirs - truly inspiring. The mullahs who rule this enormous, young country at the very breaking point... their time is limited and they're starting to panic. I say let them rot, let's see a another revolution!!! I love the images of women in hijabs leaping fearlessly at the brutal riot police... really challenges our stereotypical image (in the West) of the subservient, Muslim woman in a headdress.

Great post, sarcastically but effectively narrates the history of Christianity. What's remarkable to me is how Christians are able to break all the rules of science and reason simply by shrugging off all the unanswered questions as "the Mystery." Where else in life can you get away with that? I think Overstaged has a valid point, though, that religion doesn't strictly lead to war and conflict... certainly is has inspired many people to do positive things. So I would be a "live and let live" except that religious people keep trying to tell me how to live MY life, that MY life is sinful and MY relationship is invalid and vulgar. That's why I deserve to have an opinion about other peoples' religions, because they INSIST on forcing me how to live my life.

Clever, but get a bunch of vulnerable people together and convince them that trilobites created the Earth and wait for humans in the afterlife... your comment doesn't sound so crazy...

I AM SO IN LOVE WITH THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :heart: :heart: :heart: :heart: :heart:

Yes. And it's #1. How will Billboard deal with this??

Love this! :heart:

The old Soviet countries were the most generous - and some of the policies remain in former socialist countries. Women are legally guaranteed a huge maternity leave for something like 18 months, and tons of social privileges that increase with number of children. Of course, while that sounds nice and good, now that those countries are capitalist, it effectively keeps women out of the workforce (businesses claim they can't afford to hire them) and furthers the idea that women should stay home and care for the children dutifully. The Soviets were decades ahead of their time in terms of gender equality, but since the breakup in the late 80s, gender equality has fallen dramatically.