ghostwriter

I hope it's Green Day & U2, but it's more likely to be Wasteoflife. I'm not really keen on any of the others on that list either, apart from the All Saints track.

The Daily Mail did that as well didn't they? And weren't The News Of The World responsible for that whole paediatrician fiasco? I don't why they don't just have a seperate register for paedophiles. When most people hear someone is on the Sex Offenders register nowadays they see it as a euphemism for them being a paedophile, but that's not exactly true as you say people can be on there for being caught having a slash in a public street. While there is definitely a case for letting parents know about these dangerous men being around, the vigilante mentality gets ridiculous. If you remember Monkey Dust, their Paedofinder General character was very good at sending that sort of attitude up. As I said earlier, I think there should be a seperate register for paedophiles and rapists.

That reminds me of Keith Chegwin's quote in "Extras" about the BBC. "Still run by Jews and queers is it?". I know that was a joke, but that suggests that Jewish people and gay people have held high positions at the BBC for quite some time. Stereotypically they are the two groups it is rumoured to be the most prominent in the entertainment industry. Whether they are or not, it isn't a big deal if it's true or not really is it? Entertainment and media is a commerical industry, so they aren't going to just give propaganda. They broadcast what they think people want to see and hear. With regards to the Bible getting put in Room 101 and not the Koran, I suppose it may be to do with a lot of people being "ex-Christians" who had a religious upbringing but have since become atheist. It could also be to do with cultures from other countries being more deeply seemed with a religion, and the implication being if you slate another countries' religion, by implication you insult their culture and race. I'm not saying I agree with this view at all, I'm just trying to understand the reasoning behind it. While I agree it's ridiculous to have a newsreader who's face is covered in a veil (what would be the point, how would you understand her etc), I've got so tired of hearing some of these sort of "political correctness gone mad" stories and the spin certain newspapers like to put on it that I'm now suspicious there is much truth in them.

Well religions are mumbo jumbo if you ask me, but scientology is one of the most ridiculous. It seems everyone in Hollywood follows some wacko cult or another. Perhaps it's how they deal with the "fame". Or maybe Hollywood just attracts weirdos.

Yes, Marion Raven isn't the best female co-singer Meat Loaf has had is she? She's nowhere near as good as Ellen Foley, Karla DeVito, Lorraine "Mrs. Loud" Crosby or Patti Russo.

I don't have a particular problem with them, but acts who only sell well because of a hard-core fanbase, which like them more because they fancy them than the music and who have virtually no appeal outside of that are annoying in general. To be honest, even though Star Girl isn't very good whichever way you look at it, I prefer it to that dire Fedde whatever thing.

Well actually, I think this is one case where the "it was great let's leave it there" line didn't work. I thought the third series of The Royle Family was pretty poor compared to how it was when it started out. This one off special was much better. But I agree if they never do any more after this it'll be a great way to close it.

:lol: Good stuff. It's a shame they've lost Nana really, she was one of the best characters, and Liz Smith is excellent but I still hope we see more of it.

Very good stuff. Very funny and very poignant. The show has always done stuff like that very well. It's definitely one the best programmes there has ever been on British TV.

Odd choice of songs there, but I'll probably end up getting it. Chances are it'll change anyway.

Yes it is, and the Boogie Pimps did a very bad job of it IMO.

Interestingly, I've heard 'We Built This City' being described as "everything wrong about American music" quite a few times.

'White Rabbit' is a very good song. I quite like 'Somebody To Love' as well. But I have to say 'We Built This City' is one of my least favourite songs ever. The lyrics are so terrible. All the synthesized stuff in it has dated very badly as well. Perhaps they just reflect the stereotypes of the decade they were in- 'White Rabbit' in the psychadelic drug-influenced '60s and 'We Built This City' in the cheesy corporate '80s (whether those stereotypes were actually what either decade was like or not). I'm not much of an '80s fan to be honest. I really don't like 'Jump' by Van Halen either. I kind of like 'The Final Countdown' in a guilty pleasure way though. I was very surprised to learn earlier this week that Europe are still having hits in their native Sweden.

Lindsay Lohan, while she's nothing special in her field, actually is famous for doing something. The other two are famous for being famous. Yeah, sure Paris has got an album out or whatever, but the only reason she was signed was because she is famous.... for being famous. Given how much her album flopped I doubt she'll ever be known for her singing. Chantelle's 15 minutes should have been over ages ago, but she is nowhere near as much annoying as Paris Hilton.

Manic Street Preachers- If You Tolerate This Your Children Will Be Next. Great song. A fairly close second is Madonna- Frozen. One of her best I think. Certainly her best single not to come from her '80s heyday. 1998 has one of my least favourite number ones ever though- Gym And Tonic by Spacedust. I also can't believe how popular All Saints' terrible double A side covers of Under The Bridge and Lady Marmalade are. Anyway, my top 5 number ones of 1998 are: 1) Manic Street Preachers- If You Tolerate This Your Children Will Be Next 2) Madonna- Frozen 3) Run DMC vs Jason Nevins- It's Like That 4) All Saints- Never Ever 5) Aqua- Turn Back Time (underrated I think, because of how ultra cheesy their more famous songs were).

Technically, I think a crucifix is only a cross that has a figure of Jesus' body on it as well. If it doesn't have that on it is just a cross, although those crosses do have significance in Christianity. But with the cross you have to admit it can be used just as a fashion statement with no real connection to the religion nowadays. I'm with mushymanrob on this in terms of I have no real problem with anyone wearing any religious iconography if it doesn't impair them from doing their job. I did took a computer course ran by a Sikh teacher once- him being a Sikh and indeed him wearing a turban didn't have any bearing on his ability to teach the class. On the other hand, in history in school I was taught by a Catholic about the religious divide between Protestants and Catholics in Tudor/Elizabethan England and the Civil War. Now it could be argued that the fact he belonged to one of those religions made him biased (although personally I don't think he was, he always seemed to aproach it from a general historical point of view rather than favouring one side over the other, but I digress). Like I say, someone wearing religious iconography isn't a problem for me per se, but if it effects your ability to do your job, like the impaired communication and inability to see the face of someone wearing a veil, then it becomes a problem.

My local post office just up the road was closed down a while ago. I used to go there quite frequently as a kid to post a letter or something for my mum. The old couple who ran it were very nice, and they had run it for about 40 years, but then they retired and an Asian family bought it. They didn't stay long for some reason though. They went around the time a lot of post offices were being shut around the country. Anyway, what used to be the local post office is now a tanning salon. :rolleyes: We have to travel to the town centre now if we want to get anything post office related, and that post office is more like a bank anyway. It isn't really that much of an inconvienience for me personally, but I imagine it is for old people, who I suspect are the group who probably use the post office most often.

As in the group who did 'The Final Countdown' in the '80s? I had no idea they were still going. :lol:

I'm not sure Charlotte's voice is as suited to pop as it is to opera. Sure she can still sing pop songs better than most pop singers, but her pop voice does sound a lot less good than her opera voice. As you say, Tarja used her operatic voice while she was in Nightwish, while Charlotte hasn't really used it apart from that dance track she did with Jurgen Vries (i.e Darren Tate). Even so, she strikes me as someone who is taking the descion to do what she likes and enjoy herself rather than take the more sensible, safer but duller option. She is worth a fortune already, so it's a risk she can easily afford to take. Fair play to her, I say.

Snow Patrol

I won't pretend I'm any kind of expert on geology, but as I understand it tsunamis are caused by underwater earthquakes or volcanic eruptions. Something which I don't think can be stopped or indeed started by anything people do. In my experience, Muslims or people with different religious views in general aren't themselves offended by Christmas. In fact they often seem to wish others a merry Christmas even if they themselves don't celebrate it. Once again, it seems the goverment and councils are just ridiculously afraid of offending any ethnic or religious minority, and when they make descisons like that they end up doing race relations much more harm than good.

I suppose it might be a good idea to point out that I live in the same town that Aisha Azmi, the woman who is at the centre of this current veil debate comes from and, according to several local papers and people I know, much of the Muslim community side with the school and the council's descision that she shouldn't wear the veil considering her job was to communicate with children, and consider her something of an attention seeker. Many of those who seem to think that are actually veil wearing women themselves. A lot said that Azmi should have respect for the school's rules if she wants to work there, should have worked at a Muslim school if she wanted to wear the veil, and one mother made the point that her own children have difficulty understanding her when she has her veil on. Which is just what most people have been saying on this issue- people are free to wear what they like, but if it impairs the job you are doing then you have to dress more appropriately. It looks like this case is yet another example of one individual, several lawyers, the government and the media making a mountain out of a molehill.

I agree with mushymanrob on this. This island is cramped enough with the people already living here. We can't support everyone as it is without adding more to it. I'm not against people emmigrating here if they are going to work, but this country is far too much of a soft touch, and it does have a reputation for being that way. I don't know any other country that just seems so soft on this as we are. The loss of national identity is a key thing as well. Apart from when when theres an international football tournement on, you can't seem to express any form of national pride without being called a racist or a Nazi. It's just ridiculous. I also hope GRIMLY FIENDISH is not implying that the 7/7 attacks were in some way 'morally justified' either...

I agree with russt68, Morrissey's lyrics have a great deal of humour in them. That's probably why he is so popular. I've kind of gone off him now for some reason though. I really liked him when I was in my teens. Then I turned 20 and went off him a bit.

Well, people can wear more or less what they like in a free country, however there are practical reasons for asking someone not to wear a veil. For example, if, like that teachinhg assistant who has been in the papers over this, you are doing a job that requires communication, then it's reasonable to say you can't wear a veil as it's hard to understand someone who's voice is muffled by a veil. More importantly, if these women use a passport or any other form of identification that requires a photograph and still wear a veil when trying to get past the security, just how are they supposed to know this woman is who she says she is? She could be anyone who's just stolen someone's card. It may even be a man is disguise. I realise how unlikely that is, but it is certainly possible. It is a bit annoying generally the government seem to tip-toe around issues such as this for fear of offending a minority group. However, I think for the most part this whole issue is a lot of fuss over something which ultimately isn't really important.