1_man_army

There are a couple that I follow, but most of them are of the traditional/old school nature - so if you know more specifically what kind of style you're looking for I could probably help you out more and find some other sites for you. http://www.theboldwillhold.com/ (traditional) http://preeminentpie...blr.com/archive (kind of mixed, but mostly american traditional and japanese) http://www.tattoosnob.com/ (just good tattoos all around, but a lot of traditional and realistic) http://swallowsndaggers.net/ (traditional and neo-traditional) http://[bleep]yeahqualitytattoos.tumblr.com/page/2 (realistic) (http://mikeadamstattoo.tumblr.com/) (traditional) http://meditationsinatrament.com/ (black-n-grey/dotwork) Thanks for that, I'll have a good look through them. I'm not sure what style I'm looking to get just yet, I'm a bit indecisive lol.

Can anyone recommend a decent site where I can trawl through images of good examples of tatoos? I'm looking for some inspiration over what to get for myself.

Interesting and eclectic list, there's a few albums on there I might look up now. Anyone who can put The Smiths, Eminem and The Libertines on the same list is fine by me :thumbup: .

I aint afraid of no ghost!

Surely it would be smarter for rights holders to work with upload sites and build a system or create an agreement whereby rightsholders are able to flag up copyright-infringing files for quick deletion rather than fighting a losing battle and having upload sites taken down? Now that MU is down people will just move to another upload service and when that goes down another will get used and it won't make a difference in the long run. Seizure and prosecution of course will have to be used as the bargaining chip to coerce the upload sites to act but it really shouldn't be the first course of action. If that point has been made already then I'm sorry but I don't have time to read over the rest of the thread :P

They also have to built a democratic culture from a decentralised tribal one without any real institutions - ie, much harder than Tunisia or Egypt. Misrata have already been complaining about things. There are going to be disputes & complaints about a lot of things, the important thing is how the various factions deal with the disputes. If they are able to agree to disagree and work together for the common good then tthey will be fine, if it becomes anything creates further bloodshed then it will get bad. I don't see the latter happening to be honest, the NTC seems to have dealt with the majority of the disputes that have come up well so far.

1) Israel is not negotiating a two-state solution with Hamas but with Fatah (as representatives of the Palestinian Authority). Hamas has been the predominant group that has been firing rockets into Israel not Fatah. Conflating the two seperate groups is just not a representation of what is really happening. 2) Your counter point completely failed to tackle the point I raised. Getting back to the overall subject of the thread: On a personal level, the release of Gilad Shalit is a wonderful thing for him and his family. However, the only people that benefit from this are the two groups that are intransigent and preventing any hope of a two-state solution Likud (and more widely Natanyahu's right wing coalition) and Hamas. The release of the 1,000 detainees will be a big short term boost to Hamas but they have played their last card now having clearly feeling threatened by the popularity of Abbas's actions at the UN. This release of 1,000 prisoners for 1 kidnapped Israeli soldier may convince them that capturing more soldiers in the future. Likewise, Netanyahu is using this to gain favour with the Israeli public which isn't helpful either considering how he deliberately circumvented the Oslo Accords (after vowing not to) and considering his willingness to undermine any hope of negotiation with the PA. Yet again, the warmongers on both sides win. This where you are wrong Israel will not be negotiating a deal with only half of the Palestinians but with all of them. Meaning as long as hamas a Palestinians terrorist continues its terrorism Israel can't talk peace with them. The Palestinians are all one group of people its a 2 state solution not 3. One for the Jews and one for the Arabs not One for the Jews and 2 for the Arabs Counter point is exactly correct to what you said. As The Gabe said it is not Israel but Abbas who is undermining the peace process. Abbas going to the UN is against all agreements in till now. The way I see it, there should be talks with Hamas as well because although I disagree with much of their agenda and approach, they are a group which does unfortunately represent many Palestinians. However, the facts on the ground are that the two state solution has only really been negotiated by the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority (represented by Fatah). You could argue that the unity deal means now that Hamas has a say but in reality that deal seems to have done nothing in practice and was just a means of pacifying a dissolusioned population. As for Abbass going to the UN, I think it was important in two regards, one it made Fatah more popular which in turn gives Abbass a stronger footing within Palestine which ultimately will help Palestinian backing for the two state option that Abbass wants to make happen. Secondly, I think it gave the Israel, the US, the Quartet and the wider international community a shot in the arm and it pushed the Israel-Palestine issue back on to the agenda which can only be good in these circumstances. There were no negotiations ongoing because of the continued expansion which is a roadblock to talks (which Netanyahu is deliberately exploiting). These expansions undermine Abbass' position within Palestine which means he had no way of representing his people in peace talks anyway since you can't make a deal when you don't have the support of your people. The UN bid was more of a political move by Abbass to improve his popularity in Palestine and to get the issue back on the agenda rather than a real effort at statehood via the UN (since everyone knows the US will veto). I think it was a great move overall, Fatah is boosted (thus hurting Hamas, which is why they released Shalit) and the international community is pulling the finger out for a change.

And you have a credible source for your sequence of events? A video of the final shot maybe? No, because thats not how it went down. A doctor on the ambulance that carried him back said he died of wounds on the way. Wounds that he clearly had as he was being dragged out of the hole as seen in the videos. Also, I'm sure we all are saddened by your doubts of the NTC. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15390188 I could be wrong, but it definitely doesn't look like he was wounded in a crossfire. No not in a crossfire. But as this picture shows he was clearly suffering from his head wound before becoming a prisoner. It does seem that he was bleeding from the head when he was captured (as your image shows) but the doctors said he died from a bullet wound to the head which I would think would kill instantly. I would like to be wrong though and I'm still open to seeing any further evidence that comes out but from what I see so far it looks like he was excecuted. Not that this matters to those inside Libya from what is coming out of the country it seems like the way in which Gaddafi died isn't really a big issue to most, the debate seems to be mainly among outsiders.

How can you negotiate a deal when one side is committing terrorism daily and firing rockets at innocent civilians daily. It isn't a one sided street. 1) Israel is not negotiating a two-state solution with Hamas but with Fatah (as representatives of the Palestinian Authority). Hamas has been the predominant group that has been firing rockets into Israel not Fatah. Conflating the two seperate groups is just not a representation of what is really happening. 2) Your counter point completely failed to tackle the point I raised. Getting back to the overall subject of the thread: On a personal level, the release of Gilad Shalit is a wonderful thing for him and his family. However, the only people that benefit from this are the two groups that are intransigent and preventing any hope of a two-state solution Likud (and more widely Natanyahu's right wing coalition) and Hamas. The release of the 1,000 detainees will be a big short term boost to Hamas but they have played their last card now having clearly feeling threatened by the popularity of Abbas's actions at the UN. This release of 1,000 prisoners for 1 kidnapped Israeli soldier may convince them that capturing more soldiers in the future. Likewise, Netanyahu is using this to gain favour with the Israeli public which isn't helpful either considering how he deliberately circumvented the Oslo Accords (after vowing not to) and considering his willingness to undermine any hope of negotiation with the PA. Yet again, the warmongers on both sides win.

How can you negotiate a deal over division of land when one side is still expanding, it's an illogical position. It is like negotiating over how to divide a piece of cake while one person is still eating it up.

I have certain misgivings about how he died, as others have said a full trial would have been much more favourable and it seems that he was summarily excecuted (the cross-fire argument doesn't seem to have any supporting evidence at this point). However, I can understand why it happened in the way that it did, according to some reports it was fighters from Misrata that captured Gaddafi and considering how that city was effected during this war (& in the 40 plus years of the regime) I can see why the fighters did what they did even if I don't agree with it. That all being said, I do find a rich irony in his widow demanding a full enquiry into how he died considering how his regime have killed without mercy for the last few decades and specifically how he has killed innocent civilians during this war. Now that Libya has been literally - any more importantly - liberated from Gaddafi and his regime, the real tough work has to start. The political transition process needs to get underway quickly and in a way that is able to keep the various factions happy to an extent. They can't be seen to just be a Benghazi clique. The oil money could either be the biggest gift for the NTC - allowing them to start rebuilding quickly and getting the nation on a footing for a democratic future, or it could become a curse with every faction fighting or a bigger share. Luckily the oil is fairly spread across Libya so hopefully that doesn't become a problem. Another issue is that Libya has almost zero infrastructure because of how Gaddafi's regime function (or more imporantly didn't) and creating the apparatus of government with ministries and services will be difficult in a nation that isn't used to them and has no history of democracy or accountable governance. I'm hopeful for Libya though, I don't have the same pessimism I had after Iraq, there doesn't seem to be ethnic tension, the real risk as I see it is factionalism between brigades who fought and disagreements with (and within) the NTC. However, if they ensure that the transition is fully enclusive and not dominated by one or two factions then I think the transition can be a long term success. It won't be without problems though but are revolutions and transitions ever easy and clear cut?

They may be a small part of his overall business but I did read somewhere that Murdoch considers them important because of their ability to shape public opinion (or their perceived ability to shape it).

I will introduce you to A Tribe Called Quest: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFZLq6R-ZtM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYbwFuw_QQI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRrM6tfOHds Give me A Tribe Called Quest over Gucci Mane any day.

Brooks being arrested is just good media management for the Metropolitan Police. The allegations about Sir Paul Stevenson (the then head of The Met) taking hospitality from Neil Wallis (former deputy editor at NOTW) threatened to make things look even worse (if that is possible) for the force. A high profile arrest works as a good distraction especially when she is due in front of the Culture & Media Committee hearing on Tuesday where she could have said some things to make them look bad - now she as well as Ruper & James Murdoch will answer very little by pulling the "we don't want to impede any criminal investigation" card. They've had enough evidence to arrest/charge her for ages...lovely timing for everyone right? Nobody knows if Murdoch personally knew, if they did I doubt that it ever could be proven. As for who they have hacked, the private investigator at the centre of all this (Glenn Mulcaire) has already been jailed several years back for hacking the voicemail of Prince William. His notebooks however, contain around 4,000 names of people who are potential victims. They range from former Prime Ministers and senior politicians to celebrities to survivors of terrorist attacks and murder victims. The revelations that victims of crime were targeted were the tipping point where the public became outraged. In particular the case of Milly Dowler, a girl who at the time was a missing person, whose phone was hacked by NOTW and whose voicemails were deleted (to make room for more). The deletion of the voicemail effected the missing persons investigation because it gave hope that she was alive although she had actually already been murdered at that point. There is also evidence that NOTW was paying corrupt police officers for confidential details which is just as serious.

I know Wikipedia is never the most full proof source normally but it is referencing the CIA world factbook for the Gaza population density part so I'll use it for the sake of ease: Gaza has a population density of 4118 people per square mile which if it were to be counted on its own (rather than as part of the Palestinian territories as a whole) would put it into 6th place. The Palestinian controlled areas in the West Bank aren't as densely populated which is why the Palestinian Territories as a whole are 20th (which is still pretty dense to be honest). Anyway, you see the point - the Gaza Strip is very densely populated. Sources http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip - See the side bar for population density information. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_density - This is the table used, it is slightly misleading in the sense that it counts certain territories like Macau outside of the nations that they are part of (China) but it is a good rough guide.

Last i check he was one of 120 members of the Israeli government. Hamas the terrorist organization that has one sole purpose and that is to destroy Israel at all cost meaning sending their children as suicide bombers to blow them selves up, is half of the Palestinian government. You can't even compare Lieberman to Ismail Haniyeh, Ismail Haniyeh is a terrorist head of the hamas terror organization. Lieberman is a member of the Israeli government voted in by democracy not like Ismail Haniyeh who took control by force. Murdering anyone who stood in his way. So if you are claiming that Lieberman is a terrorist instead of a member of a democratic government then that is wrong. Also you are saying that the barrier for peace is Lieberman? He isn't part of a terrorist organization. The Palestinian Authority is part of a government with a terrorist organization, that sounds like the true barrier here. To say that Lieberman is just 1 of 120 members of government is factually correct but somewhat misleading. He is the Israeli foreign minister which gives him a key policy making role in that area and his party props up the current Israeli government which means he has a huge sway over all areas of policy making (not just in his personal ministerial remit of foreign policy). He effectively has a big veto over major government policy since pulling his party out of the coalition would lead to its collapse. I agree that Haniyeh is a deplorable individual and I disagree with his actions and extreme views however, his party was the largest after the 2006 Palestinian legislative which obviously lead to the Battle of Gaza in 2007 where they forcibly took Gaza. So to say they have no democratic mandate is somewhat insincere regardless of how terrible that thought is. They are comparible in some of their equivalent opinions on the other side. Some of Lieberman's utterances cannot help remind me of Haniyeh at times. This doesn't mean I'm calling Lieberman a terrorist or accusing him of shooting rockets into Gaza - that is why I deliberately used the word almost in my original post. I consider both men as huge barriers to peace.

What about his threat to flatten every single business in Ramallah or his allusions to Hiroshima & Nagasaki or his statements regarding drowning prisoners in the Dead Sea? Is this how a major political figure in a democratic country is supposed to behave? No, the man is almost the Israeli equivalent of Ismail Haniyeh (another screw-loose so-called politician who is a barrier to peace).

i am sorry next time will spend more time on the punctuation then the facts It isn't against international law for Israel to build on its own land not sure where you got that idea. It is Abbas's fault not Netanyahu that the last round of peace talks broke down there was a 10 month freeze set by Netanyahu to create talks when the freeze was coming to the end ( in the 10th month) Abbas said make it longer and i will talk how nice of him to remember last minute very convenient for him why could he talk at the beginning of the freeze? Whats you problem with Avigdor Leiberman? Netanyahu would have got a much more favourable settlement (from Israel's point of view) if he had kept the settlement freeze going until negotiations were finished. However, he knew Fatah couldn't keep Palestinian public behind him (which is essential in any deal) if settling continued. Abbas knew he couldn't make any deal without the support of his own public so he sensibly backed off, the only other option was to make a hollow agreement that he knew would not have Palestinian public back which ultimately could have pushed the Palestinians even further towards Hamas and/or a third Intifada. Israel's definition of its borders and the definations of it's land under international law differ radically as I'm sure you know. And if I need to go into why Lieberman is a clown then I think this conversation is over: Try this as a vague starting point - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avigdor_Lieberman#Controversies

The Palestinian position on negotiation is quite correct - how can you sit and negotiate borders when one side is constantly expanding? Israel has encouraged settlers to build settlement after settlement in areas where they violate international law, taking the most useful and arable land and then the Palestinians are expected to sit at the negotiating table and concede even more land that is internationally recognised as theirs. Israel's problem is that a few months back they had Abbas by the short and curlies and Fatah were prepared to make huge concessions (as shown by the Wikileaks revelations) as long as the settlement expansion stopped but Netanyahu wanted to keep the expansion going and made Fatah's position untennable. Now with the Arab revolutions, Israel has a much less friendly Egypt who will be far less favourable in helping Israel in regards to the Palestinians and the Palestinian unity deal between Hamas & Fatah means that the huge concessions Fatah might have made are now a thing of the past. Netanyahu definately overplayed his hand although I have a sneaking suspicion that Bibi is doing to these negotiations what he did to the Oslo accords during the 1990's. These negotiations are dead until at least the next Israeli election as I don't have faith in Bibi or a Knesset that has Avigdor Leiberman in it.

Alex Jones with a wild conspiracy theory? Forgive me if I'm not surprised, the man is loopy.

Well the guy is probably going to become a hero, so I imagine it would feel pretty damn good ...and a target for every revenge-seeking extremist.

After almost reportedly killing Gaddafi at the weekend and then killing Bin Laden last night, you almost suspect that Obama was determined to outdo the Royal wedding for press coverage lol. On a more serious note though, there will be a kick back from people who buy in to his idealogy, there was a similar outbreak of violence after the leader of Pakistan's Taliban was killed and this is obviously far more significant than that. Unfortunately, his ideology will out live him and people will continue to take up arms based on it however, I hope it hurts Al Qaeda in terms of morale and it hopefully hurts their recruitment efforts. I hope that this, alongside the Arab popular uprisings in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Syria et al will signal a great positive change in the Middle East although I'll hold my breath on that one to be honest. Also, I think it may be important to release images of him (as they did with Uday & Qusay Hussein) to kill off (no pun intended) any potential conspiracy theories that might pop up over this. _____________________________________ I love that quote, you can always trust Twain to have a great line for occassions like this. :-o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKlCEUngHB0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptuwl6_QqBw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GZlJGERbvE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcaPu9JPenU I love listening to some reggae in the sunshine.

No it wasn't, the reason it was chosen was because it was a very clear demand by the Liberal Democrats when the 2010 election produced a hung parliament, when the Coalition Agreement had to be drafted. The referendum wasn't planned by the Tories at all, they just reluctantly agreed when the alternative was a minority government or a weird Lab-Lib coalition that the public would be really unlikely to accept, and the referendum would have happened anyway. For some reason I had in my head that the Lib Dems while wanting electoral reform where pushing for another system and after the coalition negotiations this was the compromise. My bad though, my memory has been failing me lately lol.