YouTube Pulls M.I.A's Controversial "Born Free" Video

MTV Shows

Wow!I think that YouTube went way too far when it pulled M.I.A's video off of its site.I mean, you can view clips of porn on YouTube,for goodness sake.So,how the heck is this video a violation of their policy? This video is not the most shocking thing that I have ever seen.It' just very,very political,though.And I think that's the reason why the reaction to this video is so strong.Some folks highly praise it while others show their disdain for it.

Here's my opinion.I didn't dig the song at all. So,I couldn't sit through the video.And I like M.I.A. Whenever I look at any music video for more than a split second,it is because I like both the artist & the song.Your video should never be more interesting than your song.It's supposed to complement it.Not overshadow the music entirely as this video apparently has.

Here's more from MTV News:

"With its scenes of graphic violence and politically charged message, M.I.A.'s video for "Born Free" has already elicited impassioned responses from her fans and detractors. Now, thanks to those critics, it has been pulled from one of the most popular video sites on the Internet.

On Tuesday, YouTube yanked the so-called "real and explicit version" of "Born Free" from its pages, claiming the clip violated rules that "prohibit content like pornography or gratuitous violence."

A spokesperson for the site told the BBC that, while YouTube does not comment on individual videos, its policy is "to age-restrict content that has been flagged by the community and identified by our policy enforcement team as content that, while not violating our community guidelines, is not suitable for users under age 18."

Originally, the "Born Free" video was tagged as containing "content that is inappropriate for some users" and required users to verify they were over the age of 18 before they were allowed to watch the clip (something M.I.A. herself pointed out on her Twitter account)."(END OF EXCERPT)Read the rest here.

Sandra Bullock Adopted A Beautiful Black Baby!

After seeing that horrific husband of hers in Nazi gear,I was wondering if Sandra Bullock was anything like Jesse James.I mean,she is German after all.But,it appears that she is not a secret Nazi lover.Maybe her husband is into collecting Nazi memorabilia,but I don't think she's into that at all.Sandra wouldn't have chosen the beautiful,black baby that she is gazing adoringly at on the cover of People magazine if she were a xenophobe.

I love the fact that she adopted a baby that was from America.Instead of going to another continent,Sandra Bullock found a little angel right in New Orleans.There are plenty of children that are in need right here in the United States of America. I'm glad to see that Sandra realizes that.And kudos to her for getting rid of Jesse James for good.They are getting divorced.

Here's more from Essence:

"Sandra Bullock has had one heck of a year thus far. First the Oscar for "The Blind Side" then her husband Jesse James' scandalous affairs and now the revelation that she adopted a Black boy from New Orleans in January. She named him Louis Bardo Bullock. Cute name, and a great move for Sandy.

Bullock joins a small group of Hollywood celebs who have adopted Black children, like Steven Spielberg (son, Theo), Tom Cruise (son, Connor), Brangelina (daughter Zahara) and Madonna (son and daughter, Mercy and David).

Though they've been ridiculed (remember the debate about Zahara's hair?) and their motives questioned (do Black children really belong in a White household?) these celebs are really going against the grain of adoption trends."(END OF EXCERPT)

Read more here.

Noah's Ark Has Supposedly Been Found!

Since this discovery involves a evangelical Christian filmmaker,I have my doubts about the validity of the claim that Noah's Ark has finally been found.But,that's what filmmaker,Yeung Wing-cheung,says.He is 99.9% sure that is the case.I say that it would be cool if it is true.I am a lover of all great archaeological finds.And,I daresay,this would definitely be one of the most important historical discoveries ever.

Here's more on this interesting story from The Daily Mail:

"As believers in the literal truth of the Bible, they knew it was there.Even so, the explorers who say they found seven large wooden compartments beneath snow and volcanic debris near the peak of Mount Ararat can be forgiven their excitement.

'It's not 100 per cent that it is Noah's Ark, but we think it is 99.9 per cent that this is it,' said Yeung Wing-cheung, a filmmaker working with the 15-strong team of fundamentalist Christians exploring the Turkish mountain.

Noah's Ark

In the Bible, the story of Noah's Ark appears in chapters six to nine of the Book of Genesis.

It tells how God, spurred by the wickedness and corruption of man, vows to send a great cleansing flood. Deeming Noah to be the only righteous man worth saving, God commands him to build a vast ship, the ark - capable of saving himself, his family and a representation of the world's animals.

When Noah has completed his task, and God has sent 'two of every sort' of animal to the Ark, the flood waters rise until all mountains are covered and life (except fish) is destroyed. When the flood subsides, the animals leave the Ark and God vows to never again send a flood to destroy man.

The story can also be found in the texts of Judaism and Islam. Although considered a historical event, most scholars and archaeologists do not believe in a literal interpretation of the Ark story. The vessel was said to measure '300 cubits, by 50 cubits, by 30 cubits', which translates to up to 515ft long, 86ft wide and 52ft high.

They said wood taken from the site, which is more than 13,000ft above sea level, dates to 2,800BC. If it is the ark, the discovery would be the greatest in the history of archaeology and bear out one of the most famous stories in the Bible.

The team of Turks and Chinese researchers from Noah's Ark Ministries International in Hong Kong say they made the discovery on Ararat - the biblical resting place of the ark - in October

At a press conference yesterday to announce the discovery, another team member, Panda Lee, said: 'I saw a structure built with plank-like timber.

'Each plank was about eight inches wide. I could see tenons, proof of ancient construction predating the use of metal nails.

'We walked about 100 metres to another site. I could see broken wood fragments embedded in a glacier, and some 20 metres long.'

The structure had several compartments, some with wooden beams, the team said.

The wooden walls of one compartment were smooth and curved while the video shown by the explorers revealed doors, staircases and nails.

The team said the wood appeared to be cypress although, according to the Bible, the ark was built from gopher.

The group ruled out identifying the find as a human settlement, saying none had been found so high up in that area. They are keeping the exact location secret.

Four years ago and following a decade of research, U.S. national security analyst Porcher Taylor claimed a satellite image revealed a baffling 'anomaly' on the mountain's north-west corner that he believed to be the remains of the Ark.

But Mike Pitt, a British archaeologist, said the evangelical explorers had yet to produce compelling evidence.

He added: 'If there had been a flood capable of lifting a huge ship 4km up the side of a mountain 4,800 years ago, I think there would be substantial geological evidence for this flood around the world. And there isn't.'

Read more here.