I found the last line very amusing because my family is Vietnamese and we do a lot of things differently, and whenever people point out the differences in my family member's actions (particularly my parents because they are directly from Vietnam), they always say, "We are different from people here. We're just different." However, I don't think any of my family members would go to the extent that this poor man did. I feel very sorry for him because I think psychologically he had attachment issues, probably from childhood that made him cling to people irrationally and unable to part from them without feeling lost or fearful. I think therapy probably is the best thing for him, but because he is so old, I don't know if it will be effective. The older you get, the more inveterate habits become. I feel for him and wish him luck in moving on or at least coming to terms with his beloved's death.

This story is so tragic to hear - from both sides of the story. The most obvious heart wrenching fact is the death of a fellow citizen, a U.S. soldier who risked his or her life to protect the lives of us who sit here and read these news stories.

The other depressing side is the fact that a *fourteen-year-old* child killed this soldier. Children should be playing football with their siblings in the backyard. Teenagers should be singing along with the radio as they drive around with their friends. But this child has been born into and raised in an environment where he will never get to see the joy of childhood or probably of life. How sad is it that someone as young and fragile as our younger brother or our baby cousin could be capable and forced into such a situation.

I feel like someone running someone else over happens every year, no? Is that why they ended up calling it Black Friday? I don't actually no - I'm asking.

But I agree that clamoring over others and resorting to cheap tricks or dirty side jabs to get ahead is really poor behavior abd reflects poorly upon the person doing it. Isn't he or she embarrassed to be seen doing something like that? I wonder, will the chaos still be going on later in the day? Because I plan to go later, just to get some shopping in, because tomorrow is actually the only free day I have to do some shopping until a couple of weeks. Hopefully the crowd dies down by late afternoon?

Definitely mad and worried I think. I feel like this event was silly and yet important. If these nonthreatening guests could have entered the White House, what is to say about dangerous people like national criminals or international terrorists? I agree with demi23 that it was probably incompetence on the guard's part, because apparently the couple passed the machinery/weaponry test through the magnet machine, but their names were skipped and they were allowed to go through. But how does a guard just miss a couple? Don't they go in one by one? And doesn't he cross the names off once he sees them? Maybe he got distracted or something. Regardless, I think the national security forces for the White House are definitely in hot water with Obama and whoever it is in charge of the White House security.

Wow, this story was incredible. It really struck a chord in me with the comment, "'I always knew our son was still there,' says the mother with a confidence which one can only associate with a mother." The love and devotion that his mother had, staying by his side for twenty years is so heart-wrenching. It made me sad to think what if he really was reduced to a state of brain inactivity and the mom kept believing her son would come back...

I think it's interesting how the doctors didn't try to get a brain scan even a couple of years after the accident. I learned in psych class that brain scans can distinguish between brain areas where brain activity is going on; this discovery would have revealed the "alive" state of Ron! But I guess they didn't have this type of technology back then. I am just so glad that they finally found out, even if it's 20 years later, because if they hadn't I think his hope would've slowly dissipated and it would've been such a terrible way to live the rest of your life. ::shivers:: I can't even think about it right now without getting scared and deeply saddened.

Can you elaborate on the story about Hayden - why were the prisoners shot before the prison caught fire?

Also, I think that it's a good idea for some important and influential US representative to attend and monitor the elections, but I don't know if that will help the situation of recurring violence against women, no?

I'm a little confused about the relationship between the elections and the violence the de facto government is imposing on the women -- is the situation that the current government which is not one of rule of law is committing acts that violate human rights against women and the women of Honduras are wanting the elections to dethrone the current government?

I think I'd have to agree with Righter. As I was reading this article, I couldn't help but feel that the author was being a little satirical, but I may be wrong. I laughed out loud when the writer stated the fact that Michelle Obama's dress took three weeks for more than 40 people to hand embroider.

It was a little ridiculous to read as images of cheap labor workers in factories continued to float through my mind as I read about the "exchange of laughter and small talk" and Michelle Obama's boast of the incredible chef.

Of course, I couldn't *really* tell the underlying sentiment of the article, because, unfortunately, when I worked as an intern at my local newspaper back at home, many news stories of gala events or southern balls had this lilt to the feature story.

I don't think the Obama administration needs to show they are "fair" towards international terrorists. I think the fact that they are terrorists already means that they do not deserve to be treated as equals to American citizens. I mean, treating terrorists "fairly" is almost as if we're accepting their actions as legitimate. True, we treat murderers "fairly" by giving them their right to a trial, but they are already American citizens. So, I guess my question is, what happens when a criminal of another country commits a crime on another country's soil?

In addition, why are the terrorists even being tried in a civilian court? What is the purpose of going to court? Is it to prove someone innocent or guilty? (I don't know - I'm asking, but if it is, then this really seems useless especially since they've already confessed and don't show any remorse. Is this whole second trial thing to make sure they didn't falsely confess? I'm very confused.)

Really sorry if this comment is jumbled and confusing; I'm really tired right now but found this article interesting and wanted to comment.

I agree that they should go talk to a psychologist or psychiatrist. Of course, doctors don't always know everything and can be just as confused as us, but they definitely have a more solid foundation of knowledge regarding illness, relapse, symptoms, etc. This reminds me of that controversy of a young college student who wrote a book and got sued for writing very very similar passages to Meg Cabot (I think?) novel. We learned in psychology about long-term memory and the possibility of information to be stored and retrieved without the knowledge that we learned it from somewhere else, but no one seemed to believe that the girl could have been innocent and it was simply the confusion of memory and the limitations and inadequacy of our brain. If someone had consulted a psychologist, the intellectual would have brought up this point and saved the girl from a lot of embarrassment.

I guess it doesn't *really* matter, but if someone were to talk about the implications of what he did, this would be a response. I kind of feel like it was "nothing" in a way - that it'll blow over. But I guess, it's important to have him understand that he can't keep doing it.

I doubt that Adam did his shocking and disgusting display to increase his popularity or ticket sales, but more for grabbing our attention and increasing talk about him.

I feel like his defense will be twofold: one, he is an artist and has the right to freedom of expression and two, as Sherrill_Fulghum pointed out, this outrage is a double standard and may exist because he openly admitted he was gay. Addressing the first reason, even I who constantly tote the "artistic free expression" flag must say that Adam's simulation of oral sex, crotch grabbing, flipping the audience off and kiss on stage was nasty and unnecessary. Yes, he is an artist, but even artists should be aware of who they are performing in front of; I agree with Redhanded 101 - if Adam wants to be vulgar and free with his sexual expression, he should find a different venue - one where he isn't thrusting sexual images in front of children. Maybe if his music video consisted of these images it'd be a *little* better, because at least children aren't exposed to it first-hand unknowingly as they watch a "for-family" TV program.

Regarding the second reason, people don't yell about Eminem's lyrics most likely because they are less blatant. Adam simulated oral sex on stage in front of people; people can obviously *see* the vulgarity. About the double standard, people are commenting on Lady Gaga's outrageous antics as well. And what about when Britney kissed Madonna on stage - people had an uproar about that as well. What about when Justin tore off Janet Jackson's nipple cover on another music show? People complained as well!

The issue is Adam's medium for self-expression. It is a question of decency and being responsible. As a person with power and influence, one has to be aware of who he is influencing and Adam was disrespectful to his audience of viewers. Yeah, we can turn off the TV, but really, it was a public show where such actions were not what we were expecting; it's not like we paid money to go see sexual images, which would be a different issue.

Hi! You seem to know what you're talking about, so I have a question :)

"Global warming has been used as a tool by the radical environmentalists to curb the use of fossil fuels".

This may seem like a stupid question, but what is the ultimate goal of radical environmentalists? Is it because they are worried about the future generations way down the line and want to reduce the usage of fossil fuels now?

Thanks for your comment! You're are right that just because we are to be responsible does not mean we are to endorse fake information. I'll definitely check out the link you posted up.

Hello, thank you so much for your article - it definitely places the opposite argument to global warming in the open.

I have some questions, however. I am neither a proponent of global warming nor do I avidly suggest it is false. I am like this because I have no clue what to believe right now, and just want to learn more about our environment.

Firstly, what is a reason for leading scientists to lie about global warming? I read someone's comment above about squeezing money out of people, but could someone make the connection between creating this outlandish idea of global warming (if it's not true) and gaining money? Does he mean that scientists gain money to do their research?

Also, a key fact that temperatures are decreasing for the past decades is kind of large - how can someone not catch that and how do proponents of global warming explain it?

Lastly, the only comment I could possibly give to sympathize with the global warming argument is that perhaps all of this is completely false, or most of it is, but scientists foresee a drastic drop in resources or a fast decline in our environment after a certain point of human waste-ing, and wanting to prevent this from happening, the only way they know how to is to start early with raising awareness and to make the story seem much more grandiose and horrid than it actually is to stir up fear now and elicit action now?

Other than that, if global warming is a scam, it is a horrendous idea from such intellectuals to be stealing attention and money from the government as we are faced with so many more urgent problems in the world - like our economy, our forces in the Middle East, our education system, issues of international human rights like human trafficking and other pressing matters. There is still something to be said about fixing the way we waste, but I'm not sure what to think right now.

Yes, it is a tragedy how people slowly come to abuse things that are meant, at the outset, to be for the good. I was wondering if you could explain this comment a little more: "these websites cover their tracks by cycling through over 200 IP addresses based in 16 different countries – hence, tracing these is next to impossible". I would just like to learn a little more about technical jargon and processes, but if you don't know yourself, it's totally okay!

Thanks for posting this. It raises awareness of the prevalence of child porn on the internet and also raises the readers' anger that people children trust can turn against them.

Aw, thanks for the news report. I definitely agree that it would be hard on the mother not to have her husband there to support her through the birthing process, but I am sure she understands the importance of his work, and she can always have someone else she really trusts and loves by her side. I feel like the child will be very proud of his or her mother for being strong and father for being brave and hardworking. Such situations garner more respect and the child will most likely come to revere his or her parents.

Thanks for the news story!

So I posted this on another person's article on this same issue, but I thought I'd attach it to this article as well. Sorry for those of you who have to get two email notifications that I commented the same thing!


Initially, I agree with both sides of the story: with Deepizzaguy who says that people try to deceive their employers to get money and with PSDirectory who says that pictures cannot honestly portray someone's true physical health.

But then, I think about psychology and mental illnesses, and I lean more towards the sympathetic side. The rest of what I say is purely in a general scenario - as of now, I'm sure no one could say exactly what is going on in this case; she could have been lying and engaging in fraudulent methods or she could have been attempting to engage in normal life. What I want to comment on, however, is the latter viewpoint.

Firstly, depression is a pervasive and continuous mental illness; however, if I recall correctly, mental illnesses have their recessions and their peaks. A good example is in the play "Proof" where the father who is plagued by some mental illness (David Auburn does not explicitly reveal the disease) which miraculously seems to have disappeared for a good nine months. However, the daughter leaves him for school, thinking his disease had been cured, but comes back to find him writing in gibberish once again. So I have two points here: one, this lady could have been out and about during her "high points" and two, if she legitimately is undergoing depression, this facebook controversy most definitely acted as a stressor and therefore is likely to worsen her condition and lead her down the spiral to more "low points".

Secondly, one could argue that she was out and about on her birthday - how coincidental is it that her "high point" was on a celebratory day? Well, the statement that she "was following her doctor's advice and trying to have fun" really does have resounding impact. A doctor would use counseling to advise his patient who is suffering from depression to see the blessings in his or her life - to go outside more and enjoy a beautiful day - to attend a celebration that her friends put on for her - to go to a bar with some friends to enjoy the night. An example that pops to mind is from the film "P.S. I Love You". Holly is in the fathoms of depression when her husband dies; she doesn't leave her house for days, she cannot get up to clean up her place, which ends up looking like a pig's pen, and she has no energy to cook and thus orders Chinese take-out every night. However, through the encouraging letters her husband wrote and secretly gave his mother-in-law to send out before he passed away, Holly leaves her safe haven, goes to bars with her girlfriends, takes a trip to Scotland and does other activities that may seem unsuitable for a person with depression.

My point is that it is unfair for anyone to assume that someone is not undergoing a difficult time or a difficult illness like depression. Yes, she could be lying. Yes, one should be cautious as to what they put on facebook. No, we probably shouldn't accuse her of tricking her employer for financial gain; even though this story of deceitful employees *is* prominent, it's not fair to assign such a role to this story. That's just my take. Feel free to comment back! (Nicely, please).

If I'm reading that correctly, I think Greenlily was being sarcastic. I don't really know - just thought I'd try to clarify - maybe I'm wrong :/

Hello, thanks for your news article! I have a question. Is there a certain way one is supposed to stand on these nails and broken glass in order to not harm oneself? Also, is the reason for these trainings to increase flexibility? Or is it to increase pain tolerance? Also, how do these boys get recruited to be part of the martial arts club - do they sign up, do their parents sign them up, are they referred to by their schools? Anyhow, thanks for the interesting report!

Initially, I agree with both sides of the story: with Deepizzaguy who says that people try to deceive their employers to get money and with PSDirectory who says that pictures cannot honestly portray someone's true physical health.

But then, I think about psychology and mental illnesses, and I lean more towards the sympathetic side. The rest of what I say is purely in a general scenario - as of now, I'm sure no one could say exactly what is going on in this case; she could have been lying and engaging in fraudulent methods or she could have been attempting to engage in normal life. What I want to comment on, however, is the latter viewpoint.

Firstly, depression is a pervasive and continuous mental illness; however, if I recall correctly, mental illnesses have their recessions and their peaks. A good example is in the play "Proof" where the father who is plagued by some mental illness (David Auburn does not explicitly reveal the disease) which miraculously seems to have disappeared for a good nine months. However, the daughter leaves him for school, thinking his disease had been cured, but comes back to find him writing in gibberish once again. So I have two points here: one, this lady could have been out and about during her "high points" and two, if she legitimately is undergoing depression, this facebook controversy most definitely acted as a stressor and therefore is likely to worsen her condition and lead her down the spiral to more "low points".

Secondly, one could argue that she was out and about on her birthday - how coincidental is it that her "high point" was on a celebratory day? Well, the statement that she "was following her doctor's advice and trying to have fun" really does have resounding impact. A doctor would use counseling to advise his patient who is suffering from depression to see the blessings in his or her life - to go outside more and enjoy a beautiful day - to attend a celebration that her friends put on for her - to go to a bar with some friends to enjoy the night. An example that pops to mind is from the film "P.S. I Love You". Holly is in the fathoms of depression when her husband dies; she doesn't leave her house for days, she cannot get up to clean up her place, which ends up looking like a pig's pen, and she has no energy to cook and thus orders Chinese take-out every night. However, through the encouraging letters her husband wrote and secretly gave his mother-in-law to send out before he passed away, Holly leaves her safe haven, goes to bars with her girlfriends, takes a trip to Scotland and does other activities that may seem unsuitable for a person with depression.

My point is that it is unfair for anyone to assume that someone is not undergoing a difficult time or a difficult illness like depression. Yes, she could be lying. Yes, one should be cautious as to what they put on facebook. No, we probably shouldn't accuse her of tricking her employer for financial gain; even though this story of deceitful employees *is* prominent, it's not fair to assign such a role to this story. That's just my take. Feel free to comment back! (Nicely, please).

I really like how the artists (singers) are coming together to stand for a greater cause. It's important for students and children to have good role models, and when they see artists who overcome several obstacles like constantly being critiqued or striving to become better and better with each album, younger generations will look up to this work ethic. (Yes, I realize there are also down-sides to looking up to famous people as role models, but I won't go into that here - I'll just say that in the process of finding a role model, I think youth have to keep an open, critical mind and take in the good and filter out the bad. It's a high expectation to believe that youth have the ability to parse through the massive input of information from the media, but I think it should be all part of the learning process, no? And of course, there should be the help of older individuals who understand the desire to find a role model, the allure of the glam and the necessity to guide and not direct a young adult.)

Also, I enjoyed reading this article because of the dedication to incorporating the poor into the education system as well and helping them gain an education despite their disadvantages. There is the school of thought that poor people should be left to their own devices because they are simply going to die off more quickly because of their lack of resources, so why go through all the effort to help them at all? This school of thought is absurd and cold. Because, IF you put in the effort to aid the disadvantage, your army of intellectually well-equipped citizenry will soar and you will have aided in the growth of another individual. If you think about it, what other fundamental purposes do we have as human beings or citizens of a country?