A call for proof readers

This is an abstract for a paper i am submitting for publication in a few days, could someone look over it and tell me it makes sense. if you could sent them to me by email, that would be keen

thanks
since no one else has said any thing, i will take that to mean that there are no more problems. thanks for you feedback.

24 has never been the sort of show to shy away from controversy. Before the show had established itself as a critical and commercial success, the protagonist of the show, Jack Bauer, tortures a terrorist suspect in the back of a limo. Since then, 24 has been the site of much political debate. Anti-war and minority rights activists have argued the show is right-wing propaganda or depicts minority groups as caricatured stereotypes. At the same time, pro-war commentators, both outside and inside the government, argue that the show is an accurate representation of counter-terrorism.

For this paper, I will look at posts made on a message board populated by a dedicated group of fans that discuss a range of television related topics. These topics include critiques of the most recent episodes, speculation about future episodes, and discussion of the television industry. Because of 24's connection to issues related to the War on Terror, one might expect to find an in-depth discussion of the way the show depicts torture. Instead, what one finds are many posts joking about the torture and its place within the show. This paper will apply the psychoanalytic scholarship of Sigmund Freud and Alan Dundes and the sociological scholarship of Ronald G. Webb to analyze the way torture related humor functions within the context of this message board. Then, I will connect the discussion of humor to a wider discourse about the war on terror and torture.

ive added andrew's notes, thanks. (the lack of italics is a fuction of the c/p into HTML)

Cincinnati

I will be working with the Freedom Center in Cincinnati as an interpreter and researcher. I may even get to take people to Madison, or do research on Erasmus Darwin MacMaster and Thomas E. Thomas. It is no Holocaust Center, but it will do.

Move in date will be the 15th of August. start date will be the 16th. and there will be some retreat thing starting the 20th.

w00t

Faith

Woke up today to everything [chat]

All is for chattin'. Honk if you can read the spoiler text.

I have your "special counsel" right here.

Senate Democrats have apparently called for a special counsel to probe whether Attorney General Alberto Gonzales perjured himself during his testimony regarding the firing of U.S. attorneys and the domestic surveillance program.

Probing, eh? That sounds difficult. Now, I'm not a fancy lawyer with a fancy lawyering degree, and I have no experience legally probing things (or do i?) but let's see if I can find any evidence that shows Gonzales perjuring himself. But before I do that let me hop over to msnbc.com and read one of their latest articles. You know, just as a bit of a break.

“The dissent related to other intelligence activities,” Gonzales testified at Tuesday’s hearing. “The dissent was not about the terrorist surveillance program.”

“Not the TSP?” responded Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y. “Come on. If you say it’s about other, that implies not. Now say it or not.”

“It was not,” Gonzales answered. “It was about other intelligence activities.”

A four-page memo from the national intelligence director’s office says the White House briefing with the eight lawmakers on March 10, 2004, was about the terror surveillance program, or TSP.

Well, that was certainly difficult.

Senate Democrats? I know you are old and out of touch with reality. I know you read Locke in college and thought he was a sensible guy with great ideas. But how about we skip all that stupid-ass bullshit and just buy a vcr, television and then visit a Kinkos. Here's what you do. At Kinkos you print out all of the memos you have which refute the testimony of Gonzales on big sheets of paper so those near-sighted pedophiles you work with can read them. Then you mount those printouts on a wall somewhere. Say, the walls of the capital. After this you put the television next to the display, attach the vcr to the television, put the tapes of Gonzales testifying in the VCR and hit "Play". If at any point in this you are confused, you doddering old diaper shitters, you can ask any three year old nearby to help.

Then after this is set up and the tape is playing you stand back and you fucking point at it. And you don't stop pointing until all of those shit-for-brains asshole Senators look at it and exclaim, "Holy fucking shit! He lied!"

You can handle pointing, right?

Statute of Limitations: Spoilers

With the release of Deathly Hallows we have a neat opportunity to discuss spoilers and the period of time that must be allowed to pass between a thing being release and information about the thing being presented.

This article, in part, addresses the issue offhandedly.

One quote from the article favors a significant chunk of time:
"I think we should have at least a few months, allow people to read and discuss and digest before blasting it from headlines," says Leaky Cauldron Web master Melissa Anelli.

Another quote, from J.K. Rowling, endorses a shorter period of time:
"You can't be too precious about this stuff. Obviously, as a writer I would prefer people to be able to sit down and read it and discover the ending through reading the whole story. But with 'Half-Blood Prince,' people dangled a sheet over a flyover (overpass) the next day — 'Snape kills Dumbledore.' Part of me does find that very funny; I can't help myself."

What do you think?

Harry Potter: Expanded Epilogue.

The TODAY show interviewed J.K. Rowling and she said some stuff about what happens after Deathly Hallows.

Note: Pirate Pete says, "Thar be spoilers in that thar link!"