What about Rolling Stones' freedom of choice regarding their articles? Oh wait... :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
What about Rolling Stones' freedom of choice regarding their articles? Oh wait... :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
Yes we need more diversity. Let's encourage more people to bomb public places since the attention is what many of them crave.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
Short attention span today? Reread post four, which is what Tony was replying to - not to mention what he also said.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
Sorry but since I am one of those ''upset Europeans'' who can't follow american logic, please make me understand. How can a photo encourage bombing places? I'm sure readers of that magazine have enough discernment to see what's good and what it's wrong. As for a suggestion that the guy was looking for publicity, what's the point since he's dead?Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
You're a lost case.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
Learn to read before writing such crazy comments.
I think you should re-read both that post and Vop's post, then think about it, then we can discuss it again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
Discussion with you is pretty much a lost cause. So I'll pass. Thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
Who is calling for the removal of the freedom of Rolling Stone putting anything on their cover?
I know I'm not.
My wife came home from work today and had some info that pertains to this magazine issue. She works a couple days a week for a company that merchandises both their magazines and those from other companies in local stores.
It seems that the majority of local stores have decided not to sell this issue of Rolling Stone, and have elected to return all magazines sent for distribution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by airshifter
They can always just buy Time magazine and get the same brand of slop.