1. Tru3 Magic - Mos Def
2. Selfless, Cold and Composed - Ben Folds Five
3. Death of Seasons - AFI
4. All Along the Watchtower - Bob Dylan
5. A Song About a Friend - Atmosphere
6. Save the Blonde - Serart
7. Whorehoppin' (Shit, Goddamn) - Eagles of Death Metal
8. Otsegolation - Static-X
9. Under My Skin - Mudvayne
10. The Master Has Come Back - Damian Marley

Thanks for the promote

In reply to this comment by evil_disco_man:
*promote

In reply to this comment by jpg1023:
In reply to this comment by rougy:
The King's English is sometimes over-rated.

you realize he is australian. last time i checked that is not the "king's" english

It's a figure of speech. I was implying that just because he wasn't as eloquent or as precise with his words as Hitchens or Rushdie, that his point was no less valid.

It would be like me discounting your sentence above because it wasn't capitalized or punctuated according to the rules.

You know what rougy I understand you wish Obama had run out to the West Wing, bong in hand, yelling "Light up motherfuckers!! Shit's legal now!!" .. but honestly, I just spent 20 minutes compiling a well thought out response to your initial post here and deleted it after reading this post from you. I really think you've gone off the deep end. Less Alex Jones. More actual research. You have lost touch with reality.

>> ^Lodurr:
Their goal isn't a Taliban-controlled world, but an Islamic theocratic-controlled one, and to further that goal they don't need an army or air force. All they needed were a few pilots and some box cutters to inch us closer to that "holy war."

The thing the Taliban wants most of all is for people to leave Afghanistan alone.

And "Al Qaeda" is really a little pipe-dream boogie man compliments of the CIA.

The middle east, probably more than anything, just wants a major reduction of western influence and interdiction in their countries.

Three countries needed 9/11 more than anything:

1) America, for a good reason to invade Iraq,
2) Saudi Arabia, for a good reason to get US troops off their soil, and
3) Israel, to provide a long-term buffer-zone of US troops and weaponry between them and Iran.

9/11 was an inside job, and the three countries above are the prime suspects.

>> ^cybrbeast:
I hope Mos Def won't be visiting the show again. He mostly detracts from the conversation and seems so self important as to use most of the speaking time.


Agreed, when you're at the table with Rushdie and Hitchens, just sit back and listen unless you've got at least half their intellect and experience. From what was shown here, Mos Def has neither. That's not an insult either, there aren't many people on the planet who meet that bar.

I hope Mos Def won't be visiting the show again. He mostly detracts from the conversation and seems so self important as to use most of the speaking time.

Agreed, I would have much rather watched Rushdie and Hitchens debate drug policy. How did nukes get on the table again? I'd have to re-watch the video to see how Mos Def segway'ed onto that tangent.

>> ^rougy:
To claim that the Taliban wants to restore "Islamic Imperialism" is a joke considering that their country is poor as dirt, a few decades ahead of the stone age, and they don't even have an air force let alone a regular army.

Their goal isn't a Taliban-controlled world, but an Islamic theocratic-controlled one, and to further that goal they don't need an army or air force. All they needed were a few pilots and some box cutters to inch us closer to that "holy war."

Mos Def has a good point to make, but he didn't put any research time into developing it and supporting it. He literally said "I don't have anything to prove (to the audience or other guests)" on a show about debating ideas. With that kind of showing, he's a disservice to his own message.

Mos Def probably wanted to ask what does America do wrong for certain people want to attack it.

I think what Mos Def was trying to get at, but probably didn't as he got all defensive probably due to his insecurities, is just the fact that OBL and al-qaedi DO have some goals. And i think he was trying to lead Hitchens down the road of what these goals are, and why.

When i say goals, i dont mean 'they hate our freedom'. I mean, they dont like US support of dictators in the middle east, the palestine issue etc. And i think he wanted to bring it back to how having random people in prison isn't going to solve the issue; as surely others will replace the positions (in the terrorist groups) of those held in prison unless a serious look at the source of the problem is looked at, which is basically the foreign policy which much of hitchens supports (such as the disaster that was going into Iraq).

And also, i'm surprised this whole discourse happened, without actual discussion of the fact that holding numerous innocent people, just because one of them might be guilty, is morally wrong.

Hitchens says "There better not be an attack from someone who was in Guantanamo and has been released."

He's one of the most eloquent speakers I've ever heard, and a fine debater, but he is unable to put himself in other people's shoes. That's my problem with Hitch.

Imagine you were held and tortured in Guantanamo for three or four years, or longer, for something you didn't do. Are you just supposed to forget all about it when you're released?

He can never seem to understand that it is our treatment of our so-called enemies--who often only shared a racial or national commonality with real enemies--that has so much to do with why we are hated and, sooner or later, attacked.

I don't think Mos Def was far off. Many people have noticed how Osama bin Laden would pop out of the woodwork at times when the Bush administration needed a distraction or a reason to escalate the wars. And he's right, nobody has every told the America public what the Taliban wants, and they certainly never let a representative of the Taliban on television to explain it themselves.

To claim that the Taliban wants to restore "Islamic Imperialism" is a joke considering that their country is poor as dirt, a few decades ahead of the stone age, and they don't even have an air force let alone a regular army.

Mos Def wasn't far off at all.

How often I have laid awake at night .. trying to understand the fragile balance of mutually assured destruction, the former cold war and how nuclear weapons will play a role in the future of enforcing the foreign policy objectives of the United States .. only to be left crying into my pillow WHY .. WHY Can't Mos Def come and give us the answer?!?!

Well, now I know.

Mos Def didn't seem to listen to the answers he got to his questions.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Maher, def, hitchens, rushdie, iran, nukes, obama' to 'Maher, mos def, hitchens, rushdie, iran, nukes, obama' - edited by xxovercastxx