There's only one elephant foot that we have found... Stroll about and search, but I think even today 30 minutes in the room with it will get you a lifetime dose of radiation.

I wonder if we can get some good images of the elephant feet that are all over that building...

It is possible that I underestimate my own attraction to brands based on advertising. However, the idea that it must be effective because companies do it doesn't work logically. They advertise because their competitors do and there is momentum in the industry of advertising. I think of it like calling a time out to "ice the kicker" in football. Evidence suggests this doesn't negatively impact the kicker and may in fact improve their chances but coaches continue to do it because everyone else does and they'd get negative press if they didn't. Coke advertises because Pepsi does and if they were to announce that they were dropping their ad campaigns their stock would plummet regardless of if sales actually dropped. I like Coke, but I don't buy it because of their advertising. Pepsi advertises a bunch too, but I don't drink it because it tastes like shit. I actually prefer RC cola where I can find it.

People must or Bayer, Excedrin, Motrin, or Tylenol wouldn't exist. There is literally the exact same pills with a different name right next to them at a lot lower price.

On one side, you get data that relates the advertising to sales directly. On the other side there is no actual evidence of return for investment. Emotional advertising is bull crap. No one buys Wonder Bread because a car in NASCAR is covered with its logos. Why that kind of advertising is still done is beyond me. Then again, the majority of the population are idiots. BRAWNDO THE THIRST MUTILATOR!

Better question, if I enter $2,147,483,648 will their server crash?

I miss Mandrake... Back when Gnome was awesome.

Actually it's more like you bought a house and now the water company stopped treating water and pumping it to the house. The fact that you own a house without running water makes your property useless for the desired purpose of being a residence. In this case the law forbids you from digging a well and treating water yourself to make your property useful again.

So to be clear you think child porn distribution should be legal?

You are totally correct. All those "free speech" claims aren't being applied toward child porn. Both are grave human abuses and not just committing the act is a crime, but filming it, distributing it, even hosting it are also crimes. Why should murder be any different?

I think you should question why you want to see it...

I agree with you 100%. People claiming "free speech" wouldn't be doing so if it were a child porn video that ISIS released. And if it were child porn instead of brutal murder porn, Fox News would be in huge legal trouble for distributing it. Abuse of a child is a crime and so is creating or distributing a video of it. Why should murder be any different?

There are limits to free speech and I believe there should be. And I'm not talking about yelling FIRE in a crowded theater. I'm talking about things that are illegal to create, distribute, and view. For example: Child porn. Are you arguing child porn should not only be legal, but Fox News should be allowed to host it on their website? Maybe you are. If someone films a crime and distributes it in order to encourage others to commit criminal acts, it should be illegal to host and distribute it as well. You might be inclined to set a limit on what crimes might be included, maybe exclude street racing or selling pot or something else... But I think child porn and murder should probably be included in the list of banned subjects. The truth should be shared and if there is ever a trial, the jury should be able to view the evidence, but in no way should videos like this be distributed to the public for gawking at. And this is a Libertarian espousing this...

On a less government control end of things, I don't believe people should go watch this either. In the same way the cops cover a body or put up a sheet to prevent people from peeping at the dead, this is a matter or respect for the dead and the loved ones of the dead to not stare at horrific images of those killed.

When a major world power does a systematic genocide while trying to take over the globe it will have a parallel. Currently it's just a big group of thugs in an area of the world without a stable government. This would be better compared to pirates earlier in our history which the US handled very poorly. Religion may have something to do with it, but ISIS isn't killing people from Jordan over religion. Certainly not a major religious difference, maybe over sects.

There is still a difference in whether or not the perpetrators wants the public to know about their actions. The Nazis surely didn't.

There is still a big difference. Nazis didn't take pictures of concentration camps to generate sympathy for their cause. They deliberately hid the evidence because it would hurt their cause if known to the world. ISIS is intentionally staging these executions, recording it, and sending it to the media to get attention. Fox News just gave them attention. Do you think they might do something even more horrific next to make sure it gets on the news? This video shouldn't have been released because it tells terrorists that to get their message broadcast to the world, all they have to do is commit atrocities.