ideylaff:

Check online there a loads of stories relating to this....

Most Americans know nothing outside their domain


http://articles.cnn.com/2011-02-04/travel/americans.travel.domestically_1_western-hemisphere-travel-initiative-passports-tourism-industries?_s=PM:TRAVEL


http://edition.cnn.com/2011/TRAVEL/02/04/americans.travel.domestically/index.html?hpt=Sbin

You said you met an American who said they knew nothing about 9/11, I said don't exaggerate to make a point and you give me two links of the same article stating Americans don't travel. . .

Sisi_Kill:
Dude, no need to exaggerate to make a point abeg.

Even people living in a cave knew something happened.

and yet a whooping 56% of american students between 18-24 do not know sudan is an african country! 63% couldn't locate the middle east on a map. americans don't have a clue about the world around them. 1 in 5 adults cannot even locate canada!!!

Any ways before any other conutry will take away the best Olympics opening ceremony from Beljing,that conutry must have a great tradition and history but so far so good Beljing is still No.1.Beljing opening cerem. Was vivid why London was dull.

I Do believe that china went all out for theirs and they really represented their cultyre (at d same time...brag abt their inventions), wit a budget of abt $65million in production, i see no reason y nt to call theirs d best. even d representative for the london olympics bid admitted dat china's wuld b impossible to beat, but to b honest...i ws more interested in dat of britain's.....Brilliant## ...as china stood more for tradition and culture, britain proved why they were "once Everything"

I agree the social media section at London was rubbish. Mediocrity is incongruous with the Olympics, however I do feel London scored highly with many elements - the flying, glowing cyclists, the musical score, and perhaps most highly with the forging of the rings - rivalling the spectacle of Beijing. The human abd financial resources London had (less than half that of the Chinese, and perhaps even a tenth in real terms - labour costs are a lot less out there remember), must be a consideration when judging which was 'best'. That question really depends on your point of view. For sheer scale, majesty, spectacle skill and beauty - Beijing of course, but for effort and originality, diversity and entertainment, London. Two very different approaches. But the one that suits the Olympic movement, defines its purpose, symbolises the Olympian spirit best is Beijing. You don't win golds for comedy after all.