The Top 20 Albums of All Time

1. 
   #20. Faith - George Michael Play AlbumYear: 1987 Units Sold: 10 MillionSPV: $9.19 Rating (Stars): 4 Grammys Won: 1Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $9.79
   . #19. Appetite For Destruction - Guns N' Roses Play AlbumYear: 1987 Units Sold: 15 MillionSPV: $8.81 Rating (Stars): 4 Grammys Won: 0Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $9.81
   . #18. Purple Rain - Prince Play Album Year: 1984 Units Sold: 13 MillionSPV: $8.74 Rating (Stars): 4.75 Grammys Won: 2Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $9.82
   . #17. Houses Of The Holy - Led Zeppelin Play Album Year: 1973 Units Sold: 11 MillionSPV: $9.10 Rating (Stars): 4.5 Grammys Won: 0Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $9.93
   . #16. Born In The U.S.A. - Bruce Springsteen Play Album Year: 1984 Units Sold: 15 MillionSPV: $8.91 Rating (Stars): 5 Grammys Won: 0Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $10.29
   . #15. Nevermind - Nirvana Play Album Year: 1991 Units Sold: 10 MillionSPV: $10.07 Rating (Stars): 4 Grammys Won: 0Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $10.67
   .#14. Van Halen - Van Halen Play Album Year: 1978 Units Sold: 10 MillionSPV: $10.23 Rating (Stars): 4.25 Grammys Won: 0Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $10.84
   .#13. Rumours - Fleetwood Mac Play Album Year: 1977 Units Sold: 19 MillionSPV: $9.52 Rating (Stars): 5 Grammys Won: 1Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $11.47.#12. The Wall - Pink Floyd Play Album Year: 1979 Units Sold: 23 MillionSPV: $10.20 Rating (Stars): 4.75 Grammys Won: 1Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $12.51.#11. The Joshua Tree - U2 Play Album Year: 1987 Units Sold: 10 MillionSPV: $11.50 Rating (Stars): 4.5 Grammys Won: 2Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $12.54.#10. Metallica - Metallica Play Album Year: 1991 Units Sold: 14 MillionSPV: $12.08 Rating (Stars): 4.25 Grammys Won: 1Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $13.38.#9. Led Zeppelin - Led Zeppelin Play Album Year: 1969 Units Sold: 10 MillionSPV: $12.83 Rating (Stars): 4 Grammys Won: 0Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $13.60.#8. Hotel California - Eagles Play Album Year: 1976 Units Sold: 16 MillionSPV: $12.00 Rating (Stars): 4.75 Grammys Won: 0Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $13.81.#7. The White Album - The Beatles Play Album Year: 1968 Units Sold: 19 MillionSPV: $12.00 Rating (Stars): 5 Grammys Won: 0Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $14.39.#6. Led Zeppelin IV - Led Zeppelin Play Album Year: 1971 Units Sold: 23 MillionSPV: $12.42 Rating (Stars): 5 Grammys Won: 0Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $15.44.#5. Abbey Road - The Beatles Play AlbumYear: 1968 Units Sold: 12 MillionSPV: $14.94 Rating (Stars): 4.25 Grammys Won: 1Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $16.23.#4. Physical Graffiti - Led Zeppelin Play AlbumYear: 1975 Units Sold: 16 MillionSPV: $14.31 Rating (Stars): 4.75 Grammys Won: 0Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $16.38.#3. Thriller - Michael Jackson Play AlbumYear: 1982 Units Sold: 27 MillionSPV: $13.49 Rating (Stars): 4.5 Grammys Won: 4Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $17.39.#2. Dark Side Of The Moon - Pink Floyd Play AlbumYear: 1973 Units Sold: 15 MillionSPV: $16.08 Rating (Stars): 5 Grammys Won: 0Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $18.57.#1. Songs In The Key Of Life - Stevie Wonder Play AlbumYear: 1976 Units Sold: 10 MillionSPV: $16.84 Rating (Stars): 5 Grammys Won: 2Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $18.71
   

.....smell just right

• 
  
• 
  
  
• ...smell just right
  PERFUME magically transforms a person's countenance. It is an accessory that can single out a individual among a hundred others. It has the power to change ones personality, influencing the way one feels. Sweet, strong, floral or musky each can create a different sensation. Perfumes at first whiff send out a strong invitation to the wearer. Slowly it permeates the entire surrounding. Soon it blends with the body in such a way that it becomes unnoticeable to the wearer. It leaves an unmistakable trail but is hard to pinpoint. It oscillates like musical notes throughout a person's being.
  The advent of perfumes came about thousands of years ago. Ancient Chinese used a strong and pungent musk. Queen Cleopatra of Egypt used scented oil all over her body. People of Greece used to bathe in scented water. Indian folklore contains the tale that woman would bring a wave of sweet aroma that would permeate every corner of any room she entered. Her scent was a testament to her beauty.
  The use of perfumes began when people started decorating their homes with flowers. Incense was added during religious ceremonies. The smoke and the scent together brought about the first whiff of perfume. In Latin 'per' stands for medium or through and 'fumer' stands for smoke.
  The concentrated fragrance of aator existed in the Middle East since time immemorial. Present day scents come mainly form the west. Where once these used to be made mainly from natural products now they add artificial chemicals. Although the older methods created more exotic scents, the newer methods create longer lasting smells. Formulating a new perfume is a delicate balance between the two types of raw materials.
  Prices of perfumes are often high because of the materials used and the process applied. Two cups of the sweetest smelling aator requires about a million fresh red roses. Ancient techniques consisted of three things. Firstly there was the scent of the flowers. Secondly there was the need for a fixative that would seal and hold in the smell for a long time. Often they had to add strange ingredients like the sweat of a civet. That's a particular breed of cat. Then they would use amber grease and alcohol. Besides these there were about 50 other ingredients.
  Every perfume is unique and they can be separated into three different categories. First of all there is the standard perfume. It has the strongest scent. A drop is enough to have a huge effect on a passer-by. It also has a relatively higher price. It is best to store these away from directly sunlight. A good place would be a dark wardrobe. Apply on specific parts of the body for a better effect such as the wrist, the crook of the arm, forehead and neck. Often the scent lasts for 12 hours.
  Then comes the eau de toilette. It is like the perfumes except it has a higher alcohol content and a lighter scent. It generally lasts for about 4-6 hours. Last of all there is the cologne. It has the lightest scent of all and least costly. It has a high alcohol content and creates a soothing cooling effect when applied during warm weather.
  Every perfume belongs in its own world falling into specific categories.
  Florals: These give out the aroma of fresh flowers without any distinctive types. Makers of this range include Beautiful, Joy, Charlie and Armani. They are for women imparting an image of femininity, beauty and romanticism.
  Single florals: This is one of the most important classes and deals with the specific scent of only one type of flower like rose, jasmine, lily etc. Some of the well-known brands include White Linen, T rose and Diorisimo.
  Soft florals: These are created using synthetic chemicals with flowers. They have a light powdery aroma and one of the most remarkable brands is Chanel No. 5.
  Orientals: There is a huge market for this sophisticated and strong scent. Some of the notable brands are Shalimar and Chantilly.
  Soft Orientals: These are a modern creation adding spices such as cardamom, cinnamon and cloves. Check out Coco, Cinnabar, Poison and Opium. Citrus: These have a tangy and slightly pungent aroma due to the addition of lemon, orange, lime etc. It's a small classification with limited brands like Crystal and Diorella.
  Leather: These are basically perfumes designed for men. They have a dry musky scent and are soothing for the skin. Check out Gemini and Trimystic.
  Cypress: The name is taken from that of the island and the perfumes are of a dark colour. They smell like exotic ferns of marshlands and are similar to the smell you get when opening a sandalwood/chandan box. The range includes Ms Dior, Cassette and Ciao.
  Greens: This is a new and sweet category of perfumes. It's a lot like squashing fresh leaves between your fingers. What's right for you?
  Perfume usage is an extremely personal matter. It becomes a must have accessory and the best way to use the right scent is to rely on personal taste. Deodorant and eau de toilette can be sprayed all over the body. It gently blends with the body's own scent. If you want to hold the aroma for a longer duration make use of the soap, powder, oil, lotion etc of the same brand.
  Using perfumes is an enhancement of one's image. It helps to create a desirable effect on others. But more important than that is it has a feel-good factor unrivalled to anything else. You can be wearing an Armani suit and smell like a garbage truck that ran over a skunk across a sewage drain on a hot day. On the other hand you can be in a comfortable torn t-short and feel on top of the world because you smell just right.
  By S.Y

The ugly face of human rights

IN this age of globalisation, we are tired of hearing the term "human rights." And the northern hemisphere, which is more educated, developed and rich, is the leading campaigner of human rights. By now we all know what human rights means. What many of us may not know is the very hypocrisy in human rights, and the politics of human rights. How has it come to this stage? Let us try to know that.Former Irish president and UN human rights commissioner, Mary Robinson, said in 2002: "I am often asked what is the most serious form of human rights violation in the world to-day, and my reply is consistent: extreme poverty."Former UN secretary general Kofi Annan said: "The universal declaration of human rights has, at best, a hollow ring, wherever families eke out an existence on less than a dollar a day, or children die for lack of basic yet life saving care." The United Nations General Assembly, through Resolution 5/146, affirmed that poverty posed the single greatest threat to the survival of the greatest numbers of human beings, and that it was a violation of human dignity, rights and well-being.Since that resolution, rich countries have been trying to save their faces by indulging in charity. But this small amount of charity could not go far to reduce poverty, except for giving some credit and maneuvering power to rich countries over the poor. The UN and NGOs should realise that poverty, which is an extreme violation of human rights, cannot fall under charity work, and that fighting poverty must be a prime obligation for the rich. Against this background, in August 2006, a UN sub-commission for the promotion and protection of human rights adopted guiding principles for the first time in the history of UN. It proposed an international law document which would consider the fight against extreme poverty as an obligation for all states.The fact is that nearly 24,000 people die every day because of extreme poverty, and the resulting lack of access to nutrition, clean drinking water and basic medical care. Accordingly, in one hour from this moment, the world will witness the death of another 1000 people. To make a stark comparison, this toll is the equivalent of a passenger jet carrying 500 people crashing every 30 minutes. And, in this case, three out of four of the victim "passengers" are children of age five or under. Again, more than a billion people, one in every six human beings, still live on less than a dollar a day and do not have the means to stay alive in the face of chronic hunger and disease. In other words, it is poverty that kills. A single bite from a malaria-bearing mosquito is enough to end a child's life for want of a mosquito net or treatment worth $1.The director of the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), Jack Deof, said: "If only 3% of world's yearly military expenditure could be reduced and utilised for development of agriculture and food then a better life could be offered to 850 millions hungry human beings. Only in 2006, global military expenditure was $1.2 trillion. On the other hand, one country has spoiled food worth $100 billion, the fat people of the world spoiled food worth $20 billion. Given the above statistics, how it can be explained to the conscious people of the world that only $30 billion could not be collected for saving the lives of around 860 million poor human beings."From the above statement of the FAO director, two realities of the present world have become clear. First, the extreme helplessness of the majority of human beings. Second, the extreme disparity between the rich and the poor. And both are the creation of the minority rich. The endless desire to accumulate wealth and comfort, the endless greed, and the extreme indifference of the rich towards the poor are pushing millions of poor human beings to their deaths. What can be more shameful and sad for human civilisation than endangering the lives of 1 billion human beings for want of food?In a separate research, SIPR, a military research entity, showed that the top 100 weapon producers sold weapon worth $236 billion in 2003 only. And, to sell these weapons and earn money, many insecurities and wars are being stoked by the world powers. As a result, weapons worth $1 trillion are being purchased every year by various countries of the world. Against this, only $325 billion are being spent on agriculture every year. Hence, even if world leaders cannot guarantee food for each human being, they have already ensured 2 bullets per head, and 1 deadly weapon for every 10 human beings. Hence, those who earn money out of weapons, pushing 1 billion human beings towards death, should not insult the words "human rights" by attaching their names to those words.Even if we consider the meaning of human rights literally, these human rights campaigners will cut a sorry finger. Many a times, it has been found, world powers do not advocate for implementation of human rights for some issues and countries. Without elaborating, if some one looks at Palestine, Iraq, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Guantanamo, this will be clear. All these instances demonstrate that protection of human rights has been embroiled in world politics and power.All countries and people of the world, rich or poor, will have to pay a high price in failing to reduce poverty. It would be a tragedy -- above all for the world's poor -- but rich countries will not be immune to the consequences of failure. In an interdependent world, our shared prosperity and collective security depend critically on success in the war against poverty.Poverty is the result of historical and contemporary politics. There is growing awareness of the yawning gap between rich and poor nations. As of 1999, according to a UN human development report, 200 richest people doubled their income in past four years to $1000 billion, and the 3 richest people have more assets than the total assets of the poorest 600 million people. Poverty can only be eliminated if rich nations and the biggest international agencies and transnational corporations get together in promoting poverty alleviation policies like "Fighting poverty is not a charity but an obligation." Thereby, the ugly face of human right could be turned into a beautiful one.


-->