New Seven Wonders

So today, on the 07/07/07 is the day when the new seven wonders of the world will be announced. The New Seven Wonders Foundation was created by some Swiss guy, presumbly looking for some publicity and fame (cynical aren't I). About six years ago their website opened in order to accept nominations, by the end of 2005 there were almost two hundred nominations and from the top seventy seven, the foundation selected twenty one candiates from which the public were to vote for the new seven wonders of the world.

They promoted the campaign with "The key difference is that, this time around, they will not be chosen by one man, but rather by millions of people all over the world."
Yes, to a certain degree, but what were the criteria on which the 21 finalists were chosen? What about the other 56 of the top 77 nominees? If the people of the world are to chose, then why did they not just select the top 21 nominees? Why is there no more than one nominee from any country? Is that a realistic way to choose the new seven wonders? Surely they should choose the best 21 regardless of location. Already in the selection of the final 21 nominees, some selection has occurred based not on the opinions of "millions of people all over the world", but by the N7W panel.

But why the concern? Well having seen the list of 21 finalists, I just wonder and worry about what the outcome may be. While most of the obvious candidates are there (in my opinion), there are also some 'wonders' missing (in my opinion).
What about:
o The Terracotta Army near Xi'an, China?
o The Registan in Smarkand, Uzbekistan?
o Both Borobudur and Prambanan near Yogyakartya on Indonesia's Java island?
o Bagan in Myanmar (Burma)?
o Sukothai old city in Thailand?
o Cardiff Castle? (ok, just kidding there)
o Uluru (Ayers Rock) in Australia

And why are these included:
o The Statue of Liberty?
o Sydney Opera House?
o The Eiffel Tower? (it's just a big electricity pylon !)
o Christ the Redeemer Statue

How can the Terracotta Army in Xi'an not be included? It seems to be because they chose The Great Wall of China and there is this restriction - not that I have seen it mentioned, but it seems pretty obvious - of one site per country. Otherwise China would potentially have many other candidates; The Forbidden City, Dafo (The Giant Buddha). And surely France has better candidates than the tower?

If natural wonders were also included - I assume they have been excluded intentionally - as only architectural sites are in the list, there would be far more to argue about I'm sure. e.g. Why Sydney Opera House and not Ayers Rock?

So, I will wait and see what the result is. For the record, it's tough but I would have voted for (in no particular order), but this is just my opinion:

o Great Wall of China, China.
o Terracotta Army, Xi'an, China.
o Registan, Samarkand, Uzbekistan.
o Machu Picchu, Peru.
o Petra, Jordan.
o Easter Island Statues, Chile.
o Angkor Wat, Cambodia

but I'm sure someone will disagree

Note: The Pyrmaids of Giza are not included as they are already one of the seven ancient wonders of the world.