DZJ

Would you be happy for that principal to apply to explosives, heavy ordnance, biological/chemical weapons etc in private hands?

No, I was trying to make a similar point by being a smart ass. We need to be trained and qualified with the weapons we own, but I certainly would not want another layer of Big Nanny responsible for that. Who should be responsible for it if not the government?

How does one go about being stabbed to death on a regular basis? Do you make an appointment?

I've not seen the programme (though will probably watch it when I get a chance) but this strikes me as just another example of capitalism doing its thing. As long as there are rich people happy to fork out the dosh for the chance of plugging an endangered species, they'll be a much more powerful incentive than just conservationism in preventing their ultimate extinction. (Which isn't to say I'm not all for conservation, and from what I've heard of this business it seems vaguely ludicrous to call it 'hunting' at all).

To which I imagine the lawyer's response would be that if the camera is sited with legal authority then defeating it would be sufficiently akin to defacing your number plate with a black marker, or splashing mud over it, for them to still get you on it.

Where? Why? Can you show me the law? I fail to see how this is not the same as the radar defeating devices that are legal in many states. I don't know if Shropshire's thinking of a different law, but in Britain I'd imagine this would fall foul of the legal requirement to have one's registration plate in a visible and legible condition when on the road.

Of course, the inevitable result will be Wilders and all who agree with him saying 'Look what we said! This proves we were right!' and probably spawn 'Beyond Beyond Fitna' and the Iranian response 'Beyond Beyond Beyond Fitna' ad infinitum.

Reminds me of the joke about the Met's idea of a Chinese take-away as hauling off a Tibetan bloke kicking and screaming....

Do you therefore seek out articles that aren't peer reviewed?

This article, from the Jewish Chronicle, might be of interest. http://www.thejc.com/home.aspx?ParentId=m12s114&SecId=114&AId=51460&ATypeId=1

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7334545.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7332942.stm Anyone else think that the global Olympic torch relay is rapidly descending into total farce?

Makes you wonder what smell they're covering up with it!

Like Mitchell Johnson, who was spanked by a teacher, then went back to school the next day with a gun, shooting and killing that same teacher along with a few other people? Yeah, spanking is the answer. How about spanking plus bullet-proof vests for all?

I really don't understand Hillary Clinton. She keeps saying such demonstrably stupid things the satirists can barely keep pace...

Now it's taking me to a story about Manchester United football team in Italy... [Hang on, might be that I'm getting the international version of CNN, or something. Will check....]

The link took me to a video about a bomb blast in Pakistan....

Is he even likely to serve the full 10 years? Seems like a rather light sentence to me as well.

What exactly am I meant to be protesting?

What's the Father of Medicine got to do with this? And just to quote a point of labrys' which some people seem to willfully ignoring: Your protestations, warped, would sound better if they weren't quite so shrill.

Had a stupid bint on my train home a few days ago who spent 5 minutes alternating between 'Yeah' and 'OK' every 5 seconds. Never has a tunnel been a greater relief!

Correct, but doing something about it is productive. I'm not sure that actions taken in anger are ever very productive.

"During the trip, the lawmakers expressed skepticism about the Bush administration's claims that Saddam was stockpiling weapons of mass destruction." Is it still propaganda when you are correct? Of course! Don't let the facts get in the way of a good bash!

I recall another (March 2008) poll that listed US forces as the single factor most to blame for worsening security, 79% of respondents having little or no confidence in US occupation forces, 70% saying the coalition had done a 'bad' or 'very bad' job in Iraq, 71% opposed the presence of the coalition in Iraq, 53% thought the surge had worsened the situation in areas where the additional troops had been sent, and 61% said the presence of US forces was making things worse. Tricky things, polls. Data from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/14_03_08iraqpollmarch2008.pdf

Considering how many people die of alcohol, tobacco, automobiles, etc. every year, it doesn't sound that dangerous. War on Terror! War on Booze! War on Drugs! (oops, too late!) War on Smokes! War on Cars!

I don't know enough about British Africa to comment on the rights or wrongs of Zimbabwe, but that was a very interesting piece, so thanks.