Darth Vader would totally do that.

Didn't Nineteen Eightyfour have a thread running through it about the government controlling language in order to control thought?

Also, is this a bad time to mention that 'CP' is shorthand for something rather unsavory to do with the internet and children?

People who wish to take their children out in public but who don't want them photographed should have a solution.

I propose the child-sized niqab.

For me this highlights the delusion that is an art gallery, where anything that's put there can attain a status of importance simply because it's there, and regardless of any inherent merit.

Like a high-value price label on an item of produce can fool people into thinking it's a luxury in some way, so a glass of water on a shelf or a pile of bricks becomes transformed in the minds of the poeple who view it in the gallery, gaining an illusory import - introducing a heavy bias - 'you're supposed to think this has merit because it's here'.

to #41 (TRR) - sure you do.

You don't say it to someone who's JUST lost their children, but this person was an activist, who'd been campaigning for some time on the benefits of fire alarms, not a recently bereaved mother.

The idea that you have to pussyfoot around people forever like that - lest you say the 'wrong' thing - seems to be all that he stands against: No Pussyfooting.

Boycott the Western corporations sponsoring the Olympics.

1.Get list of Olympic sponsors.
2.Write letters stating that they're being boycotted for aligning themselves with an oppressive totalitarian government oppressing the Tibetan people (and more besides).
3.???
4.World Peace

Lord preserve us from people who would dictate how anything should be portrayed and those who say that because a view portrayed does not accord with their own, it should be silenced.

The things the Nazis did have always been up for grabs. If you can have 'Alo 'Alo, The Producers, the Wolfenstein games, etc, then what could the problem be with this - even without the educational sop (if that's what it is) to the various illiberal organisations that try to stamp out anything holocaust-related that doesn't match their precise world-view?

@#17 - Teapunk, I don't know why you need to import a foreign example of a 'Society of Suspicion'. America has a rich history of its own on that front.

"I have here in my hand a list of names ..."

I'm a Mostly Vegetarian™ - I eat a predominantly vegetarian diet but will eat fish very occasionally if I feel a particular need/desire to (also if there's nothing else available which is rare) - my view is largely: if it's dead already, where's the harm (essentially)?

I wouldn't, however, kill anything in order to eat it, fish or otherwise, for ethical reasons. The question that then arises for me is not so much about eating whatever animal protein that may be available but of killing any available animals for their protein, and whether I'd be prepared to die rather than take the life of another, if that was my only option.

I look forward to the day such idiots realise that, actually, PEOPLE are a security risk.

What then? ZOMG!! Ban teh peepulz!

The state and provate businesses photograph and video us constantly - 'there can be no expectation of privacy in a public place!' That's fair enough, but then they treat private individuals using cameras as terrorist suspects - effectively, in this case, but literally in plenty of others.

I'd really like to do street photography myself, but haven't built up sufficient nerve for reasons highlighted in this story.

If you photograph a child in public, you're a paedo; if you photograph a public building, you're a terrorist.

This society is scared of it's own shadow.

They better eat it quick:

"A truffle has to be consumed within 20 days of being unearthed. In 2004, a 700g truffle sold for £28,000, only to go mouldy in the safe of a London restaurant." - http://www.guardian.co.uk/italy/story/0,,2220561,00.html

to MichaelH [re#10 - With copyright as it stands now you *do* have the right to re-sell things you've bought but those things were clasically tangible assets and physical possession passed from one person to another.

With digital works there's no physical transfer and nothing keeping you from [not] deleting your copy once you've received money for it.]

You can copy the data from a CD and sell the CD. You could sell an MP3 and NOT delete the 'original' copy you bought.

There's no REAL EFFECTIVE difference that would constitute the necessity of a special NO RESALE value for digital downloads.

Well, regardless of the drawbacks, the expense ... the wastefulness ... it's always nice to have another penis euphemism.

Illegal sex? Between consenting adults? What a bizarre notion!

>Even if that citizen's blog is on US servers? How can they possibly enforce it?

Um. If the citizen resides in Italy, how about by throwing them out of the fourth floor window of a police station?