Comments on: Missing Link Daily

By: saint nicholas images

saint nicholas images — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:11:31 +0000

[...] [...]

By: really free porn video

really free porn video — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 00:44:39 +0000

[...] [...]

By: Liam

Liam — Tue, 27 May 2008 02:07:57 +0000

No worries Roger. Any chance to let the inner war nerd out I’ll happily take.

By: Roger Migently

Roger Migently — Mon, 26 May 2008 14:28:45 +0000

I hate it, but I admit I appear to have been quite wrong in my post about the so-called Australian “cluster bombs”. The SMArt 155 weapon is apparently not a cluster bomb in the way we usually understand it. According to a report in The Age, “Each round contains only two sub-munitions, has independent, reliable and redundant self-destruction mechanisms, and a self-neutralisation mechanism, and as such cannot reasonably be categorised as risking unacceptable harm to civilians.” although I do wonder what acceptable harm to civilians might constitute.
I have kept the post, as a reminder to myself, and perhaps others, of the dangers of going off hot, half-cocked and unresearched, but have posted a retraction as an update.

Thanks to Liam.

By: Ken Parish

Ken Parish — Mon, 26 May 2008 05:19:52 +0000

An erudite judge indeed.

By: stumblng tumblr

stumblng tumblr — Mon, 26 May 2008 03:04:24 +0000

While it in no way compares with the recent titillating sexual references in Federal Court reasons for judgment, I’ve always thought this bit of somewhat-related information in Z v Minister for Immigration, a Federal Court case from 1999, was interesting:

“… it should not be thought that the fact that consensual sexual intercourse between unmarried adult Muslims is a crime in Iran is entirely surprising. During Cromwells time, fornication was a statutory crime in England (see the Incest, Adultery and Fornication Act of 10 May 1650, reprinted in Firth and Rait (eds), II Acts and Ordinances of the Interregnum, 1642-1660, 387-89), although it ceased to be so on the Restoration (see Holdsworth, 6 History of the English Law (2d ed), 165-66; Blackstone, 4 Commentaries on the Laws of England, 64) and has not been so since. (Note that Blackstone was wrong to assert that, under the Cromwellian statute, a second fornication offence was a felony without benefit of clergy.) However, it would appear that legislative bodies in colonial America of like mind to the Cromwellian Parliament enacted legislation similar to the English Act of 1650: see, eg, Pollard v Lyons 91 US 225, 227-28 (1875), referring to such a Maryland statute enacted in 1715; and, even today, fornication remains a statutory crime in a not-insignificant number of American States: see 2 Am Jur 2d, ‘Adultery and Fornication’,

By: Gummo Trotsky

Gummo Trotsky — Mon, 26 May 2008 01:11:19 +0000

Penis aerodynamics is fascinating, ain’t it.

Just to make things clear – as far as I know, the flying penis in the video was filmed with its owner’s consent and I’d defy anyone to conclude that it was being depicted in a sexual context.