Thats not funny, its just depressing.

They're bad luck for mariners. I respectfully disagree with you, sundog is a much better name.

Yes, there are plenty like Gore who blur the lines. But Gore spent his time making rational claims like 'pollution=bad' not "how's that hope-y change-y stuff working out for ya'll?".

troll? I'm glad someone got my point, this is all about trolling. The GOP is a massive troll organization, as evidenced by their recent 'census' money grab. The party is all about con'troll'ing free thought and replacing it with empty values while profiting off of the whole deal.

America should start sending their idiot conservatives like Palin and Limbaugh to Australia. This worldwide surge of stupid "won't someone think of the children and our values (while padding our bank accounts)" is washing up on too many shores lately.

The world seriously needs to get over its Victorian fear of the nude body.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'd rather have a percentage of the 'pedophilicly inclined' spending their time acquiring pictures of nude cartoon characters than pictures of children. Further, in relation to the article, the way to get rid of undesirable elements of our ever changing society is not to punish the 'customer' but the 'distributor'. File sharing makes the line between the two difficult to see, but rather than putting people behind bars for the crime of clicking, why not focus more on removing the source? Under the current laws in many western nations, glancing at a computer screen displaying questionable photos of children is dangerously close to breaking the law. But there is a mile wide gap between the person who clicks a link and the person who subjects their own child to such inhumane treatment. I would suspect that the average person in a western nation sees hundreds if not thousands of simulated murders on television and in the movies, and murder is arguably a more heinous crime than active sexual deviancy targeting children. Cartoons are just as unreal as movies.

Thats like saying, 'if you want to keep that steel deck plate in place, that bolt will work, but as for keeping the whole aircraft carrier together, its meaningless.' The 'war on drugs' is a multifaceted movement, not only restricted to government or high technology. The 'war on drugs', in its most general and broad definition is the attempt by society to restrict and/or control the usage of 'unnatural' chemical modification of the mind or body - which I believe could be extended as far as overeating (junkfood, which is proven to be more addictive than heroin in mice) and alcohol abuse. The goal of this hypothetical situation(aquagliders as border patrol, basically), would be to further increase the ability of the nation to control and/or monitor its borders, and stop unwanted elements from entering - theoretically for the good of society through a general consent. Whether or not this is the right course of action is not the point. The US already pisses away billion upon billions of dollars on military operations and technologies that have poor results and sometimes lead to a redistribution of wealth in ways unanticipated by the public. The thought of a nearly real-time global oceanographic reconnaissance system I believe would be too good to pass up for a government who has all the money in the world to do with as it pleases. The interception of illegal marine drug trafficking operations seems like the perfect test bed for this technology. Im sure that with enough research you can uncover plenty of technologies in use by the US Military in Iraq and Afghanistan that were taken through their initial paces in border patrol capacity.