No need, now the police will report you, as soon as Google shows them the data. The sad part is, that this is not an "In Soviet Russia..." joke.

Since at least 40 years it's possible to get Disulfiram implanted into your body to get the very same effect. In some countries this is even done by court order.
http://www.alustonhealth.com/disulfiram-implants

Several Polish movies contain scenes of someone cutting out their Disulfiram implants (trade name: Esperal) in order to have a drink. For instance (mildly NSFW): http://youtu.be/BbFWIBxtLaQ?t=1m20s

No, they called it a republic of letters, but the concept was very similar to cyberspace.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Letters

You mean something like SideWiki provided by Google Toolbar? Features like this have been around for ages, I can distinctly remember installing a toolbar that did something simmilar in 1999. The problem is - you really don't want to know the thoughts of people who have only this in common with you, that they visited the same page. Unfortunately, most of the people who use the internet are either illiterate, stupid or both. Example: comments on YouTube, if you find one that is useful or at least vaguely coherent, please let me know.

WW2 German instructional films about destroying tanks, McGyver style, are on YouTube. It is quite impressive, how a well trained infantry could rip through unprotected tanks:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLZKbD2Turo&feature=related

Of course the Soviets did not need movies for that, as this joke illustrates:
  - Vasiliy Ivanovich, enemy tanks are attacking!
- Take the grenades from the shelf, Petka.
Some time later.
- Whew! We've beaten them back!
- Good, Petka. Now, put the grenades back to the shelf.

Please, do tell, how do you determine if Perl has been encrypted with rot13?

It still works, and usually it even does the same thing, only with better syntax. I'm pretty sure that rot-13 encryption is a stage of Perl debugging.

As for dangerous domains - you forgot ".sh". Sites from this domain could do rm -rf before you click "back".

I find it very funny, that a believer in UFOs decided to post about what is fringe and what is not.

In this case there are no "fringe" arguments - any and all travesties commited by the troops in Iraq should be mentioned - time and time again.

The truth is that the war in Iraq was caused by the US. Therefore, the US cannot just brush away accusations of civilian deaths by saying "well, it's a warzone". It is a warzone only because the US made it so, and therefore it should now accept the responsibility and admit to the real number of casualties caused.

Human nature is hell, but when you provoke a war, don't pretend that it's not your fault when all hell breakes loose.

And even as far as warzone behaviour goes, the US' is pretty extreme. Read the Guardian article about US troops shooting up the British - on a regular basis. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/22/american-troops-friendly-fire-iraq

A reasonable person should gladly accept as many restrictions that are not applicable to them, if it means the reduction in the restrictions that are.

In your example, a reasonable person would accurately identify the restriction on hot dogs as most problematic, and could try to swap it out for two other restrictions that are not applicable to them, i.e. ask the court to lift the ban on eating hot dogs and replace it with restriction on playing golf and owning race horses. The judge would probably think that those two restrictions are more severe (since he probably spends more time playing golf than eating hot dogs) and accept your trade.

IAAL, and I managed to have the judge reduce the fine imposed on my client in exchange for restricting his right to work in a managerial position for two years - for a guy, who is a janitor, I'd say it was a good deal.