Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Passenger 'moons' speed camera
news.bbc.co.uk — A front seat car passenger was photographed baring his backside at a speed camera in Northumberland. The "mooning" man was snapped by the mobile camera as the black BMW X5 drove past on the A1171 Dudley Lane in Cramlington last month.
frooo- 841 diggs
- digg it
- IconoclastStill, on 05/05/2008, -38/+5Funny, but likely the cops could ID the car and fine the driver.
- daakone, on 05/05/2008, -0/+21As stated in the article... oh nevermind.
- sarixe, on 05/05/2008, -4/+7when i dugg you down: Is Iconoclast still being offensive? Report it
- Armando57, on 05/05/2008, -3/+1We all know that the FBI keeps records of these sort of things.
- robbiemuffin, on 05/05/2008, -2/+103ok, the car was not speeding... there was no red light event (no index crime: no one is being kidnapped or murdered) ... so why does this image exist publicly? Its a good example of what the cameras are NOT supposed to be ... at least here in america, you brits are just insane. ;)
- Wiwoz, on 05/05/2008, -3/+40Agreed. This man was not hurting anybody except himself. Only his life was at risk from not wearing a seatbelt for the 30 seconds that he was mooning or preparing to moon the camera. Is it silly, indeed, juvenile? Yes. Do people have a right not to be offended? No.
- sarixe, on 05/05/2008, -6/+6wait, so i have to be offended? oh...
- sv650touring, on 05/05/2008, -1/+6people *choose* to be offended. That is why it isn't practical to give everyone the right not to be offended.
- ubpsanity, on 05/05/2008, -0/+5It was silly? Yes, Juvenile? Yes, Was I offended? No I wasn't offended. I got a laugh out of it.
- robbiemuffin, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1okay but I think you are missing the point... it doesn't matter if he is hurting himself or risking other people. The speed cameras are there to enforce the speed limit (the red light cameras too, etc). They have to have a clear list of things they are meant to be used for, and they are only to be used for those things. I can't imagine "mooning the camera" being on that list.
- sarixe, on 05/05/2008, -6/+6wait, so i have to be offended? oh...
- SmellyBroom, on 05/05/2008, -3/+16Oh no no no. Clearly this picture was only used as evidence for prosecution in a court of law. At least that's what they tell us. And the police would never lie to us right?
- sfacets, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2...and yet there it is, on the BBC.
- biotch, on 05/05/2008, -0/+30seriously ... way to teach them to NEVER do it again by immortalizing the prank on the news.
They must be laughing up a storm- phenom2k7, on 05/05/2008, -1/+2I may try it whilst in cruise control steering the wheel with my arse cheeks.
- ToadLeg, on 05/05/2008, -1/+36How the hell did they even find the image if he wasn't speeding? Do they look at each image - just to see what the people in the car are doing? I think this event proves that they do.
- breezytrees, on 05/05/2008, -0/+14Uh. No. Seriously guys.. The only way to protect children from this image of a bare-naked-ass is to release the image to the press and allow them to publish the bare-naked-ass in a newspaper.
- BobOki, on 05/05/2008, -0/+10The many cameras and attempts to extort tickets from otherwise humble law abiding people is more offensive than SHOWING THE PICTURE OF HIS ASS FOR ALL TO SEE ON THE INTERNET.... but I suppose now that every person and child can see it, it's much less offensive than it was on the road for the 4 seconds it was there.
- drachemorder, on 05/05/2008, -4/+1Yeah, well, if he didn't want people to see his hindquarters, he shouldn't have MOONED A FRICKIN' CAMERA! Sheesh.
- Nerys, on 05/05/2008, -0/+4Woooooooosh, drachemoder looks up in wonderment and thinks. Did I just miss something?
- drachemorder, on 05/05/2008, -4/+1Yeah, well, if he didn't want people to see his hindquarters, he shouldn't have MOONED A FRICKIN' CAMERA! Sheesh.
- Chazx, on 05/05/2008, -5/+6It was a mobile speed camera - that means a guy sitting in a parked police van with a camera and speed gun. ToadLeg read the article before spouting your police state crap. As for why it was released, for the lulz?
- paperclipsNsoup, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2(_|_)
- Wiwoz, on 05/05/2008, -3/+40Agreed. This man was not hurting anybody except himself. Only his life was at risk from not wearing a seatbelt for the 30 seconds that he was mooning or preparing to moon the camera. Is it silly, indeed, juvenile? Yes. Do people have a right not to be offended? No.
- hamburgers, on 05/05/2008, -15/+12nudity is offensive, it must be stopped.
- sarixe, on 05/05/2008, -0/+12exactly. stop taking showers, man! it offends me!
- intangible, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1A stinky person is offensive. A nude person is offensive. There will be only one, choose!
- lotsa1s, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1There can only be one!
HEEERREEE WE ARE!
BORN to be KINGS!
We're the princes of the uniiiversee! - sv650touring, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1I dugg you for shameless dorkiness
- lotsa1s, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1There can only be one!
- intangible, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1A stinky person is offensive. A nude person is offensive. There will be only one, choose!
- sv650touring, on 05/05/2008, -0/+7I wouldn't have thought you needed a sarcasm tag on that one, but welcome to digg.
- CarnivalOfDust, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1How do people not understand it yet? I'd have thought that after things like Hot Coffee, a sarky comment about nudity being offensive would be in the high + by now.
- sarixe, on 05/05/2008, -0/+12exactly. stop taking showers, man! it offends me!
- yelofnivek, on 05/05/2008, -0/+54His behaviour has been labelled as "dangerous and offensive"
hahahahaha- AmnioticEntity, on 05/05/2008, -0/+8kinda the point, right? how orwellian, GREAT britain indeed.
- keepinithamsta, on 05/05/2008, -1/+3Maybe he has ass herpes.
- Goodanswer, on 05/05/2008, -1/+1Goes to shw you the safty Nazi's dont know how to have ANY FUN!
- paperclipsNsoup, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1I'm just trying to figure out how you can get your ass on the steering wheel while driving. Almost looks like its worth a try... Almost
- Nerys, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2its in Britain the ass is not the driver :-)
- paperclipsNsoup, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Lol, good point. I guess the source should have been a big clue
- Nerys, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2its in Britain the ass is not the driver :-)
- Monolith4, on 05/05/2008, -1/+80lol @ orwellian britain
he's probably just showing the camera that the RFID tag the government implanted in his ass is still there.- celticspringers, on 05/05/2008, -3/+11Yes, Britain is now a 100% suveillance state. You can´t turn around without 5 cameras watching you. And the funny thing is no one in that country seems to give a damn.
- BrewBeau, on 05/05/2008, -1/+5I don't know about that. I thought it was mainly London that had all the surveillance cameras, not the rest of the country. And when I've driven over there, they have signs up to tell you when a speed camera is coming up on the motorways.
- meatmcguffin, on 05/05/2008, -3/+2It is mainly London and those cameras are mainly owned by businesses.
- hauntedchippy, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2On average, a person in the UK is snapped by CCTV over 300 times a day (BBC, 2002)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2071496.stm
- meatmcguffin, on 05/05/2008, -3/+2It is mainly London and those cameras are mainly owned by businesses.
- TheSuperunknown, on 05/05/2008, -0/+10At the same time you're hearing all this stuff about photographers getting harassed with accusations of being terrorists and pedophiles. The next step will probably be banning cameras wielded by the public in public.
Britain, you're kinda starting to suck at this freedom thing.- TheHayze, on 05/05/2008, -0/+5They were historically never really a "free" state. I mean, to be honest, that's why we came over here to "The New World". Was because they were being prosecuted in England, and other countries in Europe. Granted it was because of religion mostly, but I'm sure a few other reasons were there for some people. But indeed, England is starting to look like a not so free state in this modern age where one would expect these types of freedoms.
- Chazx, on 05/05/2008, -1/+4We suck at freedom? Says the guy from the worlds leading jailer? You hold prisoners without trial for years at Guantanamo Bay, torture terrorist suspects, lock up drug users and we suck at freedom? Just a few days ago your government began its campaign to extradite two of our citizens, a married couple with four children so they can be thrown in jail for 98 YEARS for selling pyrotechnic chemicals which can be used to manufacture crystal meth.
- klasikahl, on 05/05/2008, -1/+5Meth is a serious problem here in the States. I'm not so sure about the state of abuse in the UK. However, the couple likely knew they were doing. They were trying to profit from a meth boom. I live in Arizona, a state with a horrendous meth consumption and manufacturing problem, and I can tell you for sure that having two, four, or twelve children doesn't make a meth producer any less of a demon. In fact, it makes them worse. When meth has been manufactured in a home, that home and the homes neighboring it become uninhabitable for years, perhaps until they are demolished. The chemicals produced while making meth have lethal consequences especially for children. Children exposed to those types of gases have severe trouble breathing and participating in sports for the rest of their lives, that is if they don't contract cancer first.
Perhaps you should do some research before defending your countrymen accused of aiding and abetting a meth maker. - Chazx, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2Actually they were "caught" by a DEA sting operation. The agent made an order and received it, but also sent a few emails, including the following:
"That last red you sent was some hot s**t...causing my meth lab to catch fire."
and
"Can you provide me with a decent recipe? I'm sure you know what I mean...hehe."
The couple immediately informed the Special Branch and ignored all future orders from the agent and didn't respond to any more emails. They frequently informed the Police here of all suspicious activity, the police came over several times and found nothing wrong with their business.
http://www.sundaymail.co.uk/news/scottish-news/200 ...
Perhaps you should do some research before telling me to do my research? - lotsa1s, on 05/05/2008, -0/+0Canada is the land of the free.
- klasikahl, on 05/05/2008, -1/+5Meth is a serious problem here in the States. I'm not so sure about the state of abuse in the UK. However, the couple likely knew they were doing. They were trying to profit from a meth boom. I live in Arizona, a state with a horrendous meth consumption and manufacturing problem, and I can tell you for sure that having two, four, or twelve children doesn't make a meth producer any less of a demon. In fact, it makes them worse. When meth has been manufactured in a home, that home and the homes neighboring it become uninhabitable for years, perhaps until they are demolished. The chemicals produced while making meth have lethal consequences especially for children. Children exposed to those types of gases have severe trouble breathing and participating in sports for the rest of their lives, that is if they don't contract cancer first.
- BrewBeau, on 05/05/2008, -1/+5I don't know about that. I thought it was mainly London that had all the surveillance cameras, not the rest of the country. And when I've driven over there, they have signs up to tell you when a speed camera is coming up on the motorways.
- sv650touring, on 05/05/2008, -0/+4Monolith4, I can't believe no one commented on your RFID crack. I LOL'd in a quiet office.
- ubpsanity, on 05/05/2008, -0/+6I don't think there was enough detail to tell where the RFID was implanted... You seem to know it was in the crack though, good eyes.
- sv650touring, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2Well, that's where I keep mine. So I just assumed...
- ubpsanity, on 05/05/2008, -0/+6I don't think there was enough detail to tell where the RFID was implanted... You seem to know it was in the crack though, good eyes.
- raid517, on 05/05/2008, -0/+5You Yanks are funny. We are still much freer in the UK than in many other countries. In the UK it's lots of little private companies and individuals who own these cameras. In the US, it's mostly your government.
For example my local fast food joint has CCTV cameras, as does my local filling station, as indeed do most local stores and businesses. I personally have three CCTV cameras, one each covering the front and rear entrances to my apartment and one covering the garage - as do the majority of my neighbours.
If anything it's a cultural thing. We Brits like to spy on each other. We are probably just quite nosey - but also a lot of us are super paranoid about crime. But there is no big central agency monitoring all of this stuff in any of 'Big Brother' sort of way.
If it comes down to it I would probably personally prefer if there were less cameras - but given that my apartment block hasn't been broken into in the 8 years since I fitted mine, even I would think twice before giving up completely.- MiDri, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Thats not what torchwood told me!
- sv650touring, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1But on Spooks, the good guys get to look at all the CCTV cameras!
If the cameras are mostly owned by private people and businesses, does that mean they are the *only* ones who can see the video from the cameras? Serious question.- Nerys, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Yes my question too. Here in the US you (well your supposed) to need a valid warrant to "seize" video footage. How does that work in the UK ? (legally and in reality) Just curious.
- raid517, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1Well there's not much regulation of it really. We do have the Data Protection Act, that stops a lot of information from being abused. But it's almost a fail-safe in it's own right. With everybody spying on everybody else, if anybody steps out of line (including the police or the government), we all have a fair chance of being able to see it for ourselves.
Think 'Rodney King'; if anybody in our government did anything like that here, it's likely that they would be found out very quickly. Then you would know all about free speech.
- celticspringers, on 05/05/2008, -3/+11Yes, Britain is now a 100% suveillance state. You can´t turn around without 5 cameras watching you. And the funny thing is no one in that country seems to give a damn.
- poidh, on 05/05/2008, -0/+67That's not his arse. He just has a very ugly face.
- dsmx, on 05/05/2008, -1/+9I think I've blown my funny fuse.
- bigfloppydonkey, on 05/05/2008, -1/+9You may not have noticed, but we have a condition. We have buttocks where are faces should be.
- Armando57, on 05/05/2008, -2/+3It's Al Franken!!!!
- raid517, on 05/05/2008, -1/+3Na, that's just a typical ugly Brit!
- Armando57, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1Now I realize that Miss Spears has fallen on hard times, but let's not beat a dead horse...
- ramiro, on 05/05/2008, -0/+3The RFID crack followed by the ugly face comment. Things such as these that make me persist on reading Digg user's comments. That was a great combo! :)
- coltraning, on 05/05/2008, -0/+22"Police may take action against the man for public order offences and not wearing a seat belt."
I understand that the police might take action in the form of a seat belt fine (although, good luck getting his name from the driver). um, maybe i'm a bit crazy here, but how can you have a public order offense if no one was there to be offended?- jackhatedance, on 05/05/2008, -3/+7we were there through the camera which take the photo and digg bring it here.
we are offensed. - xaeon, on 05/05/2008, -0/+10He mooned a mobile camera, which means that someone was there operating it. It's this person who he must have apparently offended.
- coresnake, on 05/05/2008, -1/+4It's like zen ***** man, whats the sound of one arse clapping
- paperclipsNsoup, on 05/05/2008, -1/+2It's because nudity is offensive!!!! Stop those assholes
/sarcasm
- jackhatedance, on 05/05/2008, -3/+7we were there through the camera which take the photo and digg bring it here.
- Malnilion, on 05/05/2008, -0/+40I'd moon my government if I had the chance too.
- choda, on 05/05/2008, -20/+3Wait a minute, that's the driver...
Nevermind. The Brits are backwards. - winampman2, on 05/05/2008, -1/+39Why is this man's ass on the frontpage of Digg?
- poidh, on 05/05/2008, -0/+11That's why he pulled the moonie. He knew it would get to the front page of Digg. You've just been Rick Rolled..... with an arse.
- arcticblue, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2You must not have heard of goatse. That ass hass been around much longer than rick rolling. Google it if you're bored.
- poidh, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2That's not so much an ass as a gaping anus. Two different things in my book.
- arcticblue, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2You must not have heard of goatse. That ass hass been around much longer than rick rolling. Google it if you're bored.
- Goodanswer, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Because no one wanted to see his ankles.
- audguy, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1thats not his ass, its his balls
- poidh, on 05/05/2008, -0/+11That's why he pulled the moonie. He knew it would get to the front page of Digg. You've just been Rick Rolled..... with an arse.
- djonpw, on 05/05/2008, -0/+17It's Ben Affleck.
- RealmDown, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1I see the resemblance you did there.
- jameshickmott, on 05/05/2008, -0/+0No, its ben assfleck.
Reference to south park s05e10. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Eat_with_Your_ ...
- ashthediggr, on 05/05/2008, -5/+3This BMW X5 looks blue to me, yet the article goes on to say:
"The "mooning" man was snapped by the mobile camera as the BLACK BMW X5..."
Anyone see a black X5?- RealmDown, on 05/05/2008, -1/+3It's a lighter off-color shade of black.
- Tenlow, on 05/05/2008, -0/+4you're right. This must have been a different guy mooning a speed camera from a BMW X5.
- metamorfoza, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2You're right (dont know why you've been dugg down) Aparat from obvious, if you fire up the photoshop (or whatever) and use color picker all colors are in the shades of blue.
- choooke, on 05/05/2008, -0/+6I cant believe you actually checked it in photoshop.
- TFGeditor, on 05/05/2008, -1/+1BMW. Butt Mooning Welshman?
- bryceTHEhacker, on 05/05/2008, -9/+3I looked at this picture and thought "how can he do that while he's driving?"
Then I remembered "ah, the backwards UK cars. gotcha." - theholyraptor, on 05/05/2008, -1/+14So someone's watching those cameras 24/7 or watching recorded footage? What a waste of time and money. Oh wait, that's the definition of a government.
- Phearce, on 05/05/2008, -0/+6Yeah, I thought the cameras only caught speeding vehicles. Or at least, only the speeding vehicles would be reviewed for license plates.
The fact that they did review this picture when no crime was indicated means they could be reviewing every picture. But that's just paranoid. Right? - xaeon, on 05/05/2008, -0/+4It's a mobile speed camera, which means that someone is there operating it.
- heystoopid, on 05/05/2008, -1/+1Actually , these days due to extensive vandalism like the use of black paint on the camera lenses or other more destructive habits most fixed speed cameras now require additional security video cameras to monitor them as well and in one extreme case a number of video camera were needed to monitor the video security cameras too !
- Phearce, on 05/05/2008, -0/+6Yeah, I thought the cameras only caught speeding vehicles. Or at least, only the speeding vehicles would be reviewed for license plates.
- Sergej, on 05/05/2008, -0/+33"This prank could have been a real distraction from the driver and that is not something to laugh about."
And yet I laugh. - poptartrevival, on 05/05/2008, -0/+15Ass backwards! Hah! Of course, the official mentions children. A once distasteful act might lead this poor idget into being labeled a paedophile or some other *****.
- MaverickSmooth, on 05/05/2008, -0/+21Noble Sir, If you are reading this I salute you.
- Bromskloss, on 05/05/2008, -0/+17Why did the camera take a photo if they weren't speeding?
(Oh, and being all upset about the mooning passenger is ridiculous, I think. Seeing as how someone is apparently watching over him with a camera, for catching speeding cars or otherwise, he did just the right thing.) - Ingestre, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2Definately worth the fine!! every time!
- stickybench, on 05/05/2008, -3/+3I've just put an olive up my arse if anyone's interested.
- skinfrakki, on 05/05/2008, -6/+6Seems like a good example of British dental hygiene
- poidh, on 05/05/2008, -1/+3If you think ours it bad (and it can be), you should see the Poles. Toothless old crones every one of them.
- ramiro, on 05/05/2008, -1/+1By looking at the picture, I imagine that they don't floss!
- zcreem, on 05/05/2008, -1/+1You americans and your plastic white teeth, you do make me sm.. grin.
- RobotLeAwesome, on 05/05/2008, -2/+3Sucks that cameras in the UK are on all the time like that.
- JosephShell, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2Rule Brittania.
- xaeon, on 05/05/2008, -9/+2I know I might be in the minority here, but am I the only one who thinks that some action should be taken? Not for the public order offence (is anyone really offended by a bare bum these days?), but for the fact that this is quite clearly distracting the driver, he's not wearing a seatbelt, and the view from the left side of the car is going to be hindered.
If a child ran out into the road from the left side, would the driver be able to see them in time to avert an accident? I'd say probably not.- rancor01, on 05/05/2008, -0/+6>If a child ran out into the road from the left side...
Uncle Darwin takes care of kids like that..- CarnivalOfDust, on 05/05/2008, -1/+1Thank you for the best comment I've seen today. You win free tubes.
- choooke, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Lighten up tbh and stop hugging your highway code in bed at night.
- RedHerringHack, on 05/05/2008, -1/+1But there WAS no kid. I am sick of you WHAT IF morons.
- xaeon, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2That's not quite the point though, is it? He's distracting someone who is in charge of a 2 ton lump of metal travelling along at up to 60mph; he's a dick for doing it (regardless of whether he thought he was being funny), and should at least get a strong ticking off about it.
It's people like that who have helped the UK to turn into a camera state; people with absolutely no common sense at all.
- xaeon, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2That's not quite the point though, is it? He's distracting someone who is in charge of a 2 ton lump of metal travelling along at up to 60mph; he's a dick for doing it (regardless of whether he thought he was being funny), and should at least get a strong ticking off about it.
- rancor01, on 05/05/2008, -0/+6>If a child ran out into the road from the left side...
- slimnickyy, on 05/05/2008, -1/+2nice arse.
- dema, on 05/05/2008, -0/+19>"Not only is it disrespectful, but distasteful and offensive, particularly to children who may have been exposed to this nonsense."
Seriously, come the ***** on. How pathetic can people get with this "think of the children" crap. Giving the picture to the media will surely help! - passedoutghost, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2This man has lived my dream.
- heystoopid, on 05/05/2008, -1/+6Authorities over reaction is one of utter and absolute stupidity showing that morons exist in real life and are occupying the wrong senior positions in within the controlling authorities !
"Idiocracy" rocks !- RedHerringHack, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1They are going to charge him with everything they can, because he got one over on them and embareASSed them. THEY WILL NOT BE MADE A FOOL OF. The thing is that they made fools of themselves by releasing the photo.
- forklift, on 05/05/2008, -2/+1it's this kid.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=m9al-mpqXjc - browny1978, on 05/05/2008, -1/+4as the car hit the back of a park van, the passenger went arse first though the windscreen - that confused ambulance man, - had extensive trauma on his buttocks, but his face was not touched
- nebkiwi, on 05/05/2008, -0/+10"could be exposed to children" well they have exposed it to children by making the image public... it makes no sense..
- TeflonDom, on 05/05/2008, -0/+3Safety Campaigners need to shut the ***** up
- itchyfeet, on 05/05/2008, -1/+2In Australia, this is called chucking a brown-eye.
- MarsSentinel, on 05/05/2008, -1/+2Who and what the ***** are "safety campaigners"?!? I mean, huh? ***** cops. ***** politicians. ***** EVERYONE who lives to control other people and tell them what to do. Yay for Moon Man!
- beersnob, on 05/05/2008, -1/+1How TF are they going to identify the person who's doing the mooning in order to take action against him/her? They know who the car belongs to, but do you think the driver is going to identify his passenger? What are they going to do, line up all the driver's friends and have them drop trau for a comparison? LOL! And you Brits don't want to come to the US because our border agents might look at your laptop's hard drive...at least our police don't watch us 24/7!
- ubpsanity, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2But wait, how can they even talk to the driver? Yes, it may be my car, but I'd loaned it to a friend, you'll have to ask him who was in the passenger seat. Of course now I can't even remember who I loaned the car to.
(of course, I may have loaned the car to my friend so he could drive past the speed camera, and I could drop my trousers for the camera myself)
- ubpsanity, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2But wait, how can they even talk to the driver? Yes, it may be my car, but I'd loaned it to a friend, you'll have to ask him who was in the passenger seat. Of course now I can't even remember who I loaned the car to.
- john2kx, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2They're just mad that they got mooned.
- Velnich, on 05/05/2008, -0/+4Officials: "Whine whine whine, bitch bitch bitch."
- dickeywayne, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1We have a lot of cars in the U.S. that look something like that on the left side, too!
- username484767, on 05/05/2008, -0/+0nice!
- incudie, on 05/05/2008, -0/+0LMFAO You are made of win dude.
- Adelie, on 05/05/2008, -0/+3I think this was just Hillary showing off her new haircut.
- Norse, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2What an ass.
- Ricemanstm, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2And here I thought that Brits were nothing more than uptight blow hards still pissed about losing the colonies. I stand corrected...at least about the uptight blow hards part. :-)
- ATLien74, on 05/05/2008, -1/+2Can I ASS you a few questions?
- Disco1Stu, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Get this guy his medal
- nebkiwi, on 05/05/2008, -1/+3"The RIAA made me do it!"
- DaviDaviDaviD, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2***** the government. Who really gives a *****?
- MsArtGeek, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2Slow news day I guess...
- diggitygeek, on 05/05/2008, -1/+2Boy, that's a nasty crack in the windshield.
- keitarofujiwara, on 05/05/2008, -1/+1Dug for "moons".... ROFL
-
Show 51 - 55 of 55 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by