If I had a kid the first thing I'd do to any PC's would be to remove messenger, ICQ, etc. It's nutbag city in cyberspace

If my parents removed messenger I would just use online messenger. How cruel would that be! If the kid is dumb enough to meet someone online then :Z

Body found in school air-conditioning duct
By staff writers
May 26, 2007 07:48am


A SCHOOL in Phoenix was evacuated after a plumber, investigating a foul smell in the cafeteria, found the body of a man who apparently became stuck in an air-conditioning duct while trying to break in.

Roosevelt School District Superintendent Mark Dowling said Sierra Vista Elementary School was evacuated today after the body was found in the roof space, the Associated Press reported.

It was not known how long the body had been there.

"Obviously because of the smell, there are indications that he had been there for some time,'' said police spokesman Sergeant Andy Hill.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21796850-1702,00.html

Maddy suspect details released

From correspondents in Praia de Luz, Portugal

May 26, 2007 03:20am
Article from: Reuters

Police looking for white male, 35-40 years old
Parents defend leaving Maddy for first time
Were checking on her "every half-hour"

PORTUGUESE police hunting for missing British child Madeleine McCann last night issued their first detailed description of a possible suspect.

He was seen walking in the area of Praia da Luz at around 9.30pm on the night that the four-year-old was snatched from her bed in a holiday complex in the resort three weeks ago.

Police described him as white, approximately 35 to 40 years old, of medium build and 176 centimetres tall.

They said he was wearing a dark jacket, light beige trousers and dark shoes.

The Policia Judiciaria said the man was seen "carrying a child or an object that could have been taken as a child".

Chief Inspector Olegario Sousa urged anyone who had seen the man to come forward.

He said witnesses were interviewed yesterday and the day before.

The information came to light as Madeleine's parents said they were convinced she was still alive and vowed never to abandon the search for her.

In formal interviews with British TV channels for the first time since their daughter disappeared on May 3, Kate and Gerry McCann defended their decision to leave her unguarded while they had dinner.

But they said the guilt would always be with them.

“If anything really bad had happened we would have found her by now,” Gerry McCann told BBC television.

“I'm confident and believe strongly that we will find her. It's not hard to continue believing that. She's our daughter and we love her more than anyone can possibly imagine.

“The alternative would be giving up and we will not give up our search.”

Britain has been gripped by the McCann's tragedy and the photograph of the blonde-haired, wide-eyed child has rarely been off the front pages of British newspapers since her abduction.

She was snatched in the evening from a holiday resort apartment as her parents ate at a tapas bar about 100m away, in sight of the apartment.

They said they were checking on her every half hour.

The parents, both medics, said they would remain in Portugal until Madeleine was found and said they believed the public held the key to finding her.

Supporters of the family, who have flown out to Portugal to help them in the search, have printed and distributed thousands of posters of the child and urged anyone who might have any information to come forward.

“We believe it's the public that holds the key to this,” said Gerry McCann.

“Someone knows something. We would urge anyone who knows anything to come forward ... if they haven't already done so.”

Following the disappearance, British newspapers were full of debate about whether the parents had done the right thing by leaving the children alone.

“I think at worse we were naive,” Kate McCann told Sky television.

“We are very responsible parents.”

Her husband added: “For us it really wouldn't be any much different to having dinner in your garden in the proximity of the location.”

He told the BBC: “If you thought for a minute that someone could abduct your child, of course you wouldn't have left them.”

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21796827-2,00.html

The flight attendant who apparently got friendly with Ralph Fiennes in the air is getting more than he 15 minutes of fame!
Hostie Lisa's night work
Sydney Confidential
May 26, 2007 12:00

HER personal service of actor Ralph Fiennes scored her the sack at Qantas, but ex-flight attendant Lisa Robertson must be up for employee of the month at her new workplace.
Confidential can reveal Robertson was accepting personal bookings to meet with men after 9pm at a western Sydney bordello last night.

That's dedication, given a spokeswoman for The Site at Granville – which is trading off her "mile high club" notoriety – said Robertson was employed for "promotions and marketing" and not as a "working lady".

We know some brainstorming sessions over mailouts and ad campaigns can take time, but surely scheduling meetings after 9pm is beyond the normal call of duty for a one-time trolley dolly?

Confidential understands a "promotions and marketing" session with Robertson can be negotiated upwards of $285 an hour, every Friday and Saturday night.

The brothel is believed to have paid the standard rate of about $2400 to advertise its celebrity employee in The Daily Telegraph's personal classified section this week.

Featuring the image of a jet and the message "Lisa recommends the Mile High Club" the ads were part of a quirky way to up trade, The Site spokeswoman said.

"We're trying to think outside the square in how we promote the business and this has had a great response so far."

In one of her many tell-all interviews in the wake of the on-board tryst with Fiennes, Robertson claimed she had previously earned as much as $2000 a night working as a high-class Sydney prostitute.

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,21793796-5006002,00.html

Emu chase ends in tragedy
From correspondents in London
May 25, 2007 06:41am
AN EMU has been shot dead after a cross-border chase by police in Europe this week.

The Australian native was first spotted in the German town of Grenzach-Wyhlen near the Swiss border.

"We are trying to find out how it got here in the first place," a German police spokesman said.

"No bird farms or zoos in the area say they are missing an emu. It is a mystery."

Police tried to capture the emu, but it dashed away, prompting an international operation involving both German and Swiss police.

The police gave chase in parol cars for hours but were no match for the agile fugitive, which darted down narrow alleyways and made tight turns.

Vets and staff from local zoos were called in to help, before the German police called upon their Swiss counterparts.

The emu was clocked at speeds up to 50km/h, with police resorting to roadblocks, while the vets were unsuccessful in their attempts to sedate the bird with tranquiliser darts.

Finally a group of local hunters were called in, and shot the emu dead.

"Basel is a larger place than Grenzach-Wyhlen, and they had more officers available to help in the hunt for the emu," the German police spokesman said.

"In the end though it was still not enough and we had to shoot the bird."

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21791621-13762,00.html

Four shot, one dead
June 02, 2007 07:30am

AT least four people were shot - and one killed - at an Adelaide nightclub this morning.

The shooting happened at The Tonic nightclub, Light Square, just after 4.30am.

Police, who are still investigating the shooting, say it may have involved members of a bikie gang.

It is believed at least four people have been taken to the Royal Adelaide Hospital.

Further details to follow.

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,21836148-5006301,00.html

Everyday lately the news has been at least ONE murder reported in Australia. What is Australia coming to?

Hard fight over Viagra oysters
By Samantha Williams
June 02, 2007 12:00

A NSW oyster farmer has been feeding his crop Viagra to make the ultimate aphrodisiac - but now the drug's maker is threatening to take him to court.

George May began lacing his oysters with the anti-impotence drug in a bid to sell them to overseas customers.

Marketing them as Viagra Oysters, he says the process not only boosts the aphrodisiac qualities of the shellfish but there is also a potential Asian market of up to $300 million.

The unusual additive has, however, landed the farmer in hot water with pharmaceutical company Phizer and state food authorities.

Food Safety NSW says Mr May's conduct is illegal and breaches the NSW shellfish program under the food act.

Pfizer has also threatened to take legal action because Viagra Oysters is a trademark violation.

Mr May, who has patented the process, is adamant he will continue harvesting the oysters and transferring them to tanks full of crushed Viagra because there is an overseas market.

"We realise we will not be able to sell them in Australia but we haven't been told we can't harvest them here despite a number of conversations with the food authority," Mr May said.

"Other countries have different regulations so we will be selling overseas.

"I'm happy to change the name but they are going to have a real David and Goliath battle if they want me to stop."

The 59-year-old came up with the idea because of the threat of impotence after having prostate cancer surgery this year.

"It really works, it's sex in a can," he said.

He has already produced 10,000 oysters, which he eats and gives away to friends.

But food authorities and health groups are concerned, saying the drug is contaminating the oysters.

"There are tight regulations on oysters in NSW so they are safe. They can't add Viagra to oysters - it is no allowed, it's up to doctors to prescribe Viagra," a Food Safety NSW spokesman said.

"Even giving it away is illegal as it is a form of marketing to induce a sale."

A Pfizer spokesman said the global company was not happy about its product being used that way. He added a lawsuit was an option.

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,21835366-5001021,00.html

Did he HAVE to use oysters? I don't think a lot of people would feel so turned on when their partners reek of oysters.

Nice concept though.

A good oyster doesn't make your breath smell! A good oyster tastes like fresh ocean/salt water. Cos Lettuce is a natural aphrodesiac, apparently, and is less expensive than oysters

Quoted from Paula

Four shot, one dead
June 02, 2007 07:30am

AT least four people were shot - and one killed - at an Adelaide nightclub this morning.

The shooting happened at The Tonic nightclub, Light Square, just after 4.30am.

Police, who are still investigating the shooting, say it may have involved members of a bikie gang.

It is believed at least four people have been taken to the Royal Adelaide Hospital.

Further details to follow.

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,21836148-5006301,00.html

Update...

Four shot, two critical
June 02, 2007 07:30am

TWO men are in a critical condition in hospital after a shooting outside an Adelaide nightclub early today. Four men were wounded in the shooting attack outside the Tonic nightclub in Light Square in Adelaide's CBD just after 4.30am.

Police are investigating whether members of a motorcycle gang may have been involved.

The four men with gunshot wounds were taken to the Royal Adelaide Hospital. A hospital spokeswoman said two of them were in a critical condition.

South Australian police spokesman Senior Constable Tim Dodds said earlier that three of the men were "okay" but one was believed to be in a serious condition.

The ages of the men were unknown.

"It certainly happened out the front of the nightclub for whatever reason. They're investigating that now," Sen Const Dodds said.

Police will hold a media conference this afternoon.


http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,21836148-5006301,00.html

'Hands-free' phones illegal
SEAN FEWSTER, COLIN JAMES
June 02, 2007 12:15am

THE SA Supreme Court has ruled using hands-free phones while driving is an offence, prompting a review of national road rules.

Justice Tom Gray this week threw out an appeal by roofing contractor Mark Patrick Burns, who had been fined for answering a call through his Bluetooth wireless connection.
The controversial decision has brought to a head confusion over the interpretation of the Australian Road Rules, which ban the use of hand-held phones in cars but were believed by motorists not to include hands-free sets.

Mr Burns, 45, of Collinswood, was caught by a police officer as he pressed a button on his phone and began talking while stopped at traffic lights.

"When it happened, I thought the cop was just having a bad day," he said yesterday.

"My phone is next to my electric window buttons . . . I said to the cop: `What's the difference between me pushing my phone and putting down the window?'

"He said: `It's not illegal to put down your window'."

In his judgment, Justice Gray said Burns had breached federal law by:

DIVERTING his attention from the road.

LOOKING at his phone's caller ID display.

REMOVING one hand from the steering wheel.

PRESSING the phone's buttons with his thumb.

"If, at any time, it is not held in the hand, (a phone) does not lose its character as a hand-held mobile phone," Justice Gray said. "In the same way, a pocket calculator is still a pocket calculator, even when it is not placed in the pocket.

"It is clear that the legislature intended to prohibit any ordinary use of a hand-held mobile phone.

"This does not mean (it) must be held in the hand at the time of use."

Australian Road Rule No. 300 says a driver "must not use a hand-held mobile phone" when a vehicle is moving, or is stationary "but not parked".

The National Transport Commission is seeking to change rule 300 due to "considerable conjecture" in all states "over what constitutes a hand-held mobile phone". A spokesman said: "The intention (of the rule) was to ban a mobile phone that was held in the hand of the driver, not a mobile phone in a cradle."

Tradesmen yesterday labelled the court's ruling "ludicrous".

Plumbing Industry Association of SA marketing and membership manager Paul Worthington said change was needed.

"We do not endorse the use of hand-held phones while driving but if you've gone to the expense of buying an in-car set or an earpiece, you're being a responsible road user," he said.

"Will the Government now make smoking, changing the radio station, adjusting an iPod, and eating in a car illegal?

"We feel it's ludicrous to go down that path."

Mr Burns was found guilty, but not convicted, in the Adelaide Magistrates Court of using a mobile phone while driving on Richmond Rd, Marleston, on March 6 last year.

He was found guilty of an offence because he "did not have both hands available for control of a vehicle".

Mr Burns was given a $180 fine and three demerit points, but he says the points were withdrawn by the Magistrates Court.

He said the law "doesn't make sense".

"No one really knows any more where they stand when they use their phone," he said.

"You see taxi drivers pushing their computer thing while they drive, and police using their computers on the road – what's the difference?

"It's just ridiculous to spend $600 to get Bluetooth fitted and then get pulled over and booked for that, as well."

The only avenue of appeal for Mr Burns would be to the High Court. Motor Accident Commission chairman Roger Cook said he understood the reasons for the decision.

"It's been proven that both hand-held and hands-free mobiles are dangerous – that's a fact," he said.

"But obviously, hands-free phones are less dangerous, and we've encouraged people to use them where possible.

"Unfortunately, neither is perfect.

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,21834573-5006301,00.html

Pulling over suddenly to answer a mobile phone is just as dangerous.  I nearly collided with a car that did just this, I pulled up to see if she was ok and she was just chatting on her phone.
They should be switched off while the vehicle is in motion...........

Harking back to hands free phones, if that is the case, then drivers should not speak to passengers or even HAVE passengers because they could distract the driver and also cause an accident. There should be no sound system in the cars either because they too will distract the driver
If a phone call can distract the driver then numerous other things inside the car can also. I must admit to seeing people who can't keep their eyes on the road and speak to a passenger without looking at the passenger! Good grief! It's not hard to do two things at once but some people cannot and therefore are a danger on the roads.
Lawnbowler.... any sensible person would wait until it was safe to pull over and return the call OR have their phone on silent with message bank on!

Quoted from SuziH

Harking back to hands free phones, if that is the case, then drivers should not speak to passengers or even HAVE passengers because they could distract the driver and also cause an accident. There should be no sound system in the cars either because they too will distract the driver
If a phone call can distract the driver then numerous other things inside the car can also. I must admit to seeing people who can't keep their eyes on the road and speak to a passenger without looking at the passenger! Good grief! It's not hard to do two things at once but some people cannot and therefore are a danger on the roads.
Lawnbowler.... any sensible person would wait until it was safe to pull over and return the call OR have their phone on silent with message bank on!

True, Yeah good points. If thats the case drivers should not eat or smoke, the question is where to draw the line?

There's no excuse
June 03, 2007 12:00am

UNTIL last weekend, David Lutteral was a knockabout radio personality with a nice line in cheeky patter.
But since a session at a Brisbane bar last Sunday evening ended with "Luttsy" spending time in intensive care, he has become the catalyst for a public debate about the acceptance of violence in today's society.

When the Nova FM announcer woke up with a broken skull and no memory of how he got it, the reaction was one of horror and sympathy.

But that changed as it emerged that the beating had been delivered by the male friend of a young woman who had been the subject of persistent and unwanted advances by Lutteral. In the eyes of some, at least, Luttsy got what he was asking for.

But that is not a justification for a vicious assault and nor should his embarrassment deny justice being served on his attacker. After all, one punch can kill.

http://www.news.com.au/sundaymail/story/0,23739,21836787-5007190,00.html

I agree there is no excuse for violence but this guy actually harassed the two women, one in particular to the point that they felt the need to call a couple of male friends to escort them out of the night spot. Luttsy waited a few minutes before asking the bouncer/doorman which direction the group had gone and followed them, initiating a confrontation between himself and the group where one of the men punched him, once, and he went down for the count. If Lutteral had been sensible and not followed them none of this would of happened, if Lutteral had heeded the girl's wishes to be left alone, none of this would of happened! I am not saying he deserves what he got but he has proven he is an idiot by his actions and a yobbo to boot. His girlfriend should be putting this moron on notice for making a nuisance of himself with other women. Lutteral then had the hide on Monday in the paper to say it was an 'unprovoked attack by strangers on a Brisbane Street' and that Brisbane is not a safe place to be after dark. When the truth came out he stated he would not be pressing charges. Gulty much, Luttsy?

Well P plate drivers in some states are having passenger restrictions imposed on them because they are a proven distraction. But I get your point where does it end.

It does raise a thorny point that is being raised around the world, and that is that modern cars are now being crammed with lots of devices and displays that do distract drivers, and there has been a statistically verifiable increase in accidents because of all these devices and information vying for the drivers attention.