[urlhttp://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/07/24/claire-perry-porn-hack_n_3643153.html?utm_hp_ref=uk[/url

Oh dear, the MP who lead a high profile campaign and eventually got the ear of the PM and his decision to nanny us all into a life of purity, seems to have major problems in deciding what is a live web site and what is a captured image on a twitter feed.

She also appears not to be aware that her parliamentary privilege doesn't extend to Twitter which, believe it or not, is on the big bad world and not just restricted to The House.

I expect that she might be making a humble apology soon but won't hold my breath over the admission that she doesn't really understand how this internet thing works anyway.

She's a twit.

Mind, as for David Cameron's act of soundbite rhetoric, which delighted that smut-peddling, sleazy rag, the [iDaily Mail[/i ...

But he's got to be seen to be standing up to Google, not asking them for their taxes mind, just grand standing.

Any 13 year old will get around his idiot proposals in under a minute.

To be fair, if you've ever had the misfortune to hear her being interviewed or perform on QT you come to the rapid conclusion that she doesn't understand a lot about anything really.

Good old Claire "as a mum" Perry, how she blagged a gig as Cameron's very own Net Nanny is further testament to just how bad he is at picking people.

As to the proposals, how long before people are blocked from seeking a therapist because a search engine views it as "the rapist" or the people of Shorpe find themselves isolated from the digital world?

Has anyone got any ideas what the Conservative Party x factor is in drawing the female intellectual elite to the fore?

Mensch
Perry
Patel
Dorries
Warsi

It's a staggeringly impressive list.

They could all make a mean cup of tea

One believes that mebbe even pushing boat out a tad.

Mad Nad is too busy fuming about £3000 to have anything to do with this, she is boycotting any personal expenses in protest. that'll learn 'em.

Ridiculous thing to do. The ruling as they are planning on implementing it will cause more divorces than anything going forward. My other half has already asked "Are you going to be asking for it eh?" in a room full of woman. They all turned to their partners and did the same, with screwed up faces. They then went on about how they are going to find out, whether they'll be written to by the ISP or whether they'll have to use an online portal to check. The men all sat round discussing the prices of wireless dongles.

If they somehow manage to implement it well enough, all it will do is drive porn and sexual discovery back into the bushes. I'm sure all the 30+ year old men on here remember flicking through magazines in the bushes. That has died out apparently since the internet started.

Mr Cameron seems to be being driven by child abuse campaigners on this. That is a separate issue entirely. Child porn isn't on specific websites tagged as such, it's all done behind the scenes so it's harder to find. He's confusing images of children with adults accessing legal material, two entirely different things. If he's worried about kids accessing unsuitable material he'll have to have patrols in the bushes as well. You simply cannot stop kids finding it, it's not possible. So why go to such great lengths?

I just don't see what possible benefit this brings to anyone. It's going to cost the tax payer and the ISPs tens of millions and it won't stop a single child being abused. The newsagents are likely to be pleased though.

In a spiteful way it will be quite good in a way though.


The yoof of today have it far too bloody easy.

We had to wait expectantly for a flash of t!t in a Hammer horror vampire movie or the red triangle on a C4 film before being able to knock one out.

No it won't, it'll cost anyone who has an internet connection, the consumer will foot the bill.