Our host has made a few posts about changing social and legal contexts and how events can thereby be re-characterised post facto. The idea set me thinking.

In the mid 90s, a new page 3 girl came on the scene, named Linsey Dawn Mckenzie. The Daily Sport (great paper) did a countdown to her 16th birthday with her removing another bit of school uniform each week until her 16th birthday. On the happy day, she got her boobs out and very nice they were too.

Shortly afterwards, she did a video of her 16 year old self cavorting topless in various ways. Many, including me, bought a copy. All this was perfectly legal at the time.

In the following years, the law changed, making the 16/17 yr old Linsey's pictures illegal. Presumably the back issues in the Sport's archive are now held illegally, or must have been destroyed. The video is no longer on sale and any VHS cassettes that survive are possessed illegally.

But here's the thing. Material from that first video is already out there online, available for those can identify it from memory. Someone unfamiliar with Linsey's career wouldn't be able to tell the difference between her 16 year old self and later videos. And since the internet is a global resource, covering many different jurisdictions, her early video may well be hosted entirely legally in many places.

So what's the point of this criminalisation? If I find and watch this early video, am I abusing Linsey in the 90s, or now? And let me throw another spanner in the works. I met her about 6 years ago and said how much I'd enjoyed her whole career from the very start. Any favourites? she asked. Your first video, I replied, and she told me how glad she was that I'd enjoyed it.

LDM has all the necessary attributes and skills to run our country - and to show us what made Britain great.

And to think people ridiculed the Sport; papers like it (Sun/Mirror) even told/tell us how to vote.

Ms LDM's involvement in those political debates is legendary - and her reappearance (in primetime politics), inevitable.

this sounds like a case for the intrepid investigative journalist Mark Williams-Thomas (know affectionately as Mary Whitehouse-Thomas)

In that crazy hazy, yet still half sane 1990s era. Pre-Y2K Sarah Payne tragedy and rabid Rupe's insane pedo riots, 15 yrs ago this month.

This lusty hetero hack visited soft porn baron Dave Sullivan's Sport office, ostensibly on Randall type research. The pretty young receptionist asked, "Do you like the Sunday/Daily Sport?"

Insider naturally replied, "Yes, except they contain too much sport! Plus, my corner shop sells out the Sport far too early each day, with kids buying them up en route to school!"

Post the sickening very rare young Sarah's sex murder, Insider phoned the Sport Ed. Tony Livesey (now bent-Beeb R5.Live fave) and personally asked, "I hope you're not going to bow to so called public pressure and stop your hugely popular 'school uniform, wide eyed, wide legs, white pants, front pages'? You know that 99.9% of schoolgirl fans, including many boys and dads, wouldn't harm a fly let alone young girls!"

Brave Burnley fan sad sport Tone honestly replied, "We know mate, but sorry that's all got to go now, after these so called pedo riots."

Tone moved on to bent-Beeb infamy, and so did Dave now peddling soccer porn to sad 'Ammers fans, "Cum on U Irons in O's cuntry!" (West Ham now in Leyton Orient land - WTF?!)

search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0LEVyMDOtJ...&fr=dss_yset_chr


search.yahoo.com/search?p=Sunday+Sport+p...&fr=dss_yset_chr

images.search.yahoo.com/search/images;_y...jpg&action=click

the fact that Britain's biggest porn barons along with lap dance king Peter Stringfellow are now Tory Party insiders sort of sums up the UK of today.

Don't get me wrong, I can dance in the gutter along with the best and loved Soho as it was . Now it's absolutely ghastly.