Marmora Man

In another thread ???? likened the EDF to a good pub. It set me thinking - what was the best pub I ever drank in? Of course I continue to seek out new pubs to update on the current best - but I have yet to beat "The Greyhound" in Staple Fitzpaine, Somerset. It was a serendipitous find - driving to the West Country in 1977 in the rain, late and delayed a girlfriend and I stopped at the first halfway decent looking spot and found "The Greyhound". It was being restored, builder debris surrounded it. The new owners wanted to create a new kind of pub cum restaurant with rooms (Gastro pubs hadn't been invented then). Slate floors, Somerset Bath stone walls, the beer was perfect, the wood fire warming, food was excellent and our room had a huge lumpy brass bed and, because the bathrooms hadn't been finished, we used the family bathroom - complete with children's bath toys. The landlord & wife were chuffed to have us as their first guests, brought out good wine to share and were brilliant hosts, for a few years we were regulars. Regrettably the owners eventually sold out to a local chain and the special charm departed with the old owners, but I still remember the place with affection. By its nature a "Best Pub" category must be personal as there can be no absolute measure of best pub. What are your best pubs?

M y niece - who works for Waitrose, assures me that East Dulwich is a target area. At one stage she alleges they briefly considered taking over the Morrisons in Peckham but decided it was too far from their client market. Not sure I believe the MOrrisons one - but them keeping an eye on ED seems logical - and Somerfields would be a good site.

SeanMacGabhann Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > you think? > > I don't believe MM is, by nature, all that > argumentative and as he says, the original post > from BN5 caught him at a bad time. > > Having expanded his points further (in what is > possibly one of the longest posts on here?) I > can't see any point in countering - we wouldn't be > bringing anything new to the table. He makes > points I disagree with but it's clear he has > thought about them and applied his own values and > good on him I say. It's not a if it is someone > taking a reactionary stance. > > Sometimes agreeing to disagree can be the best > course On this we agree! A pint of your choice awaits you next time I can get to an EDF gathering. Better to discuss, argue and then drink together. Besides we agree on so many other things - cooking, eating, drinking, Leonard Cohen and the power of rational debate.

John Arlott wrote a book "How to watch cricket" in 1983 - I would expect that someone has updated it. Try an Amazon search perhaps?

Sean Warning - this is a long, but I hope not ranting, post! Sometimes we will differ! I won?t try to answer all points made by all posters. It is clear I am in a minority in supporting BJ ? but in less of a minority in detesting KL as cynical, hypocritical, sly, manipulative, deceitful and self serving. Some may say I have just described the average politician but in KL the unpleasant side of politicians has, in my view, been distilled into a super refined essence of nastiness without, a far as I can see, any balancing humanity or genuine desire to make thing better. I agree many are supporting BJ as a ?get Ken out? option but I see BJ as a far more normal politician looking for a role as London mayor. I am sure BJ will be an effective and efficient London Mayor ? who will use the administration and public servants to manage effectively. I do not think he has grandiose plans; that seems to be KL's beat. BJ is undeniably intelligent ? but has perfected an image as a bumbling, foot in the mouth, upper class fool - for reasons unexplained. I suspect it is to do with the fact that there is no real place today in mainstream politics for the clever maverick, This image has allowed BJ to say certain things and support certain positions that would not otherwise be articulated. It is a handicap he has created for himself and he is now working to develop a serious persona that reflects more accurately his genuine ability as he can see that the Mayor of London role can be a perfect position for the intelligent maverick. I wouldn't want this to spoil a virtual friendship but will try to answer a few points. Sean Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- His own racist and sexist behaviour has been documented over many years. Documented? Or reported by The Mail/Evening Standard. I do read rather more widely than the Evening Standard and despise the Mail. I have friends / colleagues in the London Labour movement. Their descriptions of Ken's behaviour are too blunt for publication - but I do believe they speak the truth and that is the primary source of my comment here. "His kitchen cabinet has been deeply involved in at the least shoddy accounting and quite probably financial corruption." Allegedly - unless you have access to the files... Agree "allegedly" but I did qualify my statement - at the very least there has been shoddy accounting and auditing of public funds. "He has cynically used London funds to promote himself abroad with "London Embassies" across the globe. Again - allegedly - how does this stack up? How would any other mayor differ? Isn't that part of the job? The job is to run / manage the City effectively and efficiently. I cannot see what a London Embassy in Curacao, and elsewhere, does for London. "He is a directive rather than consultative politician." Probably true. But consultive politicians are accussed of flim-flammery and not having any convictions. I like someone who has a view, says what they are going to do, stands for election and then goes and does it without being watered down by committee Consultative doesn't necessarily mean flim flam - it would involve listening and analysing before taking action. KL holds consultations and then ignores them. He stands up and says what he?s going to and then doesn?t do much / most of it. He's not alone in this but I do not like it - especially in a role that is essentially one of local action / response to a very defined community. "His attitude to London Assembly members is arrogant and dismissive - and the language he uses when addressing them when not answering their legitimate questions is rude and bullying" examples? I have watched the LA in action (sad) - and also watched it on local TV news reports. I stand by what I said. "He has politicised TfL Not sure what your point is here? He has politicised? Gordon Brown using PPP with the tube was teh politicising. Ken (rightly) opposed it and was lambasted for doing so. Look where we are now You missed my point ? KL has, allegedly, involved TFL in anti BJ campaigning. This is politicizing public servants / service and not on. He has exploited the poor of Venuzuala and Hugo Chavez to provide subsidised fuel for London Transport to fund a reduction in fares for pensioners. London transport now runs more empty buses than I can ever recall in 30+ years of London living. He got rid of the Routemaster bus after saying "only a moron would want to get rid of this iconic vehicle" whoah!! Who is politicising now? The very idea that consumers, shoppers, mainstream political parties are NOT living of the backs of the poor in other countries apart from this one stunt of Ken's?!!!! Are you serious? Yep - I was probably over the top on this one - but KLs stunt was inappropriate for London and did nothing for its reputation. As for empty buses - I travel on a variety of routes and often at non-peak hours. I haven't seen a near-empty bus yet in the last 8 years. But let;'s say you are right and they are plentiful. Isn't that the very encouragement people need to get out of cars? I often hear "oh I would give up me car but the buses are full of people armpit to armpit" - well then, here you go, plenty of space! use 'em Our experience of London buses seem to be different. I have cycled past a 17 bus traffic jam on Waterloo Bridge composed primarily of 68s & 168s. Similar jams on Blackfriars of 63s and 363s. KL doesn?t seem to have got the balance right. But to take your points: "has invited hardcore Islamicists to London who call for killing of homosexuals, Jews and apostates, for the oppression of women as well as supporting terrorism against the UK." Yep he has - how does this make him different from any other leader who has to engage with people they may disagree with? Not that long ago thatcher was welcoming dictators to this country and recently defending him in the papers as well. At least Ken has spoken out against the beliefs held by the Islamicists There is a difference between international politics and London politics. KL appears to want London to have some form of identity separate from the rest of UK. His approach and style is not coordinated with national politics. It makes him different because he doesn?t speak out against the Islamicists and I haven?t seen the PM or others inviting Dr Qaradawi to speak. And finally - the main point that bugs me: "Whatever is against the grain of current othodoxy he's for it. " That is the description of most career politicians. It is the OPPOSITE of what Ken is. Say what you like about him (and you have) but he is consistent in his views and it is left to others to catch up. Back in the 80s when he was lambasted for speaking to the IRA and standing up for gay rights - he wasn't doing it to be oppositionist - he believed they were teh right things to do. The last 20 years have proved him right. And he hasn't suddenly started hating the Irish and gay communities I have lived in London, as an adult since 1972 ? in all that time KL has been opportunist, doing what?s best for him. He may believe in what he says (I don?t believe this by any means always the case) far more often he was keen to be seen as opposing current orthodoxy. His courting of the IRA in the 80?s did not help the peace process but delayed it ? by giving credibility and publicity to the terrorist actions (He wasn?t just talking to them he was glorifying them and their actions). He supported Peter Tatchell when supprting gay rights was unorthodox, now it is mainstream he brings the leader of Islamicist organisation the Muslim Brotherhood, Dr Qaradawi to London. He turned against Trevor Phillips, once a long term ally. SM 2nd Post: As a bus user and pedestrian I can say the single biggest thing that has impacted my life as a force for Good is the ocngestion charge. Bus journeys definitely were much quicker and the air noticeably better. The fact that congestion has crept up is a sign that people accept the charge (similar to tube fares by the way) and are using cars more again. Increase the charge again But BJ isn?t going to cancel the scheme ? merely the extension into West London. I do not believe taxing people off the streets is the right way ahead. "Plans to allow motorcyclists to use bus lanes." Not sure how this is necessarily good... Statistically safer for motor cyclists. Removal of road humps and timing traffic lights to favour pedestrians. fair enough - hardly revolutionary Reducing costs of the central political machine that KL is running, Absolutely bog-standard electioneering. Anyone standing is likely to say this Removing the "bendies" - a populist move and one which I as a cyclist, pedestrian and council tax payer applaud, I don't hate the bendies as much as some - I can see how disabled people might appreciate them, BJ has identified a Routemaster design that allows disabled access see (New Routemaster) Increasing police / CPSO's on the beat - again populist but sensible. again, standard-issue quote. Prediction: if elected it won't happen But to take the wider issues concerning the man: Here he is in the Telegraph in 2006: millions of seven- to 15-year-olds are hooked, especially boys, and it is time someone had the guts to stand up, cross the room and just say no to Nintendo. It is time to garrotte the Game Boy and paralyse the PlayStation, and it is about time, as a society, that we admitted the catastrophic effect these blasted gizmos are having on the literacy and the prospects of young males." He went on to say "We get on with our hedonistic 21st-century lives while in some other room the nippers are bleeping and zapping in speechless rapture, their passive faces washed in explosions and gore. They sit for so long that their souls seem to have been sucked down the cathode ray tube. You may agree but that's me he's talking about. I don't appreciate it. I do tend to agree and have battles with sons to go out cycling etc rather than sit in front of electronic games. As for Liverpudlians I'm not one of them - I shall let them comment on him saying: "that many Liverpudlians had a "deeply unattractive psyche". The whole water-melon smiles and picanninies quote re: black people speaks for itself despite his protestations He also supported Section 28 and opposed the minimum wage Right wing? I'd say so. Right of centre ? certainly. Foot in the mouth - certainly. Died in the wool racist, sexist etc ? NO! SM ? as I?ve said before. I?m primarily a libertarian, of light blue persuasion with light red edges. Like Keef, and others, I detest Ken Livingstone. I also detest unthinking criticism of politicians / politics ? engage in discussion / argument and dialogue by all means but BN5's post got me when I'm at my most sensitive - early in the morning with a long busy day ahead. We'll probably have to agree to differ - if we're both still posting in 18 months time perhaps we can discuss BJs first year as mayor?

I have just returned to find my post to BN5 generated quite a response! When I have time tomorrow I'll reply, unrantingly, in more detail.

BN5 - what is your evidence that BJ is a hard core right winger? BJ's policies include: Opposition to plans to extend the congestion charge zone - as punitive for small business and ineffective in terms of reducing congestion Plans to allow motorcyclists to use bus lanes. Removal of road humps and timing traffic lights to favour pedestrians. Reducing costs of the central political machine that KL is running, Removing the "bendies" - a populist move and one which I as a cyclist, pedestrian and council tax payer applaud, Increasing police / CPSO's on the beat - again populist but sensible. These are all London focussed policies. BJ's parlimentary career hasn't suggested any hard core right wing tendencies. The ability to put foot in mouth yes, intention to become another George Bush no. BJ is an intelligent and thoughtful man - yes he is a conservative, but to me hard core right wing mean BNP and the like, not simply being a Tory. KL on the other hand is a down and dirty Left Wing politician rooted in the past glories of class war and activism. Whatever is against the grain of current othodoxy - he's for it. He still believes that Fidel Castro is a "hero of the left" and has been a force for the good of Cuba - which is a country still living in the poverty and oppression of Communism 20 years after the Berlin Wall fell. He has invited hardcore Islamicists to London who call for killing of homosexuals, Jews and apostates, for the oppression of women as well as supporting terrorism against the UK. His own racist and sexist behaviour has been documented over many years. His kitchen cabinet has been deeply involved in at the least shoddy accounting and quite probably financial corruption. He has cynically used London funds to promote himself abroad with "London Embassies" across the globe, his carbon footprint must be a nightmare. He is a directive rather than consultative politician. His attitude to London Assembly members is arrogant and dismissive - and the language he uses when addressing them when not answering their legitimate questions is rude and bullying He has politicised TfL - that's Peter Hendy's problem - KL has implicated him in efforts to counter BJ's arguments. Something unforgiveable in a public servant - but not in KL's world of politics. He has exploited the poor of Venuzuala and Hugo Chavez to provide subsidised fuel for London Transport to fund a reduction in fares for pensioners. London transport now runs more empty buses than I can ever recall in 30+ years of London living. He got rid of the Routemaster bus after saying "only a moron would want to get rid of this iconic vehicle" I can think of little or nothing that KL has done to improve the lot of Londoners and look forward to a change of Mayor on May 1. PS: The original post "smelt" of a viral marketing campaign against BJ to me - but maybe I'm becoming too cynical? Edited for spelling and final comment re viral marketing

SteveT Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Easy peasy jumpinjack, full heat under the pan add > a little oil and when it smokes drop in the steak > and let it spit fat spray all over the hob unless > you have a gauze wire thingy to put on to the pan. > When 2 minutes have passed turn down the heat to > about half wait 1 minute and turn the heat full > on, turn the steak with your fork let it spit hot > fat again and smoke the kitchen out and in a > minute or two, remove and eat. It will be burned > both sides and remain red in the middle. > The hob will need hosing down the kitchen and your > clothes will now stink of burnt steak and you will > have to open the window to see, but you will eat > like a king. Good man;-) Agree the cooking technique but you need a good steak to start with - my preference being for an aged (30+ days) well marbled sirloin. Anything that was once wrapped in cling film and sold by a supermarket won't respond too well. Bye the bye - my sister, a professional chef gave me the following tip to test for "doneness": Put tip of little finger and thumb together and press ball of thumb - this is how a well done steak feels. Ring finger & thumb - ball of thumb feels like medium steak Next finger & thumb - ball feels like medium / rare First finger & thumb - ball feels like rare / blue

Heaven Black Pudding is at the top of my list of loves - in all its varieties but possibly those from Yorkshire are best. Steak & Kidney pudding Bacon sandwich - smoked streaky bacon cooked crispy in decent buttered bread - eaten in the early morning and open air or at sea. Hell I thought there were very few food items I would refuse absolutely, tho' david carnell has given me food for thought there. Badly cooked food of all types Gristley meat (school dinners in the 50's) Cold over cooked / burnt fried eggs.

I've always thought it would make a great location for a very good restaurant - looking over Peckham Rye it has a fantastic location. AS snorky has noted it would have a low footfall - so needs to be a "destination" place, somewhere people will travel to experience - Michelin stars and the like

Asset Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's just not cricket is it You can't get the ball to spin - there's not enough rough - and the boundary's too short. Spectator's bar is good tho'

Lozzyloz - thanks. I knew I'd seen it but couldn't find it. I'm hoping a structural engineer's survey will substantiate my position that the house is properly underpinned and reduce my insurance

Somewhere there was an earlier EDF thread about how to reduce House Insurance premiums by getting a building surveyor to report on underpinning works completed. As my premium is huge and likely to rise still further I want to investigate this, but can't find the thread. Any advice gratefully received.

Further to PGC's reminder that Arsenal are a south London team - it reminds me that my great grandfather moved from Birmingham to work at Woolwich Arsenal. He was noted in the 1867 census in Brum as a "Gun Barrel Grinder" and was presumably an Arsenal football supporter too, giving my son's enthusiasm for them even more legitimacy - despite being born in Barnstaple.

Tonight I'm cooking - all from Lordship Lane. Steak (William Rose), mushrooms, spicy sweet potato wedges, steamed purple broccoli (Pretty Traditional), cheese (Cheese Block) and a Zinfandel from Green & Blue. Also made some lemon curd this afternoon - lemons & sugar from SMBS, to blow away rainy Sunday blues.

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Why am I not surprised East Dulwich is teeming > with Arsenal supporters..... What's wrong with that? Tickets I've been seeking are for my son who loves football and "inherited" his fandom of Arsenal from his grandfather who's been following them since 1932, so between them they've clocked up 80+ years of support. (I don't "get" football but do watch now I have an active supporter / player who can explain the offside [and other] rules to me - tho' today's offside decision against Arsenal in the game was clearly wrong!!)

I now deliberately shop for as much as I can in Lordship Lane or the immediate surrounding area. I, usually, use a canvas bag for shopping not plastic bags. I have used and supported businesses promoted by the forum. Like others I wonder whether I am speaking to, sitting next to, passing in the street, drinking / eating next to or buying goods from EDF"ers" - who's going to make a discreet lapel badge for us?

legalbeagle Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Green & Blue are opening again tonight - perhaps > those of you who are fans can pop in for a drink > to show them some support and get them back up and > running quickly? Will do - expect to be there around 8.

*Bob* Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "The Poor" > > It doesn't seem to matter how poor 'the poor' are: > they always seem to be able to budget for Sky and > a large-ish television. The Government definition of poverty is having an income of less than 60% of the median income. On this measure, the proportion of the UK population defined as in poverty is roughly one in five. (For those not mathematically inclined the median is the point at which 50% of any sample is above the median and 50% is below it). In UK I believe the median income is about ?23,000 and in London about ?27,000. On this measure it means not only that "The Poor" will always be with us (unless the range of incomes becomes so tight that, roughly, the highest income is no more than twice the lowest income) but also that as the general population becomes wealthier so the level at which poverty is defined will move upwards and "The Poor" will be able to afford what previous generations would have considered unobtainable luxuries. If, controversially, poverty were measured on a more absolute, rather than relative, scale then perhaps poverty could be eradicated. Difficulty is to devise a sensible absolute measure. Is it: a. Sufficient household income to clothe, feed and house a family in relative comfort (insulated accommodation offering warmth, H & C running water, bathroom & WC, and enough bedrooms such that no one has to share with more than one other person) with a small sum left over to allow a choice of "frivolities" such as beer, Sky movies, TV, fags or an occasional cheap holiday? b. Sufficient income clothe a family in charity shop clothing and prevent them from starving or freezing to death. (The Scrooge definition) c. Something else - either softer or harsher according to preferences. I would be in favour of something close to a. above as on that basis once a family gets beyond having to choose between the "frivolities" then they are out of poverty - not rich but off the breadline.

Brendan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Who's Michael Pienaar? TV Journalist - mostly politics.

does Michael Pienaar in Si Mangia last night count as a "famous" sighting? BTW - Si Mangia w s bustling yet maintaining usual value for money standards. 25 pounds for swift pasta & wine for two.

I've noticed this too. I have idly thought about complaining and then done nothing. I'll follow up with the bus company.

tThis proves thwee Labour gov't has run out steam. Utter tosh, completely barking. Any right minded individual would reject this as totally not British.

Peckhamgatecrasher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 1. Absolutely not. > > 2. Absolutely not. > > 3. not needed This is a very absolut-ist position and differs from the bulk of postings. iI'd be interested to hear and understand your reasoning .

I'd also add that, if you have the time, the whole of Lordship Lane provides almost all the food stuffs available in Sainsburys et al but at better value (quality & price) than most supermarkets. Importantly shopping this way is more fun, brings you into the local community and supports many small businesses. Once the butcher, baker and greengrocer knows you you'll get friendly service and good advice. Stick to the supermarkets for the bulk boring buys - washing powder, toilet rolls etc. I'd agree the area is safe and friendly - plus lots of good pubs and eateries.