Marmora Man

Reg Smeeton Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > By the way, I'm not sure what I've done to deserve > to be addressed as "Rev". > > Yours > > Reg. Reg, put it down to iPhone fingers (v is just below g on the keyboard). MM

Rev, Don't pass the buck - ring, write or email Southwark and make your comment / complaint. I agree entirely with the thrust of your argument - but not the lack of action.

Blah, the Lounge has been the place for rational and considered debate in the past and I look forward to it becoming so again. On the whole this debate has progressed from a "hands wringing" "isn't it awful" stance to providing some more considered opinions. That's as it should be. There are also plenty of witty and intelligent threads set up in the Lounge for the amusement of all. Room for everyone I think. My only disappointment in recent times has been the emergence of of more puerile, kindergarden humour hijacking some seriously inclined threads. This seems to me to be impolite. Those that want to play that way should stick to the sand and water trays.

charliecharlie Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > hhmmmmmm? > Elizabeth Bennett has cropped up twice now, I > always thought she came across as a wee bit smug > and rather prim... not two of my favorite > characteristics, but each to there own! But also witty, self knowing, flirtatious and intelligent. A sexy combination.

A footnote to the "Glorious Revolution" of 1688 - there was one other later, but less successful, invasion that took place in 1797, in South Wales and was routed, mostly, by Welsh women whose traditional hats were mistaken by the French for those of British Grenadiers. Invasion

Gallinello, I find your argument simplistic and unpersuasive. 1. At different periods of history different countries have held sway over different parts of the globe. Britain was just one of the last in the last few decades - before the US and USSR took up the baton of imperial influence. It can be argued that Britain's "stewardship" of many of the countries was positive and beneficial, in the light of its time, and certainly when compared with the actions of its European imperial rivals such as Germany, France, Belgium and the Netherlands. Hindsight history - viewing previous centuries and people from the perspective of 21st century culture and mores - is a dangerous game. 2. Britain's flags are not unique emblems of colonialism and imperialism - they have proud links to the battle against fascism in the 20th century and the battle against slavery in the 19th century. 3. Britain was last a true colonial power immediately prior to the 2nd World War. Many "colonial" members of that empire joined Britain in its fight against fascism. 4. In most cases Britain took positive action to dispose of the Empire rather than hang on until rebellions & civil wars lost it. (cf: Belgian Congo, Vietnam, Indonesia etc). I would agree that it was not a totally voluntary action - being as much the result of politics and economics as of altruism and a commitment to self determination, but it was done nevertheless and done in a way that, mostly, handed over power in as orderly a fashion as was possible. Many previously British Empire nations have strong legacies of effective legal, educational and political systems built on the years of Britain's rule. For reasons it is difficult to fathom the sub Sahara nations have not managed the transition as effectively. 5. I am from "around here" - if you mean London and also if you mean UK. I have travelled extensively around the world and seen many wealthy and impoverished countries. In my experience being British usually guarantees a friendly welcome almost everywhere - the last occasion I discovered this was in Aleppo & Damascus last year in Syria. To somehow link mindless BNP faux patriotism and individuals natural fear of fascism to a unique and broadly positive period of Britain's history is, as I said, simplistic and unpersuasive.

Tony.London Suburbs Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Why have The Socialists done so poorly throughout > Europe in these European Elections? Perhaps people are beginning to recognise that a suprastate is not exactly what they want or need. Maybe we can start to reverse direction and dismantle some of the more absurd policies. However, I'm more inclined to believe it's just apathy rather than a change of mind.

George Emerson or Lucy Honeychurch?

Those that know of my background have asked me about life in a submarine. There is a new play on at the Young Vic - until 27th June. The play KURSK is a very realistic representation of life in a nuclear submarine. It's also a brilliant piece of theatre in terms of the set and the audience interaction - as the action takes place around the audience as they sit, stand and lean on the various parts of the submarine. Recommend you give it try if at all interested.

???? Snap - excellent timing. But you got the name and I just got the film. YOur go!

Clockwork Orange?

gallinello Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yes, Jeremy, but those other countries didn't have > an Empire as 'we' had. And those other countries' > banners were rallying ensigns of liberty, equality > and fraternity, or focal, vocal symbols against > foreign domination. > Our culture is different and the Union flag, or > the cross of St. George, can both signal and > connote hostile, nationalistic and martial > sentiments. > Unfurl the red flag, the people's flag, the > international banner of all nations, workers > unite!! Galinello - I'd venture to suggest that many of the former Soviet Union states and other Iron Curtain countries found the Red Flag hostile and martial - if not nationalistic. It's also somewhat presumptuous to ascribe all colonialism to Great Britain - France, Germany, Holland, Japan, in the last two centuries, Spain in the 15th & 16th centuries, prior to that take your pick of marauding military forces looking for land and booty.

rgutsell - you're right it has come up before Zebra Crossing. It currently runs to 4 pages.

About 60 minutes and ?35.00 by taxi - which reduces the hassle factor considerably.

HAL9000 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Marmora Man Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > 7. The last Neanderthal > > Woohooo! Your place or mine? Hal - perhaps I should have been more specific - last Neanderthal woman, tho' my lack of hairiness might be a drawback!

I think it probably exists in every society - evolution and culture developed mankind to be protective of its own and suspicious of others. Knowledge and understanding will overcome the racist mindset - but hectoring and acting appalled at the very thought of its existence won't. Therefore the proper political response to BNP activities and recent electoral success is to understand how it came about, develop appropriate policies that are more acceptable and expose the true elements of the BNP's manifesto.

Following Mic Mac's thread - which fictional characters would you like to meet? Some to be going on with: Jack Aubrey - Master & Commander series by Patrick O Brian George Smiley - John Le Carre Count of Monte Cristo - Dumas Elizabeth Bennet - Jane Austen Widmerpool - Anthony Powell Sherlock Holmes - Conan Doyle Aisha - Rider Haggard

Not in any particular order - numbered for reference only. 1. Francis Drake 2. Queen Elizabeth 1st 3. Horatio Nelson 4. Emma Hamilton 5. Winston Churchill 6. The first Homo Sapiens 7. The last Neanderthal 8. Prophet Mohammed (I've seen his footprint, hair of his beard and his stick at the Tokapi Palace, Itanbul) 9. Guy Fawkes - for tips on current parliamentary crisis. 10. King Harold (before the arrow in the eye episode)

Woof said "I am not a great fan of G.B ,however the fiscal measures he has put in place are taking shape , there are shifts in mood. We will have to sit it out a while yet". The problem is not the next 12 months and whether Labour can hang on or even win the next election. It is the actions that have to be taken to ensure economic stability over the next ten years. The debt mountain that this government has created is huge. Unless we are all prepared to see taxes increasing by 10% or more then we have to accept real cuts in the cost of public services. I emphasise this is cutting the cost - not necessarily the actual services. No matter what political party wins the next election this will have to be done - and GB is fudging the issue by trying to create a dividing line between "Tory Cuts" and "Labour Investment" (previously known as "Public Spending). In Canada 10 years ago, when in a similar deep financial hole they managed to reduce costs of public services by almost 20% without significant impact on frontline public services.

The only vote that collapsed was Labour's. The majority of other main parties were either static or slightly up /down by a few % points. Smaller parties benefited - but at a General Election will lose out again. Also demonstrates that PR as a voting system makes it hard to actually change the make up of the top dogs in the political system. Labour's vote declined by 7% but no siesmic change in the overall make up of the parties representing UK in Europe. Remains dominated by Conservatives, Labour, UUKIP and Lib Dems.

macroban Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Did Marmora Man trust the Russian Navy > submariners? On the whole I trusted them to keep depth in metres while I kept depth in feet - and that we would both go for obvious multiples 200 feet, 300 feet etc or 100 metres, 200 metres. With a little thought I could avoid obvious matches between multiples in feet & metres.

Arising out of a brief discussion yesterday and a comment in another thread - I ask the question: Do you believe it is better to be trusting and believing of your fellow man or completely cynical about them and their motives. I, personally, tend toward the former - and think that's a better place to be.

Mandelson - a consumate dissembler who only ever answers the question he wanted to be asked and not the question asked. Does that make a good politician or a cynical liar? Thought the interview was a score draw and would love to have heard what was said between Andy & Mandy once the microphones were switched off. Andrew Marr is a left leaning journalist - he tried to get Mandelson to acknowledge the reported levels of frustration and anger within the Cabinet, PLP and wider party. I think though, in his heart, he knew even before the interview started that he would not lay a real glove on him.

I used to travel widely in UK and overseas. My rule of thumb was that "if in doubt - go Italian". Italian restaurants around the word can be relied upon not to cock it up - occasionally great but never bad.

Is this the most depressing statement you have ever read on the Forum?