Loz

Ms B Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > William has less than half royal blood Well, that's 100% more than his brother...

steveo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > My grandfather wanted to see the royal family hanging in the ruins of Buckingham Palace Why would your grandfather want to be hanging in the ruins of Buckingham Palace? And even if he was, I doubt he'd see the royal family from there.

Annette Curtain Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Turbo bitch from hell. > You know the one; white vauxhall nova, fluffy > toys, steering wheel cover, whitney blasting and > all the while cutting you up on the > inside/outside/front/back at 50+mph > > Any colour/age/shape applies Disagree with the last part. They are middle aged, blonde and have a really scary look in their eyes.

ultraburner Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Funny how drivers seem to think most cyclist are the worst. Funny how cyclists think that drivers are the worst.

3 little piggies Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Another stretch of road where motorists ignore signs is the lead up from East Dulwich station to > the entrance to Sainsburys. > > The stretch of Dog Kennel Hill from St Francis Road to Edgar Kail way is a 24/7 bus lane which is > mostly ignored by cars heading to Sainsburys (the majority also seem to ignore the right of way at > the mini roundabout in Edgar Kail Way). I live in the little estate next to the football club, so > use this entrance daily and on most days the bus lane is ignored by motorists, making it difficult > for anyone observing the restriction to turn in safely. > > I think this part of the bus lane needs to either be enforced (camera?) or made into a bus/turn left > only lane. And to everyone out there, please keep in mind that not all cars leaving Sainsburys turn > left, so please don't just automatically sail around the roundabout thinking about your shopping > list and latte, but slow down and check for the odd car that turns right. Cheers. 3LP, The very top part of that bus lane (last 15/20m or so) is dual-use bus/left hand turn, so you shouldn't be turning from the middle lane. But, really, that entire 50m stretch of bus lane should be dual use and most people do use it like that. And I agree that too many people at the roundabout make assumptions. I once had a bicycle miss me by millimetres when he swerved across my front because he can up my left hand side and wrongly assumed I was going to turn into Sainsburys. And coming out from St Francis Estate can be, as you say, a bit hairy at times. More annoying is when Sainsburys is busy and vehicles block the roundabout waiting to get in.

rgutsell Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If not raised zebra crossings then those square raised bumps that force drivers to line up their > cars to reduce the bump. Buses drive right over them and straddle the bump with no effect. If they > were not too far from the crossings, the slower cars would be more likely to stop for > pedestrians. They (Southwark Council) don't do those anymore. They have been replaced with the sinusoidal speed bump. I think on the basis that white vans have the same wide wheel base and passed through unaffected as well.

Cyclists.

Cora Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > They have an active flashing sign further up which flashes if you are doing more than 30. No one reacts to it > and it just spends the day flashing!.... That thing is broken and has been for some time. It usually flashes at you no matter what speed you are doing.

Why use Pirate Bay anyway - Google is the best source for torrents. Just throw "filetype:torrent" into your search. As for the censorship side of this, you are right. China gets a lot of flak for censoring the web - this is really not a lot different and may lead to even more worrying trends in the future.

Well, to be fair, Lakshmi Mittal paid for most of it.

See, this is the issue, Chippy. You can't just believe in the right to protest for causes you agree with. I've said it before, but Noam Chomsky said it best: "If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all."

Chippy Minton Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > We've been through this before Loz - you know my views on that EDL march, but if you need reminding see: > http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?20,736932,page=1 > > For clarity - > a) No Yet you would ban the EDL? (maybe my question was muddled with an excess 'all'. I think "Do you think peaceful marches by anyone through Tower Hamlets should be banned" is better?) > b) No Yet you think the UK Uncut protest was fair? I'm not sure clarity was actually achieved here.

And yet, Chippy, you raised the issue of the EDL/Tower Hamlets in relation to this. I have to say, I am confused on where you stand on the EDL's right to protest.

Talkmobile uses the Vodaphone network.

Chippy Minton Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "I would never be a part of it" - fair enough. I'd "never be part of" a UK Uncut protest. But would > you actually prevent East Dulwich residents from having a peaceful street party outside, let's say, > the Council leader's home as a form of protest? No, but I wouldn't 'prevent' UK uncut either. But I would disagree with both of their methods. > It strikes me that for someone that seems to champion freedom of speech and civil liberties so > much you probably just don't agree with what the protest was about. The two concepts are not conjoined. I don't agree with UK Uncut, but I would defend their right to protest - I just don't like their method this time. I do fully believe in freedom of speech and civil liberties, but that has to extend to everyone - a concept you seem to have difficulty with. As I showed with the Harriet Harman example, the test of what you really believe is whether you would apply it to people that you both agree and don't agree with. I think I am pretty sound on this test. > It's very sad you think what UK Uncut did goes beyond the "limit" of political protest yet EDL > marches through Tower Hamlets don't. I'm sorry, but I didn't actually mention Tower Hamlets. But I assume you are referring to the banning of the EDL marches through Tower Hamlets a couple of years ago? If I recall correctly they were banned because of the 'cause', not the 'method'. Even though I hate the EDL and everything it represents, I believe that they too have the right to fair and peaceful protest. Now if the protest wasn't peaceful, then that is a different matter and at that point the police can step in and arrest all and sundry. But banning it pre-emptively was, in my opinion, wrong. And actually a danger to the right to protest in general. I mean, who gets to decide which protest cause is undesirable? That's a slippery slope. So, here is two tests... a) Do you think all peaceful marches by anyone through Tower Hamlets should be banned? b) Do you think that protests by anyone at MPs private residences is fair protest. I can happily answer the same (no and no), not matter what the cause. Can you?

Again, unfair, obviously and something I would never be a part of. The forum and some pretty damn determined local residents knocked that CPZ idea down in the right way. As I said earlier, I would like to see a certain Ms Harman banished to the International Space Station for the next decade or four, but I defend her right to a quiet home life. No one should be hassled at home because of their job. That goes whether or not I support the cause in question.

Would you be as supportive if it was the BNP, Chippy?

I think politicians have a right to separate home and work. Even though I could see the funny side, it was wrong when the Fathers 4 Justice protested on Harriet Harman's roof. Now even though I hate Harriet Harman I know that she, like all MPs, deserve their home life. So, yes, UK Uncut were wrong. They could have picked plenty of other places.

Faark would have been a better name. It worked for FCUK.

Chilver does.

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > JAARK_FASHION Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > > Loz Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > > Why not crowd source for ideas, Alan?? > > > > Thanks. We are extremely pleased with your > > comment. > > Loz, they are extremely pleased with you. Well, I'm extremely pleased they are extremely pleased. Extreme pleasure all round.

Why not crowd source for ideas, Alan??

'Worried' as in 'no one there to video it and upload it YouTube so we can all laugh at them' worried?

Did you see QT last night? Apparently the Beeb asked LOCOG what they will do with the torches that were not purchased by the runners. LOCOG said they would probably sell them to recoup the costs.

What? No lovely laugh tiebreaker?