Sue

The honest truth is that I don't want the thread to end on vague generalisations, plus misrepresentation of what has been said on the thread. I know that anybody reading the thread from start to finish will see the full picture of who has said what, but most people coming to it will just read parts of it. I think it is unfortunate that the person who has restarted the discussion has brought in additional things which I would personally not have raised, but I can't help that.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sue Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > "Time to let this thread sink" - well, unlike > you, I tried! > > You've got to be joking. xxxxxx DJKQ said pages and pages back that she wasn't going to post again - which admin commended - and then continued to post a large number of posts. I said on NYE that I was trying to let the thread die, and didn't post again for 6 days. The thread had slipped well down, and was off the first page. I expected that that would be the end of it. I only posted again today because I felt that Louisiana's post was inaccurate (and because by then the thread had gone back to the top, so my post made no difference) and then DJKQ started again.

And so it goes on ... and on .... and on .... "Time to let this thread sink" - well, unlike you, I tried! Where were Juandan's points dismissed, DJKQ? Just for once, could you answer a question I ask you on this thread? And try to answer it logically? And have you actually read the posts concerning why there has been no prosecution? And have you read Hal's posts, for example? Just asking.

The uncomfortable thing though, Louisiana, is that much of what has been said on this thread is not actually rumour and innuendo. Are you saying that it is just rumour that Kate McCann refused to answer 48 questions asked of her by the police (and yes she was within her legal rights to do so)? Are you saying that it is just rumour that the McCanns and their friends refused to return for a reconstruction when requested to do so by the police? Are you saying that it is just rumour that two highly trained British police dogs alerted in places connected to the McCanns and nowhere else? What one may infer from the above may vary, but the facts themselves are not rumour or innuendo, I think. I would not have posted again but other people have now let this thread come to the top again.

"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time." Abraham Lincoln, (attributed) 16th president of US (1809 - 1865) ?You can fool some of the people all the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on.? George W. Bush quotes (American 43rd US President since 2001. b.1946)

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Tonight 7pm at Southwark Town Hall (junction of > Peckham Road with Vestry Road) the Licensing > Committee will decide whether to increase the > number of pitches, add Sunday 8am-4pm with 7am-8am > set-up, and closing Northcross Road between > Archdale Road and Lacon Road every Saturday and > Sunday. xxxxxxx Why have residents in affected roads not been consulted about the closing of the road? That's disgraceful.

husbandjim Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > As a local > resident in the area for 12 years I feel we should > be given priority for pitches rather than stall > holders from outside the area. xxxxxxxx I agree, other things being equal xxxxxxxxxxxx > I had a very successful stall on Northcote Road > Market for years selling high end wine > accessories, glasses and hampers but was told that > someone else on Northcross Road is already selling > these products. xxxxxxxx But there are hardly any shops on North Cross Road, how could they be? What shop? (ETA it could have been the one where Pretty Pregnant is now, which used to sell ethnic things - that had a few glasses etc?) They have a greengrocery stall at the market sometimes, and there's a greengrocer in North Cross Road. There are numerous shops selling bread just round the corner from North Cross Road, yet stalls selling bread are allowed. There's a cheese stall, with the Cheese Block just round the corner. So what actually are the rules applied when allocating stalls? ETA: Sorry, just re-read your post and I see it doesn't specifically mention shops. But surely there has never been a stall in North Cross Road selling the type of products you sell?

The residents' parking issue has been discussed before on here, and I believe there was a consultation on it. If my memory serves, the vast majority of residents didn't want it. I certainly don't, and I'm one of the people affected by people parking in my road to go to the market (and to go to the mosque on some days). It's a mild annoyance if I can't park near my house, but that's all.

Alec John Moore Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > However, I seem to recall that when Somerfield was > revamped a few years ago they had a small fresh > fish stall. That may well have closed due to lack > of patronage. That is a shame and it is > interesting that Moxons seems to be surviving > further up the Lane. xxxxxxxx Yes, they did have a fresh fish stall. The fish looked fine to me. The stall didn't last long. I have no idea why it was removed, but maybe - just maybe - the people now buying their fresh fish at Moxons didn't want to be seen shopping in Somerfield. Just a guess ..... Oh, and *Bob* and Silverfox, :))

:))

That's a really useful link ed_pete, thanks. I gave up the other day trying to find out when my garden waste collection should be - I'd mislaid the leaflet that came round, and I couldn't find the info on the council website :-$

GinaG3 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I also left my house on > NYE at around 4.30pm when I got home the next day > the postman had left a parcel on my doorstep all > night. Glad it wasn't nicked it was quite a > expensive order I had placed in a less convincing > sized box but still shouldn't of been left there > at all! xxxxxxxxxx You need to complain about that, otherwise it will happen to other people who may not be so lucky. Are you sure it was the postie and not a courier delivery?

They don't seem to have had any deliveries since the holiday. But I don't want to make excuses for them, because sadly it does seem to be quite badly managed, in terms of stock control at least. It's a shame, because I like their ethical approach, but what good is that if you can't get even very basic things which you need there?

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > plans to expand it and > add Sunday opening and close Northcross Raod > between Archdale Road and Lacon Road. xxxxxxx Lacon Road is opposite Ulverscroft Road. Does that mean that cars coming up Ulverscroft Road towards North Cross Road will just be prevented from turning left at the junction, but will be able to turn right? If so, as an Ulverscroft Road resident I don't have a problem with that.

Crikey, flappers, had a bad day?? :))

Has anyone else noticed that the stall at the Lordship Lane end of the market (I think it's the roast pork stall) seems to protrude more into the road than other stalls? It's a nightmare driving down the road and trying to pass it with cars coming the other way turning the corner. And I've only got a tiny car!

Keef Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think the road should be closed to traffic. > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Please bear in mind those of us who live in Ulverscroft Road. If North Cross Road is closed off completely, if our cars are facing "the wrong way" on a Sunday we will have to either reverse the length of the road, or attempt a three point turn with cars parked both sides of a very narrow road. If you had experienced my driving you would not wish for either of these :)) I think the other roads off North Cross Road are different because they have other roads running off them, but I stand to be corrected.

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > How would people feel about a supermarket along > the lines of The People's Supermarket where > members put in 4 hours work a month cooperatively > to receive a 20% discount? xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx I'd be well up for that, though again provided it didn't result in our small food shops closing down. But if that's going to happen anyway in ED, I'd rather it was for something like this than another (insert your own swear word here) high street chain, "aspirational" or not.

DagmarJ Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think a Marks and Sparks similar to the one on > the Walworth Rd or in Brixton would be great as > both of those have small clothes sections and > that's pretty handy. xxxxxxxx But because their clothes sections are small, there is practically no choice anyway, so what's the point? If you want to shop for clothes in M&S you can easily get up to Oxford Street from ED.

No. No. No. For all the reasons everybody else has said. It would be the thin end of the wedge in ruining the unique character of Lordship Lane with all the independent shops. I quite like to shop in M&S or Waitrose occasionally, but I think the disadvantages of having one in ED well outweigh the advantages.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Keef Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > on a summers day it soemtimes feels like a > holiday > > resort than a part of london. > > > > I like ED as much as anyone, but come on. > > I'd like to know where 'Shadow' goes on holiday > (mainly so I know which places to avoid). xxxxxxxxxxxxx :))

Yes, DMC will give you a phone appointment so that you can speak to a doctor on the phone. I've used this in the past and it's very useful. Or you could have phoned NHS direct. It is really not fair to go to a GP's surgery if you think you might have something catching. You might be feeling "shattered", but flu can be fatal for some people. Seems like the GP was quite restrained under the circumstances.

DaveR Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > I still don't understand your purpose in starting > (and perpetuating) this thread. You are obsessed > with the case, that much is clear (that's not a > criticism, by the way). You are determined that > everybody should recognise, if not the accuracy, > then the validity of your point of view. However, > there does not appear to be any other point you > are trying to make. I have explained several times why I started the thread. I'm now trying to let it finish, as should have been clear from my posts last night. So why are you continuing a pointless conversation? > > I should make it clear that I have zero interest > in the specific facts of the McCann case, although > the surrounding arguments about parental > responsibility are kind of interesting. If you have zero interest, why on earth are you posting on this thread and perpetuating it? Why not start another thread about parental responsibility? I'm sorry for the bold font, I'm not trying to shout, but I find a load of plain text makes it hard to disentangle one person's comments from another, and maybe other people do too. Edited to add: Sorry if any of the above sounded rude, but I really was hoping that last night's posts would be the end of it.

I looked out of my living room window last night and saw a foxy staring at me from across the road. We gazed at each other for a while and I went outside. We continued the gazing for a further while, then he (or she) padded off down the street. Only other time that's happened to me is when I was living in a hut on a farm. I love foxes. Sorry for the hens though. The farmers used to shut their hens in a henhouse each night so the foxes couldn't get them. Unfortunately one of the hens stuck its head out of a small gap in the henhouse. The next morning a headless chicken (literally) was found inside the henhouse. Ooops.

PeckhamRose Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I have said it before and I shall say it again; > parking attendants are the scum of the earth. xxxxxx That's not fair PeckhamRose, some of them might have a bit of an attitude but there is a reason for parking restrictions, and it's to keep traffic moving. Hugs, however xx