StraferJack

You know you don't have to go to a supermarket for a weekly shop, right? And even if you do, how does 20mph impact on the trip anyway Sorry djkillaqueen but you seem a bit ott argumentative for no great reason on this one Strip away all the city v city, age of posters, money etc etc arguments and we are no worse off.

Decent column about tv punditry here http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2012/nov/27/gary-neville-punditry-sky-bbc?CMP=twt_gu

"The post place doesn't do it for me, although I only popped in for a quick pint once." to be fair I popped in a couple of times when it opened but haven't been back since - so maybe it doesn't do it for me either! I kind of like the different spaces in there and it's nice to see it hasn't replaced an older skool boozer so it's an "addition"

I thought Jonathan Liew in the Telegraph put it very well "Let us be clear about this. We are not talking about a few isolated crooners here. A significant proportion of West Ham's travelling support participated. The press box at White Hart Lane is roughly 60 yards from the away end. The songs rang out loudly and clearly. Tottenham have a significant proportion of Jewish fans. So do West Ham, as if that matters. This is not a question of identity, or racial pride. It is a lack of manners, compounded by a lack of education, compounded by a lack of fundamental human dignity." Was disappointed both managers chose to be so equivocal as well

"Am I the only one to think the actual decor of the place makes it feel cold and bleak?" Nope...Haven't been there for years mostly due to that reason My FH drinking is mostly done in Hob and Sylvan Post, with occassional food trips to Bar Question (pub food, not gastro, but decent jerk and pizzas, made on site)

If you are clicking on the link in Mark's post http://mobro.co/markfresh You should be on the correct page. But ignore the Donate button along the very top and click on the Donate to me button underneath the picture of Mark on the top-left(ish)

See OP. I didn't I know I'm not looking for sympathy. Just wanted some reassurance the most likely outcome was a quick phone wipe

One of first things they do is switch off data/wifi so the phone can't be located. So the remote wipe doesn't get to kick in Coupled with carrier blocking the sim and the only options left to them are a complete re build or try and glean anything from locally stored info Hopefully the former

And vice versa? I'd be happy with that Good post tho MM

This basically http://www.kilburntimes.co.uk/news/crime-court/thieves_target_pubs_in_kensal_green_kilburn_and_queen_s_park_1_1699797 I've been approached like this before and been aware but tonight I was just... Switched off

Usual scam, I've read about it dozens of times and even thwarted a couple of attempts on me before Today however, post-work my attention was lax and I had my phone swept off the table before i realised remote wipe sent, phone blocked blah blah blah BUT I didn't have the passcode lock set - so any texts and photos on the phone are readable and I'm trying to think is there anything I need to worry about Are they likely to look for address/bank details or are they likely to wipe phone and sell on?

a fool is one word I suppose

Bigwade's prejudices may indeed be anti-Tory, but it's not an outlandish prediction is it?

"I'm just chortled by your and other's consistent choice of the easy target, always..... " even when presented with evidence he still sticks to his theories but only liberals are wearily predictable right?

all joking aside, West Dulwich is a large area of land with genuinely not many places to go (if you mean restaurants/bars etc) So it does have a couple of good places, but they tend to be pretty far apart The Rosendale on Rosendale Rd is a good gastropub (nearest equivalent in ED is Palmerston maybe) The Paxton is borderline WD - it's actually in Gipsy Hill but is from teh same stable as Bishop/Actress etc

"Whats down there?" fixed that for you..

"You are probably right Sean " ahh... I'm touched ", a number were unsure what voting yes would actually mean in practice " - is this true tho? Sounds a bit fake-concern from anyone so claiming

"So threads have to stick within strict paramaters set by a single person or the originator? Sounds a bit religous to me" didn't say anything of the sort. In fact I would argue that what I did say "But that doesn't mean we can't have THAT conversation (again) - I just don't see it's relevance here" was the opposite of that

"It is not unusual for a religious group to be out of step with the wider society and this issue has only served to convince many that the CoE (and most other religions) are out of touch with today's world. " But this is the point entirely. I don't think the CoE IS out of step on this point. I think, for the most part it is totally on board. But what we have is several small, loud, militant sections who are getting to skew the outcome. Which is a different thing entirely

"But my original point SJ was "... sorry I've read ita couple of times now and still not sure what that last post's point is/was? I think we agree on religions generally, and if we were discussing which are the worst at the moment we would agree there too. And we probably agree on CoE being more enlightened than most others So what are we disagreeing on? Because it has bowed to some secular trends, it is beyond reproach? External or Internal? Look the thread was about this specific (and non-trivial) vote which looks to have harpooned the church. It's a big deal to both the faithful and the leaders of that church. There will be fallout. Enlightened leaders of the church are in despair over some of the militant wing It's worth talking about frankly. And it's a discussion that doesn't really need other religions being yanked into it because they just aren't relevant to the point at hand But that doesn't mean we can't have THAT conversation (again) - I just don't see it's relevance here

"The CoE will eventually vote for women bishops once it has sorted out it's own doctrinal issues rather than in response to Twitterarti mob-rule." And a large part of that internal wish to have women bishops is the knowledge that the world has moved on and they don't want to be left behind. Ie external not internal factors Easy to ignore secular or wider views if your religion is based on intimidation, fear and control (boom! Islam reference!) but when you have become a softer cuddly religion and a dwindling custo... Er... Congregation then you simply have to adapt

"The tweetersphere is rammed with outrgae on this....I feel slightly sorry (with a touch of amusemant) for the the wooly, pretty liberal (for a dogmatic faith based creed) 'nice' C of E." to be fair, it's not just social media. Many senior (and not so senior) players within the church are just as outraged and just as vexed and just as vocal. It's a genuine issue, and not just a social media storm The league table of various religions and their current states of enlightenment (or not) is an interesting discussion but not really what the subject at hand is about

the conflation re individuals practicing a religion and the religion itself was indeed my mistake. Apologies on that score. At no point do I mean to imply that your or anyone is playing a race card. despite your wish to see me as some Guardian-wired-racism-detector I saw no racist slurs in your posts. But that said, your point is still wrong I might have clumsily used the terms catholics/catholic church muslims/Islam interchangably, but your argument still seems to run - those other two religions are often uncriticised, when in fact I was merely trying to point out that that is rubbish. You may summarise the abortion thread as reaching a consensus but the fact is I was damning the Catholic church (and yes by extension many catholics) so the question remains - why do you think those other churches don't get criticised? "No I don't \anywhere, I actually discuss ISLAM and CATHOLICISM. You're so Guardian wired up for percieved racial prejudice that that is what you infer (and probbaly think) is meant by any criticsim of religon, especilally THAT one. I really hope the raeson that you just can't bring yourself to criticise an ethnic minority RELIGON, is not on the absurd grounds that it makes you not look like a Guardian reader. That would be most illiberal and stupid....and typical foooking Guardian reader I might add. "Don't talk about it people might think we're racist" " apart from my word conflation, most of your point here is way off beam.. you thought your were being called racist - you weren't. But yeah I should choose words more carefully here

And an excellent demolition of that Timothy nonsense here http://botherer.org/2012/11/21/why-the-argument-against-women-in-church-leadership-is-theological-rubbish/

" You can make your own mind up" Well, I've made my mind up Not necessarily about LLC tho