StraferJack

click on the original post and you will see an "Edit Post " option just underneath - click on that and you should be able to change the subject line or any of the text in the message

I think PeckhamRose got to the nub of it - Kings College Hospital access. Which makes perfect sense

This makes me smile, every single time

Anyway - reason PM has been relatively quiet is because even he knows that when the clouds are gathered outside your house, you would be foolish to open all the windows But in the next day or two that could all be moot

garnwba try and speak to as many people who lived with these schemes in other parts of London. Find out how many of them originally thought as you do and welcomed the scheme initially. And now find out how many of them curse the day it ever happened

damning stuff here albeit from Nick Cohen. Hari's response should be interesting

How many tea ladies and admin support have been laid off? Genuine question

Seriously.. This idea that the BAD journos were years ago but the current lot were righteous souls needs nipping in the bud They grub around in peoples lives and present it as entertainment. Most of them will find journo work but if they dont, they more than anyone know how easy life on the dole is, right?

Notw journos unemployed? I wouldn't worry otta, according to them jobs are everywhere and even if you can't get a job, living on the dole is cushy. Probably worth 50k a year They'll be fine

Never bought the rag in the past. And not likely today But as people have pointed out... You didn't need this week to tell you it was disgusting. And there are other papers (but not all of them) which fit the same description. Get rid of them too

What mcmullan said on newsnight was "what better way to find out what people really think than by hacking into their phones" If anyone wants to defend anything he says then go ahead but you can probably make any point better than him Silverfox is tilting at windmills. Some vague idea that the guardian has even a teeny fraction of the power of the Murdoch press. But this shouldn't be a guardian v Murdoch thing ultimately. Even if they are the players, the revelations should be enough to freeze you to your core. If you want to use a comfort blanket of anti-guardian sentiment silverfox that's up to you. Do other papers do it too? Yep and let's have it all out on the table And don't worry about murdoch. Unless his empire is killed off they will come back and (underhandedly and disgustingly) CRUCIFY the guardian. And miliband

You make him sound like some weak innocent mr Ben?

has he? I don't always agree with him (by which I sometimes violently disagree with him) but particularly loathesome? found this on his wiki page "Milne was singled out by Tony Blair in a December 2001 dossier as one of ten media critics of the war in Afghanistan and the US-British response to the 9/11 attacks whose views he claimed had "proved to be wrong".[46] He was described by the novelist Robert Harris as "a Stalinist Rip van Winkle" in a September 2001 article supporting the war on terrorism.[47] The journalist Melanie Phillips portrayed Milne as a "Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas mouthpiece".[" I'd say if you were pissing off those three people you were doing something right

and we could all read that paid-by-Murdoch Matthew Paris piece if it wasn't a pay-Mr-Murdoch firewall - any chance you can screengrab it for us?

"In reality, the patronising intelligensia view that it 'woz the Sun wot won it' as if the Murdoch empire manipulated the poor britsih public election after election has been much overstated IMO...apparently only Guardian readers have the intelligence to make political decisions not based on their Newspaper readership (ha ha ha) " this paragraph is just weird - for someone who professes to loathe ideology, you don't half have some well-entrenched views of your own quids. Most people I know share your opinion about the Murdochs backing winners. The only people I know who give the "woz the Sun wot won it" any credence (coined by the Sun, not by patronising intelligentsia) are SOME Sun readers. You will probably find examples who believe it from any "side" but to claim it's "patronising intelligentsia" is just.... patronising. And from someone who is intelligent

I have bought some recently from SMBS - big bag down the bottom underneath the spices? The Turkish shop (EAst Dulwich Supermarket - opposite the deli) often do them too

Holy moly. Is this real?

Sun sub-eds have walked out in protest at notw redundancies Wow... So solidarity and workers rights not as alien a concept as it seemed to some at wapping just a week or two ago

That's a lot of very dim birds Where did you read it?

And what way did my previous avatar "go" then? As for local admins, you've been banned how many times by this one? Close to double figures anyway You constantly berate another, from the nunheadforum And despite you so far singing the praises of the admins on the links you posted they are already warning you. Its just a matter of time before you complain about them to. I have no idea who they are but when it happens you will undoubtedly claim it's an inside job and they are linked with admin on edf You aren't contentious. You are embarrassing.

Everything positive said about it so far has been said about every previous "diet" There WILL be more to come.

And by "these people" you mean you And so what? Just like notw closing to be replaced by sundaysun... Different name. Same shite Listen big man, if so many local admins have a problem with you and your multiple names, why don't you grow a pair of balls an start your own forum. Your gaff your rules. Do it. Go on But you won't. Because like the simple adolescent mental you are, it's far easier to moan, whinge, cry, point fingers and just generally piss people off.

In all seriousness, that is,from a Murdoch pov, quite a shock. He is obviously trying to stop contamination spreading and hopes such drastic action will do just that ? but compared to his normal tactics, it makes him look weak Not over yet? Question Time tonight should be a humdinger

besides - he's already getting warnings on those forums anyway "Hi allfornun. This message is close to breaking our Code of Conduct. I have removed the business' name and phone number you included. We don't object to users bringing business names up in a context such as this, so long as it is done in a constructive and well-backed up manner. Urging people to harass them on the phone is not acceptable. Perhaps you could support your argument with links to the planning documents, or to photos, which show the site you are talking about, for the benefit of users who won't be aware of the situation? You may be able to rally support and get a few users here to write to the council to get things improved. Brockley Jon, Jun 29, 2011 #2 "

I'm not sure people (the public, advertisers, other papers) are as qorked up about "legality2 as they are by a more general sense of disgust at the moment. When the illegal activity seemed to be confined to celebs a few years ago no-one gave two hoots really And how often your illegal activity is indulged in plays a pretty large part in how the authorities view the crime - if you sell drugs once you won't be even on the radar if you hand yourself in. If you have been doing it for years and have corrupted much of the people and infrastructure around you... that's different