SeanMacGabhann

Becs this time last year there was this thread which is obviously out of date but might provide a few pointers

oooh - now you're onto something there Jah

Who said subtlety wasn't your strong point Annaj

Giles - careful now...

Outrageous! And if I was drunk enough I wouldn't pick My bleedin' Way

It's no further from EDT than say, the Plough. I might stop in Bar Story for a cheeky cocktail first

One negative about choosing the WW is the fact that I have that Terence Trent D'arby song in my head now I know several people know this, but for those wondering "where"? it might be of interest that it is the pub where some of Last Orders starring Michael Caine and Bob Hoskins was filmed (exterior-wise anyway)

Wasn't it the same last year tho LadyG? Youngsters were sweeping al lbefore them and then got spanked by Spurs. Let's not get too cocky

The 60 visits is constantly mentioned but you and I have no scale of reference.Given the jobs that these people do and some of the homes they do go to, is 60 times a lot. I know it sounds a lot to me but is it unusual in that line of work? If it is then clearly someone has in quids words, dropped the ball. But if it isn't, different questions need to be asked. Is seeing a very distressed, filthy child that unusal either? You might be of a mind to say that people who can't look after their children properly shouldn't be allowed children (and that's a whole different argument) but you can't accuse all of them of killing or abusing their children as these people did. As for the broken back thing, I would like to hear a doctor's voice on this. And hasn't that doctor been suspended (all but sacked) anyway? Quids said If I was in charge of Haringey I would like that figure published as well, and compared to other councils. From an investigattaive stance, no a pre-judgment stance.

After the hiding Spurs gave us in last season's cup, it's inevitable we will be drawn together again isn't it?

So as far as his punishment/investigation goes we are in agreement then? I raised his case as a reply to people suggesting they all get off lightly or with a slap on the wrist and I used that one as a possible example of what they meant. But if we largely agree then how am I shameful? Yep, I'm aware of the supply and demand issues as well - but these sites aren't in business catering for the one time hits are they- even an arbitrary million. Just as heroin supply chains don't exist for someone who dabbles once and then realises they have made a mistake.

whoaahh there! Can we have your considered opinion on what SHOULD have happened to him then? And what would have been achieved? You are basically saying that it was no one off and he would have moved on to more dangerous activities? And you are genuinely saying that, for example his comments when interviewed at the time hold no water at all with you? (see below) It sounds to me like a man with demons and he is trying to address them. He sounds more hacked off with visiting the site than anyone else. And of course you will say "he would say that wouldn't he" - but he was investigated remember "Rock superstar Pete Townshend yesterday admitted buying child porn from an American internet site 'to see what was there', but insisted he was not a paedophile and was shocked by the prevalence of images of child abuse on the internet. The dramatic revelation came in a statement distributed to journalists who gathered outside Townshend's mansion in Richmond, west London, after rumours circulated that the star was being investigated by police for downloading child porn. Townshend made his statement following a report in yesterday's Daily Mail that police wanted to question an unnamed multimillionaire musician as part of the Operation Ore investigation into online paedophilia. In the statement, the lead guitarist with The Who, who wrote most of the band's songs, expressed his 'anger and vengeance towards the mentally ill people who find paedophilic pornography attractive'. He said: 'I am not a paedophile. I have never entered chatrooms on the internet to converse with children. I have, to the contrary, been shocked, angry and vocal (especially on my website) about the explosion of advertised paedophilic images on the internet.' Admitting he had used his credit card once to pay for images from the internet, Townshend said he was researching a book and investigating paedophilia as a result of his own 'recovered' memories of childhood abuse. 'I believe I was sexually abused between the age of five and six and a half when in the care of my maternal grandmother who was mentally ill at the time,' he said. 'I cannot remember clearly what happened, but my creative work tends to throw up nasty shadows - particularly in Tommy [the band's rock opera]. 'Some of the things I have seen on the internet have informed my book which I hope will be published later this year, and which will make clear to the public that if I have any compulsions in this area, they are to face what is happening to young children in the world today and to try to deal openly with my anger and vengeance towards the mentally ill people who find paedophilic pornography attractive.' Townshend addressed the issue of child abuse in 'Fiddle About', a song from Tommy in 1969. In it the 'wicked' Uncle Ernie boasts of abusing a deaf, dumb and blind kid played by The Who's singer Roger Daltrey, who goes on to become a 'pinball wizard'. Townshend, 57, is married to Karen Astley and has two daughters and a son. He won the Ivor Novello lifetime achievement award for his contribution to music in 2001. Last year The Who played two highly successful charity shows at the Royal Albert Hall for the Teenage Cancer Trust. Sources close to the Operation Ore said 1,500 people had now been arrested in raids across the country including teachers, care workers and at least 50 police officers. Townshend is by far the highest profile person to be caught up in Operation Ore, although Detective Constable Brian Stevens, the police liaison officer in the Soham murder inquiry, was charged with making indecent images of children and indecent assault after his details were passed to the investigation. Townshend's credit card details were passed to British police along with 7,200 other subscribers to an internet 'portal' in the US that gave access to more than 6,000 child abuse websites, mainly based in Russia and Indonesia. The site, part of a child porn business run from Texas, was smashed in 2001 after an investigation by the US postal service. Officers involved in Operation Ore believe it could lead to a 10 per cent rise in the number of people on the Sex Offenders' Register. John Carr, internet adviser to children's charity NCH, said: 'This is a much bigger problem than people were previously prepared to admit. This will force us all to rethink our attitudes. We are no longer talking about the dirty old man in the raincoat in the local park. We are talking about our neighbours and trusted professionals.' "

and being asked for photo ID was well out of order too IMO

Beef Aren't they being dealt with by traffic cameras? Heaven knows enough of them complain on phone-ins about getting a notice through the letter box weeks later? Klaus - If Rockets wasn't complaining about exactly that earlier in the thread I'd hate to see him riled...

Beef Aren't they being dealt with by traffic cameras? Heaven knows enough of them complain on phone-ins about getting a notice through the letter box weeks later? Klaus - If Rockets wasn't complaining about exactly that earlier in the thread I'd had to see him riled...

Can you imagine if fines were implemented Sue? We'll have people posting on here saying "I can't believe my tax money is being wasted on 57 plastic police telling me and my Poppsy off for his morning whoopsies" Or in the case of PGC's encounter it would be more like "Ere, some faakin Kant* only tried to give me a fine this morning " * him being a gent of a philosophical bent no doubt ;-)

Jaysus how did all of this kick off? Every month we bat venues back and forth and without TOO much bother we settle on a venue. If you setup a poll what is it going to give us that we can't already work-out using pen and paper from people posting on here? Most people likely to attend have posted their preference. Anyone (and everyone) who is even considering it are urged to do the same I think we visit pubs rather than bars for a reason - people talk more. If I think about a turnout such as last Friday's turning up on a Friday night in Adventure Bar or EDT I get a headache. I have no idea how people turning up for the first time would feel about trying to get a conversation going with those noise levels. But if people want to do it then by all means go for it Most of the pubs mentioned already would do a perfectly good job - my preference is for one we haven't been before, or one we haven't been to for a long time. I wouldn't worry about "periphery" too much - Hooper's is probably one of the more obscure venues and look how many people came along to that

I agree totally with the 2nd two paragraphs of Dave R's post, sillywoman. I could have done without the first paragraph being quite so facetious mind you - esp. when he knows full well there are a selection of parks in easy walking distance, after which cycle away Comparing drivers and cyclists on the road to cyclist and pedestrians on a path is a false comparison tho - the roads are designated shared spaces. Footpaths are not. But as I've said before I'm generally of the mutual back-scratching mindset but the aggression shown my many (let's call it a minority for arguments sake) when on a path is "disproportionate" I have no argument with the accusation that pedestrians behave badly on the roads either. But I don't believe jaywalking is illegal in this country yet? If it is then I wouldn't expect anyone fined to bemoan the fact. We might not agree with the law but we can't complain if we are caught breaking it - we know what it is. (and that's not goody-goody - by all means take your own risks and choices just as I do - just please stop complaining if caught)

Can I be a miserable twat and not have a car to get out of or road space to give up? Truth is when I'm bimbling around the parish I'm usually ok with cyclists on a pavement, but what surprise, some of them don't show the same grace and get mardy with me if I'm in their way. Well the deal is they shouldn't be there, it is illegal and I was being nice but if someone wants a fight about it I have the law on my side So by my thinking Chav, your daughter would, if she behaves as you describe, not be a problem to me but your tone and that of a few other posters on here suggests that the whole issue isn't open to debate and that life is hell on the roads so you are going to make hell for pedestrians (I generalise of course but still...)

Nope giggirl, you really can't. And nor would anyone want to But Madworld I really can't see how I can be accused of sitting on a fence here. I'm not saying "hmm on the one hand this is a horrible horrible crime, but on the other there were mitigating circumstances" But me venting raw emotion and giving in to what you seem to suggest is the "right kind of media" helps the child not one jot. And it demeans me. And by extension all of us if we give in. Or else it's no better than Lord of the bleedin Flies If it reassures you MW74 I can let fly when I am affected directly, but you really wouldn't want to be on the end of it

Cross posted with Keef's post - but Keef's was better

EDITED to reassure Microbite that I understand why you are upset by these things and I'm not trying to be hostile to you as I'm basically on the same side, excepting a few generalisations! You don't seriously think this lot are going to get a lenient sentence do you? And making a sweeping statement like "pass out extremely lenient sentences to paedoes, child abusers and people who cause harm to children, they barely get a smack on the wrist" is a bit of a generalisation surely? Apart from one or two headlines in the usual suspects, do you have data to hand to back that up? I susppose you could talk about The Pete Townsend case as an example but from everything I've read on the matter I don't see him as a threat to children and think that was handled ok. then there is the panic/mob thing which sets in where innocent lives are affected - The singer of Massive Attack was wrongfully accused of posessing material. Hell, imagine if someone posted on this forum that [insert name here] was a danger to children. Even if it was removed quickly there are enough people who would say "no smoke without fire. can't be too careful" and you can imagine the sort of thing that would happen thereafter

aka Ant, of this parish

Microbite Cheers for the clarifications. I'm still going to have to take issue with the "system having sympathy with the perpetrators". The system would have to have known that she already was one of the perpetrators for them to have taken sides. A mother of a child was lying to the health visitors and police about who was living in the house - what we know now is very different, bust, as ever, hindsight has a wonderful clarity

errr.. noone is extending ANY sympathy with the perpetrators, as I've already made clear. Nor do I like insinuation that I have any sympathy with them Nor am I suggesting that all abused children go on to become abusers. But if you REALLY want to get under the skin of this thing and find out how best to prevent in future then you have to start addressing some of the root causes. And if you look at the perpetrators in most cases they do have a history of being abused.. so there would appear to be SOME causal link there surely?