*Bob*

Were I to be in your predicament, ????, I'd prepare something more time-consuming the day before (too late?) which goes in the oven in the day (perhaps a celeriac and potato gratin with wild mushroom and leek filling?) and turn up the potential beasting factor on the day with a groovy Ottolenghi-style salad. Failing that.. Egg and chips?

It's hard to imagine how much more of a pickle the current 'policy' on drugs (if you could call it that) could be in. Old-skool drugs more readily available than ever, with more variable contents. Police policy is largely toleration - unless you get plain unlucky, or they have some other purpose (such as getting somewhere closed down, getting some arrest numbers on paper). The current cycle of tail-chasing over legal highs (legal to illegal high, change a molecule, back to legal etc etc) has set the template for years to come - in a way much more worrying than trad drugs imo. Anyway; chances of any real change to the status quo are about as likely as .. say .. a ban on landings at Heathrow prior to 7am. It aint gonna happen!

Now at 102k Jobsagoogun

Working our way through a zillion missed films via Lovefilm. Enjoyed these offerings - (which everyone else has probably already seen) Let The Right One In Gimme The Loot Intouchables The Place Beyond The Pines The Kids Are All Right

At least 15 years for sure; beyond that, I couldn't say.

Not the new foxes. They're much quieter.

Calls to ban early morning landings, Boris Island or shift the approach so someone else gets it up the rectum for a change - are cloud cuckoo. Heathrow is THE airport are we are on THE approach. The only suggestion I've seen anywhere that a) might make sense and b) might happen - is to allow aircraft to come in at a steeper glide angle than they currently do (like the City ones do in their dive-bomber like approach) - at least until they reach the last five miles or so (some of the bigger ones would have to level out to a shallower angle by then anyway) Steeper angle would mean the 'planes are higher for longer - and would make a noticeable difference to us this far out from Heathrow. Currently Heathrow is 3? and City 5.5?. So, 20 miles out or whatever we are.. anyone remember their trig? Work it out.. However, on the downside, I suspect steeper glide angle would be used by airlines as a means of trying to get more night flights through.

My aim - as always - has only ever been to inspire and nurture.

It's difficult to convince newcomers not be be idiots with their money - when everyone that came before them has made a killing.

But I digress.. Ronson!

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- I've never really listened to them that closely Still the cans on. Whip out Hatful of Hollow - and just listen to the bass on, say, This Night.. or Still Ill. It's so good, great melodic lines in there, doesn't put a food wrong. Personally I think HOH ought to be compulsory listening for anyone wanting to play in a band. Totally ON IT.

I never said I wasn't disturbed by it. Indeed, since I've spent a decade recording musical instruments through microphones with only single glazed windows between me and 'outside noise', you could say I am more affected by it than most. I'm certainly more objectively conscious of it than most - because sometimes it affects what I do all day. My point has never been that it doesn't disturb people; that some might suffer ill effects; that it might get worse in the future - my point is that it has not suddenly 'got worse' either this month, over the last three months, or indeed the last five years. That's all I've ever said.

It's a common claim, but I dispute that, Mr Otta! Check out the bass on those recordings and live sessions.. just great. (And the drummer wasn't bad an' all)

I expect there'll be a strong showing here for showboating widdly-widdlers, classical virtuoso types and big personalities.. .. so I'd make a case for 'great guitars as featured in' a couple of bands: Television and The Smiths. But there are countless others, of course.

On the one hand, you have the data. On the other hand, you have you - and your response to the noise. One is quantifiable and objective; the other is unquantifiable and subjective. To paraphrase Mr Holmes: Once you remove the impossible (flights are lower - they aren't; engines are noisier; they aren't; flight paths have changed - they haven't (and least not for a long time and brief trial notwithstanding), flights are more frequent - marginally but negligible.. Once you have removed these, then what remains must be the truth. And the truth must be that it is you and your response to noise which has changed. If you can accept this, then you will start to notice the aircraft noise less. If you can't, you will only notice the (same) noise more and more and drive yourself crackers.

The curtain place did fair exchange, Overpriced - but decent range.

You're right, Mick. I never thought of it that way. Sent from my cool jeans.

Is there really any good reason to leave this ridiculous preset signature on - when there's the option to turn it off?

Will it be the Labour manifesto? Or the Cum one? Can we choose?

I like the 'about this forum' page the best

We bought our house for ?4 - just this morning. This evening, we've had it re-valued at just shy of ?1.2m Not that it gives us any pleasure at all, of course.

lol - great flute / whistling

Nothing beats the Kings of Leon one.

The usual rule applies: The less you have, the more the things you need will cost you. Loans, mortgages, electricity, gas..

He just adds his trademark adjective to the recipe title, I think.