DuncanW

It sounds like this family had an unpleasant experience, and I have every symptahy for them on that score. I wonder though how many of the people who seem so outraged over this actually rather petty incident have ever been to a football match as a travelling away fan. I suspect not many, and it's fairly clear that the family in question only got tickets as football fans based in Denmark couldn't travel. Intimidation and violence at an around football matches is horrible, but it's nothing new and thankfully it's far less common nowadays than it used to be. This Euros is notable not for the small number of unwelcome minor incidents, but for their sparsity and for the lack of any major trouble. I get that is partly due to restrictions in place due to Covid but I would much rather the general high standards of behaviour should be celebrated, rather than dwelling on a small number of minor incidents. The last Euros was held in France and was mired with horrific violence across the country. Two England fans were left in a coma after masked Russia fans charged England supporters armed with iron bars. Some England fans had clashed with French police the night before after causing trouble in the town centre, but the fans who were attacked the next day hadn't been causing trouble. There were other serious outbreaks of violence across the country involving supporters of several different teams, including French fans ambushing Turkish fans in Paris. Turkey weren't even playing France. There's often a fine line between victim-blaming and good advice when it comes to personal safety. I think the difference is that good advice is given before the event. So for anyone who might be in Germany for Euro 2024 I would share the advice that I always follow when I have travelled to away games over the years, and in recent years with my own young children: Don't wear colours, or if you do, it's best to have a zip-up top that can cover it up when needed; definitely don't travel on the local public transport system with England face-paint all over your face. If you find yourself in a potentially hostile situation, keep your head down, remain non-expresive - smiling doesn't always come across how you think it might - and don't remonstrate with drunken yobs just because you think you are in the right, it's more likely to exacerbate than to calm things down. And if you are getting some verbal abuse, just keep your head down and suck it up, however much you don't want to. I've been in a few of these situations over the years, with and without my children - and this approach has kept me out of trouble when the potential for it has been clear. I hope that all football fans enjoy tonight's game and stay safe.

To the point that some may feel too frightened to participate in the survey, Siduhe posted on the now locked thread that responses were gathered either on the doorstep, by email, online questionnaire or by returning on a postcard. I struggle to believe that 111 households were too frightened to fill out an online questionnaire - that would seem unlikely, no?

Is there also the risk that it's a self-selecting cohort so not representative of the wider community? Residents of EDG undoubtedly deserve to have their voices heard, but I note that over half are either in favour or indifferent to the closures, or didn't feel strongly enough to participate in the survey (=indifferent?) It's not compelling stuff!

Metallic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This is their problem, they don't want their > voices lost in people speaking on the main site. > I don't blame them at all. And if you lived on > EDG you would probably want to be seen as a huge > victim. Sure, I get that people are against the closures, and want their voices heard. I don't think it furthers the anti-LTN cause though to keep on opening new threads on the subject.

We really don't need yet another thread on this subject.

"Probably" and "may well be" aren't gonna save the day here - hate to break that to you :)

Seems good to me - looks like they're here to stay so better to regulated. 12kpmh is a fairly brisk jog I would say, eg running 10km in 50 minutes - I'd be pleased with that.... :)

What is wrong with aspiring to the same levels of cycle-use as Amsterdam? What are the big differences? I know we have some hills, but bikes can go up hills. It's also pancake flat between East Dulwich and central London (if you go via Peckham) - The route of the 37 bus from Nunhead to Clapham and beyond is also flat. Also - neither London or Amsterdam are megacities, by the definition of 10M+ people. Amsterdam is part of the Randstad conurbation which has a very similar population size to London. This is not an argument in favour of the current LTNs but why would we not aim high on encouraging and facilitating active travel. I share your view that walking is just as important. The difference, in my view, is that there are few, if any encumbrances on walking in this area - not that I am aware of anyway. Compare that to cycling and it's more obvious, to me anyway, where you can spend money to effect change.

Malumbu, you might be over-thinking this a bit. I've heard that song (and other worse ones) in the past, but haven't heard it recently. And that particular one isn't the end of the world in my opinion, anyway. There's far too much focus on the pockets of idiots who follow our national team, and who are at odds with the vast majority of football fans in England. I for one am proud to be English and will be cheering on loudly from the comfort of my own home this evening, and not being overly concerned if Barry from Market Harborough doesn't approve of our players taking the knee or whatever. They will do it anyway, and most England fans will support them in that action.

Yes, it's disgusting. There was talk on the news this morning of introducing a new law around harassment of public officials, but surely we already have sufficient laws to act on this type of behaviour. Somene was arrested and charged for the harassment of that Newsnight journalist/editor the other day. https://www.expressandstar.com/news/uk-news/2021/06/29/man-denies-public-order-offence-over-bbc-newsnight-editor-incident/

Wow - you wen there, you actually went there!! Spartacus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > That's worrying as it smacks of influencing young > minds to be the councils voice. > > Last time I heard of this sort of behaviour was > pre 1939 in Germany where school children were > used to report non conformation to the party line > ... > > Can't wait till the leader of the council > publishes his book "My Fight"

I just read it's for a TV show on Discovery

You've never played Monopoly?

Admin, please feel free to delete my post which I think quotes one the removed posts.

Alex is right. M4 then M5 is normally quickest so that?s the way to go - and I would say: regardless of what Waze says when you are heading off. Parts of the A303 are single-carriageway so if there?s a problem, it?s likely to be a serious one. Early Saturday morning is the best time to go. The start of the M4 is just 11 miles from here so if you beat the traffic, it shouldn?t take more than 45 mins to be on the motorway. The M4 has a 50/60 speed limit currently from Heathrow to Reading - but it?s still the best way to go. Have a great trip.

Thank you Lola for the info Thank you Snowy for the caution - The FPFW site quotes FOI data from the MoJ - are you saying it's false?

The Halfords Apollo range and the character bikes are all stainless steel, although I think their Carrera range is aluminium. There will be other differences between bikes, but this is the critical one that will make such a big difference to his enjoyment of cycling. All the makes that NM mentions are good. I would add that we have a Ridgeback for our daughter and it seems just as good as the Frog that our son has.

oimissus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > We know that men increasingly ?identify? as women > on arrest in order to enter the women?s prison > estate. > The police are facilitating this. But self ID is > not law in this country (thank God). Genuinely interested if you have data to back that up. I think I have seen that claim refuted by trans activists elsewhere. NB for me, I infer that you are talking about a significant and therefore worrying uplift in the numbers here

Context is all I guess, Thumbs up is an interesting one as it has a completely different meaning if you're scuba diving. NB it's not at all accurate to say that 40% of people equate taking the knee with Marxism or are against it in any way. The majority of football fans support it, or at least respect it. At Wembley, it was a tiny minority who booed - many more cheered, and Millwall is a noteworthy case as it has been the exception in club football - I think maybe there was one other club where it happened, but at the recent end of season matches that had fans in (I was at one) there was no booing at most grounds.

Focusing on the issue of taking the knee and the booing of it, I would say this: The players themselves, and the manager, have made it abundantly clear that this has nothing to do with Marxism and everything to do with taking a stand (or not) against the racism that is sadly prevalent across society and within the world of football and to a large extent, social media. I have read accounts from some of these players that tell of how they are frightened to look at their phones the day after a match because of the vile abuse that will waiting for them as soon as they look at their social media feed; one in particular struck home who detailed how he can't look at his phone (social media) in the presence of his children as he is terrified that they will see some of it. I don't think you can underestimate how desperate they are for this to end. So I believe that the players are showing support for the situation in the US, in protest of the systemic inequalities here in the UK, but also very much for their own collective situation of facing such horrible abuse on such a frequent basis. Taking the knee is how they choose to make this point. So we can debate the issue of whether or not this is the best way, until the cows come home, but the the fundamentals don't change. I can't conceive of how any right-minded, non-racist person could boo their own team for doing this. Are these the same 'fans' (or their lineage) who twenty years ago threw bananas on the pitch and proudly spewed out openly racist chants. I suspect they might be. Those actions would have you ejected, banned and possibly criminally charged nowadays; booing quite rightly would not. So it serves as a cipher for their real intent.

It's not super straightforward but can be done without paying someone. Firstly, put a block on any unsuitable content coming in via your internet service provider. You can phone them and they will do this for you if you're unsure how to. You can also do this with your mobile provider. That will get you 90% there, but won't give you the time limits. This can be done though fairly easily - Microsoft and Google both have family supervision tools. We use Google for our kids' Android devices and the MS one for a Windows PC. Both can restrict use by total time and times of the day, plus ban certain websites or even have it set so they can only access websites you have approved. https://families.google.com/familylink/ https://account.microsoft.com/family/about I'm certain Apple have something similar, but I haven't used their version personally.

heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Aaaah well that won?t go well for Labour.... Apart from elections generally not going that well for them recently, how comes??

I think I?m right in saying, that you would still have trebled your money if you had bought one year ago and sold today, even with the recent downtick in price.

Sorry KK - didn't meant to trigger you. Hope you're okay now. But yes, it genuinely is becuase I can't get my head around it. At least you haven't threatened me this time...

Every sympathy for bar workers (or anyone else) who have to contend with people who are blatantly not complying with the mask-wearing regs. The government guidance seems to be pretty clear though that there are some medical exceptions. So I can't get my head round why anyone, whatever their own personal experience, would feel the need to interrogate any other individual about their difficulty in wearing a face-covering.