titch juicy

according to wikipedia The National Trust receives over ?400m funding per year, from various sources. I can't find figures for the London Olympics- but in the four years leading up to the Beijing Olympics, UK athletics received roughly ?26m funding (over four years).

Fairplay, i'll admit to be being less than knowledgable, and my views probably are misinformed. The National Trust seems like a very worthwhile institution, and the fact that it has 3.7m paid up members is testament to that- but the fact remains that it does have 3.7m paid up members, which must be a healthy source of income for it. In which case, lottery funding is better spent elsewhere, providing aid to institutions that don't have 3.7m paid up members- like UK Athletics for example.

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You may well think that's a silly example, but I > kinda think that anyone who sees short term > populism and TV viewing figures as a reflection of > national priorities is presenting a silly > example. > > It's particularly silly because it's wrong simply > on its own terms: > > The National Trust looks after 17 million paying > visitors and over 50 million non-paying visitors > to its sites every year. That's a damn sight more > that than the tickets to the Olympics. > > As for all the class war rhetoric, it's a bit > student politics isn't it? All this bolshevik > dogma about erasing bits of our history that don't > support whatever current philosophical fad we're > supporting. > > I enjoy the Limpets, but to imagine that 2 weeks > of brouhaha is more important than our national > cultural heritage is losing the plot. > > I'm not recommending that we don't support sports > or that we don't have the Limpets - far from it. > I'm just unimpressed by somebody suggesting that > it is a better use of investment than preserving > our history. How can you compare visitor numbers over 12 months, to ticket sales for a two week event- where tickets are limited. It's entirely pointless. Why do stately homes need money in the first place? And why is it important to maintain the former homes of the very wealthy- they don't automatically offer our cultural heritage anything just by virtue of their birthright. I'm sure there are examples where they have, but certainly not for the most part. Being financially rich does not equal being culturally rich. And 'a couple of weeks of brouhaha'? People train for years for a momen of glory that can change their lives forever- how is that short term? ....and why do you keep calling it the 'Limpets'?

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Thankfully those who must be obeyed are wiser than > to make it a binary choice between preserving > thousands of years of our nation's cultural > heritage for our children, and the short term > thrill of a fleeting moment of sporting success. > > Put it this way - you probably can't even say > where the 1952 Olympics was held, let alone > whether the UK won and medals, wherease the > National Trust has provided us with a rich and > inspiring record of our history that makes us who > we are today. > > Thank heavens that somebody thinks for the long > term! bit of a silly example- i imagine most people can't name more than a handful of stately homes in this country, but many can name former olympic gold medalists for me the money is much better spent on giving sportsmen and women the opportunities that they otherwise wouldn't have, rather than throwing money at symbols of privilege from a bygone era, that are largely irrelevant in 21st century britain. I think the viewing figures and olympic ticket sales bear witness to that

Regardless of the slightly cringeworthy name, it's about more than the individual standing on the podium; as each of those individuals has a team of people helping them achieve success- people they wouldn't have been to achieve it without. Whether that be team-mates, coaches, physios and in some cases even psychotherapists (Team GB cycling have an official shrink... It's true). So, it's very much about the collective.

ty segall (fantastic gig last night) thee oh sees

Jimmy Fixit Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I am afraid so Juicy, the leaves are falling off > as the roots are deep for fruit trees :-) incredible-. who knew fruit trees were such big drinkers? :-)

three days of hot weather amidst the rainiest summer on record so far, and they need watering.

Brendan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Was I the only one who saw the (what I thought > obvious) metaphor in that? if you mean; children being cared for by the nice nhs, scared because evil monsters (cameron and tories) are coming to take away their safe haven....then no, you weren't. If i'm way wide of the mark, then perhaps yes, you were

language changes, always has not a bad thing

*Bob* Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It could have been so, so awful, but it just > wasn't. > > The best music score and selection I think I've > ever heard put together for the kind of global > event that could have so easily (and usually does) > sound corporate, pompous - and populist.. in the > wrong way. If Macca had just done 'The End' and > walked off, I probably would have lunged to my > feet and applauded. I have already pretended I > didn't hear Hey Jude. > > There were some genuinely great and moving bits.. > And some filler, but ?27m can't buy everything. > Comparisons with the gaudy Chinese showboat affair > are pointless.. $100m buys you a lot more in China > than ?27m buys you in London. There was heart and > thought in the show. I'll take that over six hours > of continuous fireworks and an ultrabright LED > nailed to every available surface. > > Boyle supped from the poison chalice and came-up > with the goods, flipping the moaners the bird. > Good on yer. Agree with more or less every word; but i don't think it was ever going to be anything but good.

the nicest way would be train to london bridge, thames clipper to north greenwich, cable car to excel

email him to let him know that he's making us all feel nauseous [email protected]

"Tell the Lord Privy Seal that i'm sealed to my privy and I can only deal with one sh*t at a time" Churchill

I expect the people that have most trouble understanding the new systems are the same people that won't drive in bus lanes, even when you're permitted to. I had a feller wind down his window and argue with me when driving down the inside of him, using the bus lane (in permitted hours) on east dulwich road, where it meets peckham rye. I pointed out the sign to him, to which he replied, "it doesn't matter, it's a bus lane".

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Damon Baird Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Unless you're coming from a country that has the > euro! > > Nah, the Euro is still pretty strong against the > pound. Nah, the pound is the strongest it's been against the euro since the crash 3 years ago.

While i'm sorry for your friend and hope he is ok, I suspect the barrier didn't jump out and surprise him. I would've thought with a little care, any new road or traffic measures can be easily avoided.

Frank Ocean- Channel Orange

thanks for that- if only my tardis wasn't in the garage

sad, but inevitable day shame we never got see quite how good he could've been

thanks for the tips, but there's no issue now.

at ease everybody- it's a neighbour's now that wasn't so hard.

During the last week a cat has been climbing through our back window and coming into our flat. She's very affectionate and seems healthy- the eyes are bright, fur is clean and soft and she's not too skinny; so i'm assuming she's not a stray. It seems like she wants food, sniffing round the bin a lot, and was trying to eat a dead plant leaf that had fallen on the floor. I don't want to encourage her as we're not allowed animals in the flat, and I guess she belongs to someone even though there's no collar. I can't imagine how she would be in such good condition otherwise. I'm really after some advice on what we should do. We keep putting her out of the same window that she came in, but she keeps coming back. Last night, despite closing the window, she wouldn't leave (kept meowing for ages) until we turned the light off. Is there someone local we could call? Or has anyone in Peckham Rye (on here) lost a lovely black and white cat. I think putting a poster up might be overkill, as I know cats likee to wander, especially at night, but she seems a litte too needy, and obsessed with our flat (she's been back every night for the last week and we'd never seen her before) to just be going about her normal business....but i really don't know a great deal about cats, so I'm just guessing. Any help/advice is greatly appreciated.

the-e-dealer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Well I take it all back. Clearly we are very good > at most sports in the International Arena. (tu) That's about right, well done for being big enough to admit you were wrong. I'm not usually a fan of Charlie Brooker, but he has this spot on (apologies if there's any choice languae contained within) http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jul/08/andy-murray-not-miserable-just-normal "Andy Murray: not miserable, just normal" So what if he never smiles? Can't he just play tennis without having to pull a happy face for you?" ARTICLE: Congratulations to Andy Murray, who either did or didn't win Wimbledon this afternoon. Since I'm writing this almost immediately before the match itself kicks off, I've got no way of knowing what the outcome was. Is. Will be. Whatever. I think I can safely predict one thing, though: whatever happens, win or lose, in the post-game interview, he won't do a double thumbs-up, gurn joyously down the lens, waggle his tongue around like Gazza, then moonwalk off, waving, grinning, and making comedy trombone noises. That's not the Andy Murray we know and sort of love. People say Murray's miserable because he doesn't smile very often. He's not miserable. He's normal. Have you walked down a street recently? Any street in the country? Go on, pick one. Take a stroll. Bring a notepad. Make a note each time you spot someone walking around beaming like they just taught their dog to shit money. Chances are you'll cross six postcodes before you glimpse so much as a smirk. Which isn't to say people are inherently unhappy. Just that they've got better things to do with their faces than walking around bending their mouths up like idiots. The people who want Murray to smile are the same ones who try to make me dance at weddings. They want the world to conspicuously enjoy itself in a manner of their choosing, and they turn vaguely sanctimonious when they encounter pockets of resistance, as though their definition of fun is the only one that matters. So Murray isn't going to win the Merryville Festival of Grins any time soon. What difference does it make to you, you needy pricks? Can't he just play tennis without having to turn around after each point and pull a happy face just for you, like he's your dad watering plants in the garden and you're a toddler watching him through the kitchen window? What do you want, a tennis champion or Mister Tumble? Make your mind up, because you're not getting both. Perhaps part of the confusion is that despite being very much in the public eye, Murray refuses to play along with the patronising emotionalism demanded by the media, where sporting stars are expected to put on showy displays of "passion" that look good in a highlights package at the end of the show. If you're not a natural cartwheels-of-victory type, it must be a pain in the arse to know everyone's expectantly gauging your reaction. You know how when you're opening a birthday present in front of a crowd, all your brain can do is scream: "FOR GOD'S SAKE LOOK DELIGHTED!" at you? Multiply that by ten million. I'd say Murray's ability to ignore this pressure is almost more impressive than his racquet skills. Moments after beating Jo-Wilfried Tsonga in the semi-final, Murray was interviewed by the BBC's Garry Richardson, who found himself repeatedly trying to squeeze some kind of rousing sentiment from a man intent on describing the game in technical terms, like a straight-faced IT consultant explaining how he fixed a problem with the server. After trying and failing to get him to describe the match as a rollercoaster of emotions, Richardson brought up Murray's mum and dad, who'd been sitting in the audience. "What can it possibly have been like, Andy, for your parents watching there?" he asked, presumably hoping to prompt a moment of choked-up pride. Murray handed him a cold stone in return. "I've no idea," he replied, deadpan. "I'm not really that bothered. It's a lot harder for me, that's for sure." And there was a glimmer of a dark smirk at the end, the kind that doesn't register in a world in which all emotions must be expressible as emoticons and interior happiness is required to be rendered visible from a range of 200 metres. That's precisely the kind of sporting hero we need. One who's allergic to bullshit and treats the whole thing like a job that rather than a tear-jerked spiritual calling. He seems to want to ignore the media. Trouble is, he's so bloody good at tennis, the media can't ignore him. But like a bluebottle repeatedly bashing its face against a windowpane, it continually tries and fails to turn him into yet another easily digested celebrity. "Celebrity" is increasingly the only role the media can process, yet it's a role in which Murray looks about as comfortable as a dog on rollerblades. In the run-up to the Wimbledon final (which, at the risk of repeating myself, hasn't happened at the time of writing), press and broadcasters alike routinely described Murray as some kind of symbolic vessel containing all British hope. All our dreams, all our aspirations all on his shoulders, apparently. Poor fucker. The strong implication was that if he won, it'd solve all our national neuroses at a stroke: like England won Euro 2012, like Barclays behaved, like Diana never died. We'd be commanded to stand outside collectively waving union flags as though trying to attract the attention of some huge intergalactic queen bee hovering somewhere above the atmosphere. But if, on the other hand, he lost we'd either tut and say it's typical because we're allowed to be grouchy, but the people we pointlessly entrust with our sense of national self-worth aren't or, more likely, be expected to sit soggy-eyed watching a slow-motion montage of his disappointed face, cut to something mournful-but-unthreatening with a hint of Coldplay about it. Because if he won't supply the emotion, goddamit, we'll make the soundtrack do it on his behalf.

i bought a project debut III from richer sounds a few years ago after endless recommendations. it's a lovely thing, and paired with an ok amp and speakers gives lovely sound. Simple, stylish looks too. http://www.richersounds.com/product/turntables/project/debut-iii/proj-debut3-blk-new