Robert Poste's Child

I'm too ashamed to say, but next time I'll definitely try one of the above. That will be after the New Year diet, obvs.

I'm not convinced squirrels have enough of a world view to be calling anyone anything. Their whole existence is focused pretty low down Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

I'm not volunteering, but it does look like fun. Are you allowed to cover yourself in oil first?

Thanks for all the excellent suggestions. If anyone ever asks me again I won't look like a total idiot who never goes out...

Thanks, hadn't heard of that one, but think it will have to be north of the river as the other person has the north Londoner's mental block about SE postcodes. Meeting someone else later in H Hill though so I may end up there anyway.

Apparently I'm taking someone for cocktails tomorrow lunchtime but I haven't a clue where to go. Does anyone know of somewhere reasonably central that's nice, relaxed and not too jarringly hip or expensive? Thanks in advance for any recommendations.

Blah Blah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Even I'm a little suspicous now Davis, and I have > lost my temper at people accusing new posters of > being fake. But no way would it bother me so much > that I would feel the need to absolutely prove > those people wrong. It's just a forum. Who cares > what anyone thinks about who is who? And if some > people choose to be rude to, or suspicious of new > posters, then that's their problem. It's not worth > wasting any time bothering with it. Crikey. You've mellowed since your earlier posts on this thread.

Davis, that's not very logical - no one can 'dirty' your name as you are posting anonymously. You claimed to be a University of London lecturer but for a relative newcomer your posts quickly became provocative, which gave me the impression you're looking to stir things up rather than have a genuine discussion. Otta, fair point re picking up on use of language, but I think it's appropriate here as university lecturers not only have higher degrees but are expected to publish regularly on their subject. The OP's use of language and some of the comments seem to be at odds with this. (Note that I have heroically not commented on use of slander vs libel...) I could be wrong, though.

I suggest you PM someone else, Davis; I'm afraid I'm not really interested.

Because you're a troll.

'Flawed' not 'floored'. Animals are 'which' or 'that', not 'who'. I'm afraid it's your slightly dodgy use of English that gives you away, Davis. Trolls should be euthanised humanely by Admin.

This thread is turning into battle of the trolls. For all I know you could even be the same person.

Blah Blah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- it's the upper classes wot do it! Even twenty years ago half our local hunt in Cumbria turned up in pick-up trucks and vans. Don't assume all hunts are like the smart ones in the shires.

aquarius moon Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Are you for real? What do you even know about > living in the countryside unless you've lived > there. > What a blinkered argument. As it happens I grew up in the country, but do you really think no one has a right to an opinion if they haven't? On foie gras, not all are produced by force-feeding. Some producers make an 'ethical' version which is based on the idea that geese naturally (that word again) over-feed and put on weight to prepare for migration. http://www.meatinfo.co.uk/news/archivestory.php/aid/16463/Spanish_farmer_produces__91ethical_92_foie_gras.html Again, I personally don't eat it because I don't much care for it, but I don't have a problem if the animals have been treated humanely.

I can't believe this topic has only reached 52 posts. This tired old debate hasn't been rehashed for at least a few months. Is everyone still sleeping off their recent excesses in preparation for next week's excesses?

I would happily go ratting with a borrowed terrier, if anyone has one on offer though. Also lamping, but only if I can drive...

Blah Blah, I'm not suggesting it's pleasant for the fox, just that it involves a (for want of a better expression) natural process that is a normal part of life for wild animals. The fox may usually be the perpetrator - like tigers and some domestic cats and dogs, they do kill for fun as well as food - so it's part of the natural law it lives by. Like I said, it's not something I want to do but I don't feel as censorious about it as many people seem to.

Agree with Otta. It's why Tony B Liar was so keen to ban it - a token of what the party faithful would regard as a bit of dismantling of the old class system.

aquarius moon Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Robert Poste's Child Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Plenty of people who hunt, fish and shoot > consider > > themselves animal lovers > > > Well then, they shouldn't because they're not. > > How can you possibly call yourself an animal > lover, then go fox hunting & see a living fox > ripped to shreds, pull a living fish out of the > water & bash it on the head or shoot a living bird > from the sky?! Hounds hunt as a pack. Usually the first one breaks the fox's spinal column, killing it instantly, so it's already dead when it's broken up. It's not something I want to do myself these days even if it were legal but, to be honest, I don't have a problem with it and I don't think it's helpful to sentimentalise about wild animals.

The village is lovely: the lack of exciting shops and restaurants keeps undesirables away. An oasis in the desert of SE London.

Plenty of people who hunt, fish and shoot consider themselves animal lovers and care that they're treated humanely - if not all animals equally, and some only with a view to putting them on the table... If you polarise every argument into black and white, you're never going to address the reality of the situation.

It's an interesting q when you think how regularly you see film units set up around the village. I can't think of any films featuring footage of Dulwich at all.

A happy and peaceful Christmas from just across the invisible border into the Village.

I'm sure it is, ZT; however, your first post was wholly about your personal agenda in relation to the Townley Road crossing: only your second post, several hours later, refers to the person hurt in this accident, so you can probably see why your concern came across as an afterthought and secondary to your own concerns.

ZT, it's Christmas: time to give the personal agenda a rest; you've made your position clear enough on the other thread. Let's leave this one to focus on the poor person who was involved in this accident.