ianr

Danel_Davis Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I prefer Flanklins. It is very delicious. Any specific kitchen, food variety? > > Regards, Danel > Olympic London accommodations I don't think they do spam.

And Miss Shonk had been in post since 1905! I wonder if she eventually retired and got any sort of award. BTW, do councils still take out fidelity bonds against possible fraud, etc by employees?

Miss, Miss. George is eating the paste and won't give it to me.

Er ... plut?t http://www.mag4.net/Rimbaud/poesies/Voyelles.html?

The Trampoline and Miscreant sounds a bit like a pub name.

On Green Dolphin Street - Mark Murphy

"You need to upgrade your Adobe Flash Player to watch this video." No I don't, I have Flash turned off. ∅

I don't think you have the willpower to stay seated, and was planning on making a couple of thousand or so from the video I'd sell to a tabloid. You'd then have to emigrate, or devote yourself to a life furthering good causes. ;-)

∄

>Posting here on EDF. means the Whole World knows your intentions. >It will be flashed across all the major Tabloids. Then you'll have to spend at least a couple of weeks trundling round ED in your wheelchair trying to re-establish your bona fides.

Follow the Local Info tab at the top right of this thread for the latest information.

If it shows up as an attachment, you have successfully uploaded it, and anyone who wants to see it can download it (as on eg this page). Do you really want to force it to be downloaded and visible to everyone who loads the page, irrespective of their interest, wish or bandwidth?

> "...and the representatives that are marketing the service are from LOVEFiLM & genuine." The Woodland Trust, OTOH, as a collector for charitable purposes, would require a licence from the police or an exemption order before they could lawfully make any door-to-door collection. http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/Publications/cc20.aspx#e6

> Looking at this article it seems the police themselves advise you only to conduct these sorts of sales in a public place That's not my reading, which is just that if you are meeting in a public place, the police recommend that it be a safe busy area. You mentioned being messaged. I'd distinguish mobile phone messages from forum PMs. Someone using an unknown mobile phone number I'd count as being potentially untraceable by anybody. Someone's PM'ing does at least potentially provide you with a track record, and a link to forum, ISP, etc. records that the police could access if they thought it necessary. Similarly so, if you've communicated via their private landline phone. I'd count the existence of either of those traceables as goodish predictors of my own safety, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary. Personally, I think I'd be unlikely to buy any valuable consumer item (particularly an as-new one) without evidence of ownership, without believing that the seller would be subsequently findable if need be. An address or receipt would do; I don't think corner seat, Caff? Nero, would.

Incorporated April 2011. http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/74758109151eb0c857503e338ffebade/compdetails

> the live departures board seems normal, however i've known it to be wrong before. In what sort of circumstance was that, and how wrong?

hiate

See regulation 10 here and/or this.

Debit card chargebacks can be made. Here are some sample descriptions from the buyer's and seller's points of view. PS: IANABP

1786 Surrey Assize papers are at ASSI 31/14 in the National Archives. There are also some Southwark Quarter Sessions papers at the London Metropolitan Archives within CLA/046, eg: http://search.lma.gov.uk/scripts/mwimain.dll/144/LMA_OPAC/web_detail/REFD+%22CLA~2F046~2F01~2F016%22?SESSIONSEARCH&URLMARKER=STARTREQUEST, and at the Surrey History Centre in Woking. No trace of Ladd found in oldbaileyonline.org, The Times digital archive, or the online catalogue of Surrey HC contents..

Just come across a relevant case: Ricketts v Basildon Magistrates Court [2010] http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2010/2358.html R was seen by police via CCTV taking stuff that had been left outside a BHF charity shop. His car was subsequently stopped. The rear seat was filled with bags of items which R said he was collecting to sell at a boot sale. He admitted taking them from outside BHF and from a bin next to an Oxfam shop. R asked the High Court to quash Basildon Magistrates' decision committing him to the Crown Court for trial for theft, arguing that there had been no evidence from which the magistrates could have concluded that the items belonged to someone other than R. Held: It was an inference open to the court, that the items had not been abandoned but were, for the purposes of the Theft Act, the property of another. Application dismissed. In the case of the BHF items the court considered it an obvious inference that the items were intended as gifts to BHF, and that they remained the property of the would-be donors until BHF took possession of them (which they had not yet done).

wod, I'm wondering, for that time, whether they might have been beats rather than hippies. I could try reflecting on the differences and transition between the two, but I'm afraid three o'clock on a Tuesday afternoon doesn't seem to be quite the right time for it. It might be useful if the obloquy for hippies could be analysed more into very specific perceived and objected-to characteristics. I don't, btw, remember anyone who might have been subjected to a hippy label, using the term of themselves without some irony, though I could be wrong or limited.

Torpedoes? Are they for medical use?