dave

I'm not a scientist, but I believe the theory with rare beef in steak form is that the bacteria which might cause food poisoning tend to live on the outside of the meat - you sear the outside and the heat kills those bacteria, making it safe to eat. With burgers, and particularly where they have been freshly prepared (and presuming the mince was minced some time before), just cooking the outside won't be enough. Since the bacteria can be anywhere in the patty you need to raise the temperature right through in order to kill them and make the food safe. About 8 years ago I ordered a burger medium rare and promptly came down with some pretty bad food poisoning - have not done so since. Of course, food hygiene plays a part and all you are doing is mitigating the risk - you could still get some nasty after-effects from a well-cooked burger depending on what had happened between farm and plate. And you might get away with a rare one. I just choose not to take that risk any more.

I'd quite like to hear from someone with more knowledge on this issue - seems like this thread is very much "I think/I feel" but very little hard evidence is being introduced to back these feelings up. My own feeling is that there is validity in what some people are saying and that drug use has some relationship to the shittiness of the lives that people lead compared to the expectations they have been given (whatever social stratum they belong to) and some people choose to escape this. My own feeling is that all recreational drug use is a form of abuse, but I like a glass of wine and an occasional pint of beer - my own hypocrisy is shining there. What I do know is that my own experience growing up in Northern Ireland was that the lines (pardon the pun) between the drug trade and illegal/paramilitary activity were clear. While it may be less clear in SE London, everyone must on some level recognise that the importation of things like heroin/cocaine can only be done by reasonably large-scale criminal conspiracies. It's not a cottage industry (or indeed a nice middle-class Farmer's Market option, Dita) and people are hurt and exploited all along the way. And Amanda appears to have been one of those people. To Amanda, I would say that I admire you for turning things round. But I don't think that this is enough on its own to make you worth voting for, in the same way that I don't think that what you did in the past is the end of the story that makes you unsuitable for office. Your honesty on the past is neither here nor there. Let it come down to the issues and how you represent yourself now - I would probably have more trouble with your description of yourself as the reductive and confrontational "chav with a law degree" than anything else. And by the way (and probably worth another thread) where do forums like this fit within the framework of the Representation of the People Acts?

Not sure if it really qualifies as a euphemism, or if it's just cliche mixed with ellipsis, but "end of" used on its really gets my goat - as in "He's sacked. End of." I don't mind if people say "end of story" which I am guess was the origin of the phrase, but "end of" along? No. Please. On the positive side, a mate used to have an entry on his CV for a period as a "Client Relocation Manager" - bouncer, to you and me.

Subject to a few conditions (the first of which is that you are starting in town somewhere rather than an airport), with a licenced black cab you are perfectly entitled to insist that a cab takes you (obviously it's easier when you've actually persuaded them to stop). The tfl website handily outlines these conditions as "what you can expect":- http://www.tfl.gov.uk/gettingaround/taxisandminicabs/taxis/1140.aspx. Basically when you hail a cab and it stops and it has its light on, the driver ought to accept any fare of less than 12 miles within Greater London - and if they refuse they need a good reason. "I'm looking for a fare which is on my way home" is not a good reason. Make it clear that you know the rules and the "I don't go south of the river" merchants soon seem to see sense (and do their job...) Saying that, I have had good experiences with minicabs, both licenced and un-licenced as well. Wouldn't necessarily recommend them all, but it works for me.

Ok - back to the telly. Forgot about Life on Mars. Which was British, and which I thoroughly enjoyed. And the follow-up's going to have the sadly-missed Miss Hawes in it. Roll on 2008...

Oh - two quick points. - I meant my own list (not those above from other posters, though for what it's worth you couldn't pay me to watch The IT Crowd again) - We get the cream of American telly (mostly) and we tend to get to see each programme once or twice. Even the mighty West Wing is awful when it's just on a constant loop. Ditto Scrubs, The Simpsons and Friends, which wasn't that bad for the first while. As Sean says, there's a very small minority that's worth watching, and even then the DVD box set is the way to watch it. By the way, Shameless's very own Maxine Peake is frequently spotted over the hill in SE23.

For me, The Wire is peerless. I think it dips slightly in the second series, but picks up again nicely in 3 and 4. Am eagerly awaiting Series 5 and wondering whether I will be able to hold out until it's shown on FX rather than downloading. Heroes has managed to twist and turn like nothing I have seen since the first series of 24 and it's been sustained over a longer period than most of the HBO/Showtime dramas (20+ episodes rather than 12). I have just started watching Dexter thanks the grace of Sky+ and repeats and it's mighty good stuff. On a lighter note, My Name is Earl has stayed excellent as it's gone on, and Entourage is a guilty pleasure. Californication over on Channel 5 may rely a little bit too heavily on the laconic charm of David Duchovny, but it's worth a watch. Looking at the list above, I am wondering why there's nothing British on it - where are the current equivalents of State of Play, or Blackpool, or the first couple of series of Shameless (before it got really silly)? I think the only home-grown TV I have been watching has been the Oz Clarke/bloke from Top Gear thing or the Gordon Ramsay shoutfests. There's nothing on the commercial channel worth watching and the BBC seems obsessed with making one-off dramas or hugely expensive Poliakoff nonsense. A shame.

Oglandia Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > but his son is called 'Rafe' so he must be an *rse on the plus side, at least he spells it "Rafe", rather than spelling it "Ralph" and correcting everyone... now that would have made him a real arse...

Maybe not entirely on topic (reading the above makes me remember why I resist the temptation to have a bike in London, though). My other half and I were driving along Creek Road towards Greenwich last night when someone unseen (though I have built up a fairly comprehensive profile in my mind) lobbed a stone out from between some of the flats on the water side of the road. It hit the passenger door of my car and has left two nasty dings. Stopped as soon as I could safely and went back to take a look (trans - "find the little buggers and elucidate them on the error of their ways through the application of summary justice"). Fortunately I didn't find them. Went for a drink with some mates last night and a few had heard of the same sort of thing happening in different places. Nihilistic vandalism - no trace of who did it - and I am going to have to pick up the cost. Not happy at all. Fairly dreading going out to take a look at the damage in the cold might of day.

Let's face it, the Met have always been a shambles. At least now they're not as corrupt as they were in the late 60's and through the 1970's. These people - the firearms officers - are not professionals in the truest sense of the word - they're grunts. But there is a culture within the police service in England which tends to glorify them. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't want their jobs. The situation was a bad one. Suddenly the Met was being expected to do something which they had only read about and both at the top the management failed to step up, and lower down the structure failed and there was a combination of bad luck and incompetence along with some seriously gung-ho antics on the street. While it could be argued that you have to make your own luck, the fact is that the individual officers got it wrong, and both at an individual and at a corporate level they ought to be held responsible. Coming from Belfast, I am finding it all a bit strange. Lee Clegg did something similar when he thought that his life was in danger, had a similarly ham-fisted attempt to cover it up and ended up in jail. Blame was kept at the lowest level - at least this time there has been an open discussion about the issues. For me the serious things are the cover-up, the conduct of the trial and the fact that the Met *was* operating with the "Kratos" codeword shoot-to-kill policy and that this was sanctioned by the Chief Constable and the Home Secretary - I cannot see how this can be reconciled with the implementation of the Human Rights Act ("state shall not kill unless it really needs to"?) As for the compensation/Brazil-police-death-squads/cocaine tangents, that's all they are - this is a fairly simple issue. Should people be held responsible for taking life, or are the police above the law? I am intrigued following the outcome of the HSE prosecution on whether the Met will be prosecuted for Corporate Manslaughter (as Railtrack was, IIRC) and whether it will do any good in the long term.

Echoing the thoughts above, for the operational failure, no. But at the same time, I am surprised and dismayed by the fact that the commander on the day was singled out as not being culpable - this suggests that you can be in command without being responsible, which seems like a dangerous precedent to set. This is compounded by the fact that she was subsequently promoted - while I am aware of the fact that people are promoted out of harm's way all the time, in this case it seems incredibly perverse. For the way the charge was defended and the trial conducted, overwhelmingly he has shown appalling judgement and has attempted to evade responsibility and he ought to go having been proven wrong. This was something which the Chief Constable was running and for which he ought to be responsible. For that reason and for the good of the whole police service (incidentally, when did they stop being police "forces"?) he ought to resign. Anyone got a "Blair Out" t-shirt left over from the anti-war marches?

Maurice, while I can understand where you are coming from, I don't think that building a wall is really creating community. The fact is that you live in the middle of a city and you have bought (I don't know, maybe you're renting, or treasuring something which was handed down to you, or you're squatting, as was frequently the case in C'well Grove not that long ago...) a house on a public road. I have no doubt that your quality of life would be improved by stopping traffic passing in front of your abode, but I also know that the same thing would apply to a lot of others - sadly it's a choice that just isn't available (generally unless you're the PM or a High Court judge in Northern Ireland...) I think all you can do is to be thankful for the hiatus that the speed of repair on the bridge has afforded you and maybe invest in some attack dogs for when the Vandals are released to peruse your property once again...

Cool Runnings was apparently on loop in the England Rugby team's DVD player during the latter stages of the Rugby World Cup. I have a vision of one of them standing up and crying "I feel Olympian today" - John Candy would also have been perfect to play Phil Vickery... Worst one for me is "The Champ" - though I maybe saw it at an impressionable age. Schindler's List sometimes gets cited in this kind of list, but for me it went wrong with the cynical attempts to tug at heartstrings - (a) the little girl in the red coat; and (b) with the colour bit at the end. The book was powerful stuff.

I wasn't having a go at anyone in particular (just about the sixth time this week I have seen it...) My other half has been known to do the same thing, but I take my life in my hands offering correction to her.

another one of these - it's "toe the line" not "tow the line" (unless you are pulling a rope behind you in a boat or something) - please! thank you. that is all.

The Fields of Athenry, The Green Fields of France, and Danny Boy (Londonderry Air?) all make me cry because they remind me of my father. In relation to the first one, I hadn't fully appreciated the power of this until a few months after his death when I was at a London Irish game and they started to sing it. Reduced me to bits in seconds. And another vote for the Flaming Lips - wasn't that song written about a fan who had died? Or is it something else I am thinking of? Sometimes, as a man, it's hard to beat the simple emotional appeal of a country song - I have a soft spot for the original (Dolly) version of I Will Always Love You. Me and Bobby McGee is another, and Willie Nelson's version of Always on My Mind. And I think I am going to stop there...

Maybe it's worth just popping into the branch, telling them it's really annoying (and hugely visible) and asking if they wouldn't mind ceasing? I know - it's a million to one shot, but it just might work...

I was at the Wales v Australia rugby game in Cardiff a few weeks ago - part of the "French" Rugby World Cup. At the end of the game there was a fly-past by the Red Arrows in a delta formation - and very impressive it was. At the time I couldn't help but think it would have been even more impressive had the roof of the stadium been open... Can we expect a similar level of eptitude (if such a thing exists) during the London Olympics?

I'm with the person and fellow licence-payer who was commenting on that BBC ad (elsewhere somewhere on the interweb - the ad with "would you let some people who have never written/directed etc etc make their own comedy programme?" which then segues into the "hilarious" chicken dance thing and smugly says "That's what we do...") who said that it was a bit like having your house burgled, including having your camcorder taken, and then being sent the video of the resulting crack party which has been funded by the sale of your possessions. My opinon? Ricky Gervais is an occasionally amusing buffoon who has been hanging around Bloomsbury/the BBC courtesy of his partner for long enough for his moment to come - note that he was the music editor on "This Life", which I can't imagine involved a lot more than flicking through some Britpop CD's and picking the most zeitgeitsy tracks... His so-called interviews with Larry David and Garry Shandling were just as embarrassing as anything "David Brent" has done in action and he represents a modern telling of the Emperor's New Clothes. "The Office" was well-made etc, but was it genius? I, for one, think not despite how often I have been told otherwise on every BBC channel. But... he does appear to have a reasonable amount of self-awareness. He isn't always articulate in expressing it - which might or might not be part of the "persona" - but, according to the freesheet review I read this morning of the current show, he does at least acknowledge that it's a fine line between his material and that of Jim Davidson. As for Bernard Manning, I am not sure about the parallel. I didn't really sympathise with the vitriol that poured out on BM's death (maybe I am too young since for people my age he was always a caricature) but I did think that Marcus Brigstocke's point in his Grauniad blog entry suggesting that saying Manning had "great timing" was akin to saying that the (then topical) gunman at Virginia Tech was "a really good shot" might have had some validity...

Surely Charlie don't surf? [gets coat...]

Yup, I had the same experience with se23 dot com - one of the forum rules that the "Webmaster" has is that you are not allowed to discuss the forum. I persisted, did the bad thing twice and have now had my posting rights revoked. Maybe the EDForum (which is much more of a benevolent dictatorship) could have an area for se23 dot com refugees?

I think that the job Scott has done with The Bishop is fantastic - and strikes me as a great balance between old and new. I also think it's as far from being a clone pub as you could want - there is a proper atmosphere there, good staff, well-kept beer, great "pub" food for those who want it and a genuine welcome when you walk in. Compare it with the alternatives (a Wetherspoons pub? a generic Punch pub? *gulp* an O'Neills?) and LL seems once again to be blessed. I have had a couple of good nights in the Brockwell Park Tavern (as was) and appreciated it as being a decent and genuinely Irish-ish pub (I'm from Belfast). Worth noting that this wasn't down to gimmickry (diddly-dee music and Thin Lizzy playing/bikes hanging from the ceiling) so much as the people in the place (and the size of it). Hopefully some of that feeling will be preserved while some of the good things about the other pubs in the same stable are brought in. And fundamentally people can always walk if they don't like it.

I like the idea of the deli and think it's a good thing. The stuff that they sell is generally of a high standard and it's nice to be able to shop locally rather than trekking up to Borough Market or elsewhere - as others have said. Despite the fact that it's not cheap, I think the fact that it serves a market/need is reflected by the fact that there are frequently queues out through the door. Obviously dealing with these queues means that the staff will be under a certain amount of strain, and this might be transmitted as a certain amount of brusqueness. For that they have my sympathy - and my empathy. I have worked in similar jobs. However, I have repeatedly been in the EDD and seen people treated in a way which was just plain rude because they were unsure of exactly what they wanted. The first time I saw this sort of thing I thought the individuals serving them must just be having an off day (have never experienced the rude service myself). But again and again when I have been in there, rather than helping or guiding or informing (which, it might be said, would be particularly helpful given the scattergun approach to labelling in the chilled counter), I've seen some of the people behind the counter respond to people who want to spend money on nice things by tutting, head-shaking, condescending or patronising - fair play to the other staff who clearly don't approve. Having read some of the posts from TW, I am afraid I can see where the impatient patronising attitude might be coming from. Surely by helping people out you can ensure they keep coming back? The owners and staff of the EDD could take a few lessons from everyone at William Rose in how to deal with people when under pressure, especially when those people don't always know exactly what they want - friendly, knowledgeable, helpful and always courteous. I think that the layout of the shop is less than ideal, but then again if I wanted wide aisles with enough room for buggies etc I would go to Sainsbury's. The current layout actually means that people will speak to each other - say "excuse me" and make eye contact. And if there is occasionally damage to stock because of the bottlenecks it would only be reasonable for the manager to accept this as a loss. Bullying people into a "you break it, you buy it" policy might be counterproductive in the long run. And the general tone of the posting by TW, while laudable in standing up for the staff, has certainly not made me want to shop in the Deli anytime soon. Does anyone have any suggestions for good local alternatives, though?

Basically it's a matching jacket and trousers - normally referred to these days simply as a "suit", generally with shirt and tie. The most important thing is that this is not a dinner jacket/evening dress. Wikipedia info here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suit_(clothing)