robbin

and don't you mean #flounced out?

In your (#humble) opinion.

robbin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Posted by natty01295 Today, 06:52PM > > > Q: Where can I meet people? > So I don't feel so lonely > > > siousxiesue Wrote: > > > http://www.bereavementuk.co.uk/ > > > > These people do meet ups, the website has > photos > > of a group of people in a pub. Get in touch > with > > them Natty x > > How did you get on trying them? Natty - did you try clicking on the link that siousxiesue posted for you? As she said in her post, they do meet ups but they also have a forum and live chat facility for making contact over the internet. It is not a professional counselling service.

peggoula Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ...He is blocking the road, off street > parking... It is illegal to block the road for on street parking as well. It is a public highway and for the public at large to use - it is not lawful for any one anti-social resident to claim a space as 'theirs'. Unfortunately, there will always be a handful of anti-social neighbours who will do this without any consideration for their community/neighbours.

Posted by natty01295 Today, 06:52PM Q: Where can I meet people? So I don't feel so lonely > siousxiesue Wrote: > http://www.bereavementuk.co.uk/ > > These people do meet ups, the website has photos > of a group of people in a pub. Get in touch with > them Natty x How did you get on trying them?

You honestly spent about 2 hours just in Lidl, Peckham?!

rendelharris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I notice - returning to my original point on this > thread - that today May has intimated there will > be no vote on foxhunting either. Good, say I and > many others, I've no doubt, but again, how many > votes in rural areas were swayed (or more likely > how many who don't usually vote were persuaded to > turn out) by a promise which has proved completely > false? Honestly, I would have though almost none. What's more it was a ridiculous potential net vote loser of a policy. a massive 84% of the UK population are reported to still be in favour of the fox hunting ban. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/fox-hunting-boxing-day-poll-opposition-all-time-high-theresa-may-hunting-ban-act-vote-a7495336.html The policy would have put way more people off voting Conservative than would have been swayed into voting for them under false pretences hoping there would be a (pointless and bound to fail) free vote on repealing the ban. I also think that of the very few people that actively yearn for the reinstatement of fox hunting (as opposed to those who might support it but don't really give a toss) most of them probably would have voted Tory anyway, whether or not there would have been a free vote. I think they would recognise from the polls that there is no way parliament would have legalised fox hunting even if there had been a vote - therefore it was all a bit academic. Actually, pretty bizarre May should think it a live issue anymore. Shows just how stupid she is.

She's just awkward around people (always has been) and completely out of her depth (just as she was as Home Secretary, but the buck didn't stop with her then, so she could try to keep under the radar).

No, I'm not - I just misread your post, for which I apologise - my mistake.

Ha ha - actually, my name is derived from the first thread I ever posted on - about people robbing from bins outside houses - hence rob-bin.

kbabes Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Has anybody else had any experience of theft > around East Dulwich recently... > > For example; Car wheels stolen from cars parked in > the streets, bikes stolen from outside pubs etc, > etc? No.

cella Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ... as a cyclist knocked me > over on the pavement outside the Flying Fish. > Just walked back from Rosie's chip shop and was > almost knocked down by a bike on the pavement. Make your mind up! Were you "knocked over" or only "almost" knocked down?

You're welcome.

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > robbin Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Alan Medic Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > ...and you haven't answered my question in > the > > > Brexit thread. > > > > Probably because it was a stupid question? > > If you don't know what the question was why do you > assume it was stupid robbin? Now, that is a stupid question! What on earth makes you think I don't know what the question was? Obviously I've read the other thread - otherwise I wouldn't have commented. Seems on the other thread you took an overly sensitive position and as a consequence asked a daft question.

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ...and you haven't answered my question in the > Brexit thread. Probably because it was a stupid question?

jaywalker Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Is it now the case that people on this forum can > just say anything they like about other named > individuals as if there were no laws of libel? I > have made this point to Admin tonight. > > (To be honest, if I do not get a reply to this I > will certainly be leaving this forum). Are you for real? You think it might be libel to point out someone who speaks out strongly against private education but sends her own children to one of the poshest most expensive private school in the UK?

You never know, she may have spent all her spare cash on her Dulwich College tuition fees.

robbin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- He clearly sympathised with them or he would never > have contemplated putting them where they are > (although obviously passing over your ex-mistress > could, I appreciate, be a bit difficult). > Sorry Rendel, just to be clear - I was not suggesting Diane Abbott is your ex-mistress. I could never be that mean.

jaywalker Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > the postal votes are neither here nor there - even > in the unlikely event they've been peaked at. They > are about as biased a sample of votes as you can > get - young people don't need them (or even know > about them). > > its like quoting the Spectator for reasoned > insights into the election, or thinking the Daily > Mail is informative or amusing. > > but I know i'm clutching at straws :-( C'mon Jaywalker - don't go all flaccid on us now!

rendelharris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > robbin Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > rendelharris Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > It's true Corbyn hasn't said > > > he'll ban all young Muslims from leaving the > > > country, and ban any who do (even if they're > > > British born and bred) > > > > No, that trio have been more up for banning MI5 > > and armed Police, or did you choose to 'forget' > > that abject insanity? > > Can you point me to anywhere Corbyn said he'd ban > armed police or Mi5 please Robbin, because Google > doesn't come up with anything. As you well know, Rendel he hasn't - which presumably is why you chose to single him out. As you equally well know, his closest two supporters and until today Shadow Cabinet members (the would be Chancellor and the would be Home Secretary in charge of Police and MI5) both supported disbanding MI5 and armed Police. Corbyn belongs to the same group as them and with full knowledge of their views promoted them to the highest possible positions of potential power in this country. Corbyn clearly is not at all concerned with their stance and in fact has refused to disagree with it or condemn it. He clearly sympathised with them or he would never have contemplated putting them where they are (although obviously passing over your ex-mistress could, I appreciate, be a bit difficult). So, Rendel, you may pick away all you like but you and I and everyone else who is not being purposely intellectually dishonest. knows the point I was making. Until a few months ago (as countless posts of yours show) you would have agreed with me they are a bad bunch to be in power. For some reason, like our would be PM Theresa (who, by the way I do not support) you appear to be happy to make some pretty surprising u-turns when it suits you.

rendelharris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's true Corbyn hasn't said > he'll ban all young Muslims from leaving the > country, and ban any who do (even if they're > British born and bred) No, that trio have been more up for banning MI5 and armed Police, or did you choose to 'forget' that abject insanity?

Borky Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > robbin Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Each of you middle class lefties and keyboard > > warriors should put your money where your mouth > > is. I'm particularly talking about those of > you > > who over the last few days have been whipping > > yourselves into something resembling teenage > > schoolboy arousal about the 'closing' of the > gap > > in the polls. > > I have placed small bets on a number of outcomes > across a range of bookmakers. I only gamble on > politics .They are now squared with a little bit > of wriggle room I have a minimum profit of ?150 > or so and a higher one of ?1000 for fat tail > outcomes. > > I firmly expect to take at the lower end of the > range if that helps. Not really. The over excited teenage schoolboy arousal has been far more entertaining over the last few days.

They are definitely not always good indicators.

I'm going to lose sleep saying this, as it's you Louisa, but I think you have made yourself clear - Snorky is just being mischievous.

As well as those of you who have spent the last year slagging off Jezza and now appear to have had a road to Damascus moment about him and are praying he becomes PM.