Blah Blah

I disagreed with the snobbery he was implying. I never said we should get rid of anything. But if you can find anywhere where I've said that there is a dumb proletariat to whom we should deny certain forms of entertainment, then go ahead. I didn't even post anything before that comment from bob :D

No, take a look again at what that comment was made in reply to. It was to bob's suggestion that because something has an audience it's snobbery to criticise it. In that context my statement is not saying what you think it does.

I never understand why people moan about the conditions of bying a local authority flat. Most tenants using right to buy get a massive discount on the market price. Everyone knows there are service charges and potential works charges attached. That is something to be factored when deciding to buy. People are breaking their backs to only just be able to afford to buy a property. What happens when interest rates go up (as they will sooner or later), or taxes go up, duty etc? People give themselves no leeway.

Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Of course it is utter snobbery to quality control, > in the sense of the Sun and Jeremy Kyle. Fine to > stop them doing anything illegal, but to say to a > section of society that likes reading/watch such > stuff "I'm sorry, but people in the middle > chattering classes just think this is not of > sufficient quality for this likes of you" could > only ever be seen as complete snobbery. Hmm, but I didn't say this did I? I didn't say anyone should be denied access to any kind of programming. All I said is that it is mindless dross that adds nothing positive to life. I just don't accept that programme makers can't come up with better programming to appeal to that same audience. Is Jeremy Kyle the only way to engage some people? Is Benefits Street the only way to get noticed as a programme maker? That's what I trying to say really. And I'm not of middle-chattering class either btw ;) There are plenty of working class people with brains that engage too! Assigning any view different to your own as a class issue seems to be a theme with you Loz :D

*Bob* Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Surely you mean both these things add nothing to > quality of 'your' life, which isn't quite the same > thing. Some people - quite a lot of people - enjoy > them, no matter how much you wag your finger and > tell them they shouldn't. No I mean what I say. I defy anyone to give an example of how Jeremy Kyle and his show does anything to enhance the world for the better. There is universal crap.

*Bob* Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > It's for their own good. We know better. They are > only The Dumb Proletariat. That's a bit unfair. I think people would be better off without the Sun and Jeremy Kyle, as both things add absolutely nothing to the quality of life. To argue that we should permit everything, because it's snobbery to quality control, isn't a good argument in my opinion. Look at the shameful behaviour of the News of the World for example. Lives and reputations were wilfully destroyed by some journalists at that paper. It's more than ok to criticise the people behind these things, because the media has a huge power to shape opinion, to both make and break people. It's right that we ask programme makers to act responsibly.

Yes Pecan are the main local food bank. And recipients have to be referred to them so any donations go directly to those who need them most.

When I cycled down there last night, only a small section south side of Bournemouth Road junction was blocked off. It was kind of nice to experience half of Rye Lane without traffic and made me think that pedestrianising south of Bournmouth Road, and re-routing buses down Bournemouth and back round to meet Peckham Rye could work. Would be a great spot for a proper market too.

I agree with you completely Rosie. We all have to take more repsonsibility for the part we all play in enabling this destructive system we live within. I'll be honest and say I don't hold out much hope of any great change. People are on the whole deeply flawed.

Hmm Rosie. Yes soy production does result in deforestation, along with all the other cash drops that Latin America is turning to. The majority of soy grown however, is used to feed animals, like poultry, cattle and even farmed fish. Deforestation is the result of economic need, combined with global demand etc. Wrong in the harm being done to the envoronment yes, but right if you have a nation of people to feed and no help coming from anywhere else. It goes back to the premise that huge amounts of resources are required to produce all that beef that feeds burgers to nations. We eat too much. We are completely disconnected from how our food is produced, so yes, we don't make connections between cattle feed and deforestation (unless we look into it). The truth is that a producing a beaf burger is a messy business, and has impacts beyond just the cow itself.

And I suggest you allow people to take any view of your OP they like, which includes disagreeing with your persective on that article. It's a public forum, not YOUR soap box.

Yes Haruki. The eco system needs balance and that is something we humans are destroying. All life is a part of that eco system, and has taken millions of years to evolve. We are destroying it in just a couple of centuries. Pretty good evidence for why we perhaps should not rate humans as highly as some of us do.

Why not care about both equally?

Yes Dulwich Fox, omega 3 is very important for all the reasons you state, but that's why flaxseed and flaxseed oil are an important part of a vegetarian diet. Other sources of Omega 3 are tofu (and soya based food), walnuts, rapeseed etc. So again, not a problem if you eat the right things. I totally agree right-clicking, epsecially with regards the production of corn to beef. Cows of course are better fed on grass. Grass fed cows don't have ecoli in their guts, and therefore have less need for anti-biotics etc. Feeding corn to cows is just part of the process of industrialisation of meat production. And people do eat far more meat than they need to. Uncleglen, your point highlights perfectly why change needs to come from above, from suppliers and producers. But as they are profit led, not by environment or well being, only regulation can force change. It's a brave government that takes on the might of corporations.

red devil Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 'Lapsed Vegetarians' would've been kinder. And > then a general open question asking people who > have 'lapsed', why they did so. Surely it's better > to try and understand, rather than to > automatically castigate people... This was a point in my post. We don't have a culture that is supportive of vegetarian eating. i.e. being a vegetarian always involves paying more, going further, putting up with lack of choice in restaurants and pubs etc. That's why I think some people find it hard to continue. Someone above claimed vegetarianism carries health risks. Well I don't see obesity, diabetes and heart disease being caused by vegetarian diet! At the end of the day it is possible to get everything you need from all diets. You just have to know enough about what you are eating and be sensible about it.

I became vegetarian about ten years ago because I don't like the industrial ways in which animals are processed for meat (so I guess on priciple). Prior to that I ate meat but have always cared about animals, so I don't agree that a person can't care about animal welfare and eat meat at the same time. Many meat eaters for example will only eat meat reared in ethical ways. The article makes no effort however to understand why people giving up something they previously enjoyed relapse when surrounded by the stuff they are trying to give up. It takes will power and discipline to change anything that is entrenched in a persons life and food is no different. We are raised (unless our parents are vegetarian) as meat eaters. Most pubs/ restaurants (unless vegetarian) cater very poorly for vegetarians. Some of the nicest food I've ever eaten is vegan, but you have to go out of your way to find it. There is so little that promotes vegetarianism that it is a constant effort for some people. So I get why people relapse, and I think the OP is being a bit judgemental and unfair.

And not everyone wants/ or can afford to pay west end prices at their local. If there's a market for it, then it's good for the area.

Look for a Buffalo too, if you Cantel the difference.

I'd stilton want to know what feta dumped it tho.

Lauren vs stero kicks was no contest imo. Lauren is a very talented singer. The right act went home.

Try contacting a wildlife rescue centre to come and get it and have a look. If it is injured or ill they will take care of it. They can also just humanely relocate it too. Hose pipes and other methods to drive it away in fear will not help the animal. Try these guys, http://www.londonwildlifeprotection.org.uk/

right-clicking Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "The advertising industry's prime task is to > ensure that uninformed consumers make irrational > choices, thus undermining market theories that are > based on just the opposite.? > ― Noam Chomsky It's a fundemental flaw of our economic philosophy. We employ people to make crap which then has to be somehow sold to keep everyone employed. Meanwhile, those at the top suck all the wealth they can from the wages of the masses. If you really think about it, most of human life is pointless.

This is my experience of this forum. I joined about a week ago (not a while, as Loz claims). I post on a thread about the sad death of a man in Sydenham Woods and no-one minds. I post on thread about vegans (because I'm a vegetarian) and no-one minds. I post on a thread for a prospective conservative for MP and all hell breaks lose, simply because I and others (in my opinion rightly so) want to ask questions that touch on current conservative policy. This person is seeking to be an MP, not a local councillor. I stood my ground without being rude to anyone and Loz butts in, like he's some forum big cheese and I stand up to him. Now I can't post for him writing crap that I'm a troll. Is that how it's going to be Loz? THAT's how those people welcome new members to the forum. Btw Loz, in that genius brain of yours, did it not occur to you that this thread has hit a chord with me, and that's why I'm posting on it? Of course not, you just want to have a go don't you Sherlock. This experience is a perfect example of why many people have little good to say about debate on here.

For the last time Loz, you are WRONG. Get over it. Or are you trying to deliberately provoke me again?

Louisa I have never been on this forum (and that the last time I'm going to say that) before and that's exactly Krolls point. It's why I probably won't stick around either. Why can't you and Loz (and the other one Aquarius Moon) just accept you are wrong? It's like some kind of playground nah nah nah. Who cares anyway! It's a forum. People can come and go as they please.