Blah Blah

E-cigarettes are still facilitating the main addictive element of smoking - i.e nocotine. So the question should be whether or not it's ok to advertise/ glamourise an addictive substance. It's a grey area because there's no doubt that the smoke inhaled from tobacco is carcinogenic and e-cigarettes are a better altenative. But at the same time, the same industry that sexed up tobacco to turn everyone into smokers, is now producing e-cigarettes. Those are companies whom have never cared about the health of their customers. The question therefore is whether people who would never have taken up smoking, will take up e-cigarettes. That's impossible to know right now, but that for me is where the danger in glamourous advertising lies. Personally I'd keep those ads off the telly and treat e-cigs under the same legislation as tobacco advertising.

Half that makes no sense to me either and proves my point of what a moron you are.

In a final effort to get you to see sense Grok, if you were played audio files of just voices speaking English, you would pretty easily to be able to tell Oriental from Asian from Indian from African from European. Most people could do that. Some people would be able to tell a Chinese accent from a Japanese one, or a Canadian from an American, or a Russian from a German. Some might even be able to do better and pinpoint differences between local accents, like Cockney compared to Brummie and the global equivalents. Being able to do that of course requires local exposure and knowledge. Accent is a defining characteristic that helps identification, that's all. So your whole argument that the OP was somehow wrong to reference that is nonsense, as many have pointed out, and the fact that people have been off the forum over Christmas and come back to find you still banging on about it says something not very rational about you. Move on dude.

'funny clothes'???? There's an insult if ever there was one. Most people would reference anyone with any accent and most people who live in London have plenty of exposure to accents from the various countries of Africa. But as your post shows, you are more intent on trouble making than diplaying any intelligence. Go and look a pictures of Ethiopians compared to Nigerians for example. You'll see a physical difference, a difference that black people themselves see, because unlike some white people, they don't see everyone with a different skin colour as all looking the same. They are the same differnces that we acknowledge accross europe btw. Africa is a huge continent that borders the middle east and anthropologically is an area of great difference - if only you open your eyes and look properly. Whilst the OP may not have had the knowledge to pinpoint which African accent she heard, it is perfectly ok to acknowledge an accent, in the same was as we would acknowledge an eastern European or Asian etc accent.

There does seem to have been a spike lately though and going on about stable yearly averages, whether slightly up, down or otherwise is of little comfort to those who have been burgled. There's probably a small group of people responsible for most of the recent burglaries, and they need to be caught asap.

For goodness sake Grok, give it a rest. Nothing the OP said gave any impression of the sort. Most of us can tell from an accent if a black person is a first generation migrant or not. Some of us can even tell the difference in accents between different African countries. It's a perfectly valid observation to make, despite your attempts to accuse the OP of something other than the face value reason for posting. Would you say the same about someone referencing a white person with an Irish or Scottish accent? I suggest it's you who has a problem there, not the OP.

Except mitochondrial DNA says was are all out of Africa.

Not only a great story and great ending, but also a great example of how people can come together and help each other :)

Agreed Otta.

I too agree with Buddug. Grok, why do you deliberately set out to confront in unhelpful ways, behaviour typified by the following comment? "He was shouting at his child (she looks between 8-10). Hitting her on the back, and back of her head. Swearing and shouting she wasn't going to school. She was screaming every time he hit her and saying she wanted to go to school please Daddy. Who doesnt have to raise voice to kids sometimes? Hitting or pushing along? Smacking, slapping, punching? Tantrum screaming like all kids can or crying out in pain? Swearing bloody, flipping or other?" Most adults know the difference between acceptable chastisement and physical violence when they see it and no, neither my wife or I have ever felt the need to hit our children. The OP clearly reports abuse, the damage of which psychologically is well researched. The risks to hitting anyone in the head, let alone a child, are also well researched. But I shouldn't have to be pointing that out to you should I? Step back and think about what you are writing.

How this thread has deviated! There's very little subjective room for describing a grown man hitting the back of a child's head imo. How else could the OP have described that? And that the child was crying as he did it. Not really much room for interpretation there either.

I cycled through this yesterday for the first time, from the Old Kent Road and found it to be ok. Haven't tried it from the Walworth Road side yet. But I can also see how it is worse for driving and why there are tailbacks. And before the changes, cyclists had paths accross the central island anyway, for safe crossing. Doesn't feel like the right answer to the problems that existed before.

I think you've done the right thing. If the Police find them, they will automatically alert social services. It's quite possible they live in that vicinity too.

Whatever the rights or wrongs of cartoonists, they don't deserve to die for it. I think everyone can agree with that.

I took that line in the script to mean that the money was useless to him, the builder, because he wouldn't get away with stealing it. I could be wrong though.

How is that sanctimony ????. When so many people are struggling to get their first home, and often being outbid by BTL investors, I thinks it's a perfectly reasonable suggestion.

Interesting. I think the article hits on a valid point in that simple messages that require no research or further reading (like denial) are more effective. It's why conspiracy theories grip people so easily. People don't feel they need to research for themselves and test the theory, because the theory is a simple one. The truth is often harder to piece together, and requires a deeper understanding of the processes, or science etc etc. And some people are basically lazy.

Travel is also expensive for those commuting into London every day to work. Season tickets costs thousands and those who buy them often have to stand on their journeys in as well. It's all just creaking under the cost and the demand.

Or the OP could just sell the home and give someone else the chance of owning their own home, instead of seeing all their hard earned wages going to pay off someone else's mortgage. That's an option too.

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ...not to mention the custodians of the country > and economy at that time Messrs Brown and > Darling...now where they from? Yes. because it never went wrong under Thatcher, Major and Lamont - oh wait!!!!

Louisa strikes me as more of a Harvey's Bristol Cream kind, with maybe a drop of Cinzano Bianco here and there. At her 'Admins Plesaure' does seem like a harsh sentence. Free Louisa!

You are talking utter nonsense Grok. Name me one place specifically that would lead to a riot if Police go there, go on, just one. And I can't think of any area in Peckham that is a no go zone either. Police on the beat have been replaced by Community Wardens. You will see them everywhere in Peckham. And before this government cut funding, safer neighbourhood Police teams could regularly be seen on estates. They were in fact, a very successful form of beat policing.

A bit like pinning your economy on just the city and property even ;)

London spy started ok, but then just got more & more bizarre. The burning maze had a bit of Carrie meets The Shining about it.

I thought is was rubbish from the beginning. Way too cosy and I just didn't buy the postcard nonsense and the tenuous link to extremism that wasn't.