Huguenot

No, it was from the survey that we ran on this forum. If you check paragraph two, the clue is in the phrase "we ran a CPZ survey on this forum". The full results were distributed at the time on this forum, so they'll still be here somewhere. I'll have a look and see if I still have a copy. Don't worry too much though Loz, because the survey was run on the forum, there's still plenty of scope to say that you don't believe/accept the data, that the sample size isn't representative, or that people were lying etc. Which group are you in BTW? Is it as a resident on one of the affected roads, one of the peeps who make use of the affected roads on trips to LL or the station, or a local trader?

You're right kford. One tibby writes in a single sentence stream-of-consciousness with no capitals or punctuation. The other one seems to write in well formed sentences using really quite complex ideas and metaphors. Very weird thread.

You'd have to ask that of them wot rote it. I deliberately didn't talk about the overall picture, as I'm sure it's more complex, but the debate was about peak oil, not about the end of energy. Hence the assumption is that many aspects of mechanization can still go ahead as usual - including heating greenhouses and sheds, and running conveyor belts. Distribution could still take place over electrified rail systems etc. The ones that aren't much good without oil are things like refrigerated overseas distribution.

Yes, the south circular is an absolute nightmare around and beyond clapham. If you were up the north end of ED and wanted to be congestion free I'd go... Half Moon Lane, Norwood Road, at Tulse Hill A205 west towards Streatham. Straight across A23, third left into New Town Road. Follow this straight onto Emmanuel Road and Fernlea Road to Balham Station. Straight across Balham High Road. First left, first righ into Dendy Road, leading onto Ravenslea Road and finally to Nightingale Lane. Turn left and follow the road down, over Trinity Road onto Burntwood Lane. At the end turn left onto Garratt Lane, right onto Summerstown Road and right onto Plough Lane (past the old Wimbledon Footie stadium). At the end of Plough Lane go straight over Durnsford Road onto Gap Road. Follow this and take 3rd left onto Alexandra Road (just over the railway). Follow Alexandra Road all the way down into Wimbledon town centre. At Wimbledon Hill Road turn right, first left onto Worple Road. Go down to the gyratory and follow this round. On the opposite side will be Combe Lane and signposted for A3. At the A3 go soutbound until you reach the Kingston bypass, come off the A3 here following Kinston Bypass, probably signposted A309 to Hampton Court Palace. Follow this until you go past East Molesey Station, ovr the Thames, where on the other side Hampton Court Palace will be on your right, but you'll turn immediately left onto Hampton Court Road. Follow this as it turns into Upper Sunbury Road and the Staines Road pas the Kempton Park Racecourse. About half a mile after the racecourse there'll be a major roundabout where you'll turn left onto the M3. Yay!

It's no more vigilante than Crimewatch or a newspaper photofit. The CPS thing is a red herring. If it was a first-time shoplifting offence the police would likely issue a "Penalty Notice for Disorder" without needing to go to court. If the alleged crim refused to pay it would be their choice to go to court, not the CPS. If the defendant agreed to pay, he's admitting guilt in the eyes of the law, and the libel case couldn't be pressed. Basically, there's nothing illegal about this unless it's proven to be false. I suspect the recommendation of plod is that the evidence is incontrovertible. With all that in mind, I celebrate the public humiliation of thieves.

Buns Lots of buns. It's not actually true to say that the UK isn't self-sufficient in food. It depends what food group you're talking about, and how easy or difficult it is to rectify the situation: http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/46174000/gif/_46174429_food_security_446gr.gif The only situation that might be slightly unnerving is fresh vegetables - but it's easy to rectify. There's plenty of available farmland. Currently the EU pays farmers not to farm. Potatoes and meat are nothing to worry about. The fruit thing's a shame, but no reason to panic - there's quite enough of our nutritional requirements in more 'British' foods. Fruit's a bit of a luxury. So from a food perspective the transport oil thing wouldn't necessarily be a crisis, just a change of style. Cooking it might be a different matter. If you'd like a detailed breakdown of UK food security you can find it here.

Yes you do leave yourself open for action, and one of the key defences for libel/defamation is truth. I suspect both the plod and the shopkeeper are aware of this, and have sufficent proof before posting to make a civil action 99.9% likely to fail. If the plaintiff takes action then they expose their identity and open themselves for prosection on a shoplifting charge. If they are convicted then the libel action's over. QED.

If they're sufficiently mentally ill that they can't recognise that theft is a crime then they're probably not going to be too bothered about their photo in the window.

Lol, comparing photos of shoplifters to the death penalty is about as close as I've seen to a Godwin without quite crossing the line ;-) Sorry you find me Singapore dull and cultureless. I'm not quite sure of the relevance to this debate, but are you suggesting that exposing shoplifters for being thieving blighters will make the UK dull and cultureless? Letting thieves get away with it because they're part of some cheerful cockney local colour seems to be a weak argument. I honestly think that you've got so bogged down in the 'principle' of this argument that you've lost any sense of perspective. They were shoplifting, they got exposed. They'll be socially embarasssed and somewhat chastened. It's hardly disproportionate. The likelihood of this being a middle-class whoopsie or mentally disabled is invisibly small. Talk about not seeing the wood for the trees.

I was intrigued by this as I don't remember it, but I used to be a fan of these things. Apparently Unilever do make a dehydrated Oxtail Soup in the 1-2-3 range. However, it's not a cube, it's a packet of loose granules. It comes in both home and industrial(2kg) sizes. Despite this none of the major supermarkets stock it. Sainsbury's, Tesco's, Asda and Waitrose all came up a blank. I'd probably focus my hunt on the large floor space 'value' chains like Lidl or Aldi. You can buy the 2kg buckets from wholesalers online.

Whether we like it or not, 'face' is a very important concept in some cultures. Whilst publicity probably saved this woman initially, it might be wise to let this drop off the front pages so that the option to change her sentence can be done without losing face. Having said that, no-one knows the truth behind this case, it's also possible that this woman was behind the murder of her husband.

PM computedshorty.

Hi Ridgley, we're not 'obliged' to help as part of the EU. However, Ireland do receive a net income from the EU, have done for years, and the UK pay into EU funds. In general, the term 'bailout' is poorly used in these scenarios. It's mostly about underwriting loans made by financial institutions, it doesn't actually mean money is changing hands. It's important that you don't perceive this as handing over 10 quid to a beggar. Where money does change hands it's a loan not a gift. Louisiana makes a very good point about responding to real rather than perceived need in foreign aid. However, financial support for Ireland doesn't come out of foreign aid budgets, it's another thing entirely. Ireland is a major trading and cultural partner of the UK, so the best way of thinking about it might be as the UK as a supplier who lets a shopkeeper delay his payments for a month because the shopkeeper's having a bad couple of weeks.

If you think smallholders can afford security staff zeban, you're on a totally different planet. There are indeed exceptions, the odd funny moment, the odd mentally unwell. But the massive massive massive majority are just thieves. Shopkeepers aren't ferrari driving bankers or faceless government bureaucrats. They're people just like you, with a limited income or a bank loan, that search out stuff elsewhere and import them into the local community as a service - from which they generate a small profit. When shoplifters strike they are literally stealing food from the mouths of the shopkeeper's children. It's pathetic example of the crisis in english society that the local community isn't up in arms in defence of their local suppliers. Instead they're whinging about extraordinary exceptions that they feel 'prove' their case. Idiotic.

It's difficult because a large number of people on this forum are those that drive to the station and park in those roads - not everyone will share your need for a solution. It was particularly insightful that when we ran a CPZ survey on this forum there was a majority against a CPZ, but that was because the majority of respondents did not live on affected roads. In fact they parked on the affected roads when they were doing a quick run to Lordship Lane, or a convenience run to the station. The ones talking about what a 'nightmare' a CPZ is, and how they don't work etc. etc. may have an entirely different agenda - to keep their options open to park outside your house. The majority of those on the affected roads (90%+) actually voted for a CPZ, in spite of the potential cost and hassle. The traders are aginst a CPZ, but seem strangely unwilling to find out how much of their trade actually comes from people parking on affected roads. As a consequence I don't think they're being honest either. It's possible they don't want a CPZ solely for personal convenience. So, as I say, this isn't an honest debate, it's full of competing agendas and forked tongues. That's why it gets so heated.

It seemed weird in the first place, and it seems weirder now. Did the initial crime get reported to the police? You said that you were trying to report it, but the thief 'grabbed your hand'? Did you call them again afterwards? Did you get a crime number? Did you receive a visit from a police officer? Did you go to the police station? Were you contacted by victim support?

I can understand your point zeban, but technically there is no difference between seeking out shoplifters to help with enquiries than it is to seek out armed robbers or issue photofits of muggers. Both haven't been convicted, both have the opportunity to sue for defamation. Similarly there's an important difference difference between a vigilante and neighborhood watch - that after identifying the perpetrator vigilantes try and employ physical punishment outside the law. I take it the shopkeeper isn't recommending that the alleged crim should be attacked? I can't see the police signing this off. In other words he isn't a vigilante. All in all I think we'll find the shopkeeper is completely within the law, completely within their rights, and understandable in their frustration - what's more I'm betting the evidence is completely incontrovertible.

My all time worst flight was with American. We'd gone with them because we could get business for the same price as standard on BA. What an absolute disaster. Shabby planes, dogeared seats and a non-functioning entertainment system. I understand that Continental and American were in merger talks, so there may not be much between them. I do understand that Continental operate a much younger fleet though, which might make difference as to whether you feel like you're in a flying shed. If there is a two drink rule, that would be reason enough for rejecting anyone on a long haul flight.

"Well Im afraid we do own Christmas" [sic] No you don't. You stole it and renamed it. It's points to the arrogance and self-absorption of the Christian faith that you can't accept that. Anyway, I love the decorations... coloured lights, trees, generosity of spirit and and gift giving. It's a shame that for some Christians it's more about ownership and religious hectoring. The celebrations undoubtedly have huge positive social and economic effect at a dismal time of the year - the very reason such celebrations were invented. If Southwark needs to cut something then cutting seasonal celebrations would be short sighted. Take charitable assistance away from churches instead.

Eh? East Dulwich Forum, he represents East Dulwich Ward and he's not allowed to talk about it? If councillors from other wards don't comment on here then that is their problem, not James'. You can't ask James to talk about other wards, and it's completely unreasonable to ask him not to comment because your own councillors are so crap they won't get involved. Sorry you feel bad about it, but write to them and complain, not James.

If you're really full of peace and goodwill, the best way to communicate that would not be by claiming that Christians own "Christmas" and that you're being patronisingly charitable in letting other people celebrate it ;-) Did you know, during the pre-Christian Roman mid winter festival (called the Saturnalia) masters and slaves changed places for the day (as well as exchanging gifts)? Seems peace and goodwill is not the sole preserve of Christians eh?

Unemployment Benefit claimants?

"Everyone enjoys Christmas, it's a significant time for Christians, and they dont mind anyone enyoying it with them" That's cheeky Tarot. Gift giving at the winter solstice predates Christianity, winter markets, the 12 days of "Christmas", yule logs, trees, holly & ivy, ho ho ho are all non-Christian traditions. There's every evidence that "Christmas" was just the politically motivated theft of other people's celebrations in support of a totalitarian expansionist regime. You outght to be pleased that the rest of us don't mind sharing our festivals with you Christians.

That's not a correct interpretation of 'scientific belief' Sedgewick. The one thing that all those theories currently have in common is that they've been tested, found to be inaccurate and consequently rejected. This is a good definition of 'belief': "Belief is the psychological state in which an individual holds a proposition or premise to be true". Science does not hold things to be 'true', instead it says that the balance of evidence suggests that a particular hypothesis can be considered accurate until a better one is identified. This is a good summary: "To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. Scientific researchers propose hypotheses as explanations of phenomena, and design experimental studies to test these hypotheses." Regligious belief entails gathering no evidence, measuring no phenomena and applying reason that at best is distorted. It avoids all 'testing' on the grounds that testing undermines faith. In order to disguise the failings in this approach religion invents a supernatural mega-being to paper over the cracks. If the accuracy of this approach is challenged religions become more entrenched in their beliefs and usually embark on wars of oppression and wholesale slaughter.

The east coast of Africa isn't the Dodecanese. They were heading from the Seychelles to Tanzania, and would have been travelling within 200 miles of the Somali border. Kenya itself was on the verge of a civil war. They were comfortably on the sout coast of India. They could have chosen a zillion other places to go. They would have received copious warnings from locals in the Seychelles. The authorities would certainly have told them the 'official' reach of piracy, but would also have communicated that this was hardly laid in stone - and would undoubtedly advised them unofficially that they should travel elsewhere. http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/46617000/gif/_46617719_seych_kidnap_466map.gif