Huguenot

LOL! I'm not sure that Shenzhen is smoggy coz of smokers charliecharlie. I think it's because of the cars that people drive, the cheap consumer rubbish they buy and the energy they burn. The majority of these people are non-smoking westerners. And they have the bloody nerve to complain about smokers? Makes me irrationally angry. Hypocritical blangers!!

Walking in a clear bright morning with delicious fresh air... and getting stuck if front of a whinger. ;-) Even if I stop smoking, they won't stop whingeing. There'll just be something else.

I could of course add that you can get the train into Blackfriars and walk for just three more flipping minutes. Look, if you want to campaign on me me me London Bridge London Bridge London Bridge from DENMARK HILL ONLY AND DIRECTLY EVERY BLOODY MINUTE, then you're on a winner. Congratubloodylations. You can't win the battle on Victoria, because the trains will still go there. This service was only once every 30 mins anyway. The changes to trains confer vast benefits to many more people than YOU YOU YOU. I'm just glad that I'm not the self-centred egotist that tries to engage vast numbers of people on the basis of fabricated bullknackers just to add a few minutes to my own convenience. It comes as no surprise that the consensus of people against NR on this politicised rampage are living at the taxpayers convenience anyway. No experience of compromise, no experience of commitment, just a shedload of me me me gimme gimme gimme take take take strop strop strop. Go for yer life ;-)

"more likely to be sucking cock at cabinet table" There you go again. More homophobia. "if your liberal mates used in the USA ...." Is that now taking on the USA too? "you dinner lady you" Now you hate dinner ladies? Come on snooky. Is there no end to your hatred? Do you hate yourself? Tickly tickly *stroky head* ;-)

You're all chumps. I was posting on this 'ere forum when admin was posting to himself to make it look popular.... (Click on my name and go to first post, woooo yeah! back THEN!!!! ;-) 2006!) Within a month of launch some pillocks were complaining that it isn't what it was. I can tell you, with considerable authority, that it's exactly the same as what is was. A cornucopia of pookies. I only post on here myself because I like being abused. The cleverer the better. Only the vainglorious attract my down-nose-looking. Come on now. Brush yourselves down. Raise your chin.... there. That's better. Now, go and poo in his briefcase.... :)

Tenets, James B ;-) Boo yakka Mick Mac. You've got to be bloody rich to be worried by Lib Dem CGT reform, and I don't see any policies that will disincentivise people from preparing for the future. LD will only struggle at the next election because of 'cut your nose off to spite your face' tribalism. Mainly great policies. Stupid stuff with the 'only a 2 grand bonus' but sometimes you have to be populist.

LOL! On other notes... "...we are here to provide for all those who are weaker and hungrier, more battered and crippled than ourselves. That is our only certain good and great purpose on earth..." I don't see a current ideological split between the parties on this. Most of them are in the middle. There's a certain amount of quibbling over the definitions of "weaker and hungrier, more battered and crippled" but a general belief in the welfare state. The concern is noted in the electorate. We've had threads on this forum about perfectly fit ruddy cheeked right wing tossers jogging away from disabled parking spots because we 'can't do nuffink abaaaart it' *finger*. The debate lies outside some sort of bleeding heart concern for corpses in the gutter, and much closer to the complexities of international cooperation in the face of limited resources. The Tories think they can achieve this by spinking down the stave end of their Britannia trident in the gutter (which is moronic), the Lib Dems are more conciliatory. Labour are just fluttering in the wind.

I can see PGC's point, but it doesn't work in practice. If God was omniscient and omnipresent, not only would he have seen it coming, but he'd probably observe 'Here we go again'. Besides, if God gave up a child to save someone else he'd probably be chock full of smug middle class martyrdom.

Fag, a junior boy who acts or acted as servant ("fagging") to a senior boy at a British independent school. It's you that's calling the Lib Dems fags, I've made no such assertion. If you aren't aware of the coalition agreement, and the elements on it from the Lib Dem manifesto, then you ought to read up on your subject. If you are simply suffering from blind obstinacy, then I'm surprised you see that as a positive quality. If you're just being cynical, then I would remind you that you're the one who thinks that now Labour are in charge of Southwark that Nunhead is going to get all their wet dreams at once.

Audacious I am ;-) It absolutely is tyrannical. Her ideology is trumping her clarity. She is removing the rights of the electorate to select whoever they choose. It is the end of democracy. We would all like to see a parliament that more closely reflects the population, but you cannot do this by removing democratic rights. You must instead educate the electorate in the benefits of diversity and ensure the opportunity to learn the necessary skills are open to all.

Well sure, anything's possible - but I'm not sure it's valid to protest against something the we imagine might happen! So far as I understand the developments are all linked. Hence if the funding is cut then the system stays as is.

It can't have been much of a boot in the balls if you needed to tell me you'd done it ;-) More silly homophobic class war stuff? Ooooh, ooooh, the toffs and the fags, see if you can get your chewing gum on their blazers?

It's not really worth debating with you jenny1840 beacuse all we're going to get is a load of puerile and vaguely homophobic class war jokes ;-)

Gosh boswell and Mr Mann, chill a little! I think Quids was just having a little fun and trying to cheer up the students. Talk about thin skin! Mr Mann clearly hasn't detected the irony in criticising Quids for something he wouldn't do in a pub - and then calling him a t*sser. ;-)

This 'Pear of Anguish' would make an attractive religious keepsake and also a nasty way to go. I'll leave it to your imagination to guess how it works... http://mightybroke.com/mightypix/pearanguish02iv7.gif

Aha, indeed. So here it is...

I thought this was a satire originally, or a parody. But it doesn't seem to satirise or parody anyone. It's not even really parodying ED either. ED is transparently left wing - not right. It may be poking fun at the coalition, but I don't think ED will care. EDers tend not to be ideological and don't wear political parties like identity badges. Most sensible Lib Dem supporters see the coalition with the Conservatives as an opportunity to pull the Tories left rather than the LDs right. I think the sensible money is on compromise, not conflict. Some left wing dinosaurs would prefer to cut off their noses to spite their faces! AFN would like ED to be a conservative heartland, as it would suit her need for an enemy at the door. ;-) Either way, here is Blueberry and Lemon jam - it's very tasty, very healthy and full of consummate goodness: Ingredients * 4 1/2 cups blueberries * 6 1/2 cups sugar * 2 teaspoons lemons, rind of, grated * 1/3 cup lemon juice * 2 (3 ounce) envelopes liquid fruit pectin (Ball Fruit Jell) Directions 1.Prepare jars and lids according to manufacturer's instructions. 2.Combine blueberries, sugar, lemon peel, and lemon juice in a large saucepot. 3.Bring to a rolling boil over high heat; stir frequently. 4.Stir in pectin. 5.Boil hard for 1 minute. 6.Remove from heat and skim foam (if necessary). 7.Immediately ladle into hot jars, leaving a 1/4 inch headspace. 8.Cap and process for 15 minutes in a boiling water canner.

Yarp, tried that. It came up with... We couldn't find anyone named @victoriainse15. It had the same answer for any variations on that that I could think of :( Maybe Singapore have banned it. ;-)

Couldn't seem to get that link to work?

This is kind of a good summary: "For example, by 2012 the number of trains serving Denmark Hill station will increase from nine to 11 an hour during peak times and from six to eight trains in the off-peak. Improved connections and more frequent trains will mean that 30,000 more people will live within 30 minutes of King?s College Hospital in 2012 compared to 2006."

To be fair to Network Rail, they've never said the London Bridge to Victoria line had no value. They said that the two main terminals, and particularly LB didn't have sufficient platform space to accommodate the service as it stands at the moment alongside more long distance commuter lines and the ELL. NR felt that the Dartford service alongside the ELL and new Bellingham service provided a better solution than the south London Line, but not on quite the same terms as it does at the moment. The lobby groups have been effective in getting their point across... "A survey by London Travelwatch found that 88% of passengers on the line felt they would be inconvenienced by the changes, the survey also noted that respondents were generally unaware of the ELL/Overground proposals or of any possible benefits they might bring" So a lot of the people are protesting with half the information. This is undoubtedly a significant failure on behalf of Network Rail. However, I believe that the protest groups are also deliberately keeping their members poorly informed - and suspect they have a hidden agenda of protest for protest sake, rather than a better service for commuters. In the sense that the protesters are ill-informed, then I think it's likely that a lot of the fuss is a knee-jerk reaction to change per se. A map of the proposed changes can be seen here You can also view a pdf attached to this post. I should point out that I have no affiliation with the rail services, I just hate to see anyone taking an unfair slagging from people who aren't being given the whole picture. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7f/South_london_line_future.png/800px-South_london_line_future.png

Petrichor (Thanks to ruffers) from Greek petros "stone" + ichor the fluid that flows in the veins of the gods in Greek mythology) is the name of the scent of rain on dry earth. The term was coined in 1964 by two Australian researchers, Bear and Thomas, for an article in the journal Nature. In the article, the authors describe how the smell derives from an oil exuded by certain plants during dry periods, whereupon it is absorbed by clay-based soils and rocks. During rain, the oil is released into the air along with another compound, geosmin, producing the distinctive scent. In a follow-up paper, Bear and Thomas (1965) showed that the oil retards seed germination and early plant growth.

"Having said that though, the majority of accidents happen on rural roads and are not speed related (according to the dept of transport data)" No DJKillaQueen. Sorry, but your figs aren't accurate. I appreciate that you think I'm on your case, I'm not. Please find attached Road Traffic Accident data from DOT. 58.5% of accidents HAPPEN ON URBAN 'A' ROADS. In England this increases to 60.6%.

Ah, you'll be fine wallerski! :) Sometimes it can get a bit full-on having new experiences every day - especially if the bogs are stinky. I used to get over it by parking up in the hotel pool for a day and getting the buggers to ferry me booze. It feels like you're 'losing' a day, but in fact you're make the rest of the time so much better!

So has CWALD turned into leagaleagle truned into ImpetuousVrouw?