Huguenot

As I've said, the studies show the opposite to what your mum thinks. Cycling proficiency lessons would help though. Kids are more likely to takes risks because they're kids.

Easy thing for blind spots is to check if you can see the driver's eyes. If you can't see his/hers, then s/he can't see you. I don't think I'd generalise about good/bad cyclists anymore than I would good/bad drivers. Plenty of studies demonstrate that your level of awareness drops as your personal risk does. This implies that drivers are far less likely to have their wits about them than a cyclist. It doesn't surprise me that drivers would blame anyone apart from themselves.

Dunno, Sherwick, who's guilty of what?

So did someone forget to move the sun when we changed the clocks?

For God's sake, Lizzie, you are not allowed to accuse Vince of racism because he believes ED to be better than high crime areas. In the subject of his post he was contextualising crime rates, nothing else. If you have prejudices, then they are yours, you cannot in all reasonableness suggest that someone else shares them. That's offensive behaviour.

That doesn't tell you anything about ED honk, that just tells you what Vince thinks. I don't believe that what I think will tell you anything about Singapore, nor anything about Beijing or anywhere else I've lived.

Hmmm. I guess it's an hour out? ;-)

That was the capital punishment gag ;-)

"the sun dial in The Sexby Gardens seems to be set on winter time" Tell me more!

"its a great word , saves time and explaination" Sure, that's how prejudice works. It characterises and dehumanises someone by classifying them. It's all about intent, chavtastic is a celebration and unlikely to draw fire. Don't get me wrong, I'm not above using terms like these, but when I do most of my colleagues will tender a reproachful glance as they're as aware as I am that I've been lazy and nasty. There undoubtedly is a sub-culture of people who have Kate Moss posters on their wall, but I'd only christen someone with that sobriquet if I was being vindictive.

Irony wush

Jeez AfN, you take disagreement personally don't you? Big Hugs. :) I didn't quite understand your stream of consciousness stuff there, are you suggesting that I think the Tomlinson case is a conspiracy? I'm aware that honesty isn't your best suit, but please take the time to read my views on the subject. You'll find them earlier on the thread.

Good ol' days eh, TLS? ;-) The only reason I don't subscribe to capital punishment is because it's not possible to get it right all the time. However, I think that people who would wilfully train a dog to set it on a stranger's pet are demonstrating such a lack of respect for society that they don't deserve to be part of it.

Sage advice indeed Stupid. I'd probably not lie, but try and pass off the current salary as a joke. As in 'I was doing work experience, I hope you're not going to hold that against me?' I'd follow up, as Stupid says, with a reiteration of my strengths and contributions, and then ask them what salary my skills could attract.

"Now these bleeding labour lot get in, house prices go through the roof handing all those old sarf london families a bucket of money to hand on to their kids and to top it off, transport and opportunities increase and the local schools really started to improve. Bleedin tony blair." Good heavens, Christ on a bike etc.. Am I in agreement with AfN?? Assuming the irony meter was going full tilt of course. Also I agree with MM, things must be going to hell on a handcart! GB has indeed reaped the rewards that autocrats suffer when it comes to succession time, there's no-one there. I'm not sure this is directly the responsibility of Gordonski, but more of the length of time they've been in office. I don't feel any glee, because there's no evidence that the Tories have a better solution. In some respect this is a greater criticism of the opposition, because they've had plenty of time to build a better infrastructure without the pressures of government. Even with this free hand, they come up with the potty boys. Ridiculous.

No, AfN, these production companies don't 'get it made and sell it to the highest bidder'. The production companies come up with a concept and a budget which they propose to a distribution house who touts it around TV stations to see if anyone will buy it. If it's a low budget ratings winner (think 'Deal or No Deal') then most will take it. If it's a high budget documentary than like as not the only possible bidder is the BBC, who (if they take it) will then become more involved to ensure their money is wisely spent. If there is no buyer, the program won't get made. I have no doubt that there are efficiency savings to be made at the BBC, but I'm also an apologist for human nature. Organisations don't run particularly efficiently because people aren't robots. More power to that. If you want to make this debate (a new goalpost again AfN) about whether I would welcome the BBC at 15p a day, then the answer is yes, but it doesn't change the initial question about whether the BBC is value for money at 38p. It is. Finally, if you are seriously asking if shouting at people is provocation, then I suggest that you try shouting obscenities in people's faces in Nunhead's pubs for a few hours. If you provoke a response then it is indeed, quite literally, provocation. I'm not one of the people in this world who dehumanise policemen, if you do, which I'm sure you don't, then that would be a failure of imagination and a heinous crime. I can assure you that as a human being, if I came up to you and screamed obscenities in your face, you would hit me with your baton. I would have deserved it. That's why AfN I welcome your opinion, I don't tell you to f*ck off to another thread (as you have done to me), and I shall smother you with kisses and hugs if I ever meet you in the street ;-)

So far as I understand Admin is multiple people.... ::o Something about their name being legion for they are many. Now where have I heard that before ;-)

I wouldn't hold up Singapore's rights to public assembly as a beacon for others to follow, but it would also be silly to try and judge Asian countries by western standards. They believe in corporal punishment for example. Singapore only achieved independence during violent upheaval just over 30 years ago in a region riven by turmoil and civil unrest. This is within most resident's lifetimes, and memories are long over here. The local mindset for political debate has been demonstrated recently in both Thailand and Malysia, where protestors overran the regional equivalent to the G7 meeting, and created a city centre riot to burn maths books because of the use of English text. It's not in the nature of the local communities to protest peaceably, they feel more comfortably with highly polarised polemic, agitation, and an emotional mindset verging on hysteria. A bit like some of the ED borders crew. Whilst stringent, technical restrictions such as those on protests (for example acquiring a permit) have created a community in Singapore that generates close to US$50,000 income per head (ten times local averages), that is peaceable, very welcoming and only a wee bit boring. The police are charming and friendly. Horses for courses an' all that.

Re. "Hoist with [one's] own petard", it's a quote from Hamlet. It means to be damaged by your own attack on someone else. I can't work out for the life of me what this has to do with 'Thatcher's Children', unless you are suggesting that they had a good education? The quote was written around 1600 - that's about 400 years ago if you're struggling. Since Thatcher was around for only 10 and a half years, it seems unlikely that she had much influence on the phrase. Petard was actually a bomb that apparently was named after the act of breaking wind.

Can the protestors suggest an alternative to contain the violent fringe that attends their events? They seem unwilling/incapable of doing so. Any other social event wouldn't get a license with this kind of track record of destruction in their wake. Perhaps they could hold their events in fields where there's nothing to trash?

Chuckle. I don't think you'll get the best out of Admin by suggesting that s/he has snobbish delusions. You mentioned earlier that your problem was with a thread entitles "This Forum's Gone Gay", it doesn't sound much to me like a postcode issue as a prejudice one? You are quite right to talk about responsibilities to the community, it seems you're a little less strict with yourself though?

Antijen, these delusional idiots are welcome to make their own television shows, I've never suggested they shouldn't. There's nothing totalitarian about my point of view. They can show it to whoever will watch it. AFN isn't arguing about the 'option' to tune in, s/he wants all the other television stations shut down. As with AFN, you're inventing an argument to defend. I simply don't agree with AFN that we should shut the BBC down and replace it with this moronic crap because it's 'better'. The question was, is the BBC value for money. At 38p per day, it demonstrably is. Ignoring any nonsensical student union arguments about bias, drama, documentary and natural history programmes are worth the 38p in their own right. If you want to talk about a history of liberation, then think about the BBC's 1961 showing of 'Cathy Come Home', programmes like this changed society. Probably many of the freedoms you enjoy today are down to the Beeb. Regarding AFN's assertion that this stuff gets made with or without the Beeb. This is palpable nonsense. You may not know how the commissioning system works, but independent 'free-to-air' stations don't get them made.

Great point RD

Are you an astronaut Cupid?

Well, yes, I thinking 'making up' stories destroys democracies, which are reliant on informed decision. If people deliberately do this in order to influence voting intent then they should go to jail, not to a new job. If it's true then it's a different matter altogether, and people are allowed to offer their interpretation or speculate as to impact. This particular story appears to be just silly. I don't know whether it revealed intent to smear people, or was just a smug little twit putting up silly ideas to a mate.