Huguenot

It's a simple job for the iPhone 4, but needs a bit of fingertip control and jewel lees screwdrivers. Here's the best example: http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-19512_7-57565724-233/how-i-replaced-my-iphone-4s-battery-for-$8/

I think if you've got to the point where you're seeking out obscure evidence from niche conspiracy theorists and junk nutritionists to justify extraordinary public health claims for which there is no substantive evidence, then you have to ask why that is? The point at which your fears and anxieties build up to an irrational and disproportinate set of beliefs is when you've got to ask yourself if you've become paranoid?

Isn't this discussion really about taboos? The threat of deadly makeup and homicidal leather jackets may well be technically 'true' but the risk is so vanishingly small that there has never been a documented case to support these ornate theories. It's certainly not big enough to justify the visceral overreaction of some individuals to such 'gross' women. So isn't this protest really about 'gross' women upsetting the natural order and threatening the very fabric of society? The fact that the protestors on this thread regularly find themselves on other threads voicing traditionalist, conservative, reactionary opinions would seem to support this? The challenge with public makeup is that it reveals the design and application behind a woman's outward appearance. It's a statement of independence - a rejection of the idea that women are somehow naturally demure, feminine and retiring 'pretty little things' in favour of more complex motivations and machinations. So these protestations are perhaps the last gasp of Victorian traditionalists resentful of female equality? For 'gross women putting on makeup in public' instead read 'women should know their place'.

Vestry Road nuclear shelter http://www.flickr.com/photos/91281132@N00/sets/72157626826934654/with/5769204572/ The idea of surviving a nuclear war whilst surrounded by that abysmal shade of blue makes me want to kill myself. What is it about public bodies and terrible colour schemes?

I'm not convinced that Louisa actually believes what she is saying ;) I am impressed by her pioneering approach to banning shoes on public transport for Elf and Safety reasons. I am also impressed by her rather fine back garden aeroplane impression.

So InThePink, you're suggesting that....?

I assume you're referring to the censorship comment drusky? I read your post for a long time, trying to make sense of it. I have no reason to 'think about how that came about'. I came to the conclusion that after your 100 word discourse on the requirement for paperwork, bureaucratic oversight and systems (of which censorship is a part) that you meant that your 'no' referred to immediately prior posters. If I misunderstood you drusky it was because your comments were inconsistent and your meaning was vague. I have altered the quote, you'll notice that it doesn't change the meaning or context of anything else in my post.

"No censorship is the solution not the problem" Censoring sex is as ridiculous as referring to Voldemort as 'he who must not be named'. It's the stunted binary moralizing of schoolchildren. By trying to 'silence' sex you create psychological illness, you don't cure it. Whilst sitting in toilet cubicles I encounter with unnerving regularity demented neighbours who empty entire rolls of loo roll into the pan before they can have a number 2. It doesn't take rocket science to recognize this as a person who has been deranged by early childhood parental hectoring. "We need to know who has access to children, the regulatory processes in place, the accountability procedures, how people and organisations who make key decisions about children are themselves subject to a responsibility framework, reporting and feedback mechanisms and, most importantly, clear lines of sight across the whole matter so that everything is transparent to those who are active participants in society." Whilst rooted in goodwill, I find it extraordinary that intelligent adults really believe that socially unacceptable behaviour can be controlled through bureaucracy. Crimes aren't committed by upstanding, honest and transparent individuals - but by duplicitous, dishonest and manipulative miscreants. Reasonable diligence and oversight is worthwhile, but if it cripples the system it's pointless. We need to be empowering and inspiring child workers to do their best. We need to lift the veil of secrecy and psychological abuse that allows sexual abuse and unhealthy obsessions to go unspoken and unaddressed. It needs to be stressed that most of this silence and warped behaviour is created by Victorian moralists treating sex as a disease that must be hidden from sight.

If it really was G&T (and not, for example the loo or sparkling mineral water) the prognosis is poor - there's lots of corn syrup that will be left behind from the tonic even if you suck the water out with rice. Corn syrup is a good conductor, and although absorption might extract some water and reduce conductivity, enough will probably be left gumming it up to render it inert. Definitely worth a try though.

I'm fascinated to discover the solution that Southwark Greens propose to solve this crisis. The practicality and applicability of their solution will go a long way to resolve outstanding questions I have about the role of the Greens in modern society - tin foil hat loons or progressive capable politicians that deserve a vote. I look forward to finding out. (BTW a failure to propose any workable solution to this challenge puts the needle in the 'loon' camp)

What an important point Penguin68! If clusterfucks like Qatada are the price of free society and a massive global reduction in violence over the last two centuries then we should be happy to pay. That being said I don't have any problem with the portable scanners, because they're not being used inappropriately. Knives ARE allowed to be carried in the UK within certain parameters and that makes perfect sense.

Cuba sounds a fine idea!

You need to stop asking the same question now Greenson.

Answers during the working day usually come four or five per hour maximum. Answers in evenings or non working days maybe one or two an hour - people are out, busy, or just not in front of a PC. Relax a little. I'm sure you'll get some ideas.

It may depend on what kind of groups? Maybe sports would be a better bet?

I've got a Waitrose just around the corner from me in Singapore. It's called Cold Storage, but everything in it is Waitrose, including the prices. What does that say about ED?

There's a trick in there of course - that the actual date would depend upon which calendar you were using, which largely depended upon what religion you were, and hence whose history you were reading...

You want us to name and provide address details for journalists in South East London so you can publicly humiliate them? Why on earth would anyone do that?

Took 2 minutes. Rump Parliament declared the act declaring England to be a Commonwealth (republic) on 19 May 1649 Cromwell died 3 September 1658 Convention Parliament proclaimed Charles II lawful monarch on 8 May 1660 Charles II died 6 February 1685 William and Mary were crowned on 11 April 1689

Erm, surely google is your friend?

Tragically it all seems to come down to emotional response to the manifesto in the last two weeks before the election.

I think the received wisdom is that the opposition should never disclose policies mid term, as it allows the government to unpick the poor strategies or co-opt the good ones.

Cheers *Bob*, as predicted it was always going to be a disappointing discussion. Have a great day.

You'll notice I managed to get through that without insulting you *Bob*. A shame the same could not be said of you.

Ah, interesting point. Is the quality of a metaphor defined by what was implied or what was inferred? Is it degraded as an artform if the audience is unfamiliar with context? My own answers are contradictory - I'd tend to feel the quality of a metaphor can only be crafted, not accidental, but then I don't think a great work of art ceases to be one if the audience doesn't appreciate it.