rendelharris

Applespider Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > One way system in and out? Are they nuts? That > will cause worse havoc! Doesn't it make sense? If it means what I think it means it's what I wrote to them suggesting a while back - that people coming in are only allowed to use the new stairs and people coming out use the old ones, it would at least prevent the two streams colliding. Ideally it would be reversed so the new stairs were used for entrance in the morning and exit in the evening, but that might be rather complex and require more staff which the powers that be would doubtless be unwilling to fund. Only a temporary alleviation before the much-need second entrance though. Three to four years? Will it be speeded up if/when multiple people are seriously injured or even killed in a crush incident?

Passiflora Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rendelharris Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Living on Copleston, whatever the rights and > > wrongs of CPZs we are now in a position to have > no > > alternative I feel - our road and Soames Street > > are starting to look like a commercial carpark, > > one vehicle in three is a cab (as Rofflick > notes, > > usually without commercial plates, which argues > a > > dealer is probably storing them here), LGV or > > campervan in our section. > > A few years ago you wrote on this forum and > attacked people who supported a CPZ in their area. How sweet and very strangely obsessive of you to remember (though par for the course - I'm afraid I can't recall what made you decide to start this rather insipid feud with me, must have been something good). If your powers of recall stretch further, I was specifically debating with someone who was rejoicing over the fact that a CPZ meant they had plenty of room to park in their area as the school and hospital traffic had disappeared, and I was enquiring as to who was going to teach their children and cure their ailments. If you look at what I actually wrote above, I said "whatever the rights and wrongs of CPZs we are now in a position to have no alternative I feel" - that's not supporting a CPZ per se, it's acknowledging that having been surrounded by them we'll have to have one too or become a dumping ground for every used vehicle dealer and van hire company in the area. Hope that clears that up for you.

Perhaps this thread should now be deleted as the OP has edited out all her racial trolling? The replies don't really make much sense without it.

robbin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > No. Frankly if anybody were to be as neurotic as > that, they should see a doctor and get some > medication for their condition. But get it quick as the stockpiles the government (the government, robbin, not scaremongering lefty Remoaners!) have told the pharmaceutical companies to create won't last forever... https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/no-deal-brexit-medicine-stockpile-health-secretary-matt-hancock-nhs-prescriptions-a8504806.html

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The f-ing tories eh? > https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/aug/05/ho > w-virgin-became-one-of-the-uks-leading-healthcare- > providers > And as a person who has worked in the NHS fyi > EVERY single piece of equipment etc is bought from > private companies....the only state VERY > subsidised area is teaching the staff- who > promptly bugger off Yes, the f%^ing Tories indeed. If you read that article properly (get a grownup to help if necessary) you'll see that Labour asked Virgin to look at the NHS and report on what could be done to improve it. Labour did not award Virgin Care any NHS contracts for the simple reason that Virgin Care did not exist before 2012 (previously Assura Medical from 2010), the year it gained its first NHS contracts. All of the ?2bn of NHS contracts awarded to Virgin Care in its entire history were won under the coalition or Tory governments. Wrong again.

Marseilles has a murder rate per capita double that of London. It suffers from endemic violence caused by the fact that many neighbourhoods are under control of drug gangs. All the black working class are forced into the quartiers nords which contain many of the poorest arrondisements in France (including the poorest, Felix Pyat, where more than 50% of residents exist below the poverty line). Marseilles has been described by French commentators as a remaining outpost of apartheid. However, it is delightful if one sticks to the southern parts, nearer the sea, just as Paris is delightful if you stay in the centre and out of the banlieues (the French have a real talent for social apartheid). I'm going to take a wild guess that our Pollyana troll does not inhabit the quartiers nords.

As you're not rightwing or racist, could you expand on what you mean by "some communities"?

Careening off topic, but take a road like College Road, which is 90m higher at its southern end than its northern, if one lived up near the radio mast one wouldn't say one lived in "the lower part of College Road", despite its southern orientation, surely? Nor would I say DKH Primary is opposite "the lower end of Camberwell Grove", despite the fact that is also almost due south of the Camberwell end. To me, if someone says of a road which has a significant slope (as Upland Road does, very nearly identical to Camberwell Grove in fact) that they live in the lower part of the road I naturally assume the part near the bottom of the slope.

Cardelia Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rendelharris Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > EDNate Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > > > Right but this post is specifically for those > > of > > > us in the lower parts of ED where walking up > to > > GG > > > for the 37 would take us 20+ minutes and then > > 30+ > > > minutes on that bus to get to victoria and > yet > > > again we are looking at over an hour ! > > > > The very furthest (easternmost) end of Upland > road > > is almost exactly half a mile by road from the > 37 > > stop on LL, at what pace do you walk?! > > The OP said they lived on the "lower part of > Upland road". Picking the Upland Road/Dunstans > Road junction as an example, the distance to the > Goose Green roundabout is 1.2 miles. That's easily > a 20 minute walk at average pace. I logically took the "lower part" to mean the part that's actually lower, i.e. down the bottom of the hill. If by "lower" they actually meant "southern", yes that's further.

EDNate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Right but this post is specifically for those of > us in the lower parts of ED where walking up to GG > for the 37 would take us 20+ minutes and then 30+ > minutes on that bus to get to victoria and yet > again we are looking at over an hour ! The very furthest (easternmost) end of Upland road is almost exactly half a mile by road from the 37 stop on LL, at what pace do you walk?!

Living on Copleston, whatever the rights and wrongs of CPZs we are now in a position to have no alternative I feel - our road and Soames Street are starting to look like a commercial carpark, one vehicle in three is a cab (as Rofflick notes, usually without commercial plates, which argues a dealer is probably storing them here), LGV or campervan in our section.

Why don't you get off the 185 at Denmark Hill (this would give you the option of using the 176 as well) and take the train to Victoria and walk/tube/bus it (0.75 miles) to Green Park from there? Got to be quicker than trying to get a bus up Camberwell New Road in rush hour.

JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > That decision - the one England player in the ruck > was inverted apparently - his feet were near the > NZ side. What does "behind the last players feet" > mean :) > > Sometimes I realise how little I know of the > current Laws even though I've watched since the > 70s. > > Another controversial tackle/attempted charge down > in the Wales game also. Assume (though the laws are not unambiguously clear) the line is drawn on the last body part of any player in the ruck? Otherwise the tackled player could go down feet first and effectively eliminate offside. It was very marginal and really dependent on the millisecond between the NZ flyhalf having his hands on the ball (still in the ruck) and lifting it from the turf (open play). Apparently Garcez was unable to make the decision himself as due to the conditions he couldn't see the big screen clearly - if we're going to have TV reviews perhaps in such conditions a sheltered screen, such as used for soccer VAR, might be needed - there were actually a bunch of screens near me for the use of those in the disabled section that would have done the trick. One thing I haven't seen much commented on but I thought was disgraceful was that the ABs, after watching one replay on the big screen, decided it was offside and marched up the pitch to the point of the infringement before Garcez had decided - that was clear intimidation. The charge down/tackle on Halfpenny was very poor I think and Kerevi was lucky not to be sanctioned - the legitimacy of the chargedown attempt was dubious, as he leapt from a point and at a time when it was clear he couldn't possibly get near the ball, then seemed to make no attempt to check or change course before giving LH a smash which sent him out of the game. Citing commisioners should be having a look at that, I think.

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ?160 a ticket? Where were you? Is there a Royal > Box? > > Good game though with another controversial > moment. Bog standard seats and face value - and those were by no means the most expensive available! Sinful really but a 50th birthday present to myself. Great game - having looked at it several times I think Lawes was marginally offside, but only ourselves to blame, we could have won it with a drop goal at the death if they'd organised themselves properly.

Was anyone else at Twickenham today? We got there well over an hour before kickoff but such were the inadequate arrangements for ticketing and security checks we just managed to make it to our seats (by sprinting across the concourse) in time for the haka. Standing for nearly an hour packed like sardines with thousands of others queuing in the pissing rain didn't make for the best pre-match buildup, surely when the RFU is charging us ?160 a ticket they could afford a few more staff and have more gates open? On the plus side once we were in it was brilliant!

dbboy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I believe buses are controlled by something called > "Ibus", a controller who monitors where buses are > in there journey compared to where they should be > plus in the cab is a device that seems to allow > the driver see where they should be. This can > result in buses crawling between stops as a P13 > did yesterday from Underhill Road to Lordship Lane > at which point it returned to "normal" speed. > You'll here a message broadcast on the bus saying > "this bus has been instructed to wait here to even > out the service". The driver puts out this message > so they can "legitimately" wait at a bus stop for > a few minutes. Really annoying when it happens and > being turfed off early because the bus is > terminating earlier than its destination is even > more annoying. Its apparently called progress, > yeah, right, I'd quite happy describe it as > something else though. Little us the paying public > can do about it. Yes it is annoying having to wait, but don't you remember when we would all moan about how one would wait half an hour and then three buses turn up at once? That virtually never happens now and in my experience the buses are much more regular and evenly spaced these days, a few minutes waiting at a stop is a reasonable price to pay for that I feel. No excuse for terminating services early though.

Horse's mouth? https://www.gov.uk/wills-probate-inheritance

Maybaby Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There is such a thing as literally ignoring > people. Might you try it? Ignoring racism, Islamaphobia, antisemitism and hatred? Yes that's always worked ever so well in the past, perhaps if we all stick our fingers in our ears and close our eyes they'll all go away - that'll work.

cn150 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Everyone should treat each other with respect and > dignity, it?s really important for maintaining > civility. Sorry, I don't believe that antisemitic Islamaphobic racist bigots are deserving of respect, dignity, or civility. They should be called out and brought to account at every opportunity. We live in very dangerous times where these foul people are encroaching more and more into the mainstream of political discourse, and every decent person should stand up to them wherever they try to spread their filth, in national politics or even on such backwaters as the EDF. Respect, civility and dignity have to be earned, they haven't earned it.

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rendelharris Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > But uncle, you are a racist, and an > Islamaphobe, > > and an antisemite, I can quote you chapter and > > verse from your posts which prove that. It's > not > > shutting down meaningful discussion to call you > > out on that. > > Such a pile of unadulterated BS as usual...you > have made this up- as for 'antisemite' that is > laughable.... Yeah? Islamaphobia: two weeks ago the charming Freya Mickleson posted "Labour has turned London into the Middle Eastern shit hole it is today. I can only imagine those who are voting to remain are supporters of terrorism & would like Sharia Law implemented into our society." You responded, "Yes." Antisemitism: a few weeks ago someone posted that the owner of a derelict house was called xxxx but his real name was [something like] Jacob Rothstein. You posted "That last line tells you everything that's wrong about Britain and still is!" (I reported your comment to Admin and it was deleted) Anti-immigrant/racist: September 17th, you commented "We have attracted the lowest of the low to London." Made it up, have I? These are just the most recent examples.

Just for info the direct Peckham Rye Kings X/St.Pancras trains are 6.04, 6.34, 7.04, 7.14, 7.34, 8.04, 8.34 and 9.04. As Katie says, you've got more options if you don't mind changing at Blackfriars.

If I can put in a word for cycling (I know it's not for everyone, just for information!) the superhighway now runs all the way to Kings X, so it's virtually all off-road from Peckham Library, and the bits that aren't are exceptionally quiet backstreets.

But uncle, you are a racist, and an Islamaphobe, and an antisemite, I can quote you chapter and verse from your posts which prove that. It's not shutting down meaningful discussion to call you out on that.

It doesn't really matter if the PVA dries completely - its main purpose is to seal the wall and prevent porous plaster from sucking the moisture out of your adhesive, making it shift and crack as it dries. The adhesive, if prepared correctly, will offer sufficient adhesion on its own.

If you're trying surreptitiously to dispose of waste without anyone noticing/getting caught, making a bloody great bonfire of it in the middle of the night in an urban area then standing by the side of it for hours would seem an odd way to go about it.