rendelharris

Catalyst Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Why does anyone care what happens in Canada > (population 36 million)? It's already legal for > recreational use in 9 US states including > California which by itself is a larger population. I'd suggest that as Canada is not only closer to us in population size but also in terms of legislature and legal system, and has introduced a nationwide legalization, its model might well be of more validity in predicting what might happen in the UK than the USA model.

Not sure it would require much policing if it was properly designed and clearly marked - lanes which are, in my experience, have very little problems. This one's just ridiculous in its markings and situation.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I rank them all shite. The chain is run by a > brexit loving, dog and music hating knobhead. > Spoons sucks. It?s the Ryanair of the booze > business. Some are shite (Kentish Drovers I wouldn't drink in for free, seen a number of very nasty situations in there), some are OK (Fox garden a delight on a summer evening), beer nearly always reasonably kept and daft cheap. Yes they're owned by a total (redacted), but if you restrict your custom to public houses where the owners support remain, as do the brewers, you're in for quite a lot of sobriety. Oh, and music is a massive part of my life, but I really like not having to listen to a barperson's/landlord's choice when I want a quiet jar!

Absolutely - never use it, too much pedestrian/cyclist conflict caused by bad design, I always go round via Bellenden.

Passiflora Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What an appalling attitude James Barber! > Southwark Council have had rented garages over the > Southwark area for many years and to be suddenly > told they will be taken away to build new houses? > We all know there is a critical shortage of > housing but this is the lowest of the low! So it's more important to house motor cars than to house people?

Froglander Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I read that dogs are now banned from all > Weatherspoon pubs. Yep, even in massive gardens like the Fox on the Hill where it would be easy to have a dog area. Seems a bit petty really, well-behaved dogs on leads wouldn't do any harm. From my experience of being a regular there and living opposite for a decade, humans got up to far worse in the garden after sundown than any self-respecting dog would!

Yep, bang straight up to Vauxhall, over the bridge, Park Lane, Marble Arch, Edgeware Road, CC free. That's how we always go. Can be a bit of a mare at rush hour though, early in the morning (pre-7AM) fine and OKish during the day, fine on weekends.

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You might be right Rendel about the BAME support > for a second vote but your statistics are not > reflected in the pictures of the people who > marched in the summer, in Liverpool or yesterday. Well it's not so much I may be right as I am right - a quick Google will confirm this for you. JL's point is valid, is it not - any pro-Brexit events are even "whiter". The ethnic composition of any protest is not a valid reason to doubt its sincerity or popularity, I'm still baffled as to why you thought it should be raised.

You, keano, are the one who raised the question of race. BAME people in this country voted 70-30 to remain. You clearly are attempting to push a rather silly "it's only white middle classes who are complaining" agenda. If that's what you believe, in the face of clear evidence to the contrary, good luck to you, but you really shouldn't be surprised if you get called on it.

So in other words, you can't actually justify the logical inconsistency of claiming that a road has "very little traffic" but that diverting that traffic elsewhere will cause apocalyptic congestion, and so you refuse to debate and resort to insult. That's fine, whatever works for you. You definitely have an affinity with the current incumbent of the White House - claim you didn't say what you said, even when the written evidence is there for everyone to see, then resort to bullying and insults when proven wrong. Top notch.

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Absolutely pathetic. Making accusations of racism > has become the refuge of scoundrels. But why did you feel the need to draw attention to the racial profile of the marchers? You've been asked a number of times why you did this and have yet to offer any explanation.

spider69 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Please explain why the junction should be closed.I > have stated my point. Evidence to warrant > closure. > > You really have a problem if you have to go to > such lengths delving into the past to keep your > ego intact. > > Await your reply. At least I am keeping you busy > so you must be pleased. > > If you do not reply I will not be offended. It's hardly delving into the past, it was a few days ago and I remember what you said - it stuck in my mind chiefly because it was so absurd. I'm afraid there's little point in engaging in debate with someone who says something one day then claims they didn't say it two weeks later, even though the evidence is there on this thread in black and white. Trumpian! You advanced the argument that there was no need to have any traffic control measures on Champion Hill as there is "very little traffic". Yet you claim that diverting this "very little traffic" off CH will cause untold traffic problems? Can you acknowledge the logical inconsistency of this?

Captain Marvel Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Christ Joe, take a chill pill It's kind of serious when people start bringing race into issues (without any seeming justification), people will (rightly) get upset.

"I have not said that. It does seem you are on auto pilot." spider69, October 3rd, 10.03 AM, wrote: "I have not seen any major increase in traffic over the years apart from the brief burst when the rush hour is on. Not that you would really notice. Apart from that brief spurt it is pleasant for pedestrians, cyclists and car users with very little traffic and is safe to use." Funny that, eh, it almost looks like you did, in fact, say exactly that.

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What if the vote were 52% remain and 48% leave? > Would such a slim majority be acceptable or > definitive and settle the question once and for > all? Not as far as Nigel Farage was concerned: "In a 52-48 referendum [for Remain] this would be unfinished business by a long way. There could be unstoppable demand for a second vote." Oddly he seems to have changed his tune since then. There was no obligation on the part of the legislature to call a referendum (nor to take the result as binding, as it happens), it was a voluntary act on their part. Why, therefore, would it be wrong for them to do the same again? We vote for a government every five years, we see how they do, and if they're rubbish we (hopefully) vote them out. But in a referendum which will arguably have a greater effect, for a longer time, on the fortunes of our country than any change of government, we can't have a confirmatory vote on the terms and conditions (none of which were known at the time of the first vote?). You and your fellow Leavers, Keano, are continually saying that leave is the will of the people - well what are you afraid of then? If it's the will of the people we can just confirm that with a second vote once the full details of the deal are revealed and off we go. Not worried that the will of the people might have changed, are you?

spider69 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I thought we were talking of the effect of traffic > being diverted to Grove Hill Road, Bromar Road > etc. The traffic from a road which, according to you, has "very little traffic". If the traffic volume is as low as you claim, why do you believe it would have any serious impact?

Charles Notice Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You have not disappointed. Indeed. Perhaps you could stop being snotty and explain why "minimal traffic for a small part of the day" (your words, not mine) being diverted onto a main through route will cause problems? ETA By the way Charles, you do know this is a discussion forum, right? I.e. it's permissible for those who do not agree with your opinions to post? Just checking.

Charles Notice Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- Champion Hill has minimal traffic for a > small part of the day. Why this scheme. It's amazing how apparently Champion Hill experiences virtually no traffic - yet if that minimal traffic that's only even there for a small part of the day is diverted to Denmark Hill/Grove Lane it will cause carmageddon?

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The game is called ?spot the non-white face? > > I spotted about half a dozen non-white faces > yesterday which was an improvement on the previous > two. > > What conclusions can we draw from this? I don't know, what? If you're trying to claim that Remain is only a white middle-class movement, you're on pretty dubious ground - BAME voters were overwhelmingly anti-brexit to the tune of roughly 70-30.

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > How many in 'that' 700,000 were voters in the > referendum? > So you think it's ok to waste hours of police time > marching AGAINST democracy > How many Remain voters changed to Leave after they > witnessed the arrogant and puerile behaviour of > Barmier et al? 1. Virtually every one, one would imagine - who would be committed enough to go on a march but not bother to vote? 2. Democracy? Oh you mean the unnecessary referendum won by an illegally-funded campaign with Russian interference? Most thinking people would recognise the right to peaceful protest as a cornerstone of democracy. The argument that people should not march because it "wastes hours of police time" is of course so pathetic it doesn't need addressing. 3. Virtually none I should imagine. For someone not to fall for the Leave lies of the land of milk and honey waiting for us post-referendum, but to change their opinion when they see what a farcical fuckup the whole thing has become, they would have to be as stupid as...now, who can I think of... Sadly the whole sorry affair will end up with us leaving. But it's nice to see people like you squirming and squealing about democracy (your version of course, in which presumably Muslims, Jews and non-whites wouldn't get a vote); it shows all too clearly that even you are aware that Leave won a freak vote, in highly dubious circumstances, and that the result in no way reflects the opinions of the British people today, and you're scared shitless your grubby little moment when all your hatred and bile is being legitimised in legislation will be taken away.

Well done marchers, I feel bad now - I guess I've been put off marching after 2,000,000 of us marched against bombing the shit out of Iraq and it made no odds, also I can't be doing with kettling at my age, but I should have been there. Hats off to those less lazy than me, proud of you.

Just for fun: Islamaphobia: last week 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: two 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!" Anti-immigrant: September 17th, you commented "We have attracted the lowest of the low to London." These are all just examples in the last month or so, if I could be bothered to dip back into the festering cesspit that is your commenting history there would be many more. What was that about lying?

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You are a lying toad RH and whenever I see your > name on a post it is SO predictable that I don't > even bother looking. Go and tell your trolling > lies elsewhere- Every post I have written is TRUE > and as I've said before you will NEVER know what > is going on while you are stuck in your lefty ED > bubble! Do you seriously have the nerve to claim you're not Islamaphobic, antisemitic and anti-immigrant? Because I can quote you chapter and verse if you like.

sally buying Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I have not seen any notices relating to this > anywhere. It's fully notified on the website and there are prominent notices on Champion Hill > So Southwark will be hoping that most people will > be unaware this is taking place. Conspiracy theories ahoy! > Getting the normal "save the planet objectors" to > object and using their vote to push it though on a > % basis. Yes, no reasonable person could support, it's all Green loonies > Any long term residents will know how important > this through route is. Plenty of long term residents, of whom I am one, think blocking it has some validity > It has been in existence and proved to be the > right ever since the roads were laid down. This road has been there since about 1830 or earlier, sure they were thinking of motor traffic at that time > Accept that Southwark wants cars off the road and > will do anything to achieve this. Yes it's a terrible conspiracy to stop 10,000 premature deaths a year and appalling damage to the health of our children, bastards! > I came down the Grove Hill road, Bromar Road route > today and got stuck as traffic could not move. > When all traffic is forced into this route it will > be impossible Could you have used public transport, cycled or walked your journey instead? > Crazy. I so agree.

Just arranged a redelivery for a missed item - noticed on the redelivery website there's the option to have your item redelivered to your local post office for collection for 70p. I know, you shouldn't have to pay extra for something they should do anyway, but if you're a long way from Peckham worth considering and cheaper than the bus fare and whatever you consider your time worth queuing.