rendelharris

There's an even easier way if you use a Mac: double click picture in Finder and it will open in preview. Click "File>duplicate" and a copy will appear, then ask to save that copy: at the bottom of the "save" popup there's a "quality" slider which can be dragged up and down to whatever kb/mb size desired.

At one point you could get a free T-shirt if you drank in twelve of their pubs - don't think it had to be in one day or a pint in each but we did try to do that once - got as far as the third and it was so nice we gave up and stayed. The staff had a good T-shirt also - "I'm a Firkin bar steward."

Vik Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > For cods sake, all these puns are giving me a > haddock... Perhaps it's time to draw the discussion elegantly to a close like they do in French movies. Fin.

DulwichLondoner Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I honestly believe the only solution is to move > somewhere that is either not served by > SouthernFail, or served by very frequent Southern > trains (e.g. commuting from Clapham Junction to > Victoria has always been fine). Why not Overground from PR or DH via Clapham then - Waterloo or Victoria in 30-40 minutes?

Mick Mac Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The Freisian and Firkin in Clapham Old Town was a > great bar in the early/mid-1990s Ah, happy days - and if it was too full (it was justifiably popular) the Prince of Wales just across the road was good too - is it (PoW) still there? Haven't been in Clapham Old Town for years.

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Quite right Rendel, fat fingers or predictive text > I'm afraid. Sorry Thou art shriven - used to do it all the time myself - it's a counterintuitive sort of spelling, isn't it?

I feel sorry for the guy, being turned away without a fair herring. If everyone does that his business will be floundering.

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm employed and well renumerated, but thank you > for your concern. Sorry to be a pedantic wanker, but it's what pedantic wankers do: the word is remunerated, from the Latin remuneratio, to give back, recompense. Very common slip.

Was it the Goose and... in Borough? That's the first one I remember, though I think several opened all around the same time.

Punch Taverns bought them up, then I think sold them - or some of them - to someone else, they closed down the brewing side, which was its USP, ruined them, then they all got rebranded under other names. Vandalism. Happy days of youth in the Friesian (sp?) and the Faraday in Clapham as well as the Phoenix - some of the best beer I've ever had in London.

Unlucky sir, I was rooting for you...I wonder what odds one could have got on Konta winning and Murray not making the semis?

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rh you are only quoting those that are actually > convicted- tip of the iceberg... Oh I see, having proved to you that fewer convictions per head are accrued by EU citizens resident in the UK than UK citizens you now claim ah, but the unsolved crimes are committed by Eu citizens? How about some real world figures, instead of the uncle's perception world figures?

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The bigger picture Rendel is that figure could be > ten times greater or more if we strike a trade > deal with the EU and then are free to make our own > trade deals with the rest of the world. > > Yes, the status quo is safe, we're chugging along, > but we could be booming Is "ten times" a figure you've plucked out of the air or do you have a solid basis to it? The ?13BN figure is just one aspect of EU membership benefits, the CBI (hardly a hotbed of lefties) estimates that EU membership is worth ?72BN to the UK. "if we strike a trade deal with the EU." If ifs and buts were fruits and nuts we'd all have a merry Christmas...I don't see too many signs that the EU (the world's largest economy, which absorbs 45% of our total exports) are minded to let us settle on nice easy terms, do you?

titch juicy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So hold on Rendell, what you're pointing out here > is that the regulation Keano has higlighted as an > imposition on us by the EU, actually benefits us > to the tune of about ?26 billion a year? > > You shouldn't need to hold Keano's hand through > this. I'm sure if he'd read past the headline he'd > have known that. :-)

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The second part wasn't relevant to titch's > question of EU impositions so I chose a specific > example from the many freely available to people > if they are not too lazy to do some research for > themselves Ah, so you chose the specific example saying that EU regulation costs us ?33BN but chose to leave off the very next sentence which says it benefits us by ?59BN because it wasn't relevant. I see. > It's not ?26 Billion titch, you've overlooked our membership fee. > Take that into account and we've hardly got enough out of it to pay for a round of drinks In 2016 our EU membership fee was a net (i.e. after rebate) ?13.1BN. I don't know what boozer you drink in but even in East Dulwich ?13BN still buys quite a sizeable round.

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > titch juicy Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > Titch, from the article posted by Alan above as a > simple example > > Membership of the EU, especially its single > market, brings with it many rules. Some are > ill-judged, uncosted and not subject to > cost-benefit analysis. The working-time directive > was a needless intrusion into an issue better > decided at national level. And regulation imposes > costs. Open Europe, a London-based think-tank, > using official figures, says the annual cost to > the economy of the EU?s 100 most expensive rules > is ?33 billion ($49 billion) a year. You've accidentally left off the next sentence, which reads "Yet regulation also brings benefits, put in this case by the government at ?59 billion." It does then say (see this is what you have to do to quote accurately rather than selectively) "surely an exaggeration" but those are the UK government figures.

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Rendel said > > So you regard 48% of the electorate as idiots, > basically > > I have never said that or implied it. You have > chosen to interpret my words that way Come off it squire, you said: "People are entitled to campaign as much as they like, no matter how misguided. It's healthy for a democracy. I see the flat earthers now have a discussion group on Facebook." Not seriously going to claim you weren't drawing a comparison? Especially when earlier in this thread you said: "Years ago Loz, people feared sailing towards the horizon meant you'd fall off the earth. In fact, if it was wasn't for fearless Brexit-like types prepared to take a risk the Antipodes would never have been discovered and they're be no Dame Edna. Remainers are a bit like early cartographers - Here be Dragons" (By the way just for interest, none of the early explorers, cartographers or anyone else thought the world was flat, it's been generally accepted that it's round since about 300BC)

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This was 2011 > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-ord > er/8439117/EU-migrants-commit-500-crimes-a-week-in > -UK.html > > and the Latvian who murdered Alice gross had > already killed his own wife and served time and > then came in and out of the UK 7 times and was not > prevented. There are powers to stop criminals > who've served 2 years in jail from not entering > but they slip through the net. The statistics in that article spurred me to dig a little deeper in more recent figures, uncle. Here's something for you to try out on your pianola: there are around 3.2M EU citizens resident in the UK, and last year 37,000 were convicted of a crime, making roughly 1 in 87 of them. Taking the remaining population of 62M, they produced 1.2M criminal convictions, giving them a crimes per head ratio of around 1 to 52. So it would appear that EU citizens in the UK are in fact about 30% more law abiding than the natives.

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Rendel, > > I see from your post you were up with the larks. > You have an amusing tendency to try and put words > into my mouth but the early hour might explain > that. > > FYI, If you use the current definition of a Blue > Moon as the second of two full moons in a single > calendar month (rather than the older definition > of the third of four full moons in a single > season) The next one is due on January 31, 2018 > (despite Brexit as the BBC is fond of saying). > Can't promise it will have a blue tinge as that > depends on particular atmospheric conditions. > > So sorry Rendel, I think you dreamt of that moon > last night. Unfortunately I can't find any EU > Directives or Regulations on Blue Moons, or Larks > for that matter, but no doubt they are works > (working party) in progress. I haven't put words in your mouth keano, I've quoted exactly, word for word, what you've said at one point, then quoted, again word for word, what you said at another point which entirely contradicts your first statement. Exact quotation and putting words in someone's mouth, two rather different things. I think you've misunderstood the blue moon, not addressed to you, just a joke between self and Dulwichlondoner about the rarity of our being in agreement.

DulwichLondoner Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > PS @rendelharris, you and I agreeing on something? > It's now 2 pints I owe you :) Skies were cloudy last night but I assume there must have been one of these... http://i.imgur.com/mYVwru0.png

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > People are entitled to campaign as much as they > like, no matter how misguided. It's healthy for a > democracy This doesn't exactly chime with your earlier statement that "My faith in democracy has also been shaken to the core by the bitter backlash of some remainers who don't seem able to accept the result of a referendum they participated in." > I see the flat earthers now have a discussion > group on Facebook. So you regard 48% of the electorate as idiots, basically, and the cause of remaining in the EU as akin to believing the earth is flat? Which is amusing as you're the one warning us of "dark forces" at work and recycling tired old half-truths and downright lies (even our Nige gave up on the straight bananas one).

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's not what people signed up for in 1975. I think a fair few people are starting to wonder if what they're going to get now is quite what they signed up for last year, no? It is a fair point that the EC/EU has certainly evolved since the 1975 referendum, but you are tacitly agreeing, are you not, that people are entitled to keep campaigning even if a referendum doesn't go in their favour? The anti-EC/EU lobby have been campaigning solidly for the last forty years since the '75 vote, they didn't shrug their shoulders and accept the democratic will of the people - again, did that "undermine your faith in democracy"? The UN and ICJ impose the collective will of other states on "sovereign states," up to and including taking military action against them and bringing their leaders to trial when their laws transgress the internationally accepted boundaries of law and human rights. Neither body limits its activities to "Sovereign states who defer to them and consent to their arbitration." If, as you appear to, you believe that the sovereignty of the individual state must be paramount then surely you must oppose such interference?

dbboy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > green flag? Yes, a company which does breakdown cover, sort of thing...

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Democracy. Don't be fooled by Gina Miller and her > like. Dark forces are at work there Obviously one person's "exercising the democratic right to challenge the government" is another's "reds under the bed." "Dark forces," forsooth! While I respect your right to your point of view you do tend to stray into somewhat hyperbolic territory. > Personally I expected the Remain camp to win. I > thought with all the 'warnings' of Armageddon > people would err on the side of caution. > Fortunately the British people are braver than I > hoped. If Remain had won I would have accepted the > vote as I believe in democracy. I would have > shrugged my shoulders and thought to myself 'don't > come crying to me if it all goes pear-shaped' So when a referendum goes one particular way, that's game over for eternity? Everyone should give up on their beliefs and toe the line? So all those who've fought for over forty years against the emphatic 1975 vote (67-33, with only the Shetlands and the Outer Hebrides voting leave) to remain in the European Community - have they shaken your faith in democracy to the core with their inability to accept the result of a referendum? By the way, from one of your earlier posts: "A country that can't make its own laws and can be told what to do by another body isn't a sovereign state." Would one be correct in assuming you'd be in favour of the abolition of the United Nations and the International Court of Justice at the Hague, then?

Bic Basher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I thought the title was of an U2 album. Or a description of their hypocritical tax arrangements...