david_carnell

Well, just to prove a few people wrong, I'm a big fan of whisky macs, dubonnet & gin (by all accounts the Queen Mum's favourite tipple) and a good sherry. Franklins sells all with good grace.

Hello cycle-people. I'm planning on utilising my employer's cycle-to-work scheme to commute from Peckham to Victoria each day. I was hoping for some advice on a couple of issues. I'm in love with old-fashioned, Dutch style, sit-up-and-beg bicycles(mainly because I'm a bit of a ponce!) and am looking around for the best one. I've fallen for a Velorbis and wondered if anyone had any experience of them or could recommend something different. Aside from the cost of the bike and initial accessories (locks, lights etc) can anyone give me a rough budget for thru-year maintenance so I can work out how cost effective it will be compared to the train? Finally, route. I live in the Bellenden Rd area and work, effectively, at Victoria Station (or that end of Victoria St). I was planning to cycle up to Peckham High St, along to Camberwell, past the Oval, round Vauxhall Cross and over Vauxhall Bridge, along V. Bridge Rd and into Victoria. Is that the best route? Is Vauxhall Cross an utter nightmare? Many thanks and if you see a wally on a Dutch bike with a deerstalker-shaped cycle helmet sometime soon, say hello....it's probably me!

The Strange Death of Liberal England. Marvellous stuff.

And it can much worse in those proper suburbs. You want to see grim, try Sutton and 1am on Sat or Sun morning. ED is serene in comparison.

Good grief....England have another immigrant for a batsman and this one isn't from the Southern Hemisphere.

I do wonder if your typical Greenpeace activist even knows that they're franchises though? I doubt it. It'll all be part of the "evil empire of oil".

I'm not even sure I know how to feel about this! ;-) PR stunts are all well and good Rosie - but when directed at the wrong target, with little effect on those guilty for BP's crimes AND with almost no effect on the motorist - then it would seem that even this has failed. Greenpeace are becoming a cliche of themselves. And I'd be much more impressed if they performed some facile stunt at the BP HQ - base jumping sans parachutes for e.g than pick on defenceless garage owners/workers.

They are idiots. If they had done any research they would know that BP petrol stations have very little to do with the BP company they really wish to attack. The petrol stations are franchises run independently by families or small-businessmen. People who can barely afford to lose a days takings due to some unwashed trustafarians . Not only that but due to them being independent franchises, their owners cannot fight back against the bullying tactics of Greenpeace. In addition it targets the wrong end of the product anyway. The motorist simply drove along the road to a different petrol station - so the net impact on petrol consumption would have been zero.

Old enough to know better Yes please

To be fair ????, the Spanish weather forecast is a bit of a doddle.... Scorchio!

Don't use any of them. All use MetOffice data which has an accuracy of about 30%. You're just as likely to know by having a guess yourself. Biggest con going. The Met Office is owned by the MOD if any explanation of uselessness is needed.

1) Wind up gramaphone 2) Velvet cushion 3) A punt 4) A picnic hamper with plovers eggs Mobile, luxurious and with decent sound quality. Problem solved.

Yeah - possibly a female as the males are grey rather than the brown in the photos

MrBen - that is superb work and journalistic nous. I am impressed to a barry degree. Look forward to seeing you on Saturday.

luncheon splendid gosh wally

IMonster - Daydream in Blue

Training in Corsica? Wimp. Bellenden Belle and I have just returned from a hard week's training camp in the wilds of the Yorkshire Dales. Fried breakfasts, 14-mile hikes up mountains and numerous pub stops coupled with howling winds and rain have left us battered, bruised and super barry shape. We shall be on the start line next weekend with calves of steel and a new found love of London life. Ho!

1/10 for doing it after I saw it. And I don't talk down to you Keef. I just highlight flaws in your argument or when I think you're wrong. But I do that to lots of people on here and none of them seem to descend into the gutter or name-calling. And if they disagree then have a go back. But do it with logic and panache and rhetorical style. Not by being rude. You have a big chip on your shoulder from somewhere or something and I clearly niggle you. But that's your issue, not mine. Grow up, get over it and behave like an adult. If you don't like being taken to task, don't say anything.

Keef Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > D_C, not picking *bob* up on his posts, because > he's rather funny and popular, and well, you know, > Sean probably likes his posts too? Well, yeah, that and a sense of irony I suppose. And you did mention class - you just didn't say the word.

But the children really would die of starvation in there.

Keef Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Probably because they have never in their lives > actually been descriminated against, and this > allows them to feel like a wronged party, whilst > also looking awfully green and "right on". Oh puur-lease. Now it's a feckin class issue again Keef?! They've never been discriminated against? Really? How do you know? Have you met them? Do you know the first thing about them beyond their names and where they send the kids to school? No, of course not. But don't let that get in your way to have a dig at the "awfully green" and "right on" crowd. As per ususal. And even if you're right, and they've lead lives of serene happiness and bliss, so what? Somehow they're no longer allowed to make the same choices of any other parent without you or anyone else here wading in with you size nines? Leave the personal attacks out of it at the least.

kristymac1 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Now who's hysterical?? I wasn't referring to the > risk of child abductors, I was referring to the > risk associated with the inevitable heightened > media attention along that route (for the next 24 > hours anyway - after that no doubt the 'hysteria' > will have moved along). Last week the kids only > had to manage one road with a lollypop man, today > they'll face a slalem of photographers. *blushes* Ah. In that case, accept my whole-hearted apologies for getting on my high-horse over a mis-understanding. Nuance isn't best conveyed in this medium. You are indeed correct about the slalom of photographers - an amusing image mind you.

kristymac1 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Great, so the precise route that these little'uns > take to school unaccompanied is now national news > - doesn't that put the children at even more risk? Yes....yes it does. Do you know why? Because child abductors regularly scan national newspapers looking for clues as to the routes children take to school. It's pretty tricky for them to figure out otherwise. It's not like children have any identifying clothing that would associate them with a school or walk the same route every day or anything is it? Children these days have got pretty cunning. Often they disguise themselves as adults before burrowing tunnels to their school so as not be seen by predators lurking around every corner. My god, the hysteria on here would make Chris Morris blush.

dulwichmum Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > @David Carnell. > > You mis-understand me. The McCann's should be > prosecuted for abandonment at least. What do you > suppose would have happened there if they had not > been white middle class? This is all about lazy > parenting, not empowerment and exercise. My kids > walk to school every day. Why can't parents take > their responsibility seriously and walk with them? I didn't misunderstand you. You crow-barred in a ridiculous comparison. I'm not going to move this discussion off its topic with a blow-by-blow account of the McCann incident but I could not disagree more. Nothing more than a terrible accident. And if anything should ever happen to any child making their way to school in Dulwich it would be the same. At what point is it just acknowledged as such? If a lorry runs of the road and kills a teenager it's an accident. And so it should be for a 12 year old. And an 8 yeard old. And a 5 year old. It has nothing to do with parenting. These people should be commended, not witch-hunted.

Buggie Whilst I know and respect you personally, and the work you and all other medical professionals do, do you not think that your view point on this is distorted by precisely that? Working as a paeds nurse you undoubtedly see some horrendous sights. But these are statistically rare. And whilst people will scream till blue in the face that "one road injury/death is too many" may be a good sound bite it is impossibly optimistic. Whilst I have no doubt you only have children's best interests at heart, I firmly believe no-one is in any position to make the decision the Schonrocks have made other than themselves. Surely six months of incident free cycling should indicate they have taught their two children well?