Belle

Classic Rock Have just realised that one of these posts was yours BIG HUG!! All respect I do still think of you and how hard it was for you. I went through what you went through in 1999, I lost my man to a CO poisoning accident, you lost yours to a bike thing, as I recall. I do remember the wonderful funeral where that lovely lady, Ethel? Enid? was sitting on the bike after the service, she always drank a half of stout/guiness on the end of the bar and chatted to everyone, she was about 75-80 as I recall. How are you love? Big hugs

I dont remember leaving in a fit of pique, but if you say so, it might be right Or it may be that, having traitorously moved to the red rose county I thought I had best bow out gracefully. Who can recall after all this time? What I can say is that, even as I pass my third anniversary in Liverpool, a friend found is never a friend lost and I still cherish my pals on the Sheffield Forum We had a lovely new year's eve party back in 2003 or 2004 or whenever it was, at my house, lots of fun and forum, chat and champagne And Da Bouncer is probably still hunky and Phen is bound to be still intelligent and the couple who shall remain nameless and from whom I still hope for a wedding invitation are likely to still be in love and Moon ought also to be still witch like and helicopters still rise above the valley and Max will still be fencing and usw... And nobody has probably ever even until this day met Geoff... If you ever want me to come to an old boy's (sic) party to celebrate the Forum, you only have to ask Viva la Forum Belle

LibDems believe in winning Err that is it The Liberal Party used to believe in Laissez Faire - that means letting the people just get on with it and letting some sort of natural unfettered decision making rise to the surface. Not interfering or "leaving it alone", I suppose that would be the best translation. The LibDems however do not believe in Laissez Faire, they believe in bags of interference, usually in direct opposition to whichever other party from either spectrum is in power. Ask a LibDem locally if they believe in pornography for the 16s - access to and participation in - and they will say no, heaven forfend, dreadful idea, and we would all agree. But it is their national position. Ask a LibDem locally if they believe in alcohol at 16 instead of 18 and they will say it has a terrible impact on anti-social behaviour, and we would all agree. But it is their national position. LibDems nationally oppose ID cards and ASBs, but Lib Dems locally complain about "feral youths" roaming the streets - well they do in Liverpool anyway where they are very unsophisticated and unreconstructed. The truth, as we all know, remains that the LibDems are a mixed bag, a Woolworth's mixture, no two the same, except that they passionately disagree with everyone else, no matter what they propose and no matter at what end of the spectrum. You might as well support the Rainbow Alliance (anyone remember them)?

Just checking in to see how you all got on, feel an ongoing sense of responsibility for your results. I think ward boundary changes have a lot to blame for the results. Veronica and Alf and Rosemary were and are stalwarts, loyal to their electorate and loyal to their party. I am sorrowful at their loss and refuse to believe that Veronica would even know how to be rude to a living soul, can only imagine it was a communication breakdown Chins up Labour comrades, regroup and press on. Here in Liverpool Labour took five seats, all women as it happened, no all women shortlists, just natural selection. I am not bragging, just adding support and best wishes, you turned it round before you can turn it round again, despite the new boundaries, just get out there and MEET THE VOTERS, you have 12 months to get this sad situation back on track xxxx

Dont you really hate being wrong?

Belle here, one of the oldies and goldies It seems like a thousand years ago but I think in truth I joined in 2003 And it got me the sack - but we dont need to go there So, anyone still around that remembers me? Am now living in Liverpool and loving life Would love to hear from the old crew, especially any of those that came to a party at my house, whenever it was, all those years ago, 2003 or 2004? Hugs and kisses Belle

Strength in numbers eh? I just wish to reiterate that if you cannot learn to allow interesting debate to ebb and flow (with all the usual provisos that apply about being rude or illegal) then you will continue to stifle threads and discussions. Relevance is irrelevant, if you will forgive the clumsy expression. Interesting and lively debate is what matters and keeps people coming back. You must beware turning people off and turning them away. Otherwise this site will be finished. And as proof of what I say, I shall take my debating elsewhere That's one poster with over 1000 postings, three forum meets, one house party with other forumers and two years history with the site you have just lost.

Sian May I point you to this post here, the post that launched this thread. It makes it clear that this is the thread for general chit chat about the fall-out and etc of the London bombings. This thread was set up by Joe because there were complaints about people talking about things not felt relevant to the initial thread. This is our catch-all London bombings thread. Please let us debate these issues of massive importance to us all and to the world in this thread here, rather than sending us to further threads. If it is about the London bombings and speculation and finger pointing etc, then THIS is the thread. Regards Belle

You will see for instance in this example that you have now effectively killed the debate stone dead.

I think you need some homework on the work of a moderator This is not the first time I have felt obliged to comment on your moderating. Last night at 9pm you were happily contributing long posts on the subject of Islam and quoting from holy books. Now you are objecting. What is the matter Joe? Did it get too boring for you? When are you going to let people's conversations range where they want? You took us out of the last thread and brought us into this new one because we wanted to talk about ramifications. Now you want to move us again. (Before you ask, I of course believe that you are free to pull anything genuinely offensive or likely to break the law - particularly the new law proposed which will outlaw incitement to hatred. I think you should remove far more posts than you actually do as a matter of fact.) I cannot think this is the kind of moderating Geoff had in mind.

I am with T020 on this, it is staggeringly complicated. It is possible for one person to change class if their circumstances change - my parents were born working class but were educated out of it, and into the middle class, getting professional white collar jobs. I was born middle class but lived with an unemployed husband in a terraced house in poverty for a few years, which then made me working class. Then I graduated from university and became, on another standard of definition, middle class again. Further more, your plumber on £50k might have been to Oxford Uni but decided to go into plumbing rather than the city. He might live somewhere up the posh end of Sheffield and have children at private school. Some people think working class means people who work, as opposed to people who do not work. All this begs the questions, is it really relevant? What does it tell us? How useful is it really?

You are quite wrong swan-vesta It matters a lot Just think of all those skin heads who might have to have their tattoos re-done! (If I decide to launch a campaign to ban Yorkshire puddings because they discriminate against Lancastrians, can I rely on someone posting a thread all about it as though it might actually be going to happen? Thought so)

This will seem very over simplified But there you go, I am feeling very simple minded today. I was thinking about how it would be if the terrorists turned out to be British, from Oldham for example. I was thinking what their motivation would be. I was thinking about angry young men with raging testosterone. I was reminded of combat 18 skin heads. They find something to get riled up about, an ill that they can blame for why their lives are not how they wanted them to be and then unleash violence in a big way. It also reminds me of football hooligans who plan big fights with supporters of other teams where they go out with knives and chains to pre-organised scraps. And all those blokes in Manchester (and other cities) that go out shooting each other at night in gang warfare. The scale is obviously different, the weapons are different but I do feel there is some similarity. I dont think the real reason for it has anything to do with Islam. That is the convenient hook they have chosen for their violent urges. (They might think God told them to do it, but I think the Yorkshire Ripper said the same didn't he?) I think this is partly a bloke thing - white, black or asian, it is about getting angry and getting righteous and doing something very violent to "make them pay" (whoever "they" are) I dont mean all blokes are like this, I dont know what I mean really, but sometimes as a woman, I do despair.

I am pleased this thread is here, thanks Joe et al I would first of all like to say something to Phan. I have been actively involved in some of our "business continuity planning" at work, that is where you work out what you would do if a bomb went off in your building, or you lost all your power in a blackout etc. You imagine a scenario, something like "You have been informed that there has been a gas main explosion on the High Street outside your building" and then you work out what you need to do to keep the business running or minimise disruption etc. You work out which bits of your business are essential and must have first dibs on available office space and which you can safely send home for a week etc. Some organisations have teams who do this planning full-time, for a living. What the man in the radio 5 broadcast was saying, as I understood it, was that he had gone into a company, as a consultant, to begin working with them on their business continuity plan. It was their first meeting and he had proposed a scenario, that was probably only a few lines long if it was like any of the others I have seen before, and said "You have been informed that bombs have gone off in the following locations x, y and z and the underground has been brought to halt." They would then identify what problems that would cause them and what they could to limit them. This is a process that takes ages, months and you have dry runs where you practice everything and see if it works. Just like they did with the emergency services. But as I understand it, this man said, to repeat, that this was his first meeting with them. They hadn't planned any responses yet. So if their scenario imagined bombs exploding in the three places where they did in fact happen, I would call that spooky, a scary coincidence, but I couldnt go further than that. The man who was interviewed probably only dreamt up his scenario the week before and none of the staff in the company he was consulting for knew what it was going to be (or that there would even be a scenario, not having gone through it before). If that is not a coincidence, then I am not sure what you are suggesting, spell it out for me. This post is too long for my other point so I will come back with that after. Belle

I agree with you. Accessible toilets are designed for ease of access for people who need more room, or hand rails etc. They are not about fast-tracking. There is nothing at all wrong in using an accessible toilet if it is totally free. It is surely also helpful if it reduces the pressure on regular toilet queues. Parking spaces are different - and not just because of the law but because you are stealing that space for ages, hopefully you would be in and out of the loo in a very short time. I have never heard that you have to have a disability to go in the accessible toilets, however if you do have a disability, they are the ones that you should find easier to use.

An old love used to tell me that you could never have too many mugs. I think that was because he liked to leave them unwashed, growing interesting mould cultures all over the house, and yet still be guaranteed of finding a clean one in the cupboard. I have too many tea-sets. About 10 at the last count, and I dont even drink the stuff!

RedRobbo et al I am all in favour of cleaning up threads and removing obnoxious posters, and people inciting violence etc. In fact I am practically famous on here for complaining about certain people and their totally unacceptable posts. That is not the point I was making. I was discussing the fact that Tony and Joe had stated, baldly, in black and white that we had not to talk about the implications of the bombings, the policital reasonings etc, but had to confine ourselves to the basics. - Tony is now calling it the "purpose of this thread." So I suppose the point I was trying make, but not succeeding with, is "What exactly is the purpose of this thread then?" and who said those two moderators were the ones to decide? The BBC and similar sites are there to provide news updates, so that cannot be it. I can see I am not making sense so I shall take myself away elsewhere. Belle

My understanding, severely limited though it is, is this. The people who carry out terrorist acts against the West, or against western targets in the East, are not particularly concerned about one issue, be it the war in Iraq, or the Palestinian conflicts etc. Their hatred is of the West, full stop. They hate our liberalism, our way of life. The fact that we dress in what we want, drink alcohol, go to parties, watch violent movies, have casual sex and generally behave in ways that they think demonstrates poor moral fibre. They want a world where women are all covered up and do what their men say and no-one drinks or loses control etc, like the way the Taliban were running things in Afghanistan. Conversely, for thousands of years the West has tried its best to impose western "civilisation" on the East. The West has gone to enormous lengths for thousands of years to subdue the East (think of the crusades for instance and then the Raj). Now some people either from, or with a love for, the East (and their moral stance) are hitting back at us. I am not taking sides, just explaining it how I see it. I think the war in Iraq might have converted a few waiverers to the cause, but I see this as part of something lasting thousands of years, not something that can be laid at the door of any particular man on either side of the divide (eg Bin Laden, Bush or Blair.) In some respects it is business as usual

I had made my posts above before reading this. So sorry if I have offended anyone. However, who said you get to decide? My understanding is that you are meant to moderate and stop people from typing inappropriate things, committing illegal acts through copywrite or libel etc. I am not sure your power runs to deciding what we are allowed to talk about on a thread about the London bombings. This is one of the most important things to happen to us in a long time and we deserve time and space to discuss it in all its aspects. It was bad enough when the politics section was pulled - that section allowed us with political opinions to debate together in splendid isolation, but if you wont let us debate on such a topic in the general chat area either then I do not see any point in taking part in the Forum any more. That is what I come here for.

Have you got the inside track then? You know who it was and why? Do share

I am with Bully_beef on this. The so called "Reverend" Ian Paisley isn't expected to form witch hunts every time a loyalist commits a terrorist act for instance. - or less controversially, the Arch Bishop of Canterbury is not expected to act against every crime committed in this country by CofE members. (He would not have time to do anything else if he was) All decent people abhor terrorism, it isnt necessary to keep on saying so, although the British Muslim organisations are expected to do it every time....

I used to work in petrol stations years ago. Mobile phone bans on forecourts go back donkeys years, to the time when phones were first invented. Nobody knew if they were dangerous or not, but thought they might be. Health and safety being paramount, they were banned - just like they are in hospitals around equipment. I have read recently that this ban might now be able to be phased out. I am minded to point out though that had a phone ever set fire to a pump etc, you lot would have been the first to ask why you werent warned. The staff who work in petrol stations are only following instructions, they are not scientists, they did not devise the rule. Their manager has told them that it is dangerous and that they must alert people and get them to turn their phone off. They are not doing just to embarass their customers as someone suggested, that might drive them away which would not be a very good idea.

Slimsid Let me ask you a question Imagine there was a girl on the forum who created lots of posts about her failure to get a boyfriend. She asked questions about men who slept around a lot and what you thought about them, She decried her single state and the fact that no-one had ever wanted to sleep with her etc Then she asked if hypothetically any blokes would go out with her. How do you think you would respond? What do you think other blokes would say? Do you think you might think that this girl had a scent of desperation about her? Do you think that might put you off? Would you think to yourself that she would do much better if she kept quiet about her virginity, general unpopularity etc. Would you advise her to just get out there and be chatty and see what happened? Now see if you can advise yourself . (Not that there is anything wrong with virginity but I know that young men feel it is a plague on them for as long as they keep it).

From the BBC. Ignore the rain, hail and thunder - Friday, 24 June is the happiest day of the year, according to an academic. Dr Cliff Arnall, of the University of Cardiff, said the combination of good weather and the prospect of time off means Britain will be on a high. The seasonal disorders specialist has devised a formula which measures good mood using increased outdoor activity, high energy levels and more sunlight. He used a similar method to work out 24 January was the most depressing day. The equation Dr Arnall devised to find the happiest day, in work commissioned by ice cream maker Walls, was O + (N x S) + Cpm/T + He. Within that, O stands for being outdoors and outdoor activity, N for nature, S for social interaction, Cpm for childhood summers and positive memories, T for temperature and He for holidays and looking forward to time off. Dr Arnall said: "Happiness is associated with many things in life and can be triggered by a variety of events. No joy for Henman but it's all smiles for Andrew Murray "Whether it's a sunny day, a childhood memory, or something as effortless as eating a delicious ice cream, I wanted my formula to prove the key to happiness can really be that simple." Other factors which helped 24 June towards becoming the happiest day were the Wimbledon championships adding a sense of national pride, and the fact that it has fallen on the Friday this year. But with storms hitting most parts of Britain and both Tim Henman and Greg Rusedski out of the All England Championships, will Dr Arnall's equation still compute? "The issue about the weather specific to this formula is the temperature, which is still reasonably high," he said. "This will pass - you do get summer storms and skin is waterproof. "Andrew Murray has come completely out of nowhere at Wimbledon and the way that he plays compared to Tim Henman, that coolness - he seems very professional and collected. "I think the endless hopes, the optimism, that we have still remain." *** Is it working for you? Do you feel happy today?

When this came on the news last night I was very cross. I drew a deep breath, squared my shoulders and then opened my mouth ready to start a nice big rant... ...but before I could start, my partner shouted "It's a bargain, well worth every penny." He then looked over to me as he rummaged in his pockets, and said, forstalling my rant "Here you go, have 61 pence from me. I'll pay your contribution too, they're worth it." So that effectively shut me up.