camberwell70

.

John Prine. One of the great songwriters. RIP

se22cat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Dulwich handy Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > F*** the circumstances > > Slightly racist..... > > Or is it me ?! > > Do you even know what an ABC1 even is? What a > moron. Is it a cinema?

Bill Withers

se22cat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Bloody council should be out using their paint for > this rather than their retarded anti-resident CPZ > crap. 'Retarded' Why are you using this kind of language?

Xian, Orpington High Street

Live, BBC2, from 7:30

otter

earth

Leave it; its 2019 totally.

Handsome to the day he died..

ample

Hello

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KtBbyglq37E

Robert Poste's Child Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Calling men and teenage boys: in this hot weather, > why not shower daily and wear deodorant? OMG

DaveR Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > To anyone living in central London, or even SE or > SW low numbers south of the river, this is surely > suburbs - zone 2/3 borders, reachable only by bus > and overground, most of it built since 1900. Inner > suburbs these days perhaps, but you couldn't call > it inner city or urban. > > (Pedantry alert) > > The number part of London postcodes does not > indicate how central you are - it's alphabetical > by postal area - so the rererence to 'low numbers' > doesn't make sense. And most of ED was built > before 1900, in the 1880s and 1890s. > > That aside, I agree that inner suburbs is the best > description - it fits the history, architecture > and the general feel. > > Re 'offensive all night party' - obviously not > literally all night, but I'd be pretty hacked off > about this: > > "the last guests left about 2:15 when we switched > off the music" > > if it was my neighbour, whether they'd warned me > or not. True. Inner suburbs but not Inner London.

DulwichBorn&Bred Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Love the London cheesecake from Greggs. Dulwich born and bread?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=V6yo5rT4FJQ

civilservant Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > i was pointing out to the OP that some so-called > 'native' birds are actually migrants - unlike > parakeets which are now a settled species in this > country, (also grey squirrels, rabbits, chestnut > trees, sycamores and any number of garden plants - > all introduced, but now part of the 'native' > furniture) > > in the process, i seem to have outed uncleglen as > a peddler of fake news Haha

times

Rendell, who says, ever, I was having a chat with a black guy? I was having a chat with a gay guy?

rendelharris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Not assault, but under S4 of the Public Order Act > there'd certainly be a case for a charge of > "Causing fear or provocation of violence" - two > men with a dog shouting obscenities at a woman > sounds pretty like. Or indeed behaviour likely to > cause a breach of the peace would be a another > option. But not assault though (legally, though > obviously it can certainly feel like one when > faced with it). > > N.B. re the "obviously gay" thing, at the risk of > causing annoyance some people are, through > behaviour, language, dress etc, fairly obviously > gay, aren't they? I must admit I might say "I was > having a chat with this gay bloke in a pub" in the > same way I might say "I was having a chat with > this black guy" or whatever, just an identifier. > Certain the OP didn't mean any offence, though > given the context perhaps "obviously a couple" > would have conveyed the same meaning and not > risked upsetting anyone. Its nonsense what you are saying. i thought you were intelligent.

Sounds threatening to me.

Verbal assault