Jump to content

Recommended Posts

titch juicy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Huguenot- the restaurants aren't obliged to take

> foie gras off the menu, if someone asks them to.

> Surely they would do what they thought was best

> for the business.

>

> If they did decide to take it off the menu, for

> moral or business reasons- you have the freedom of

> choice to eat elsewhere.

>

> It's not Tom Micklewright's choice to remove it

> from the menu, it's the restaurants.



Huguenot?

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Make it stop, make it stop, make it stop!!!

>

> It's like Groundhog Day, I keep clicking this

> thread, but nothing new has actually been said

> since about page ... 2?

>

> Just let it die in peace, like an old aged goose!


Not until we (that's not the assumed 'we' of benevolent coercion but the implicit 'we' of a group of ugly men with torches) have caused its liver to explode and can all lick bits off the walls of this thread.


*crouches with a small bottle of truffle oil - waiting to spring... and smoking next to a fucking patio heater fuck you*

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It's irrelevant tj.

>

> Mickelwright is campaigning to take choice away

> from other people. He's not trying to persuade

> people of his personal convictions regarding Foie

> Gras, he's trying to cut off the lines of supply.



...and the restaurant doesn't have to remove it

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It's irrelevant tj.

>

> Mickelwright is campaigning to take choice away

> from other people. He's not trying to persuade

> people of his personal convictions regarding Foie

> Gras, he's trying to cut off the lines of supply.



so by that rationale- protestors disagreeing with the war in the middle east are fine, but if they start demanding that the government remove british soldiers from afghanistan, they are out of order?

The argument always holds up - when it comes to public issues we have a parliamentary process to go through regarding legislation preventing objectionable behaviour.


If you're aware of issues surrrounding products produced using socially unacceptable methods then that's what publicity is for.


We don't give license to individuals to act unilaterally acccording to their own whims, because there's an awful lot of people out there with some very strange convictions. I really don't get why this is so hard to understand.

Still not getting it tj - I'm not criticising Mickelwrights convictions, and I'm not challenging his right to protest. If he wants to perition parliament I'll celebrate his commitment.


I'm criticising his methods - subterfuge and manipulation to get his own way. I'm criticising his belief that this makes him heroic. I'm criticising his belief that his own views are more important that anyone elses.

If Mickelwright thought that restaurants made their own minds up, then he wouldn't be lobbying them.


If Mickelwright didm't want to take away our choice of what to eat, then he wouldn't be targeting restaurants at all.


Since he posted on here, he clearly feels that increasing the size of his gang will increase the pressue on restauraters.


This is the reality - the arguments in support of his behaviour contradict themselves.

Remind me again.. is the 74th or 75th time Huge has diverted and expanded a minor point of nothingness to biblical proportions - simply in order fuel his personal vanity debating project? I've lost count.



And can someone please lower me a rope? I've fallen into the deep well of sadness.. again. Hay-yelp.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Does anyone know when the next SNT meeting is? I am fed up with my son being mugged on East Dulwich Grove! 
    • The issue must be everywhere at the moment. I was visiting a friend last week in Bermondsey, think we were walking  down Linton Rd & we dodged 7 dog poos. It was disgusting. 
    • Thanks for your message — I actually took the time to look into what CityHive does before posting my original comment, and I’d encourage anyone with questions to do the same. Yes, the Companies House filings are overdue — but from what I’ve gathered, this seems likely to be an accountant or admin issue, not some sign of ill intent. A lot of small, community-based organisations face challenges keeping up with formalities, especially when they’re focused on immediate needs like food distribution. Let’s not forget CityHive is a not-for-profit, volunteer-powered CIC — not a corporate machine. As for the directors, people stepping down or being replaced is often about capacity or commitment — which is completely normal in the voluntary and community sector. New directors are sometimes appointed when others can no longer give the time. It doesn’t automatically mean bad governance — it just means people’s circumstances change. CityHive’s actual work speaks volumes. They buy most of the food they distribute — fresh produce, essential groceries, and shelf-stable items — and then deliver it to food banks, soup kitchens, and community projects across London. The food doesn’t stay with CityHive — it goes out to local food hubs, and from there, directly to people who need it most. And while yes, there may be a few paid staff handling logistics or admin, there’s a huge volunteer effort behind the scenes that often goes unseen. Regular people giving their time to drive vans, sort donations, load pallets, pack food parcels — that’s what keeps things running. And when people don’t volunteer? Those same tasks still need to be done — which means they have to be paid for. Otherwise, the whole thing grinds to a halt. As the need grows, organisations like CityHive will inevitably need more support — both in people and funding. But the bigger issue here isn’t one small CIC trying to make ends meet. The real issue is the society we live in — and a government that isn’t playing its part in eradicating poverty. If it were, organisations like CityHive, The Felix Project, City Harvest, FareShare, and the Trussell Trust wouldn’t need to exist, let alone be thriving. They thrive because the need is growing. That’s not a reflection on them — it’s a reflection on a broken system that allows people to go hungry in one of the richest cities in the world. If you're in doubt about what they’re doing, go check their Instagram: @cityhivemedia. You’ll see the real organisations and people receiving food, sharing thanks, and showing how far the impact reaches. Even Southwark Foodbank has received food from CityHive — that alone should speak volumes. So again — how does any of this harm you personally? Why spend time trying to discredit a group trying to support those who are falling through the cracks? We need more people lifting others up — not adding weight to those already carrying the load.
    • Well, this is very disappointing. Malabar Feast  has changed its menu again. The delicious fish curry with sea bass no longer exists. There is now a fish dish with raw mango, which doesn't appeal. I had dal and spinach instead, which was bland (which I suppose I could/should have predicted). One of my visitors had a "vegetable Biriani" which contained hardly any vegetables. Along with it came two extremely tiny pieces of poppadom in a large paper bag.   This was embarrassing, as I had been singing Malabar's praises and recommending we ordered from there. The other mains and the parathas were OK, but I doubt we will be ordering from there again. My granddaughters wisely opted for Yard Sale pizzas, which were fine. Has anybody else had a similar recent poor (or indeed good!)  experience at Malabar Feast?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...