Pugwash

I heard that interview on Solent. What the News fails to mention is the absolute lambasting that Gosport's chairman gave to the News journalists. Called them unprofessional, ignorant, amateurs, etc. What I'd call a very robust denial!

He's been injured, but I take your point. Real question is would he get a place in our current side?

He's been injured, but I take your point. Real question is would he get a place in our current side?

I suspect navy leave was cancelled, international tensions over Hitler seizing power and Japan's invasion of Manchuria. Or they just couldn't be ar5ed.

Hoddle. The obvious choice.

Hordle. The obvious choice

Cobwebs...

Hampshire Bowman at Dundridge. http://www.hampshirebowman.com Not sure if you can book. Excellent beer, nice hidden location so mobile-free, do a beer festival last week in July.

Agreed. Though I seem to recall that the Baron Harkonnen portrayal was suitably gross and repellent, with just the right amount of humour! Children of Dune was made into a mini-series a few years back and was shown on sci-fi channel. I only managed to see part of one episode, but it looked promising. Apparently, there was also a Dune/Dune Messiah series with William Hurt that wasn't shown in this country. Now ordered on DVD, so will see...

Herbert's universe is undoubtedly very rich, but I agree that the books lost their way a bit after the first three or four. Nevertheless, the first book stands out as one of the finest books (of ANY genre) of the 20th century. I like the Asimov Foundation series for different reasons. It's very straight 'hard' sci-fi, typical of that optimistic 50's era, not too complicated and very 'linear' in the progression of the story. Always been a fan of those sweeping time-spanning sorts of stories. I returned to the Foundation series recently for nostalgic reasons, but as part of the recommended reading order that includes the Robot stories. Asimov filled in gaps in the storylines to bring them together with the later novels written in the 80s and early 90s. Obviously having been written over a period of 40 years, the styles of the later novels are quite different to those written in the 50s, but it somehow works when the 15 novels are read in chronological order.

Agree Charlie, your comments sum up perfectly my own feelings about the book. Found the style a bit frustrating. Enjoyed it, but not champing at the bit to read the next one. Having had a Kindle for a while, I've found myself going a bit retro. I read Frank Herbert's 'Dune' series way back in the 70's, so recently bought and read the first book on the Kindle. It's always stuck in my mind, but I'd forgotten what a colossal book it really was - in every sense of the word. At least the Kindle version is a lot lighter! Just starting Dune Messiah now.

Either you're trolling and being obtuse or you genuinely don't understand the issues under discussion. Either way I'm never going to convince you about infrastructure problems because you fail to see the obvious and clearly don't know enough on the subject. No, I'm not convinced that the EPL is attracting significant foreign investment. London's also packed with foreign visitors, a damn sight more of them. I used the point about Manchester and textiles to support the point that they USED to be world renowned. I certainly never suggested they should still be doing that, as you well know. Nor did I say that I preferred that the investment be made in Frankfurt. Suggest you read a bit slower. On the whole the Olympics were a great national spectacle. Somewhat ironic that most of the elements of the big shows were about this green and pleasant land or our industrial past. Don't seem to remember too much about London's financial district. Yes it was more of a success than other nations have recently produced, but still didn't do much for the rest of the country. Even poor little Weymouth lost a lot of money. As for the Commonwealth games, well they're a bit of a side show really aren't they? Like the runners up prize, after the IOC rejected Manchester's bid, saying they would only consider a future bid from London and no other UK city. Actually yes, I've been to every one of those places you mention and a whole lot more. That's why I raised the issue about the redressing of the balance in the past two decades. Good to see a bit of regeneration of the inner cities. Hopefully that'll be followed up by investment into wealth creating industry. It' also good to see the likes of the BBC moving to Salford. Now that development's a positive sign for the future. Don't get me wrong, I do see investment around the country and I see wise businesses recognising the benefits of moving out of the London area. I just don't see much of a shift in the perceptions of the general public, the media and politicians.

F'sure. Cardiff's future is looking Rosie.

Kind of comment you'd expect from one of 'Arry's mates, I suppose.

Congratulations! Best get her name put down now to be the team's mascot at the Champion's League final in ten years time! Enjoy a quiet Christmas.

This is the same 'Dave' who was "on Team Nigella". Look how that turned out.

...and the same Monaco that was founded by a bunch of pirates and developed with wealth stolen from Southampton?

So he was playing for the reserves of an amateur team in one of the smallest states in Europe - then gets a 2-year contract with them? Absolutely priceless!!!

Pretty obvious why the road and rail layout throttles the rest of the country, isn't it? The fact that links between regional centres are often difficult and inadequate restricts the movement of goods and services that ultimately stifles growth in the regions. Utilities - The current London-centric economy means inefficiencies in transportation and consumption of goods, transmission of power and other utilities and leads to an unstable and inherently inefficient national infrastructure. The city's just too big. Manchester & EPL - You know as well as I do that most of the EPL money goes either to a very few wealthy businessmen or into the pockets of foreign footballers who will probably take most of it abroad. Infrastructure - The expansion of Heathrow/3rd London airport is simply the overloading of an already congested system. BAA and London are acting in their own self-interest, of course, as building a new airport outside of London would mean them losing money - even though it would almost certainly be more efficient and beneficial to the nation as a whole. The Shard is an extravagant statement. No the money probably wouldn't have been spent elsewhere in the UK - more likely in Frankfurt or Paris, which simply illustrates the low profile of other UK cities. I'd like also to cite the example of the money spent on London 2012 Olympic developments, most of which was spent in London. This project drained a lot of construction resources from the rest of the country, such that good companies were losing their best staff to the detriment of other national projects. You can argue that it kept a lot of people employed, but where's the long term benefit to the nation in shipping some bits out to Brazil and flogging a stadium at cut price to a bankrupt East End football club? Still we've got a nice park to walk in, I suppose. Pretty much a repeat of the Dome fiasco 12 years earlier. In answer to your last question, I don't know how much has been spent. I could look it up, I suppose, but then it's not always a question of how much is spent, but how wisely. There have been some notable national investments around the country - the Didcot Diamond, for instance. But then I'm sure if they had the land and someone could've make a decent profit on it, then the government would've found a way to build it closer to London.

Ha! So you're one of those who leaves ten minutes before the end, then?

Most rail links radiate out from London. Ever tried getting from Norwich to Brum in a reasonable time? Or Cardiff to Doncaster? London cross-rail link anyone? Most of the motorways radiate from London. Christ, that's even how they number them. The national grid is unbalanced with the greatest demand in the South East and generation in the North. There are severe difficulties in distributing power around London. A high proportion of London's thirst is quenched by water from the Cambridgeshire fens. There's the continuously escalating investment (£250m) in the Thames water ring - just to 'stand still'. Practically half of East Anglia is given over to feed the masses in London every day. Manchester (and other northern cities) used to be world renowned for their textile industries. Old Trafford? Doubt if many people in the far east could have named the stadium 30 or 40 years ago before the global appeal of the EPL - and it's hardly an investment in the UK is it? Where to start with national investment? Well, there's the airports debate that prompted this thread. If a new airport is required, why does it have be built somewhere near to London, when congested travel links mean it would be more easily and quickly accessed if it was sited outside of London - perhaps somewhere in the M4 corridor for instance? Then there's the Thames barrier, even The Shard and other extravagant developments. You may argue some of these are private or local enterprises, but they nevertheless suck resources away from the rest of the country.

To answer the OP - yes. I've seen a lot of the world and worked in a lot of different places, including about 10 years (on-and-off) in various parts of London. It's dirty, smelly, unfriendly, crowded and expensive. Yes the work and money is there, nice to visit for the attractions, but I'd never choose to live there. That's my opinion, many others take the opposite view, which I respect. However, in practical terms London is 'throttling' the rest of the country because of the geographic imbalance in the national infrastructure in terms of communications, road and rail links and its gluttonous consumption of power, water and other resources. The process seems to have got worse over the last century as well. The cities of Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow, even Sheffield and others, used to be world-famous for their particular industries but are now mostly unknown to foreigners since the decline of the UK's international standing. Instead, much of the national investment in effort and resources have been ploughed into London to help it retain its 'world city' status. Only in the last 20 years or so has some effort been made to reverse this trend. Someone mentioned how Germany is more diversified. This is largely down to the way in which the German nation developed from individual states, each with their own capital, financial and industrial centres. Consequently their national infrastructure (at least in the West) is much more diversified than in the UK. London is one of the world's great cities but makes an eccentric 'hub' for the rest of the nation.

Done the same. Took a print of the confirmation screen... just in case.

People who walk through the main doors of a shopping mall/airport/hospital and just stop, block the doors and gaze around expecting to be instantly transported to their shop/terminal/ward of choice.

Get a shave from a proper Turkish barber. Shaves you twice and flames off the odd nose and ear hair, tourist-kebab style.