Spoiler - Fri 28th - Jim

[Serena Blanchflower]

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. Spoiler Space
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Wow! I seem to have something in my eye! That certainly wasn't
something I'd foreseen but it makes complete sense of the way Jim has
been behaving and was beautifully acted.

[Nick Odell]

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.            Spoiler Space
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Wow!  I seem to have something in my eye!  That certainly wasn't
something I'd foreseen but it makes complete sense of the way Jim has
been behaving and was beautifully acted.

Yes and beautifully written, to boot. I didn't catch the name of the
writer at the end - which probably means it's someone fairly new - and
all I have to say is that, with writing like that, I reckon that TA is
probably in safe hands for the next few years.

Nick

[LFS]

Post by Nick Odell

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.            Spoiler Space
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Wow!  I seem to have something in my eye!  That certainly wasn't
something I'd foreseen but it makes complete sense of the way Jim has
been behaving and was beautifully acted.

I cried. I've always liked Jim as a character and it made a lot of
sense. But I do share Vicky's view a bit about another Issue being
brought in.

Post by Nick Odell
Yes and beautifully written, to boot. I didn't catch the name of the
writer at the end - which probably means it's someone fairly new - and
all I have to say is that, with writing like that, I reckon that TA is
probably in safe hands for the next few years.

Simon Frith.

[Nick Odell]

Post by LFS

Post by Nick Odell

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.            Spoiler Space
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Wow!  I seem to have something in my eye!  That certainly wasn't
something I'd foreseen but it makes complete sense of the way Jim has
been behaving and was beautifully acted.

I cried. I've always liked Jim as a character and it made a lot of
sense. But I do share Vicky's view a bit about another Issue being
brought in.

Post by Nick Odell
Yes and beautifully written, to boot. I didn't catch the name of the
writer at the end - which probably means it's someone fairly new - and
all I have to say is that, with writing like that, I reckon that TA is
probably in safe hands for the next few years.

Simon Frith.

Not exactly a new face. Must have been my ears - where's that
hard-of-hearing thread?

Nick

[John Ashby]

Post by Nick Odell

Post by LFS

Post by Nick Odell

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.            Spoiler Space
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Wow!  I seem to have something in my eye!  That certainly wasn't
something I'd foreseen but it makes complete sense of the way Jim
has been behaving and was beautifully acted.

I cried. I've always liked Jim as a character and it made a lot of
sense. But I do share Vicky's view a bit about another Issue being
brought in.

Post by Nick Odell
Yes and beautifully written, to boot. I didn't catch the name of the
writer at the end - which probably means it's someone fairly new -
and all I have to say is that, with writing like that, I reckon that
TA is probably in safe hands for the next few years.

Simon Frith.

Not exactly a new face. Must have been my ears - where's that
hard-of-hearing thread?

About half past three.

john

[BrritSki]

Post by John Ashby

Post by Nick Odell
Not exactly a new face. Must have been my ears - where's that
hard-of-hearing thread?

About half past three.

YAJeremyCorbynAISM5antisemitic tweets

Loading Image...

If that link doesn't work it's an image of a lady leaning over JC and
asking "Are you too frail to be PM" and him replying "Half past three".

[Dumrat]

Post by BrritSki

Post by John Ashby

Not exactly a new face. Must have been my ears - where's that hard-of-hearing thread?

About half past three.

YAJeremyCorbynAISM5antisemitic tweets
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/imageserver/image/methode%2Fsundaytimes%2Fprod%2Fweb%2Fbin%2F81b67482-9a82-11e9-8a68-72ba3d118d54.jpg?crop=1500%2C1000%2C0%2C0&resize=600
If that link doesn't work it's an image of a lady leaning over JC and asking "Are you too
frail to be PM" and him replying "Half past three".

-:D

I've just listened to the omni, which I don't usually do, particularly if I've already
listened during the week. The earlier episodes are all the more comprehensible,
particularly Shula's behaviour, if you know what's coming. I cried again, it was
excellently acted and scripted.

Given people's misgivings about this particular choice of story-line, I was wondering if
"elder abuse" taking place at "The Laurels" would be more palatable (not the right word,
sorry) than "historic abuse"?

[Vicky Ayech]

Post by Dumrat

Post by BrritSki

Post by John Ashby

Not exactly a new face. Must have been my ears - where's that hard-of-hearing thread?

About half past three.

YAJeremyCorbynAISM5antisemitic tweets
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/imageserver/image/methode%2Fsundaytimes%2Fprod%2Fweb%2Fbin%2F81b67482-9a82-11e9-8a68-72ba3d118d54.jpg?crop=1500%2C1000%2C0%2C0&resize=600
If that link doesn't work it's an image of a lady leaning over JC and asking "Are you too
frail to be PM" and him replying "Half past three".

-:D
I've just listened to the omni, which I don't usually do, particularly if I've already
listened during the week. The earlier episodes are all the more comprehensible,
particularly Shula's behaviour, if you know what's coming. I cried again, it was
excellently acted and scripted.
Given people's misgivings about this particular choice of story-line, I was wondering if
"elder abuse" taking place at "The Laurels" would be more palatable (not the right word,
sorry) than "historic abuse"?

I really don't want another issue-driven and full of angst story.
Surely we have enough of those going on already? A simple tale of
countryside folk. TA is my safe place to listen, except it isn't now.

[Fenny]

On Sun, 30 Jun 2019 11:41:11 +0100, Vicky Ayech

Post by Vicky Ayech

Post by Dumrat

Post by BrritSki

Post by John Ashby

Not exactly a new face. Must have been my ears - where's that hard-of-hearing thread?

About half past three.

YAJeremyCorbynAISM5antisemitic tweets
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/imageserver/image/methode%2Fsundaytimes%2Fprod%2Fweb%2Fbin%2F81b67482-9a82-11e9-8a68-72ba3d118d54.jpg?crop=1500%2C1000%2C0%2C0&resize=600
If that link doesn't work it's an image of a lady leaning over JC and asking "Are you too
frail to be PM" and him replying "Half past three".

-:D
I've just listened to the omni, which I don't usually do, particularly if I've already
listened during the week. The earlier episodes are all the more comprehensible,
particularly Shula's behaviour, if you know what's coming. I cried again, it was
excellently acted and scripted.
Given people's misgivings about this particular choice of story-line, I was wondering if
"elder abuse" taking place at "The Laurels" would be more palatable (not the right word,
sorry) than "historic abuse"?

I really don't want another issue-driven and full of angst story.
Surely we have enough of those going on already? A simple tale of
countryside folk. TA is my safe place to listen, except it isn't now.

I don't listen any more, but Ma brought up what had happened. She's
not thrilled by the storyline. As she says, we used to listen as a
family over tea when we were small. This is hardly a family friendly
subject to be broadcast at 7pm.

My only comment is that if Jim is 80, how old is this other person and
how did he get to attend the party?

[Serena Blanchflower]

Post by Fenny
My only comment is that if Jim is 80, how old is this other person and
how did he get to attend the party?

We were told that he was a young man, and that could easily be someone
in the age range of 18-23, which would suggest he was now in his early
to mid nineties. Shula told Jim that he had been brought by an old
neighbour of Jim's, who had been invited.

[Chris McMillan]

Post by Serena Blanchflower

Post by Fenny
My only comment is that if Jim is 80, how old is this other person and
how did he get to attend the party?

We were told that he was a young man, and that could easily be someone
in the age range of 18-23, which would suggest he was now in his early
to mid nineties. Shula told Jim that he had been brought by an old
neighbour of Jim's, who had been invited.

Why hasn’t asked Fiona if she actually invited Harold or just the neighbour
who brought Harold along because they both wanted to meet Jim and his
children again?

Sincerely Chris

[carolet]

Post by Chris McMillan

Post by Serena Blanchflower

Post by Fenny
My only comment is that if Jim is 80, how old is this other person and
how did he get to attend the party?

We were told that he was a young man, and that could easily be someone
in the age range of 18-23, which would suggest he was now in his early
to mid nineties. Shula told Jim that he had been brought by an old
neighbour of Jim's, who had been invited.

Why hasn’t asked Fiona if she actually invited Harold or just the neighbour
who brought Harold along because they both wanted to meet Jim and hishe
children again?
Sincerely Chris

At the party, when the chap in the wheelchair was first mentioned, Fiona
was present. I think it was her that said that he was the son of friends
of their grandparents, and she didn't know who he came with. If it
wasn't her, she certainly didn't volunteer any extra information.

[Mike]

Post by carolet

Post by Chris McMillan

Post by Serena Blanchflower

Post by Fenny
My only comment is that if Jim is 80, how old is this other person and
how did he get to attend the party?

We were told that he was a young man, and that could easily be someone
in the age range of 18-23, which would suggest he was now in his early
to mid nineties. Shula told Jim that he had been brought by an old
neighbour of Jim's, who had been invited.

Why hasn’t asked Fiona if she actually invited Harold or just the neighbour
who brought Harold along because they both wanted to meet Jim and hishe
children again?
Sincerely Chris

At the party, when the chap in the wheelchair was first mentioned, Fiona
was present. I think it was her that said that he was the son of friends
of their grandparents, and she didn't know who he came with. If it
wasn't her, she certainly didn't volunteer any extra information.

Probably another S/W’s amnesiacal brainfart.

[Chris McMillan]

Post by Mike

Post by carolet

Post by Chris McMillan

Post by Serena Blanchflower

Post by Fenny
My only comment is that if Jim is 80, how old is this other person and
how did he get to attend the party?

We were told that he was a young man, and that could easily be someone
in the age range of 18-23, which would suggest he was now in his early
to mid nineties. Shula told Jim that he had been brought by an old
neighbour of Jim's, who had been invited.

Why hasn’t asked Fiona if she actually invited Harold or just the neighbour
who brought Harold along because they both wanted to meet Jim and hishe
children again?
Sincerely Chris

At the party, when the chap in the wheelchair was first mentioned, Fiona
was present. I think it was her that said that he was the son of friends
of their grandparents, and she didn't know who he came with. If it
wasn't her, she certainly didn't volunteer any extra information.

Probably another S/W’s amnesiacal brainfart.

Thanks, Carolet.

Sincerely Chris

[Mike]

Post by John Ashby

Post by Nick Odell

Post by LFS

Post by Nick Odell

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.            Spoiler Space
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Wow!  I seem to have something in my eye!  That certainly wasn't
something I'd foreseen but it makes complete sense of the way Jim
has been behaving and was beautifully acted.

I cried. I've always liked Jim as a character and it made a lot of
sense. But I do share Vicky's view a bit about another Issue being
brought in.

Post by Nick Odell
Yes and beautifully written, to boot. I didn't catch the name of the
writer at the end - which probably means it's someone fairly new -
and all I have to say is that, with writing like that, I reckon that
TA is probably in safe hands for the next few years.

Simon Frith.

Not exactly a new face. Must have been my ears - where's that
hard-of-hearing thread?

About half past three.
john

‘I’m ninety three you know!’

[Clive Arthur]

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.            Spoiler Space
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Wow!  I seem to have something in my eye!  That certainly wasn't
something I'd foreseen but it makes complete sense of the way Jim has
been behaving and was beautifully acted.

#hello, you too?

Cheers

[Sally Thompson]

Post by Serena Blanchflower
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. Spoiler Space
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Wow! I seem to have something in my eye! That certainly wasn't
something I'd foreseen but it makes complete sense of the way Jim has
been behaving and was beautifully acted.

I held my breath. Absolutely agree on all counts.

[Mike]

Post by Sally Thompson

Post by Serena Blanchflower
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. Spoiler Space
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Wow! I seem to have something in my eye! That certainly wasn't
something I'd foreseen but it makes complete sense of the way Jim has
been behaving and was beautifully acted.

I held my breath. Absolutely agree on all counts.

Yes, definitely, (or as the Wunderkind’s spill chicken suggests at her
attempts at the word, ‘defiantly’) welldone; unfortunately, I can foresee a
child mole station story line lasting for months.... :-(((

[Vicky Ayech]

Post by Sally Thompson

Post by Serena Blanchflower
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. Spoiler Space
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Wow! I seem to have something in my eye! That certainly wasn't
something I'd foreseen but it makes complete sense of the way Jim has
been behaving and was beautifully acted.

I held my breath. Absolutely agree on all counts.

Yes, definitely, (or as the Wunderkind’s spill chicken suggests at her
attempts at the word, ‘defiantly’) welldone; unfortunately, I can foresee a
child mole station story line lasting for months.... :-(((

It was well done. Congratulations to actors and writers. But I wish
they had not done anotehr issue story. They did Helen, Rob, Greg and
anorexia, that is three for just her! They did Pat's depression and
Mike's. They did Elizabeth's and Freddie#s jail and Lily's older man.
Then tehre was Jack #2. I know these are over time but the Rob story
and this are really very ..what is the word I want? Strong?

I would really prefer that TA has more farming and more every day
stories of country folk. We've still got Ed/Tim, Poppy and Will to go
too. :( And while Joe ending is the natural course of things it will
be sad. And the token oh how we laughed, local yokel thing with bert
or Lynda does not make it ok.

[Vicky Ayech]

On Sat, 29 Jun 2019 09:36:41 +0100, Vicky Ayech

Post by Vicky Ayech

Post by Sally Thompson

Post by Serena Blanchflower
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. Spoiler Space
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Wow! I seem to have something in my eye! That certainly wasn't
something I'd foreseen but it makes complete sense of the way Jim has
been behaving and was beautifully acted.

I held my breath. Absolutely agree on all counts.

Yes, definitely, (or as the Wunderkind’s spill chicken suggests at her
attempts at the word, ‘defiantly’) welldone; unfortunately, I can foresee a
child mole station story line lasting for months.... :-(((

It was well done. Congratulations to actors and writers. But I wish
they had not done anotehr issue story. They did Helen, Rob, Greg and
anorexia, that is three for just her! They did Pat's depression and
Mike's. They did Elizabeth's and Freddie#s jail and Lily's older man.
Then tehre was Jack #2. I know these are over time but the Rob story
and this are really very ..what is the word I want? Strong?
I would really prefer that TA has more farming and more every day
stories of country folk. We've still got Ed/Tim, Poppy and Will to go
too. :( And while Joe ending is the natural course of things it will
be sad. And the token oh how we laughed, local yokel thing with bert
or Lynda does not make it ok.

It's a matter of balance. Ambridge is supposed to be my happy place.
They are OTT on misery since Nigel died.

[John Finlay]

Post by Sally Thompson

Post by Serena Blanchflower
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. Spoiler Space
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Wow! I seem to have something in my eye! That certainly wasn't
something I'd foreseen but it makes complete sense of the way Jim has
been behaving and was beautifully acted.

I held my breath. Absolutely agree on all counts.

I did find it stretched my credibility a bit when he shared with Jazzer
as well as Alistair though.

[Vicky Ayech]

On Sat, 29 Jun 2019 09:50:46 +0100, John Finlay

Post by John Finlay

Post by Sally Thompson

Post by Serena Blanchflower
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. Spoiler Space
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Wow! I seem to have something in my eye! That certainly wasn't
something I'd foreseen but it makes complete sense of the way Jim has
been behaving and was beautifully acted.

I held my breath. Absolutely agree on all counts.

I did find it stretched my credibility a bit when he shared with Jazzer
as well as Alistair though.

Yes MTAAW and I hope Jazzer can keep a secret, even when drunk. And I
hope St Shula NEVER finds out what it is. She just needs to know
Snappy knows and it is being sorted. She'd begin nuggering counselling
as her new project.

[Mike]

Post by Vicky Ayech
On Sat, 29 Jun 2019 09:50:46 +0100, John Finlay

Post by John Finlay

Post by Sally Thompson

Post by Serena Blanchflower
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. Spoiler Space
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Wow! I seem to have something in my eye! That certainly wasn't
something I'd foreseen but it makes complete sense of the way Jim has
been behaving and was beautifully acted.

I held my breath. Absolutely agree on all counts.

I did find it stretched my credibility a bit when he shared with Jazzer
as well as Alistair though.

Yes MTAAW and I hope Jazzer can keep a secret, even when drunk. And I
hope St Shula NEVER finds out what it is. She just needs to know
Snappy knows and it is being sorted. She'd begin nuggering counselling
as her new project.

Lay counseling?

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

Post by Mike

Post by Vicky Ayech
On Sat, 29 Jun 2019 09:50:46 +0100, John Finlay

Post by John Finlay

Post by Sally Thompson

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. Spoiler Space
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Wow! I seem to have something in my eye! That certainly wasn't
something I'd foreseen but it makes complete sense of the way Jim has
been behaving and was beautifully acted.

Yes. Very believable - what with Jim being such a dry old stick
normally, the opening was very moving.

Post by Mike

Post by Vicky Ayech

Post by John Finlay

Post by Sally Thompson
I held my breath. Absolutely agree on all counts.

I did find it stretched my credibility a bit when he shared with Jazzer
as well as Alistair though.

Jazzer was sort of just there. And (see another post) I think Jim
saw/sees depths to Jazzer that others don't.

Post by Mike

Post by Vicky Ayech
Yes MTAAW and I hope Jazzer can keep a secret, even when drunk. And I

(Yes, that concern occurred to me too. Or let something slip even when
not drunk.)

Post by Mike

Post by Vicky Ayech
hope St Shula NEVER finds out what it is. She just needs to know
Snappy knows and it is being sorted. She'd begin nuggering counselling
as her new project.

I hope so too - though assuming they both stay in Ambridge (and how
friendly they've become lately), I haven't a clue how he _will_ convince
her. She's going to be dying to know - and, if we're honest, I suspect
most of us would share the curiosity.

Post by Mike
Lay counseling?

You remind me of my line "do clergymen do more than lay people?".

[Nick Odell]

Post by Vicky Ayech
On Sat, 29 Jun 2019 09:50:46 +0100, John Finlay

Post by John Finlay

Post by Sally Thompson

Post by Serena Blanchflower
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. Spoiler Space
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Wow! I seem to have something in my eye! That certainly wasn't
something I'd foreseen but it makes complete sense of the way Jim has
been behaving and was beautifully acted.

I held my breath. Absolutely agree on all counts.

I did find it stretched my credibility a bit when he shared with Jazzer
as well as Alistair though.

Yes MTAAW and I hope Jazzer can keep a secret, even when drunk. And I
hope St Shula NEVER finds out what it is. She just needs to know
Snappy knows and it is being sorted. She'd begin nuggering counselling
as her new project.

More appropriate than any other sort, I'd say.

Nick

[BrritSki]

Post by Nick Odell

Post by Vicky Ayech
On Sat, 29 Jun 2019 09:50:46 +0100, John Finlay

Post by John Finlay

Post by Sally Thompson

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.            Spoiler Space
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Wow!  I seem to have something in my eye!  That certainly wasn't
something I'd foreseen but it makes complete sense of the way Jim has
been behaving and was beautifully acted.

I held my breath. Absolutely agree on all counts.

I did find it stretched my credibility a bit when he shared with Jazzer
as well as Alistair though.

Yes MTAAW and I hope Jazzer can keep a secret, even when drunk. And I
hope St Shula NEVER finds out what it is. She just needs to know
Snappy knows and it is being sorted. She'd begin nuggering counselling
as her new project.

More appropriate than any other sort, I'd say.

BTN :(

[Sid Nuncius]

SPOILER SPACE TRIMMED

Post by Nick Odell

Post by Vicky Ayech

Post by John Finlay

Post by Sally Thompson

Wow!  I seem to have something in my eye!  That certainly wasn't
something I'd foreseen but it makes complete sense of the way Jim has
been behaving and was beautifully acted.

I held my breath. Absolutely agree on all counts.

I did find it stretched my credibility a bit when he shared with Jazzer
as well as Alistair though.

Yes MTAAW and I hope Jazzer can keep a secret, even when drunk. And I
hope St Shula NEVER finds out what it is. She just needs to know
Snappy knows and it is being sorted. She'd begin nuggering counselling
as her new project.

More appropriate than any other sort, I'd say.

BTN  :(

Tricky one. Very funny and worthy of a BUMRA in anyone's book, IMO.
But BT? On balance, very witty MV, I think, so up for the Bottoms instead.

Note to JPG: You mentioned elsewhere that you'd like witticisms to be
preserved somewhere. Would you consider reviving/constructing a BUMRA
website and adding new nominations? I'd welcome it very much.

[Dumrat]

Post by Sid Nuncius
SPOILER SPACE TRIMMED

Post by Nick Odell

Post by Vicky Ayech
Yes MTAAW and I hope Jazzer can keep a secret, even when drunk. And I
hope St Shula NEVER finds out what it is. She just needs to know
Snappy knows and it is being sorted. She'd begin nuggering counselling
as her new project.

More appropriate than any other sort, I'd say.

BTN  :(

Tricky one.  Very funny and worthy of a BUMRA in anyone's book, IMO. But BT?  On balance,
very witty MV, I think, so up for the Bottoms instead.

My thoughts exactly, when I saw the BTN suggestion, as Nick's remark made me laugh right
out loud, Sid. So glad to be in sync with the BTM -:D

Post by Sid Nuncius
Note to JPG: You mentioned elsewhere that you'd like witticisms to be preserved
somewhere.  Would you consider reviving/constructing a BUMRA website and adding new
nominations?  I'd welcome it very much.

Gosh, yes, so would I -:D Pretty please with bunting on top, JPG?

[Mike]

Post by Dumrat

Post by Sid Nuncius
SPOILER SPACE TRIMMED

Post by Nick Odell

Post by Vicky Ayech
Yes MTAAW and I hope Jazzer can keep a secret, even when drunk. And I
hope St Shula NEVER finds out what it is. She just needs to know
Snappy knows and it is being sorted. She'd begin nuggering counselling
as her new project.

More appropriate than any other sort, I'd say.

BTN  :(

Tricky one.  Very funny and worthy of a BUMRA in anyone's book, IMO. But BT?  On balance,
very witty MV, I think, so up for the Bottoms instead.

My thoughts exactly, when I saw the BTN suggestion, as Nick's remark made me laugh right
out loud, Sid. So glad to be in sync with the BTM -:D

Post by Sid Nuncius
Note to JPG: You mentioned elsewhere that you'd like witticisms to be preserved
somewhere.  Would you consider reviving/constructing a BUMRA website and adding new
nominations?  I'd welcome it very much.

Gosh, yes, so would I -:D Pretty please with bunting on top, JPG?

Bunting’s extra Luv.

[Kate B]

Post by Dumrat

Post by Sid Nuncius
SPOILER SPACE TRIMMED

Post by Nick Odell

Post by Vicky Ayech
Yes MTAAW and I hope Jazzer can keep a secret, even when drunk. And I
hope St Shula NEVER finds out what it is. She just needs to know
Snappy knows and it is being sorted. She'd begin nuggering counselling
as her new project.

More appropriate than any other sort, I'd say.

BTN  :(

Tricky one.  Very funny and worthy of a BUMRA in anyone's book, IMO.
But BT?  On balance, very witty MV, I think, so up for the Bottoms
instead.

My thoughts exactly, when I saw the BTN suggestion, as Nick's remark
made me laugh right out loud, Sid. So glad to be in sync with the BTM -:D

Post by Sid Nuncius
Note to JPG: You mentioned elsewhere that you'd like witticisms to be
preserved somewhere.  Would you consider reviving/constructing a BUMRA
website and adding new nominations?  I'd welcome it very much.

Gosh, yes, so would I -:D Pretty please with bunting on top, JPG?

Didn't Paul Herber offer some space for this?

Also, am hoping all is OK at Gilliver Towers: Jpeg and I had an exchange
of emails on Friday which was cut short when his server unexpectedly
started bouncing my emails, and he hasn't been on here since either.

[Chris J Dixon]

Post by Kate B
Also, am hoping all is OK at Gilliver Towers: Jpeg and I had an exchange
of emails on Friday which was cut short when his server unexpectedly
started bouncing my emails, and he hasn't been on here since either.

He is still Tweeting, so all is not yet lost.

Chris

[Kate B]

Post by Chris J Dixon

Post by Kate B
Also, am hoping all is OK at Gilliver Towers: Jpeg and I had an exchange
of emails on Friday which was cut short when his server unexpectedly
started bouncing my emails, and he hasn't been on here since either.

He is still Tweeting, so all is not yet lost.
Chris

Ah. Perhaps he hasn't noticed...
--
Kate B
London

[Paul Herber]

Post by Kate B

Post by Dumrat

Post by Sid Nuncius
SPOILER SPACE TRIMMED

Post by Nick Odell

Post by Vicky Ayech
Yes MTAAW and I hope Jazzer can keep a secret, even when drunk. And I
hope St Shula NEVER finds out what it is. She just needs to know
Snappy knows and it is being sorted. She'd begin nuggering counselling
as her new project.

More appropriate than any other sort, I'd say.

BTN  :(

Tricky one.  Very funny and worthy of a BUMRA in anyone's book, IMO.
But BT?  On balance, very witty MV, I think, so up for the Bottoms
instead.

My thoughts exactly, when I saw the BTN suggestion, as Nick's remark
made me laugh right out loud, Sid. So glad to be in sync with the BTM -:D

Post by Sid Nuncius
Note to JPG: You mentioned elsewhere that you'd like witticisms to be
preserved somewhere.  Would you consider reviving/constructing a BUMRA
website and adding new nominations?  I'd welcome it very much.

Gosh, yes, so would I -:D Pretty please with bunting on top, JPG?

Didn't Paul Herber offer some space for this?

I did indeed. All ready to go whenever ...

[Paul Herber]

Post by Kate B

Post by Dumrat

Post by Sid Nuncius
SPOILER SPACE TRIMMED

Post by Nick Odell

Post by Vicky Ayech
Yes MTAAW and I hope Jazzer can keep a secret, even when drunk. And I
hope St Shula NEVER finds out what it is. She just needs to know
Snappy knows and it is being sorted. She'd begin nuggering counselling
as her new project.

More appropriate than any other sort, I'd say.

BTN  :(

Tricky one.  Very funny and worthy of a BUMRA in anyone's book, IMO.
But BT?  On balance, very witty MV, I think, so up for the Bottoms
instead.

My thoughts exactly, when I saw the BTN suggestion, as Nick's remark
made me laugh right out loud, Sid. So glad to be in sync with the BTM -:D

Post by Sid Nuncius
Note to JPG: You mentioned elsewhere that you'd like witticisms to be
preserved somewhere.  Would you consider reviving/constructing a BUMRA
website and adding new nominations?  I'd welcome it very much.

Gosh, yes, so would I -:D Pretty please with bunting on top, JPG?

Didn't Paul Herber offer some space for this?

http://www.bumra.pherber.com/doku.php

Who wants to be admin/editor?
Is a wiki suitable for this? If not please advise ...
My email is valid.

[Dumrat]

Post by Paul Herber

Post by Kate B

Post by Dumrat

Post by Sid Nuncius
SPOILER SPACE TRIMMED

Post by Nick Odell

Post by Vicky Ayech
Yes MTAAW and I hope Jazzer can keep a secret, even when drunk. And I
hope St Shula NEVER finds out what it is. She just needs to know
Snappy knows and it is being sorted. She'd begin nuggering counselling
as her new project.

More appropriate than any other sort, I'd say.

BTN  :(

Tricky one.  Very funny and worthy of a BUMRA in anyone's book, IMO.
But BT?  On balance, very witty MV, I think, so up for the Bottoms
instead.

My thoughts exactly, when I saw the BTN suggestion, as Nick's remark
made me laugh right out loud, Sid. So glad to be in sync with the BTM -:D

Post by Sid Nuncius
Note to JPG: You mentioned elsewhere that you'd like witticisms to be
preserved somewhere.  Would you consider reviving/constructing a BUMRA
website and adding new nominations?  I'd welcome it very much.

Gosh, yes, so would I -:D Pretty please with bunting on top, JPG?

Didn't Paul Herber offer some space for this?

http://www.bumra.pherber.com/doku.php
Who wants to be admin/editor?
Is a wiki suitable for this? If not please advise ...
My email is valid.

I would if I knew how but I had a look at the link and wouldn't know where to start, I'm
afraid :(
This has reminded me - I presume I saw the recent news about Kimbo's campaign to keep
Mevagissey's surgery open on here - this is the latest:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/jun/11/cornish-village-mevagissey-gp-surgery-saved-from-closure-after-local-campaign

[BrritSki]

Post by Dumrat

Post by Paul Herber

Post by Kate B

Post by Dumrat

Post by Sid Nuncius
SPOILER SPACE TRIMMED

Post by Nick Odell

Post by Vicky Ayech
Yes MTAAW and I hope Jazzer can keep a secret, even when drunk. And I
hope St Shula NEVER finds out what it is. She just needs to know
Snappy knows and it is being sorted. She'd begin nuggering counselling
as her new project.

More appropriate than any other sort, I'd say.

BTN  :(

Tricky one.  Very funny and worthy of a BUMRA in anyone's book, IMO.
But BT?  On balance, very witty MV, I think, so up for the Bottoms
instead.

My thoughts exactly, when I saw the BTN suggestion, as Nick's remark
made me laugh right out loud, Sid. So glad to be in sync with the BTM -:D

Post by Sid Nuncius
Note to JPG: You mentioned elsewhere that you'd like witticisms to be
preserved somewhere.  Would you consider reviving/constructing a BUMRA
website and adding new nominations?  I'd welcome it very much.

Gosh, yes, so would I -:D Pretty please with bunting on top, JPG?

Didn't Paul Herber offer some space for this?

http://www.bumra.pherber.com/doku.php
Who wants to be admin/editor?
Is a wiki suitable for this? If not please advise ...
My email is valid.

I would if I knew how but I had a look at the link and wouldn't know
where to start, I'm afraid :(

YANAOU

www.bykimbo.com/bestofumra/ still exists but has no content.
Unfortunately not on wayback machine either :(

I wonder if Kim still has a backup....

[Paul Herber]

Post by BrritSki

Post by Dumrat

Post by Paul Herber

Post by Kate B

Post by Dumrat

Post by Sid Nuncius
SPOILER SPACE TRIMMED

Post by Nick Odell

Post by Vicky Ayech
Yes MTAAW and I hope Jazzer can keep a secret, even when drunk. And I
hope St Shula NEVER finds out what it is. She just needs to know
Snappy knows and it is being sorted. She'd begin nuggering counselling
as her new project.

More appropriate than any other sort, I'd say.

BTN  :(

Tricky one.  Very funny and worthy of a BUMRA in anyone's book, IMO.
But BT?  On balance, very witty MV, I think, so up for the Bottoms
instead.

My thoughts exactly, when I saw the BTN suggestion, as Nick's remark
made me laugh right out loud, Sid. So glad to be in sync with the BTM -:D

Post by Sid Nuncius
Note to JPG: You mentioned elsewhere that you'd like witticisms to be
preserved somewhere.  Would you consider reviving/constructing a BUMRA
website and adding new nominations?  I'd welcome it very much.

Gosh, yes, so would I -:D Pretty please with bunting on top, JPG?

Didn't Paul Herber offer some space for this?

http://www.bumra.pherber.com/doku.php
Who wants to be admin/editor?
Is a wiki suitable for this? If not please advise ...
My email is valid.

I would if I knew how but I had a look at the link and wouldn't know
where to start, I'm afraid :(

YANAOU
www.bykimbo.com/bestofumra/ still exists but has no content.
Unfortunately not on wayback machine either :(
I wonder if Kim still has a backup....

You need a login username and password to be able to edit pages, after that it becomes
easier!

[krw]

Post by John Finlay
I did find it stretched my credibility a bit when he shared with Jazzer
as well as Alistair though.

No I think that was deliberate; they all live together and it gives
Snappy someone to whom he has implicit permission to talk about it
without having to ask Jim if he can tell Jakob or Shulie. Jim may say
he has little feeling for his children - but to him Jazzer is another
one of his children.

I still do not believe a man of 90 plus would travel to Jim's birthday
party with such accusations hanging over his head - apart from that and
having read why the producer has imposed this on Jim I have to accept it.

[Mike Ruddock]

Post by krw

Post by John Finlay
I did find it stretched my credibility a bit when he shared with
Jazzer as well as Alistair though.

No I think that was deliberate; they all live together and it gives
Snappy someone to whom he has implicit permission to talk about it
without having to ask Jim if he can tell Jakob or Shulie.  Jim may say
he has little feeling for his children - but to him Jazzer is another
one of his children.
I still do not believe a man of 90 plus would travel to Jim's birthday
party with such accusations hanging over his head - apart from that and
having read why the producer has imposed this on Jim I have to accept it.

Where did you read this?

Mike Ruddock

[Dumrat]

Post by Mike Ruddock

I did find it stretched my credibility a bit when he shared with Jazzer as well as
Alistair though.

No I think that was deliberate; they all live together and it gives Snappy someone to
whom he has implicit permission to talk about it without having to ask Jim if he can
tell Jakob or Shulie.  Jim may say he has little feeling for his children - but to him
Jazzer is another one of his children.
I still do not believe a man of 90 plus would travel to Jim's birthday party with such
accusations hanging over his head - apart from that and
having read why the producer has imposed this on Jim I have to accept it.

Where did you read this?

There's an article at the Beeb here, Mike.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/1VQ1z3rvXHWWY93JBQ1499q/jims-historic-abuse-how-the-story-unfolded

or
https://tinyurl.com/Jim-s-abuse-TA

I don't know if it's the one KRW means?

[krw]

Post by Dumrat

Post by Mike Ruddock

Post by krw

Post by John Finlay
I did find it stretched my credibility a bit when he shared with
Jazzer as well as Alistair though.

No I think that was deliberate; they all live together and it gives
Snappy someone to whom he has implicit permission to talk about it
without having to ask Jim if he can tell Jakob or Shulie.  Jim may
say he has little feeling for his children - but to him Jazzer is
another one of his children.
I still do not believe a man of 90 plus would travel to Jim's
birthday party with such accusations hanging over his head - apart
from that and
having read why the producer has imposed this on Jim I have to accept it.

Where did you read this?

There's an article at the Beeb here, Mike.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/1VQ1z3rvXHWWY93JBQ1499q/jims-historic-abuse-how-the-story-unfolded
or
https://tinyurl.com/Jim-s-abuse-TA
I don't know if it's the one KRW means?

Correct. Sad indictment of the BBC getting on a bandwagon and imposing
it on our ears.

[Vicky Ayech]

Post by krw

Post by Dumrat

Post by Mike Ruddock

Post by krw

Post by John Finlay
I did find it stretched my credibility a bit when he shared with
Jazzer as well as Alistair though.

No I think that was deliberate; they all live together and it gives
Snappy someone to whom he has implicit permission to talk about it
without having to ask Jim if he can tell Jakob or Shulie.  Jim may
say he has little feeling for his children - but to him Jazzer is
another one of his children.
I still do not believe a man of 90 plus would travel to Jim's
birthday party with such accusations hanging over his head - apart
from that and
having read why the producer has imposed this on Jim I have to accept it.

Where did you read this?

There's an article at the Beeb here, Mike.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/1VQ1z3rvXHWWY93JBQ1499q/jims-historic-abuse-how-the-story-unfolded
or
https://tinyurl.com/Jim-s-abuse-TA
I don't know if it's the one KRW means?

Correct. Sad indictment of the BBC getting on a bandwagon and imposing
it on our ears.

It said the writer was keen to cover the subject, so yes, you are
right.Imposed it on us.

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

[]

Post by Vicky Ayech

Post by krw

Post by Dumrat

Post by Mike Ruddock

Post by krw
having read why the producer has imposed this on Jim I have to accept it.

Where did you read this?

There's an article at the Beeb here, Mike.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/1VQ1z3rvXHWWY93JBQ1499q/jims
-historic-abuse-how-the-story-unfolded
or
https://tinyurl.com/Jim-s-abuse-TA
I don't know if it's the one KRW means?

Correct. Sad indictment of the BBC getting on a bandwagon and imposing
it on our ears.

It said the writer was keen to cover the subject, so yes, you are
right.Imposed it on us.

It's a common theme in "Law and order - special victims unit" (FreeView
21, most nights); they haven't yet done someone as old as Jim, but
certainly people who are now adults who were abused in childhood is a
common storyline there (and I think other American Krimis). They've also
covered more than once the destruction false accusations of this can
bring.

From the article: "After Shula persistently but gently encouraged Jim to
open up" - I do think she was quite concerned, but I get the impression
most of UMRA wouldn't agree with "gently". " I’d always been
interested in Jim’s back story and what made him so buttoned up and
unemotional" - not sure I like the implication of that: it could lead
some people to assume _anyone_ who's unemotional (or at least doesn't
_show_ emotions) has a dark secret. Some people - and it's commoner
among Jim's generation - are unemotional _without_ there being anything
"buried", and I fear this may in a _few_ cases lead to their life being
made a misery by well-meaning pesterers.

And spoiler from that article (though I'd have predicted it):
.
.
.
.

.
.
.

.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

"With his long-kept secret finally revealed to Alistair, Jazzer and
Shula" - so she does find out, and by implication soon.

[Vicky Ayech]

On Mon, 1 Jul 2019 06:54:40 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
[]

Post by Vicky Ayech

Post by krw

Post by Dumrat

Post by Mike Ruddock

Post by krw
having read why the producer has imposed this on Jim I have to accept it.

Where did you read this?

There's an article at the Beeb here, Mike.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/1VQ1z3rvXHWWY93JBQ1499q/jims
-historic-abuse-how-the-story-unfolded
or
https://tinyurl.com/Jim-s-abuse-TA
I don't know if it's the one KRW means?

Correct. Sad indictment of the BBC getting on a bandwagon and imposing
it on our ears.

It said the writer was keen to cover the subject, so yes, you are
right.Imposed it on us.

It's a common theme in "Law and order - special victims unit" (FreeView
21, most nights); they haven't yet done someone as old as Jim, but
certainly people who are now adults who were abused in childhood is a
common storyline there (and I think other American Krimis). They've also
covered more than once the destruction false accusations of this can
bring.
From the article: "After Shula persistently but gently encouraged Jim to
open up" - I do think she was quite concerned, but I get the impression
most of UMRA wouldn't agree with "gently". " I’d always been
interested in Jim’s back story and what made him so buttoned up and
unemotional" - not sure I like the implication of that: it could lead
some people to assume _anyone_ who's unemotional (or at least doesn't
_show_ emotions) has a dark secret. Some people - and it's commoner
among Jim's generation - are unemotional _without_ there being anything
"buried", and I fear this may in a _few_ cases lead to their life being
made a misery by well-meaning pesterers.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
"With his long-kept secret finally revealed to Alistair, Jazzer and
Shula" - so she does find out, and by implication soon.

I assumed/hoped this was just a mistake. They do make them,
journalists do.

[Penny]

On Mon, 1 Jul 2019 06:54:40 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
From the article: "After Shula persistently but gently encouraged Jim to
open up" - I do think she was quite concerned, but I get the impression
most of UMRA wouldn't agree with "gently". " I’d always been
interested in Jim’s back story and what made him so buttoned up and
unemotional" - not sure I like the implication of that: it could lead
some people to assume _anyone_ who's unemotional (or at least doesn't
_show_ emotions) has a dark secret.

Must admit it set me wondering about my father's experiences at boarding
school*. There was an odd moment, many years ago, when he came home to
find bro#2 and I watching The Naked Civil Servant. He got visibly angry and
switched off the TV.

*Mined ewe, he had sent bro#1 and bro#3 to the same school so maybe not
there.

[Jenny M Benson]

Post by Penny
Must admit it set me wondering about my father's experiences at boarding
school*. There was an odd moment, many years ago, when he came home to
find bro#2 and I watching The Naked Civil Servant. He got visibly angry and
switched off the TV.

My father's reaction when he came home to find me watching Ray Martine
on Stars & Garters ot limited to a visible portrayal of anger. I just
wondered how he KNEW that Ray Martine was a ... I just forget which
offensive term he used.

[Jenny M Benson]

Post by Jenny M Benson
My father's reaction when he came home to find me watching Ray Martine
on Stars & Garters ot limited ...

... was not ...

Sorry about that. In some ways I really like this wireless keyboard
which was a thoughtful birthday present from my son, but it does have an
annoying habit of just totally ignoring me from time to time.

[krw]

Post by Jenny M Benson
My father's reaction when he came home to find me watching Ray Martine
on Stars & Garters ot limited to a visible portrayal of anger.

Neither programme or performer known to me. Perhaps he was not
transmitted in the South.

[Nick Odell]

Post by Jenny M Benson
My father's reaction when he came home to find me watching Ray Martine
on Stars & Garters ot limited to a visible portrayal of anger.

Neither programme or performer known to me.  Perhaps he was not
transmitted in the South.

Perhaps, like me, you weren't allowed to watch ITV at home. Perhaps,
unlike me, you didn't nip round to the neighbours to enjoy the forbidden
fruits of independent television.

Nick

[krw]

Post by Nick Odell

Post by Jenny M Benson
My father's reaction when he came home to find me watching Ray
Martine on Stars & Garters ot limited to a visible portrayal of anger.

Neither programme or performer known to me.  Perhaps he was not
transmitted in the South.

Perhaps, like me, you weren't allowed to watch ITV at home. Perhaps,
unlike me, you didn't nip round to the neighbours to enjoy the forbidden
fruits of independent television.
Nick

My father told me off for not watching Blue Peter or I would have seen
how to build the firework stand which he had just used to let off
fireworks safely.

I pointed out that I had seen it on Magpie on ITV.

I was taught to be an accountant by Jenny Handley's brother. Never met
her though.

[Mike]

Post by krw

Post by Nick Odell

Post by Jenny M Benson
My father's reaction when he came home to find me watching Ray
Martine on Stars & Garters ot limited to a visible portrayal of anger.

Neither programme or performer known to me.  Perhaps he was not
transmitted in the South.

Perhaps, like me, you weren't allowed to watch ITV at home. Perhaps,
unlike me, you didn't nip round to the neighbours to enjoy the forbidden
fruits of independent television.
Nick

My father told me off for not watching Blue Peter or I would have seen
how to build the firework stand which he had just used to let off
fireworks safely.
I pointed out that I had seen it on Magpie on ITV.
I was taught to be an accountant by Jenny Handley's brother. Never met
her though.

‘Crackerjack’ ‘One cabbage over here, please.’

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

Post by Vicky Ayech
On Mon, 1 Jul 2019 06:54:40 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
From the article: "After Shula persistently but gently encouraged Jim to
open up" - I do think she was quite concerned, but I get the impression
most of UMRA wouldn't agree with "gently". " I’d always been
interested in Jim’s back story and what made him so buttoned up and
unemotional" - not sure I like the implication of that: it could lead
some people to assume _anyone_ who's unemotional (or at least doesn't
_show_ emotions) has a dark secret.

Must admit it set me wondering about my father's experiences at boarding
school*. There was an odd moment, many years ago, when he came home to
find bro#2 and I watching The Naked Civil Servant. He got visibly angry and
switched off the TV.
*Mined ewe, he had sent bro#1 and bro#3 to the same school so maybe not
there.

I do hope it doesn't get used as yet another knocker of the boarding
school principle. (UMRA, like a lot of society, seems to have a downer
on the principle, and of course the belief that homosexuality is rife at
at least single-sex ones.) FWIW, my school (now bisexual, but wasn't
when I was there) was full of _rumour_ of such, but I suspect little or
none in practice (and what if any there was, I'd be surprised if it
involved the boys/staff mostly implicated in the rumours).

Like carolet, I also hope no connection with atheism is made. Especially
by Shula, if she does find out. [I was never subjected to anything
untoward (at school or elsewhere), and am a devout - though quiet -
atheist, since I think my 20s (agnostic before that).]

[Nick Odell]

FWIW, my school (now co-educational, but wasn't
when I was there)

Fixed it for you

Nick

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

Post by Nick Odell

FWIW, my school (now co-educational, but wasn't when I was there)

Fixed it for you
Nick

The error was partly deliberate, in that I knew the word I used wasn't
the right one (couldn't immediately think of the above, though probably
would have eventually), and partly that I rather liked using the word I
did use.

[Serena Blanchflower]

Post by Nick Odell

FWIW, my school (now co-educational, but wasn't when I was there)

Fixed it for you

I think I preferred Jpeg's original ;)

[Fenny]

On Mon, 1 Jul 2019 20:17:21 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
I do hope it doesn't get used as yet another knocker of the boarding
school principle. (UMRA, like a lot of society, seems to have a downer
on the principle

I don't remember noticing that.

[carolet]

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
[]

Post by Vicky Ayech

Post by Dumrat

Post by Mike Ruddock

Post by krw
having read why the producer has imposed this on Jim I have to accept it.

Where did you read this?

There's an article at the Beeb here, Mike.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/1VQ1z3rvXHWWY93JBQ1499q/jims
-historic-abuse-how-the-story-unfolded
or
https://tinyurl.com/Jim-s-abuse-TA
I don't know if it's the one KRW means?

Correct.  Sad indictment of the BBC getting on a bandwagon and imposing
it on our ears.

It said the writer was keen to cover the subject, so yes, you are
right.Imposed it on us.

It's a common theme in "Law and order - special victims unit" (FreeView
21, most nights); they haven't yet done someone as old as Jim, but
certainly people who are now adults who were abused in childhood is a
common storyline there (and I think other American Krimis). They've also
covered more than once the destruction false accusations of this can bring.
From the article: "After Shula persistently but gently encouraged Jim
to open up" - I do think she was quite concerned, but I get the
impression most of UMRA wouldn't agree with "gently". " I’d always been
interested in Jim’s back story and what made him so buttoned up and
unemotional" - not sure I like the implication of that: it could lead
some people to assume _anyone_ who's unemotional (or at least doesn't
_show_ emotions) has a dark secret. Some people - and it's commoner
among Jim's generation - are unemotional _without_ there being anything
"buried", and I fear this may in a _few_ cases lead to their life being
made a misery by well-meaning pesterers.

I also fear that this is going to be used as an explanation of why he is
an atheist.

[krw]

Post by carolet

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
[]

Post by Vicky Ayech

Post by Dumrat

Post by Mike Ruddock

Post by krw
having read why the producer has imposed this on Jim I have to
accept
it.

Where did you read this?

There's an article at the Beeb here, Mike.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/1VQ1z3rvXHWWY93JBQ1499q/jims
-historic-abuse-how-the-story-unfolded
or
https://tinyurl.com/Jim-s-abuse-TA
I don't know if it's the one KRW means?

Correct.  Sad indictment of the BBC getting on a bandwagon and imposing
it on our ears.

It said the writer was keen to cover the subject, so yes, you are
right.Imposed it on us.

It's a common theme in "Law and order - special victims unit"
(FreeView 21, most nights); they haven't yet done someone as old as
Jim, but certainly people who are now adults who were abused in
childhood is a common storyline there (and I think other American
Krimis). They've also covered more than once the destruction false
accusations of this can bring.
 From the article: "After Shula persistently but gently encouraged Jim
to open up" - I do think she was quite concerned, but I get the
impression most of UMRA wouldn't agree with "gently". " I’d always
been interested in Jim’s back story and what made him so buttoned up
and unemotional" - not sure I like the implication of that: it could
lead some people to assume _anyone_ who's unemotional (or at least
doesn't _show_ emotions) has a dark secret. Some people - and it's
commoner among Jim's generation - are unemotional _without_ there
being anything "buried", and I fear this may in a _few_ cases lead to
their life being made a misery by well-meaning pesterers.

I also fear that this is going to be used as an explanation of why he is
an atheist.

I think it is inevitable given what was said on Friday. I have not yet
heard Sunday.

[Mike]

Post by krw

Post by carolet

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
[]

Post by Vicky Ayech

Post by Dumrat

Post by Mike Ruddock

Post by krw
having read why the producer has imposed this on Jim I have to
accept
it.

Where did you read this?

There's an article at the Beeb here, Mike.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/1VQ1z3rvXHWWY93JBQ1499q/jims
-historic-abuse-how-the-story-unfolded
or
https://tinyurl.com/Jim-s-abuse-TA
I don't know if it's the one KRW means?

Correct.  Sad indictment of the BBC getting on a bandwagon and imposing
it on our ears.

It said the writer was keen to cover the subject, so yes, you are
right.Imposed it on us.

It's a common theme in "Law and order - special victims unit"
(FreeView 21, most nights); they haven't yet done someone as old as
Jim, but certainly people who are now adults who were abused in
childhood is a common storyline there (and I think other American
Krimis). They've also covered more than once the destruction false
accusations of this can bring.
 From the article: "After Shula persistently but gently encouraged Jim
to open up" - I do think she was quite concerned, but I get the
impression most of UMRA wouldn't agree with "gently". " I’d always
been interested in Jim’s back story and what made him so buttoned up
and unemotional" - not sure I like the implication of that: it could
lead some people to assume _anyone_ who's unemotional (or at least
doesn't _show_ emotions) has a dark secret. Some people - and it's
commoner among Jim's generation - are unemotional _without_ there
being anything "buried", and I fear this may in a _few_ cases lead to
their life being made a misery by well-meaning pesterers.

I also fear that this is going to be used as an explanation of why he is
an atheist.

I think it is inevitable given what was said on Friday. I have not yet
heard Sunday.

So you know not what he saideth on the Sabbath?

[Tony Smith Gloucestershire]

On Monday, 1 July 2019 17:09:44 UTC+1, Mike wrote:
<snipped>

Post by Mike
So you know not what he saideth on the Sabbath?

A pedant writes:

"I said, thou saidest, he/she/it said, we said, ye/you said, they said."

[Mike]

Post by Tony Smith Gloucestershire
<snipped>

Post by Mike
So you know not what he saideth on the Sabbath?

"I said, thou saidest, he/she/it said, we said, ye/you said, they said."

Yes, could I get a side salad with that and ketchup on the side please?

[Jim Easterbrook]

Post by krw

Post by carolet
I also fear that this is going to be used as an explanation of why he
is an atheist.

I think it is inevitable given what was said on Friday. I have not yet
heard Sunday.

A pity, when there are so many other reasons to be an atheist.

[Mike]

Post by Jim Easterbrook

Post by krw

Post by carolet
I also fear that this is going to be used as an explanation of why he
is an atheist.

I think it is inevitable given what was said on Friday. I have not yet
heard Sunday.

A pity, when there are so many other reasons to be an atheist.

God only knows how many!

[John Ashby]

Post by Jim Easterbrook

Post by krw

Post by carolet
I also fear that this is going to be used as an explanation of why he
is an atheist.

I think it is inevitable given what was said on Friday. I have not yet
heard Sunday.

A pity, when there are so many other reasons to be an atheist.

We are all polyatheists, I just don't believe in one more god than Shula
doesn't believe in.

john

[Serena Blanchflower]

Post by carolet
I also fear that this is going to be used as an explanation of why he is
an atheist.

Not so much an explanation of his atheism but as an explanation of his
extreme antipathy towards any kind of churchianity or anyone involved
with the church.

[Vicky Ayech]

Post by Dumrat

Post by Mike Ruddock

I did find it stretched my credibility a bit when he shared with Jazzer as well as
Alistair though.

No I think that was deliberate; they all live together and it gives Snappy someone to
whom he has implicit permission to talk about it without having to ask Jim if he can
tell Jakob or Shulie.  Jim may say he has little feeling for his children - but to him
Jazzer is another one of his children.
I still do not believe a man of 90 plus would travel to Jim's birthday party with such
accusations hanging over his head - apart from that and
having read why the producer has imposed this on Jim I have to accept it.

Where did you read this?

There's an article at the Beeb here, Mike.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/1VQ1z3rvXHWWY93JBQ1499q/jims-historic-abuse-how-the-story-unfolded
or
https://tinyurl.com/Jim-s-abuse-TA
I don't know if it's the one KRW means?

Shula didn't persist gently. She bulldozed her way in when he wanted
her to go. And she was not one of the people he told. Or not so far
and I hope not ever.

[Vicky Ayech]

Post by Dumrat

Post by Mike Ruddock

I did find it stretched my credibility a bit when he shared with Jazzer as well as
Alistair though.

No I think that was deliberate; they all live together and it gives Snappy someone to
whom he has implicit permission to talk about it without having to ask Jim if he can
tell Jakob or Shulie.  Jim may say he has little feeling for his children - but to him
Jazzer is another one of his children.
I still do not believe a man of 90 plus would travel to Jim's birthday party with such
accusations hanging over his head - apart from that and
having read why the producer has imposed this on Jim I have to accept it.

Where did you read this?

There's an article at the Beeb here, Mike.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/1VQ1z3rvXHWWY93JBQ1499q/jims-historic-abuse-how-the-story-unfolded
or
https://tinyurl.com/Jim-s-abuse-TA
I don't know if it's the one KRW means?

And the article says the editor worked closely with survivors uk. Well
they claimed to have worked with women's refuges over Helen's story
and the refuges agreed they served abused women badly with the way
the story was done. I'm not sure how well this served abused
children. Helen ended having her baby in prison and narrowly escaped
a sentence. What would be a good or bad outcome for Jim? I think the
story going further and action being taken would not be something he
would like.

[Mike Ruddock]

Post by Dumrat

Post by Mike Ruddock

Post by krw

Post by John Finlay
I did find it stretched my credibility a bit when he shared with
Jazzer as well as Alistair though.

No I think that was deliberate; they all live together and it gives
Snappy someone to whom he has implicit permission to talk about it
without having to ask Jim if he can tell Jakob or Shulie.  Jim may
say he has little feeling for his children - but to him Jazzer is
another one of his children.
I still do not believe a man of 90 plus would travel to Jim's
birthday party with such accusations hanging over his head - apart
from that and
having read why the producer has imposed this on Jim I have to accept it.

Where did you read this?

There's an article at the Beeb here, Mike.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/1VQ1z3rvXHWWY93JBQ1499q/jims-historic-abuse-how-the-story-unfolded
or
https://tinyurl.com/Jim-s-abuse-TA
I don't know if it's the one KRW means?

Thanks for the reference. I note the usual "If you have been affected by
. . . " at the bottom of that text and I had wondered on Friday why that
suggestion wasn't read out after TA.

Mike Ruddock

[Mike]

Post by Mike Ruddock

Post by Dumrat

Post by Mike Ruddock

Post by krw

Post by John Finlay
I did find it stretched my credibility a bit when he shared with
Jazzer as well as Alistair though.

No I think that was deliberate; they all live together and it gives
Snappy someone to whom he has implicit permission to talk about it
without having to ask Jim if he can tell Jakob or Shulie.  Jim may
say he has little feeling for his children - but to him Jazzer is
another one of his children.
I still do not believe a man of 90 plus would travel to Jim's
birthday party with such accusations hanging over his head - apart
from that and
having read why the producer has imposed this on Jim I have to accept it.

Where did you read this?

There's an article at the Beeb here, Mike.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/1VQ1z3rvXHWWY93JBQ1499q/jims-historic-abuse-how-the-story-unfolded
or
https://tinyurl.com/Jim-s-abuse-TA
I don't know if it's the one KRW means?

Thanks for the reference. I note the usual "If you have been affected by
. . . " at the bottom of that text and I had wondered on Friday why that
suggestion wasn't read out after TA.
Mike Ruddock

But, but, but, it was!

[Penny]

On Sun, 30 Jun 2019 08:39:56 +0100, Mike Ruddock

Post by Mike Ruddock

Post by Dumrat
There's an article at the Beeb here, Mike.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/1VQ1z3rvXHWWY93JBQ1499q/jims-historic-abuse-how-the-story-unfolded
or
https://tinyurl.com/Jim-s-abuse-TA
I don't know if it's the one KRW means?

Thanks for the reference. I note the usual "If you have been affected by
. . . " at the bottom of that text and I had wondered on Friday why that
suggestion wasn't read out after TA.

You must have switched off too soon, I heard it.

[Mike Ruddock]

Post by Penny
On Sun, 30 Jun 2019 08:39:56 +0100, Mike Ruddock

Post by Mike Ruddock

Post by Dumrat
There's an article at the Beeb here, Mike.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/1VQ1z3rvXHWWY93JBQ1499q/jims-historic-abuse-how-the-story-unfolded
or
https://tinyurl.com/Jim-s-abuse-TA
I don't know if it's the one KRW means?

Thanks for the reference. I note the usual "If you have been affected by
. . . " at the bottom of that text and I had wondered on Friday why that
suggestion wasn't read out after TA.

You must have switched off too soon, I heard it.

Ah, I heard continuity start to remind us of when the next TA would be
on and switched off.

Mike Ruddock

[Dumrat]

I did find it stretched my credibility a bit when he shared with Jazzer as well as
Alistair though.

No I think that was deliberate; they all live together and it gives Snappy someone to whom
he has implicit permission to talk about it without having to ask Jim if he can tell Jakob
or Shulie.  Jim may say he has little feeling for his children - but to him Jazzer is
another one of his children.
I still do not believe a man of 90 plus would travel to Jim's birthday party with such
accusations hanging over his head - apart from that and having read why the producer has
imposed this on Jim I have to accept it.

How old do you think Jim is, KRW? I was convinced that the party was for a "milestone
birthday" of his, which would make him 80 or maybe 85 now, given that Snappy is 57. I'm
not clear if he came to live in Ambridge in 2007 immediately after he retired, or after
he'd been retired for a while and then thought he might be better off in Ambridge? That
would make a difference to how old he is now, as would whether or not he took early
retirement. If he was 8 when the abuse started, and Harold was a "young man" - Harold need
only have been 5 or 6 years older than Jim, as there were no teenagers pre the Fifties or
Sixties, so he could conceivably only be 85 now. As a reason for Harold thinking it a good
idea to turn up to the party - I saw it suggested somewhere that abusers can actually
block out their abuse, or it be so normal to them that someone like Harold might actually
believe Jim would like to see him again after all this time, having conveniently
forgotten/not understanding the effect the abuse had on Jim. (I'm sure someone like Jimmy
Savile was like that. So self-centred and unempathetic that he wouldn't think twice about
being in the same room as people he'd abused and thinking they'd be delighted to see him -
after all, they were so lucky he'd paid them attention, weren't they?)

[Serena Blanchflower]

Post by Dumrat

Post by krw

Post by John Finlay
I did find it stretched my credibility a bit when he shared with
Jazzer as well as Alistair though.

No I think that was deliberate; they all live together and it gives
Snappy someone to whom he has implicit permission to talk about it
without having to ask Jim if he can tell Jakob or Shulie.  Jim may say
he has little feeling for his children - but to him Jazzer is another
one of his children.
I still do not believe a man of 90 plus would travel to Jim's birthday
party with such accusations hanging over his head - apart from that
and having read why the producer has imposed this on Jim I have to
accept it.

How old do you think Jim is, KRW? I was convinced that the party was for
a "milestone birthday" of his, which would make him 80 or maybe 85 now,
given that Snappy is 57.

I'm pretty sure that this was Jim's 80th birthday but I'm not certain
why I think that. Alistair probably did mention which birthday it was,
when they first started discussing marking it in some way, but it's
quite possible that I've just assumed it, for much the same reasons you
suggest.

Post by Dumrat
I'm not clear if he came to live in Ambridge in
2007 immediately after he retired, or after he'd been retired for a
while and then thought he might be better off in Ambridge?

He first came to Ambridge when he broke his leg quite badly and needed
Alistair and Shula to look after him. I don't think he ever went back
to live in Scotland, or not for any substantial period. I think he'd
retired a few years earlier.

Post by Dumrat
That would
make a difference to how old he is now, as would whether or not he took
early retirement. If he was 8 when the abuse started, and Harold was a
"young man" - Harold need only have been 5 or 6 years older than Jim, as
there were no teenagers pre the Fifties or Sixties, so he could
conceivably only be 85 now. As a reason for Harold thinking it a good
idea to turn up to the party - I saw it suggested somewhere that abusers
can actually block out their abuse, or it be so normal to them that
someone like Harold might actually believe Jim would like to see him
again after all this time, having conveniently forgotten/not
understanding the effect the abuse had on Jim.

Yes, I'd been going to suggest that, in his mind, and at this distance,
he would be convinced that it had been fully consensual. It wouldn't
occur to him that anything was "hanging over him" - or that Jim would be
anything other than happy to see him again.

Post by Dumrat
(I'm sure someone like
Jimmy Savile was like that. So self-centred and unempathetic that he
wouldn't think twice about being in the same room as people he'd abused
and thinking they'd be delighted to see him - after all, they were so
lucky he'd paid them attention, weren't they?)

:(

[krw]

Post by Dumrat

Post by krw

Post by John Finlay
I did find it stretched my credibility a bit when he shared with
Jazzer as well as Alistair though.

No I think that was deliberate; they all live together and it gives
Snappy someone to whom he has implicit permission to talk about it
without having to ask Jim if he can tell Jakob or Shulie.  Jim may say
he has little feeling for his children - but to him Jazzer is another
one of his children.
I still do not believe a man of 90 plus would travel to Jim's birthday
party with such accusations hanging over his head - apart from that
and having read why the producer has imposed this on Jim I have to
accept it.

How old do you think Jim is, KRW? I was convinced that the party was for
a "milestone birthday" of his, which would make him 80 or maybe 85 now,
given that Snappy is 57. I'm not clear if he came to live in Ambridge in
2007 immediately after he retired, or after he'd been retired for a
while and then thought he might be better off in Ambridge? That would
make a difference to how old he is now, as would whether or not he took
early retirement. If he was 8 when the abuse started, and Harold was a
"young man" - Harold need only have been 5 or 6 years older than Jim, as
there were no teenagers pre the Fifties or Sixties, so he could
conceivably only be 85 now. As a reason for Harold thinking it a good
idea to turn up to the party - I saw it suggested somewhere that abusers
can actually block out their abuse, or it be so normal to them that
someone like Harold might actually believe Jim would like to see him
again after all this time, having conveniently forgotten/not
understanding the effect the abuse had on Jim. (I'm sure someone like
Jimmy Savile was like that. So self-centred and unempathetic that he
wouldn't think twice about being in the same room as people he'd abused
and thinking they'd be delighted to see him - after all, they were so
lucky he'd paid them attention, weren't they?)

My belief is that Jim is 80, retiring at 60 and moving to Ambridge a
little later. He was 8 and if Harold was a young man I would interpret
that as about 18 - so around 90 give or take a couple of years. Similar
calculations have been aired on Facebook.

Given the publicity given to historic abuse I reckon anyone who thought
likely to be accused would stay clear - although 5 or so years ago it
might well have been different, how long has Savile been dead?

[Mike]

Post by krw

Post by John Finlay
I did find it stretched my credibility a bit when he shared with Jazzer
as well as Alistair though.

No I think that was deliberate; they all live together and it gives
Snappy someone to whom he has implicit permission to talk about it
without having to ask Jim if he can tell Jakob or Shulie. Jim may say
he has little feeling for his children - but to him Jazzer is another
one of his children.
I still do not believe a man of 90 plus would travel to Jim's birthday
party with such accusations hanging over his head - apart from that and
having read why the producer has imposed this on Jim I have to accept it.

Shula came awfully close to saying ‘I’m terribly worried about Jim’.

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

Post by Mike

Post by krw

Post by John Finlay
I did find it stretched my credibility a bit when he shared with Jazzer
as well as Alistair though.

No I think that was deliberate; they all live together and it gives
Snappy someone to whom he has implicit permission to talk about it
without having to ask Jim if he can tell Jakob or Shulie. Jim may say
he has little feeling for his children - but to him Jazzer is another
one of his children.
I still do not believe a man of 90 plus would travel to Jim's birthday
party with such accusations hanging over his head - apart from that and
having read why the producer has imposed this on Jim I have to accept it.

Shula came awfully close to saying ‘I’m terribly worried about Jim’.

(-:

[krw]

Post by Mike

Post by krw

Post by John Finlay
I did find it stretched my credibility a bit when he shared with Jazzer
as well as Alistair though.

No I think that was deliberate; they all live together and it gives
Snappy someone to whom he has implicit permission to talk about it
without having to ask Jim if he can tell Jakob or Shulie.  Jim may say
he has little feeling for his children - but to him Jazzer is another
one of his children.
I still do not believe a man of 90 plus would travel to Jim's birthday
party with such accusations hanging over his head - apart from that and
having read why the producer has imposed this on Jim I have to accept it.

Shula came awfully close to saying ‘I’m terribly worried about Jim’.

There he is - catch him and getting working on BUMRA please.

[Chris McMillan]

Post by Serena Blanchflower
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. Spoiler Space
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Wow! I seem to have something in my eye! That certainly wasn't
something I'd foreseen but it makes complete sense of the way Jim has
been behaving and was beautifully acted.

Yup!

Sincerely, Chris