The Argos Tent Thread



On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:56:49 +0000 (UTC), "Ian Dainty"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>"gaza" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
>berlin.de
>
>> > > Ade
>> >I had been forced to drink a bottle of wine and then some shorts.
>> >
>> I can understand the difficult circumstances that this must have created. Were the "shorts" dirty
>> or clean ?
>
>I had to think for a moment or two before I understood what you meant. Doh!
>
>Dropped into Toys R Us for a sledge today. They haven't got any in. Who runs these places? They
>said they were expecting a delivery tomorrow "if the lorry can get through"! Usual story. A bit of
>snow and the country closes down.
>
>I blame Tony.
>
>Ian.

The enquiry into the leak of the results of the previous enquiry will, I can exclusively reveal,
completely exonerate Tony of any duplicity in the matter of the latest in a long line of false
weather forecasts.

--

Paul

My Lake District walking site (updated 29th September 2003):

http://paulrooney.netfirms.com
 
"Paul Rooney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]

> The enquiry into the leak of the results of the previous enquiry will, I can exclusively reveal,
> completely exonerate Tony of any duplicity in the matter of the latest in a long line of false
> weather forecasts.

Did you see last night's "I'm a has-been, get me out of here". I think Tone should have to do the
Ostrich test. Only....
a) Lots more ostriches (is this the right form of plural)
b) Starve them first
3) No protective clothing and put the seed stuff round his b*lls too.

Just to make it fair, if he lives he gets to be King.

--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
 
In message <[email protected]>, Jim Ford <[email protected]> writes
>>> > Ade
>> >
>>> Ignore my other posts in this thread. I was posting under difficult circumstances. I had been
>>> forced to drink a bottle of wine and then some shorts. And then I accidently sat in front of a
>>> computer and made some posts.
>
>Reminds me of the W.C.Fields' saying "Lost my corkscrew once. Had to survive on food and water for
>three days!"
>
Didn't he once say that he doesn't drink water because fish **** in it.

--
Martin Richardson
216/284 Munros (34/34 'Furths')
217/89 Donalds 397/1552 Marilyns 439/439 Nuttalls
 
Ian Dainty <[email protected]> wrote
>"gaza" <[email protected]> wrote

>Dropped into Toys R Us for a sledge today. They haven't got any in. Who runs these places? They
>said they were expecting a delivery tomorrow "if the lorry can get through"! Usual story. A bit of
>snow and the country closes down.
>
>I blame Tony.
>
I listened to the Hutton report today, and everything is the BBC's fault. Tony is innocent.

It must be true 'cos a Law Lord said so.....
--
Gordon
 
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:51:01 +0000, Martin Richardson
<[email protected]> wrote:

>In message <[email protected]>, Jim Ford <[email protected]> writes
>>>> > Ade
>>> >
>>>> Ignore my other posts in this thread. I was posting under difficult circumstances. I had been
>>>> forced to drink a bottle of wine and then some shorts. And then I accidently sat in front of a
>>>> computer and made some posts.
>>
>>Reminds me of the W.C.Fields' saying "Lost my corkscrew once. Had to survive on food and water for
>>three days!"
>>
>Didn't he once say that he doesn't drink water because fish **** in it.

[Hmm, I have waited a while to say that like that...]

--
Better to be thought stupid than to speak and confirm it.

Mail john rather than nospam...
 
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:11:05 +0000, Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:

>I listened to the Hutton report today, and everything is the BBC's fault. Tony is innocent.
>
>It must be true 'cos a Law Lord said so.....

I wonder which senior Labour party member he is a) friends with, b) godfather to a child of, c) in
hock to, d) all of the above ?

--
Suicide Hotline... Please hold for the next available operator...

Mail john rather than nospam...
 
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:56:32 -0000, Paul Saunders wrote:

>Andy Howell wrote:
>
>> Hmm, I was looking forward to joining you lot on a future expedition, but I'm not sure that I
>> would actually understand what was going on!
>
>Well I'll explain. What's going on is that we're all trying to democratically discuss the route for
>the next day's walk (interrupted by frequent side-discussions of Photoshop), but as we get
>progressively drunker our plans get less and less coherent and eventually nothing gets decided at
>all. Next morning we have a quick hung over chat outside the tents and spend 5 minutes deciding on
>the route. Then we start the walk at 9:30am precisely.

Unless it is going to be baking hot and the only pub is ****. In which case we start before 8.00 and
make up for the lack of drink the night before in the evening :)
--
Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks"
 
Andy Howell wrote:

> Hmm, I was looking forward to joining you lot on a future expedition, but I'm not sure that I
> would actually understand what was going on!

Well I'll explain. What's going on is that we're all trying to democratically discuss the route for
the next day's walk (interrupted by frequent side-discussions of Photoshop), but as we get
progressively drunker our plans get less and less coherent and eventually nothing gets decided at
all. Next morning we have a quick hung over chat outside the tents and spend 5 minutes deciding on
the route. Then we start the walk at 9:30am precisely.

Paul
--
Calendars for 2004
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/cal/cal.html
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749
 
In message <[email protected]>, Paul Saunders <[email protected]> writes
>Andy Howell wrote:
>
>> Hmm, I was looking forward to joining you lot on a future expedition, but I'm not sure that I
>> would actually understand what was going on!
>
>Well I'll explain. What's going on is that we're all trying to democratically discuss the route for
>the next day's walk (interrupted by frequent side-discussions of Photoshop), but as we get
>progressively drunker our plans get less and less coherent and eventually nothing gets decided at
>all. Next morning we have a quick hung over chat outside the tents and spend 5 minutes deciding on
>the route. Then we start the walk at 9:30am precisely.
>
You forgot to say that my car has to be pushed first.

--
Martin Richardson
216/284 Munros (34/34 'Furths')
217/89 Donalds 397/1552 Marilyns 439/439 Nuttalls
 
> Well I'll explain. What's going on is that we're all trying to
> democratically discuss the route for the next day's walk (interrupted by
> frequent side-discussions of Photoshop), but as we get progressively
> drunker our plans get less and less coherent and eventually nothing gets
> decided at all. Next morning we have a quick hung over chat outside the
> tents and spend 5 minutes deciding on the route. Then we start the walk
> at 9:30am precisely.
>
> Paul

Hmmm. Sounds like a **** take. But in fact, this account by Paul is 100% accurate.

Ian.

--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
 
In article <[email protected]>,
John Laird <[email protected]> writes:

>>I listened to the Hutton report today, and everything is the BBC's fault. Tony is innocent.
>
> I wonder which senior Labour party member he is a) friends with, b) godfather to a child of, c) in
> hock to, d) all of the above ?

Not important. Who appointed him? Who set his terms of reference?

Didn't Stalin say something about that kind of power? Now they've fired a warning shot against
anyone in the Meeja who might feel confident to go public on the Very Big issues.

--
Nick Kew
 
Nick Kew <[email protected]> wrote
>In article <[email protected]>, John Laird <nospam@laird-
>towers.org.uk> writes:
>
>>>I listened to the Hutton report today, and everything is the BBC's fault. Tony is innocent.
>>
>> I wonder which senior Labour party member he is a) friends with, b) godfather to a child of, c)
>> in hock to, d) all of the above ?
>
>Not important. Who appointed him? Who set his terms of reference?
>
>Didn't Stalin say something about that kind of power? Now they've fired a warning shot against
>anyone in the Meeja who might feel confident to go public on the Very Big issues.
>
It all came about from an enthusiastic weapons inspector, who liked explaining the technical side to
the press, and a piece of bad journalism which was not properly checked out by Gilligan's bosses.

Yet we can be led into an unnecessary war and the Leader comes out smelling of roses.

Mush be shome mishtake shomewhere.

Bit like the striker who can miss as many goals as he likes so long as he scores the winner, but the
BBC are like the goalkeeper - one mistake and you're booed off the field.
--
Gordon
 
"yup" <[email protected]> wrote

> remember last year we had a thread going for ages regarding the little
tent
> from Argos for £30 quid ?

Still in the latest version of their catalogue by the way, which looks like it's just out, along
with other bits and pieces from Karrimor, Crag Hoppers and Vaude.
 
W. D. Grey <[email protected]> wrote
>In article <[email protected]>, Gordon <[email protected]> writes
>>Bit like the striker who can miss as many goals as he likes so long as he scores the winner, but
>>the BBC are like the goalkeeper - one mistake and you're booed off the field.
>
>Yeah but how much are they being paid to get it right?

Too much, if you refer to the soccer players, ask Leeds United. :)
--
Gordon
 
* Martin Richardson <[email protected]> deigned to grace uk.rec.walking
* with their presence by declaiming:

> Didn't he once say that he doesn't drink water because fish **** in it.

No - I think what he said was 'Don't drink water - fish make love in it!'

Regards: Jim Ford
 
On 28/1/04 6:56 pm, in article [email protected], "Paul
Saunders" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Andy Howell wrote:
>
>> Hmm, I was looking forward to joining you lot on a future expedition, but I'm not sure that I
>> would actually understand what was going on!
>
> Well I'll explain. What's going on is that we're all trying to democratically discuss the route
> for the next day's walk (interrupted by frequent side-discussions of Photoshop), but as we get
> progressively drunker our plans get less and less coherent and eventually nothing gets decided at
> all. Next morning we have a quick hung over chat outside the tents and spend 5 minutes deciding on
> the route. Then we start the walk at 9:30am precisely.

Sounds un-missable. Where are you going next?