On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 17:27:30 +0000, Grunff wrote:

That's like saying that when I buy a kitchen knife I have to prove that
I'm not going to use it to kill anyone!

That law will be drafted by January.

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:17:41 -0000, "Ian Middleton"
wrote:

But in the corner of the room on top
of a "TV unit" was a perfectly TV shaped mark in the dust and patch was
warm.

They did that to me some time ago, and I was sufficiently annoyed at
their persistent letters to date that I let the chap in to have a
look, hoping it would make them go away.

It's a part-furnished rental, which includes a very ugly "TV cabinet"
with folding doors on it. The guy's eyes _lit_up_ at the sight of
this, as he'd clearly found the sneaky TV. So he flung the doors open,
at which point several hundred CDs cascaded all over his feet.

I tried my best Jean Brodie voice and said "I do hope you're going to
pick those up" To be fair, he did. Buggers still kept sending the
letters though.

"Kalico" wrote
| But if I did seal the sockets I would have to let the inspector
| into the house to view the arrangement -

You can hold the TV set up to the window. Or take a photo of the sealed
sockets, keep one copy to show the inspector, and post the other to yourself
in a sealed envelope.

You can then produce the sealed sockets in evidence in the future, and the
postmarked envelope with its photo of *identical* sealed sockets at a point
in time past, to show that your sockets were and have remained sealed and
the set has been unable to be used for broadcast reception.

Owain

"Ian Middleton" wrote
| A friend who did a stint as licence inspector said ...
| Had a whole variety in interesting stories ...

Story of inspector knocking on door, housewife answers. Inspector asks for
TV licence, housewife says she bought one last week and put it behind teapot
on dresser but she is rushing to work, can the inspector come back later
when her husband will be in.

Inspector comes back later, door is opened by husband. Inspector asks for TV
licence. Husband does not know where it is. Inspector says "behind the
teapot on the dresser". "By 'eck," says husband, "I didn't know those
detector vans were /that/ sensitive."

Owain

In message , Kalico
writes

This is all getting a bit silly.

If you check back to my original post you will see that I did not ask
about whether I need a license or not.

I DO NOT NEED A LICENSE.

My queries were about the necessity to report the lack of a need for a
license to the authorities and to get some idea of how they behave if
I do nothing.

I would have thought the answer was obvious

There is nothing in law compelling you to tell them that you don't need
a license

--
geoff

Stefek Zaba wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:


Innocent until proven guilty is the thesis.

OK its not a criminal offence, so its merely the burden of evidence
being most likley to point etc. etc.

It most certainly *is* a criminal offence - it's not a commercial
contract you enter into with the Beeb, it's a condition of using
apparatus to receive broadcast TV signals in the UK. And non-possession
of a licence is a criminabubble offencifier.

Which is part of what's offensive about their snotty, guilt-assuming
letters...

I'd like a lawyer's opionion on that.

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 23:27:12 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

man with Army penknife in briefcase arrested for possessing and
offensive weapon.

Actually that should read, "Confrontational arsehole arrested for
posession of offensive weapon (a telescopic baton) also had a Swiss
Army knife with him"

Andy Dingley wrote:

man with Army penknife in briefcase arrested for possessing and
offensive weapon.


Actually that should read, "Confrontational arsehole arrested for
posession of offensive weapon (a telescopic baton) also had a Swiss
Army knife with him"


On that subject, I recently read that you can be arrested for carrying a
Swiss Army Knife. I've carried one in my pocket since I was 10 years
old, and find it extremely useful in everday life. I don't intend to
stop carrying one.

--
Grunff

Andy Dingley wrote:
On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 23:27:12 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:


man with Army penknife in briefcase arrested for possessing and
offensive weapon.


Actually that should read, "Confrontational arsehole arrested for
posession of offensive weapon (a telescopic baton) also had a Swiss
Army knife with him"

what collapsible baton?

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 09:13:34 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

what collapsible baton?

Depends how dirty your mind is...!
--
Bob Eager
begin a new life...dump Windows!

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 15:53:39 +0000, Kalico wrote:

For about the past year or so I have been receiving increasingly
threatening letters from the TV licensing people about the fact I do
not have a license.

I'm not too fussed about buying one since I do not use the TV for
anything other than watching the occasional video. Indeed, there is
no TV in the main living room and no aerial lead on the TV that is
upstairs.

The 'notices' are sounding increasingly nasty. If I do not get a
license OR write to tell them I do not use a TV, then it is likely
that the skies will darken and the seas will boil etc etc.

My first question is whether I have to tell them that I do not watch
regular TV programmes? I know you can get a fine now for not
declaring SORN on a vehicle if it is off the road, but is TV licensing
as bad as that?

Secondly, does anyone have any experience of what happens when the
inspectors call at your house? They surely will at some point. I
could write to tell them what they want to know, but there is that
little bit of rebel still left in me that hates conforming to the
nanny state's big brother-esque dictats.

Does the inspector actually have to register radiation, or similar,
coming from the back of my TV set to 'prove' I am watching it (not
sure how they would get on with an LCD tv)? If so, surely I would
have to let them into my house. Do I have to?

Also, can they tell the difference between me watching a video and a
regular TV programme? It would be rare that my girlfriend and I would
put a video on before 11pm (sounds fun doesn't it? - the reality is
less exciting). Surely they would not start to bang on the door at
that hour and I could be forgiven for not answering it if they did?

Cheers
Rob


Replace 'spam' with 'org' to reply

You have to have a licence if you have equipment capable of receiving
a signal. I argued sucessfully, that I don't have this. I do have a
TV, and Video, and a Massive Video collection, but the TV in the house
is not capable of receiving a signal, as one does not reach the house.

We don't get radio inside either, the walls are simply too thick, and
the signal too week.

I phoned up the TV people and told them this, they agreed I was right,
the bad letters stopped. Just for good measure they sent the detector
van down to my place, got the damm thing stuck, and let all the sheep
out on the road. The farmer was ****ed off big time. I don't think I
will ever see them again.

I am in N Wales, just oustide the National Park.

Rick

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 08:24:52 +0000, Grunff wrote:

On that subject, I recently read that you can be arrested for carrying a
Swiss Army Knife.

Not for a month or two - but I imagine this will inevitably happen
soon.

A SAK is _not_ on the prohibited list, although most police are
ignorant of the law. And of course you can be arrested for anything,
if the officer wants to.

My own pocket knife is a Spyderco Delicia, which _is_ illegal, because
it's fitted with a folding lock. The same knife without the lock would
not be safe to use, so I carry it to save the risk to my fingers.
Perhaps I can have this offence taken into consideration when I'm sent
down for refusing the compulsory finger-printing for ID cards.


Two interesting posts that Scott Leckey made to rec.knives
Message-ID:
Message-ID:

"Andy Dingley" wrote
| .. The guy's eyes _lit_up_ at the sight of this, as he'd
| clearly found the sneaky TV. So he flung the doors open,
| at which point several hundred CDs cascaded all over his feet.
| I tried my best Jean Brodie voice and said "I do hope you're
| going to pick those up" To be fair, he did. Buggers still
| kept sending the letters though.

If you'd kept some old paint tins in that cupboard you could have got a new
carpet out of the experience.

Owain

Rick Dipper wrote:


You have to have a licence if you have equipment capable of receiving
a signal. I argued sucessfully, that I don't have this.

AARRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!! !!!!!!!!!

"Literacy hour" remedial reading skills training needed.

FFS, the statute is pretty damn clear what you need a licence for. You
need a licence to

u s e

equipment to receive, etc. Mere possession, *without* use, - and without
licence - is N O T the offence.

The business about keeping it detuned, away from aerial sockets (if
present), gumming up the RF input, etc etc etc are all to help rebut a
presumption of 'use'. Such a presumption might not strike many of us as
fair or reasonable: but the overwhelming majority of the population are
watchers of broadcast TV, and some substantial proportion of those with
TVs and no licence are indeed using them to receive broadcasts. Hence
the elaborate, disproportionate, steps to which it turns out in practice
to be worth going to get the suspicious,
can't-imagine-life-without-a-teli morons who account for the bulk of the
TV Licensing organisation's workforce off one's back.

Though I do like Andy Dingley's idea of posing as a tin-foil nutter -
along with a little harmless sodium bicarb + tartaric acid in the mouth
to help with the foaming bit ;-)

Stefek

Andy Dingley wrote:

Perhaps I can have this offence taken into consideration when I'm sent
down for refusing the compulsory finger-printing for ID cards.


You won't be the only one refusing. Retinal scan anyone?


--
Grunff

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:35:43 +0000, Stefek Zaba
wrote:



Though I do like Andy Dingley's idea of posing as a tin-foil nutter -
along with a little harmless sodium bicarb + tartaric acid in the mouth
to help with the foaming bit ;-)



I had a friend at university who had this down to a tee.

His party piece was with Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons and the like,
who while we were there became persistently annoying.

This individual could throw up pretty much to order and his party
piece would be to be poised when they came to the door at the
appointed hour, whereupon he would run down the stairs to the front
door screaming that he was the Antichrist and would puke ceremonially
at their feet.

It worked a treat for any of these persistent and unwanted callers.



--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:35:43 +0000, Stefek Zaba
wrote:



Though I do like Andy Dingley's idea of posing as a tin-foil nutter -
along with a little harmless sodium bicarb + tartaric acid in the mouth
to help with the foaming bit ;-)



I had a friend at university who had this down to a tee.

His party piece was with Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons and the like,
who while we were there became persistently annoying.

This individual could throw up pretty much to order and his party
piece would be to be poised when they came to the door at the
appointed hour, whereupon he would run down the stairs to the front
door screaming that he was the Antichrist and would puke ceremonially
at their feet.

It worked a treat for any of these persistent and unwanted callers.

.andy


ROFL !!! Nice trick if you can do it.

Another good one is to touch any literature they hand to you, then pretend
it has burned your hand. Works especially well if the literature has a
crucifix or some such on it.

Grunff wrote:


You won't be the only one refusing. Retinal scan anyone?

They're unlikely to to the retinal thing. Iris is the one biometric
which comes close to meeting HomeOfficious fantasy requirements
(genuinely highly probable to be unique across a population the size of
the UK, with distance-from-one-measurement-to-another within the same
eye being hugely, statistically-reliably, smaller than
distance-from-one-measured-eye-to-another (including both eyes of one
person).

Now, linking that fact to other "facts" about the individual; shelling
out for the expense of iris readers at all the places aspects of the ID
card proposals handwave they'll be; expecting you'll be able to
'eventually' have *everyone* registered - not just the stable-address,
engaged-in-society people, but those living rough, or deliberately
avoiding contact with the authorities - those are some of the places the
fantasy starts to move rapidly and orthogonally away from the reality
the rest of us inhabit.

Stefek Zaba wrote:
Grunff wrote:


You won't be the only one refusing. Retinal scan anyone?

They're unlikely to to the retinal thing. Iris is the one biometric
which comes close to meeting HomeOfficious fantasy requirements
(genuinely highly probable to be unique across a population the size of
the UK, with distance-from-one-measurement-to-another within the same
eye being hugely, statistically-reliably, smaller than
distance-from-one-measured-eye-to-another (including both eyes of one
person).

It's also possible (with a big camera admittedly) to do this from quite
some distance.
However, technology that would let a policeman carry a little thing that
would identify anyone within a couple of meters is quite possible.
Obvious countermeasures are dark glasses, and patterned contact lenses.
(It's hard to fake well, as the iris should respond to light and have a
pulse)

In message , Kalico
writes
But if I did seal the sockets I would have to let the inspector into
the house to view the arrangement - something most others advise
against doing.

FFS - just ignore them or tell them to **** off

.... together with a happy xmas message

--
geoff

Huge wrote:

Perhaps we need to refuse "en mass", 'cos I'm not carrying one.

I can well see a good number of people are going to enjoy thinking of
all sorts of creative ways of bollxing the system... The irony is that
by the time EDS (or one of the other usual susspects) have finished
developing it, there probably won't be much chance of it identifing a
fart in a sleeping bag!

As an aside, I find it interesting how many people fall for the "it
won't be compulsary to carry one" argument....

The "ID Card" will be no such thing - there will be the same multitude
of IDs that we currently have, only over time these will acquire linkage
to the ID database.

There will probably also be a genuine ID card as well with no other
pupose than being an ID card (i.e. what most people think and ID card
will be), but if you carry any of these or not will be a moot point. The
linkage to the database is *you* and not the cards. You can be linked to
your database record (of some 51 key facts!) by using the biometric at
any time (unless you plan to leave you face, eyes, and fingers at home).

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

Ian Stirling wrote:


It's also possible (with a big camera admittedly) to do this from quite
some distance.
However, technology that would let a policeman carry a little thing that
would identify anyone within a couple of meters is quite possible.
Obvious countermeasures are dark glasses, and patterned contact lenses.
(It's hard to fake well, as the iris should respond to light and have a
pulse)

Yeah - according to John Daugman, inventor and holder of the core patent
which makes this work (and one of those rare cases where a patent is
used to general advantage, in that he seems quite fierce about getting
licensees to implement it right and f'r example includes a
"size-of-population-being-matched-against" parameter into the algorithm,
to keep the likelihood of a false match low as pop. size increases), the
largest distance it's practical for is about 20m, with pretty exotic
optics. As you say, a 2m "semi-covert" scan is possible; and anything
covert or semi-covert is easier to counter than a live scan with a real
person supervising it...

Huge wrote:


Perhaps we need to refuse "en mass", 'cos I'm not carrying one.

See you in the 'Scrubs?


Plenty of info and organising over at www.no2id.net ...

The message
from Andy Dingley contains these words:

man with Army penknife in briefcase arrested for possessing and
offensive weapon.

Actually that should read, "Confrontational arsehole arrested for
posession of offensive weapon (a telescopic baton) also had a Swiss
Army knife with him"

AIUI that Swiss Army Knife wasn't actually a knife at all but a tool set
of some sort with a lockable blade and it was the lockable blade that
upset the plod although the baton is probably the more serious offence
in that it doesn't have any legitimate use.

There are one or two types of Swiss Army Knife that have a lockable
blade but they are few and far between and the typical folding blade
ones shouldn't interest the law unless actually used in a threatening
manner.

--
Roger

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 19:26:15 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

Huge wrote:

Perhaps we need to refuse "en mass", 'cos I'm not carrying one.

I can well see a good number of people are going to enjoy thinking of
all sorts of creative ways of bollxing the system... The irony is that
by the time EDS (or one of the other usual susspects) have finished
developing it, there probably won't be much chance of it identifing a
fart in a sleeping bag!

It'll be Arthur Andersen, since they had so much recent success on
this project:


"Deregulation of the chicken's side of the road was threatening its
dominant market position. The chicken was faced with significant
challenges to create and develop the competencies required for the
newly competitive market. Andersen Consulting, in a partnering
relationship with the client, helped the chicken by rethinking its
physical distribution strategy and implementation processes. Using the
Poultry Integration Model (PIM), Andersen helped the chicken use its
skills, methodologies, knowledge, capital and experiences to align the
chicken’s people, processes and technology in support of its overall
strategy within a Program Management framework. Andersen Consulting
convened a diverse cross-spectrum of road analysts and best chickens
along with Anderson consultants with deep skills in the transportation
industry to engage in a two-day itinerary of meetings in order to
leverage their personal knowledge capital, both tacit and explicit,
and to enable them to synergize with each other in order to achieve
the implicit goals of delivering and successfully architecting and
implementing an enterprise-wide value framework across the continuum
of poultry cross-median processes. The meeting was held in a park-like
setting, enabling and creating an impact environment which was
strategically based, industry-focused, and built upon a
consistent, clear, and unified market message and aligned with the
chicken’s mission, vision, and core values. This was conducive towards
the creation of a total business integration solution. (Andersen
Consulting helped the chicken change to become more successful."




--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

In message , The Natural
Philosopher writes
John Rumm wrote:

Harvey Van Sickle wrote:

My suspicion is that one's word would not be enough to carry the day
in a legal challenge -- some sort of physical evidence of disabled
receiving capability would need to be shown -- but I'm happy to be
proven wrong if a legal precedent can be pointed to.
Given that our legal system still loosly clings to the ideal of
"innocent until proven guilty", one might expect that it would be up
to the authorities to prove that you were using it in violation of the
licensing terms, not that you could if you wanted. cf. You have a car
that can exceed 70 mph, therefore you are nicked for speeding.

That will be the next thing to happen.

Cars capable of more than 50mph will be banned from suburbia.

Politicians (capable of lying) banned from the houses of parliament

--
geoff

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 21:47:09 -0000, ":::Jerry::::"
strung together this:

Then, presumably it would still be in it's wrappings, not to mention the
fact that you would have a receipt showing that you had only just bought the
set....

I haven't managed to read all posts thoroughly but the TV gestapo send
you letters if you buy a TV, not if you have one in the house. So, if
you buy a TV you have to fill out your details on a form, then they
st6art sending you letters to apply for a TV licence.
--

SJW
Please reply to group or use 'usenet' in email subject

"Lurch" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 21:47:09 -0000, ":::Jerry::::"
strung together this:

Then, presumably it would still be in it's wrappings, not to mention the
fact that you would have a receipt showing that you had only just bought
the
set....

I haven't managed to read all posts thoroughly but the TV gestapo send
you letters if you buy a TV,

No, they send letters to addresses without a licence which they have no
record of there *not* being a TV installed.

not if you have one in the house. So, if
you buy a TV you have to fill out your details on a form, then they
st6art sending you letters to apply for a TV licence.

But people, who have never bought a TV whilst living at the address, have
received letters.

In message , Andy Dingley
writes
On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 23:27:12 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

man with Army penknife in briefcase arrested for possessing and
offensive weapon.

Actually that should read, "Confrontational arsehole arrested for
posession of offensive weapon (a telescopic baton) also had a Swiss
Army knife with him"

Yes, but so what?

It's a complete misuse of law

Just like the anti terrorist laws, the only people who seem to be
getting arrested are peace protesters

--
geoff

Huge wrote:

Perhaps we need to refuse "en mass", 'cos I'm not carrying one.

See you in the 'Scrubs?


Hey, we could hold our next uk.d-i-y meet there!


--
Grunff

In message , Grunff
writes
Andy Dingley wrote:

Perhaps I can have this offence taken into consideration when I'm sent
down for refusing the compulsory finger-printing for ID cards.


You won't be the only one refusing. Retinal scan anyone?

Looks like we have a political movement getting off the ground here

get yourselves down to http://www.no2id.net/

--
geoff

"roger" wrote
| AIUI that Swiss Army Knife wasn't actually a knife at all
| but a tool set of some sort with a lockable blade and it
| was the lockable blade that upset the plod although the
| baton is probably the more serious offence in that it
| doesn't have any legitimate use.

If a baton has no legitimate use, then many police officers must be breaking
the law by carrying offensive weapons.

Oh, one law for ....

Owain

In message , Lurch
writes
On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 21:47:09 -0000, ":::Jerry::::"
strung together this:

Then, presumably it would still be in it's wrappings, not to mention the
fact that you would have a receipt showing that you had only just bought the
set....

I haven't managed to read all posts thoroughly but the TV gestapo send
you letters if you buy a TV, not if you have one in the house. So, if
you buy a TV you have to fill out your details on a form, then they
st6art sending you letters to apply for a TV licence.

Absolutely not true

--
geoff

"Rob Morley" wrote in message
t...
In article , "Kalico"
says...

Seems that using a detector van can pick out which channel is being
viewed. They can pick it up from the aerial on the roof, though I
cannot see it being so accurate as to be able to discern my aerial
from my neighbour's, three storeys up.

The signal is picked up from spurious emissions from the set and not from
the aerial.
The accuracy of location is very precise at TV frequencies, so determining
which room on which floor is very easy. You could do it with a hand held
receiver at those frequencies.

I think they actually detect the IF from the set's tuner.

No, it must come from the front end of the receivers local oscillator. That
way, they can say which channel you are watching. The set's IF is a constant
for every channel.

Dave

In message , Dave
writes

Seems that using a detector van can pick out which channel is being
viewed. They can pick it up from the aerial on the roof, though I
cannot see it being so accurate as to be able to discern my aerial
from my neighbour's, three storeys up.

The signal is picked up from spurious emissions from the set and not from
the aerial.
The accuracy of location is very precise at TV frequencies, so determining
which room on which floor is very easy. You could do it with a hand held
receiver at those frequencies.

I think they actually detect the IF from the set's tuner.

No, it must come from the front end of the receivers local oscillator. That
way, they can say which channel you are watching. The set's IF is a constant
for every channel.

I really did mean LO, and only though about it after I had posted

that's alcohol for you

now go switch your computer off and drink some everyone.

--
geoff

"Huge" wrote in message
...
"Dave" writes:

"Rob Morley" wrote in message
et...
In article , "Kalico"
says...

Seems that using a detector van can pick out which channel is being
viewed. They can pick it up from the aerial on the roof, though I
cannot see it being so accurate as to be able to discern my aerial
from my neighbour's, three storeys up.

The signal is picked up from spurious emissions from the set and not from
the aerial.

I think you have very little idea how superhet mixers work.


Well..... how about telling us then, as you seem to be saying they you do
know how they work....

brown vegetables in the roux, then add chicken stock and
allow to simmer for 20 minutes.
Add the patties or stuffed heads, and some loose crawfish,
lobster, long piglet, or what have you.
Cook on low for 15 minutes, then allow it to set for at least
15 minutes more.
Serve over steamed rice; this dish is very impressive!



Stuffed Cabbage Rolls

Babies really can be found under a cabbage leaf -
or one can arrange for ground beef to be found there instead.

8 large cabbage leaves
1 lb. lean ground newborn human filets, or ground chuck
Onions
peppers
celery
garlic
soy sauce
salt pepper, etc
Olive oil
breadcrumbs
Tomato Gravy (see index)

Boil the cabbage leaves for 2 minutes to soften.
In skillet, brown the meat in a little olive oil,
then add onions, peppers, and celery (all chopped finely)
and season well.
Place in a large bowl and cool.
Add seasoned breadcrumbs and a little of the tomato gravy,
enough to make the mixture pliable.
Divide the stuffing among the cabbage leaves then roll.
Place seam down in a baking pan.
Ladle tomato gravy on top,
and bake at 325° for 30 - 45 minutes.



Umbilical Cordon Bleu

Nothing is so beautiful as the bond between mother and child,
so why not consume it?
Children or chicken breasts will work wonderfully also.

4 whole umbilical chords (or baby breasts, or chicken breasts)
4 thin slices of smoked ham, and Gruyere cheese
Flour
eggwash (milk and eggs)
seasoned bread crumbs
1 onion
minced
salt
pepper
butter
olive oil

Pound the breasts flat (parboil first if using umbilical
cords so they won?t be tough).
Place a slice of ham and cheese on each, along with some minced onion
then fold in half, trimming neatly.
Dredge in flour, eggwash, then seasoned breadcrumbs;
allow to sit for a few minutes.
Sauté in butter and olive oil until golden brown,
about 6 minutes on each side.

roger wrote:

The message
from Andy Dingley contains these words:


man with Army penknife in briefcase arrested for possessing and
offensive weapon.


Actually that should read, "Confrontational arsehole arrested for
posession of offensive weapon (a telescopic baton) also had a Swiss
Army knife with him"


AIUI that Swiss Army Knife wasn't actually a knife at all but a tool set
of some sort with a lockable blade and it was the lockable blade that
upset the plod although the baton is probably the more serious offence
in that it doesn't have any legitimate use.

There are one or two types of Swiss Army Knife that have a lockable
blade but they are few and far between and the typical folding blade
ones shouldn't interest the law unless actually used in a threatening
manner.

I reiterate "what collapsible baton"?

None of the reports I saw mentioned that...URL?

crust (see index)
Whole fresh pre-mie; eviscerated, head, hands and feet removed
Onions, bell pepper, celery
½ cup wine
Root vegetables of choice (turnips, carrots, potatoes, etc) cubed

Make a crust from scratch - or go shamefully to the frozen food section
of your favorite grocery and select 2 high quality pie crusts (you
will need one for the top also).
Boil the prepared delicacy until the meat starts to come off the bones.
Remove, de-bone and cube; continue to reduce the broth.
Brown the onions, peppers and celery.
Add the meat then season, continue browning.
De-glaze with sherry, add the reduced broth.
Finally, put in the root vegetables and simmer for 15 minutes.
Allow to cool slightly.
Place the pie pan in 375 degree oven for a few minutes so bottom crust is not soggy,
reduce oven to 325.
Fill the pie with stew, place top crust and with a fork, seal the crusts together
then poke holes in top.
Return to oven and bake for 30 minutes, or until pie crust is golden brown.



Sudden Infant Death Soup

SIDS: delicious in winter, comparable to old fashioned Beef and Vegetable Soup.

The message
from The Natural Philosopher contains these words:

I reiterate "what collapsible baton"?

None of the reports I saw mentioned that...URL?

AIUI the original report was in the Spectator but it was crossposted
(verbatim I think) to a number of ngs including uk.rec.walking here I
read it and the subsequent lengthy discussion. Not at home atm so unable
to spend time searching for it myself but I am fairly sure swiss army
knife was in the title of the thread.

From what I remember the story was that as well as the so called swiss
army knife the plod found a collapsible baton within the briefcase that
the owner claimed he had got for protection at home (itself of
questionable legality) and had only put it in his briefcase to keep it
away from his young daughter who had found it and was playing with it.

I don't have any truck with such offensive weapons. However I do find
that the most convenient place to store my ice axe is close to my
bedhead.

--
Roger