Robert Woolley wrote:
On 17 Jul 2005 08:18:00 -0700, wrote:



The TfL website described 7/7 as the worst day in the Underground's
history, which surely means their collective memory does not go
back as far as WW11 and various events at Bank, Balham and Bethnal
Green? (Though it would be bad taste to play a cynical numbers game
re.victims.)

Worse peace time day I think you'll find.

The actual words are "This is the worst incident in the history of
London underground".
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Richard J. wrote:
Robert Woolley wrote:
On 17 Jul 2005 08:18:00 -0700, wrote:



The TfL website described 7/7 as the worst day in the Underground's
history, which surely means their collective memory does not go
back as far as WW11 and various events at Bank, Balham and Bethnal
Green? (Though it would be bad taste to play a cynical numbers game
re.victims.)

Worse peace time day I think you'll find.

The actual words are "This is the worst incident in the history of
London underground".

Is that "London underground" what has become the system or "London
Underground Limited"?

If the latter, then the statement is true since LU Ltd only came into
existence in 1984. ;-)

Brimstone wrote:
Richard J. wrote:
Robert Woolley wrote:
On 17 Jul 2005 08:18:00 -0700, wrote:



The TfL website described 7/7 as the worst day in the
Underground's history, which surely means their collective
memory does not go back as far as WW11 and various events at
Bank, Balham and Bethnal Green? (Though it would be bad taste to
play a cynical numbers game re.victims.)

Worse peace time day I think you'll find.

The actual words are "This is the worst incident in the history of
London underground".

Is that "London underground" what has become the system or "London
Underground Limited"?

I copied it exactly as it appeared in the "Notes for editors" at the
bottom of at least two press releases. I guess the lower-case 'u' was
just a typo.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

"Adrian" wrote in message
. 244.170...

Perhaps some taster snippets (and, no, I'm not talking about the prurient
downmarket tabloid blood'n'guts stuff) would help those of us on the other
side to better understand, though?

What exactly are you after?

If TFL really are using the phrase "London underground" they really
area losing the plot...

"London Underground", "London Underground Limited" and even "London's
Underground" could all in some way refer to the network developed from
1863, though of course the use of the title "UndergrounD" to embrace
what were then still independant or associated Tube and Sub-surface
railways came in the early-20th Century. What "London underground" is
heaven knows, it sounds a like part of a terrorist organisation in
itself.

As an aside, for some reason the initials "LU" are now the preferred
choice, even though London Undreground Limited remains a legal body,
albiet under TfL instad of LRT. I always think of LU as a south-west
London bus company, but to confuse matters still further, the Mayor has
organisised several anti-terrorist/anti-racist events under the banner
"London United" - complete with New Johnston script!

If TFL really are using the phrase "London underground" they really
area losing the plot...

"London Underground", "London Underground Limited" and even "London's
Underground" could all in some way refer to the network developed from
1863, though of course the use of the title "UndergrounD" to embrace
what were then still independant or associated Tube and Sub-surface
railways came in the early-20th Century. What "London underground" is
heaven knows, it sounds a like part of a terrorist organisation in
itself.

As an aside, for some reason the initials "LU" are now the preferred
choice, even though London Undreground Limited remains a legal body,
albiet under TfL instad of LRT. I always think of LU as a south-west
London bus company, but to confuse matters still further, the Mayor has
organisised several anti-terrorist/anti-racist events under the banner
"London United" - complete with New Johnston script!

wrote:
If TFL really are using the phrase "London underground" they really
area losing the plot...

"London Underground", "London Underground Limited" and even "London's
Underground" could all in some way refer to the network developed from
1863, though of course the use of the title "UndergrounD" to embrace
what were then still independant or associated Tube and Sub-surface
railways came in the early-20th Century. What "London underground" is
heaven knows, it sounds a like part of a terrorist organisation in
itself.

However, IIRC a correspondent to "Modern Railways" writng from the
Netherlands in about 1984 (when LU Ltd was formed) advised that simply using
the initials spelt a less than polite term for the male appendage in his
native language.

We heard that "lul" and meant something obscene in Hindi.

On 17 Jul 2005 08:18:00 -0700, wrote:

Interestingly, I've already has hassle when taking photos on LU with
staff citing 7/7 as reason for the "ban"(Sic). Sadly this is how
dictorship starts - as of course there is no ban on general personal
photography on LU (save the usual well-discussed caveats)

I thought the official line (even prior to recent events) was that all
photography is totally banned on LU without a permit?

but perhaps
now maybe we should introduce one "to be on the safe side"? Remember
terrorism is all about making people change their daily routine and
general way of life.

asdf wrote:
I thought the official line (even prior to recent events) was that all
photography is totally banned on LU without a permit?

Nope, only commercial photography, using a flash and/or using a tripod.