On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 05:01:54 -0600,
wrote:

In article ,
(e27002 aurora) wrote:

On Fri, 1 Jan 2016 09:59:36 +0000, Basil Jet
wrote:

On 2016\01\01 09:50, e27002 aurora wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2015 20:23:11 +0000, BevanPrice
wrote:

On 29/12/2015 11:15, e27002 aurora wrote:
On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 21:05:52 GMT, d
wrote:

On Thu, 24 Dec 2015 14:25:15 +0000
Basil Jet wrote:
I notice that "Nine Elms" roundels have gone up all over the
hoarding surrounding the former Sainsburys opposite Wilcox Road.

Boris has also ceremonially started a conveyor belt from the
Battersea station site to the Thames.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcjSnzw38iI

Maybe they should have just built a two way conveyor from Battersea
to Vauxhall and then we wouldn't need the railway ;-)

I wonder if when that extension is built and the line is
operationally split in 2 whether one half of the line will be given
a new name or whether it'll still all be known as the northern line?

Logically two independent lines should have two names. Independent
from a customer facing standpoint that is. It would be no surprise
if they still exchanged empty stock movements.

If the bits that were the "Charing Cross, Euston and Hampstead
Railway" remain together, the "Hampstead Line" has a good ring to it.

Or, how about something royal? "The Queen Elizabeth Line", "The
Charles, Prince of Wales Line", or "The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge
Line". I suspect in every day speech these would become the QE2,
Charlie, or Duchess Lines respectively. :-)

TfL could celebrate a great politician: "The Cromwell Line", "The
Winston Spencer Churchill Line", or, especially the part that
includes the Barnett Branch "The Baroness Thatcher Line".


That last one would probably make half the passengers want to
puke.......

You are believing your own leftist propaganda. Allow me to paint a
more realistic pictu
More than half of the potential users of the route just would not
care. Sad, but welcome to the modern apathetic world.

A healthy number would be happy to see the Iron Lady so honored.

A boisterous left wing minority would make a lot of obscene fuss. They
would use the methods at their disposal, vandalism, graffiti et al.
This says more about them than the great lady.

LU would be stupid to use a name which would obviously attract graffiti.

Superficially you have a point Basil. But, why should conservatives
only see the names of leftist "heroes" honoured, and not our own,
merely because we do not resort to illegal and antisocial tactics.

Let's take your point a step further: why fight Islamic State, doing
so may bring about more terrorists attacks in Europe and North
America.

Never let the scum win.

We very rarely name public facilities after party politicians. Things (e.g.
the Cambridge college) have been named after Churchill precisely because he
is seen as a national saviour, above party politics. Perception is all of
course. Nobody has suggested naming anything after Wilson either and he's a
less controversial figure than Thatcher.

That has much to do with media coverage. Wilson's capital controls,
prices and incomes, and high tax policies did immense damage. Brains
and capital simply left Britain.

Much of the Baronesses success was down to repairing Wilson's damage.
That is not the way the TV, Radio and the press reported it.