I can't see anything wrong with this if it was just a temporary stunt which would not cause damage to the immediate vicinity. Howver the fact that a) channel 4 offered a paltry two grand for the priviledge and b) the national trust accepted it is a disgrace
Reply | with quote | Posted by notjamesbond 6th May 2003ce 21:25 |
Big Brother & National Trust (Randall, May 04, 2003, 23:39)- Re: Big Brother & National Trust (Randall, May 04, 2003, 23:46)
- Horsing around... (BoC, May 05, 2003, 00:35)
- Re: BBC news link (pebblesfromheaven, May 05, 2003, 10:05)
- Is nothing sacred? (grufty jim, May 05, 2003, 16:19)
- Re: Big Brother & National Trust (laksmi, May 05, 2003, 22:53)
- Re: a mass wash-off (Joanna, May 06, 2003, 12:59)
- Re: Big Brother & National Trust (ocifant, May 06, 2003, 14:13)
- Re: Oh my God! (Nat, May 06, 2003, 14:22)
- A horrible thought... (Cursuswalker, May 06, 2003, 20:37)
- Re: Big Brother & National Trust (notjamesbond, May 06, 2003, 21:25)
- Re: Big Brother & National Trust (broen, May 07, 2003, 00:02)
|
|