> >On Feb 23, 10:09 pm, Charles Ellson <char...@ellson.demon.co.uk>
> >wrote:
> >> On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 10:22:59 -0800 (PST), Andy <andyp...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:

> >> >On Feb 23, 5:38 pm, 77002 <e27...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Feb 23, 12:53 pm, Andy <andyp...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >> >> > On Feb 23, 11:59 am, boltar2...@boltar.world wrote:

> >> >> > > On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 11:14:47 -0000

> >> >> > > "Peter Masson" <peter.mass...@privacy.com> wrote:
> >> >> > > >"burkey" <johnnyburk...@gmail.com> wrote

> >> >> > > >> Plans to start Croxley Rail Link services in 2016

> >> >> > > >The formal (Railways Act 2005) closure notice for Watford LUL station has
> >> >> > > >now been published. Any objections must be in by 12 April, though actual
> >> >> > > >closure will not take place until the Croxley Link is open, expected in
> >> >> > > >2016.

> >> >> > > I expect the residents of the new estate next to the station who no doubt
> >> >> > > BOUGHT BAsed on proximity to the tube are going to be mightily miffed.

> >> >> > And even more miffed with their solicitors, if the plans for the
> >> >> > existing station to close were not bought to their attention before
> >> >> > buying?

> >> >> The nearest tube station is quite some distance.  I guess it would be
> >> >> Edgeware?

> >> >Not that I mentioned tube stations but, if you are going to be
> >> >pedantic, it would help if you could get the name Edgware correct!!
> >> >Stanmore is closer to Watford Met anyway.

> >> But while generally frequented by tube trains is not a tube station.

> >Of course, if we are going to get silly, then not too far from Watford
> >Met, on the north curve from Croxley to Rickmansworth, there is the
> >only tunnel with tube like construction on the Met.

> >Very few stations are tube stations anyway, even in central London, as
> >the running tunnel has often been opened out to form the platforms.
> >The tube is now widely used for all London Underground services and
> >even TfL now use the term for both the deep level 'tube' lines and the
> >Sub-Surface lines.

> So ? Does repetition make something any more true ?