Nuxx:19c1114b-8b68-427e-bf3f-89b0d46b9539@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com

Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <19c1114b-8b68-427e-bf3f-89b0d46b9539@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: Labyrinthine paranoia Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 23:23:13 -0700 (PDT) References:   <395d142d-7081-4b91-92a8-eed081475f48@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>  <4v3694p551ur5o77fvu7bfi9l29aj6ghgh@4ax.com>   <40d6949900pjpg8999iruch5j0vsmdlqvo@4ax.com>  <9a0794h6kah04ae9ol5fpkrduc7mdqt10a@4ax.com> Lines: 34 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 88.105.145.93 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1217658194 14404 127.0.0.1 (2 Aug 2008 06:23:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2008 06:23:14 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com; posting-host=88.105.145.93; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.1) Gecko/2008070208 Firefox/3.0.1,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Bytes: 3256 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:660287

On Aug 1, 10:35 pm, "Just zis Guy, you know?"  wrote: > On Fri, 01 Aug 2008 22:23:59 +0100, Jeff York  > said in : > > >>... He said one or two > >>things that were, purely by coincidence, correct, but his agenda was > >>to oppose enforcement. > >No it wasn't. > > So you say. But that was not what he said to me in email > correspondence, and it is not the conclusion that others have drawn > from his holy jihad against cameras, in support of which he invented > the wholly spurious and unsupportable idea that cameras kill.

If you found out one day that cameras did actually kill, and the evidence was indisputable, would you drop your pro-camera campaign, admit that you'd been wrong, and start campaigning for cameras' removal instead? You know perfectly well that you wouldn't. Everyone knows that you would carry on exactly as before, pretend you had never seen the indisputable evidence, and do your best to ensure that no-one else saw it either. Because it's you who has the jihad, against motorists, and like Al-Qaeda, you couldn't care less how many people you kill while carrying it out.

(By the way, "holy jihad" is a tautology, like "PIN number", since "jihad" means "holy war". Since you like to pretend that you're some kind of genius, and you're such a pedant when it suits you, I thought you'd appreciate me letting you know.)

> He was a crank, end of.

Where, as usual with you, "end of" means "I can't justify what I've just said, and I'm getting fed up with you making me look bad by asking me to do so".