Nuxx:Ef5a5261-ceed-4743-a223-910e757ccbd6@g20g2000vba.googlegroups.com

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!g20g2000vba.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: Cycling in London safer than ever. Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 21:37:29 -0700 (PDT) References: <7545bea3-0420-4e73-adc3-179249344e6c@w3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com> Lines: 58 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.156.150.242 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1245299849 10428 127.0.0.1 (18 Jun 2009 04:37:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 04:37:29 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: g20g2000vba.googlegroups.com; posting-host=81.156.150.242; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.11) Gecko/2009060215 Firefox/3.0.11 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Bytes: 4251 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:710441

On Jun 17, 3:47=A0pm, spindrift  wrote: > > =93Some of these cycling groups are not sympathetic to me because they > regard me as a Conservative. It is an agony for them to see me as a > Conservative, championing the thing that they think is a wonderful, > leftist, liberating thing,=94 he says, ever the contradiction.

There is no contradiction there. You really don't like that he's hit the nail on the head, do you? You absolutely hate it when someone dares to expose the true aims of extremists like you.

(You hate it even more when someone has the temerity to expose one of your anti-motorist measures as dangerous: if they do it frequently and loudly enough, you start vicious, psychopathic hate campaigns against them, drive them to their graves, and even persist after their deaths, don't you? How *dare* anyone get in the way of your holy crusade against motorists?)

> Are these cycling groups really so shallow? > > =A0=93Yes, they are,=94 he says firmly. =93It is psychological torture fo= r > them to see something they regard as antiestablishment to have been > captured by this creature of the Conservative liberal establishment. > It is a nightmare for them. The more I do, the more painful it is.=94

Spot on. Boris has got the measure of the car-hating loonies. They are anti-car and anti-Conservative way before they are "pro-cyclist"; they probably aren't pro-cyclist to any real degree at all. No-one who was truly pro-cyclist would ever find it painful for pro-cyclist measures to be implemented, whatever political party the implementer was from, and however anti-motorist they were (or weren't).

> The claim that the LCC is anti-Conservative is of course

...competely true.

> We have also criticised those of which we don't approve, such as the > scrapping of the Western Extension to the Congestion Charging Zone, > the decision to allow motorbikes in bus lanes

...because they, like Spindrift, are actually just anti-motorist and anti-motorcyclist, not pro-cyclist. This is proven beyond any real question by the fact that allowing motorbikes in bus lanes makes things *safer* for cyclists, yet the measure was *still* dismissed out of hand by the loonies. Similarly, there is no evidence that scrapping the Western Extension will make things any worse for cyclists: again, the fact that it's a pro-motorist measure is the only reason for the loonies' opposition.

No matter what Boris does for cyclists, and no matter how pro-cyclist he is compared to Livingstone, Spindrift and his ilk will always criticise him simply because he's not anti-motorist like Livingstone was. Why does Spindrift persist with this "I'm pro-cyclist" nonsense when it's *so obvious* that he's simply a car-hating fruitcake? *Who does he think he's fooling?* (Another question, like the Lou Knee one, which is never answered by the person concerned, because they know they can't provide an answer which isn't humiliating to them.)