Nuxx:61c8c344-49fd-4081-b534-dc47d0bfa72d@m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com

Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <61c8c344-49fd-4081-b534-dc47d0bfa72d@m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: Just A Quick One Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 07:07:28 -0700 (PDT) References:  Lines: 49 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: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1217426849 3586 127.0.0.1 (30 Jul 2008 14:07:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:07:29 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: m45g2000hsb.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: 4042 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:659709

On Jul 29, 4:26=A0pm, Nuxx Bar  wrote: > Going by what Spindrift has posted over the years, and the style that > he has used, do you honestly believe that his agenda is a noble, > selfless, transparent one (e.g. saving lives), rather than an > extremist, selfish, hidden one (e.g. an illogical hatred of > motorists)? =A0Even if you believe that speed cameras save lives, have > you never suspected that Spindrift is not the wonderful, caring > individual that he would like people to think he was? =A0Does Spindrift > really strike you as someone who would devote so much time and effort > to saving the lives of random road users? =A0Do you think it's a good > thing that Spindrift is one of the most (in)famous camera advocates on > the Internet? > > If you agree with me that he has a hidden agenda, what do you think it > is? =A0Are there any possibilities other than the most obvious (that he > hates motorists)? =A0Does he, like Chapman, have links with SCPs or > similar? =A0Surely if his motive is anything other than saving lives, > Spindrift's posts are just as damaging to those who genuinely believe > that cameras save lives as they are to anyone else. > > (In fact, they don't really damage the anti-camera movement at all, we > just find him comical. =A0For a while there was even a school of thought > (in some quarters) that Spindrift was actually Paul Smith, such was > the extent to which Spindrift blackened the reputation of camera > supporters.) > > Does anyone *really* think that Spindrift is a good camera advocate, > who has a purely selfless, philanthropic agenda? =A0I very much hope not.

So, we've had the usual meaningless, vague, timewasting bollocks from the trolls, but not one of them has even attempted to defend Spindrift. I can only conclude that they know perfectly well that his agenda is nothing to do with saving lives. So why don't they disown him? Is it because they also have a hidden agenda? Surely if they really cared about saving lives, they would be sick and tired of Spindrift making them look so bad all over the Internet? I think it's very telling.

I think it also says a lot about how blinkered camera supporters are in general. We haven't had *one* person say "I support cameras but I think Spindrift is a twat", in this thread or any other. You get the impression that even if Robert Mugabe started posting and defending speed cameras, the trolls would refuse to condemn him. Once these people get into "defending cameras" mode, all reason, logic, common sense and decency goes out of the window. I think it's very telling.

And yet again, Crapman refuses to deny that he has links with SCPs and/ or other organisations which are making and/or paying people money as a direct result of cameras. I think it's very telling.