Nuxx:5f834456-f6aa-4b80-aa7a-9134b1e19199@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com

Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <5f834456-f6aa-4b80-aa7a-9134b1e19199@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: Motorist attacker attacked. Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 19:31:54 -0700 (PDT) References:  <20080729063523.6737ff91@bluemoon>      Lines: 54 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 1217471515 10338 127.0.0.1 (31 Jul 2008 02:31:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 02:31:55 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: b1g2000hsg.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: 3962 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:659811

On Jul 30, 1:06=A0am, JNugent  wrote: > Clive George wrote: > > "JNugent"  wrote: > >> Clive George wrote: > >>> "Nuxx Bar"  wrote: > >>>> I'm sure we've all seen groups of cyclists who go round antagonising > >>>> motorists in order to pick fights. > >>> That's one of the most hilarious things you've ever written. Well don= e. > >> Why is it "hilarious"? > >> Doug of Doug Hall over on ukt has posted links to several videos showi= ng > >> exactly what the PP described - both in the USA and in the UK, apparen= tly > >> under the general description "Critical Mass". I would not find it ver= y > >> likely that sich things are unknown to readers or ukrc, for what I sug= gest > >> are obvious reasons. > >> So even if we are lucky enough never to have witnessed such things for > >> ourselves at first hand (and Lord be praised, fortunately that's most = of > >> us), we still know that it has happened and is happening - don't we? > > It's hilarious because it's utter bollocks, despite what you claim abov= e. > > The fact that you choose to defend his lunacy merely puts you some way = down > > the sanity spectrum as well. > > Does the fact that he is broadly right* in that particular claim count > for absolutely nothing, then?

As I'm sure you've discovered, this is the kind of thing that we're constantly up against in this trollpit. If you're not one of the anti- motorist crowd, then it doesn't matter how right you are, you will always be told that you're talking "bollocks" or similar. Anyone who dares to defend motorists in any way, shape or form is always wrong by default. It's not about what people say, it's about who they are. I could come up with absolute, incontrovertible proof that cameras cost lives right now, and not one of the motorist-haters would say anything but "That's hilarious" or similar.

> If so, why?

You won't get a straight answer of course, though I admire your patience in trying to reason with those who are unreasonable.

> [*Yes, I do realise that having seen the online videos of "groups of > cyclists who go round antagonising motorists in order to pick fights" is > readily deniable by individuals. But then, no-one really thought that he > meant literally that everyone reading his post would have seen them.]

It doesn't really matter what I said. It was always going to be wrong, because a non-motorist-hater said it.