London Critical Mass corking wins police approval.

[Doug[_3_]]

Seems the anti-CM motorists here are completely wrong, as usual. The
cops are using their 'discretion' on corking, which makes it perfectly
legal.

http://asitc.wordpress.com/2010/10/30/london-october-critical-mass-2010/

"...I spent half an hour at the end of the mass with the police and
that angry taxi driver who wanted to fight the world. They almost
booked him for offence language when talking about us “communist
Effing scum, dole cheats”. The experienced copper on site had one
request to us massers: the younger riders at the front should be urged
to have adequate lights and some hi vis if corking..."

-- .
Critical Mass London.
http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
"Get out of my way you communist Effing scum, dole cheats”

[Mrcheerful[_2_]]

Doug wrote:
> Seems the anti-CM motorists here are completely wrong, as usual. The
> cops are using their 'discretion' on corking, which makes it perfectly
> legal.
>
> http://asitc.wordpress.com/2010/10/30/london-october-critical-mass-2010/
>
> "...I spent half an hour at the end of the mass with the police and
> that angry taxi driver who wanted to fight the world. They almost
> booked him for offence language when talking about us “communist
> Effing scum, dole cheats”. The experienced copper on site had one
> request to us massers: the younger riders at the front should be urged
> to have adequate lights and some hi vis if corking..."
>

Anecdotal.

[Tony Dragon]

On 06/11/2010 08:57, Mrcheerful wrote:
> Doug wrote:
>> Seems the anti-CM motorists here are completely wrong, as usual. The
>> cops are using their 'discretion' on corking, which makes it perfectly
>> legal.
>>
>> http://asitc.wordpress.com/2010/10/30/london-october-critical-mass-2010/
>>
>> "...I spent half an hour at the end of the mass with the police and
>> that angry taxi driver who wanted to fight the world. They almost
>> booked him for offence language when talking about us “communist
>> Effing scum, dole cheats”. The experienced copper on site had one
>> request to us massers: the younger riders at the front should be urged
>> to have adequate lights and some hi vis if corking..."
>>
>
> Anecdotal.
>
>

True, but it does admit to lawbreaking, and points out the taxi had
nothing to do with the bike accident.

But don't forget, cm is now no more than a tourist attraction.

--
Tony Dragon

[Paul - xxx[_2_]]

Doug wrote:

> Seems the anti-CM motorists here are completely wrong, as usual. The
> cops are using their 'discretion' on corking, which makes it perfectly
> legal.

No. Discretion does NOT make it perfectly legal at all.

It might mean they're exercising discretion possibly/probably due to
the numbers involved and inconvenience to them of processing those
breaking the law.

--
Paul - xxx mobile ....

[Mike P[_20_]]

On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 01:50:35 -0700, Doug boggled us with:

> Seems the anti-CM motorists here are completely wrong, as usual. The
> cops are using their 'discretion' on corking, which makes it perfectly
> legal.

Have you come up with a new meaning for the word discretion? Last I knew,
it certainley didn't mean "legal". Freedom of judgment or choice is far
nearer the correct definition. Which, in this case means there's too many
CMing pricks for them to be arsed prosecuting, and just want the whole lot
of you out their site as quickly as possible.



--
Mike P

[Doug[_3_]]

On Nov 6, 10:04*am, "Paul - xxx" > wrote:
> Doug wrote:
> > Seems the anti-CM motorists here are completely wrong, as usual. The
> > cops are using their 'discretion' on corking, which makes it perfectly
> > legal.
>
> No. *Discretion does NOT make it perfectly legal at all.
>
Oh really. So when the police used to do the corking themselves that
was illegal? Or do you assert that ANYTHING the police do MUST be
legal?

Surely if the police turn a blind eye to something and take no action
it must regard it as legal? If not how can they be justified in taking
no action against a crime?
>
> It might mean they're exercising discretion possibly/probably due to
> the numbers involved and inconvenience to them of processing those
> breaking the law.
>
Doesn't seem to have deterred the police in the past when 20 cycle
police regularly accompanied and controlled the ride and issued
tickets. But they seemed to have changed their tune somewhat since
loosing out against CM by the Law Lords decision.

-- .
Critical Mass London.
http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
"Get out of my way you communist Effing scum, dole cheats”

[Doug[_3_]]

On Nov 6, 1:15*pm, Mike P >
wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 01:50:35 -0700, Doug boggled us with:
>
> > Seems the anti-CM motorists here are completely wrong, as usual. The
> > cops are using their 'discretion' on corking, which makes it perfectly
> > legal.
>
> Have you come up with a new meaning for the word discretion? Last I knew,
> it certainley didn't mean "legal".
>
OK maybe the exercise of police discretion does not make an act legal
but it does imply it is regarded as not very illegal or serious,
contrary to the claims made by motorist here who say corking prevents
drivers 'going about their lawful business' when in fact it merely
delays them a little, as their own intentional contribution to road
congestion does..
>
> Freedom of judgment or choice is far
> nearer the correct definition. Which, in this case means there's too many
> CMing pricks for them to be arsed prosecuting, and just want the whole lot
> of you out their site as quickly as possible.
>
So why in the past did the police go to all the trouble of embarking
on three major court cases. ending with the Law Lords, against London
CM and provide 20 cops to accompany every ride? Doesn't seem they
wanted CM riders 'out of their sight' at all and the police themselves
started the whole, lengthy and costly process.

-- .
Critical Mass London.
http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
"Get out of my way you communist Effing scum, dole cheats”

[Tony Dragon]

On 07/11/2010 07:51, Doug wrote:
> On Nov 6, 10:04 am, "Paul - > wrote:
>> Doug wrote:
>>> Seems the anti-CM motorists here are completely wrong, as usual. The
>>> cops are using their 'discretion' on corking, which makes it perfectly
>>> legal.
>>
>> No. Discretion does NOT make it perfectly legal at all.
>>
> Oh really. So when the police used to do the corking themselves that
> was illegal?

No, they were controlling traffic.

> Or do you assert that ANYTHING the police do MUST be
> legal?
>
> Surely if the police turn a blind eye to something and take no action
> it must regard it as legal? If not how can they be justified in taking
> no action against a crime?
>>
>> It might mean they're exercising discretion possibly/probably due to
>> the numbers involved and inconvenience to them of processing those
>> breaking the law.
>>
> Doesn't seem to have deterred the police in the past when 20 cycle
> police regularly accompanied and controlled the ride and issued
> tickets. But they seemed to have changed their tune somewhat since
> loosing out against CM by the Law Lords decision.
>
> -- .
> Critical Mass London.
> http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
> "Get out of my way you communist Effing scum, dole cheats”
>


--
Tony Dragon

[Paul - xxx[_2_]]

Doug wrote:

> On Nov 6, 10:04*am, "Paul - xxx" > wrote:
> > Doug wrote:
> > > Seems the anti-CM motorists here are completely wrong, as usual.
> > > The cops are using their 'discretion' on corking, which makes it
> > > perfectly legal.
> >
> > No. *Discretion does NOT make it perfectly legal at all.
> >
> Oh really. So when the police used to do the corking themselves that
> was illegal?

No. Police officers do it with full authority to do so. They're
merely letting cmers do it, effectively turning a blind eye towards the
law being broken. Practicality.

> Or do you assert that ANYTHING the police do MUST be legal?

I'm asserting nothing of the sort

> Surely if the police turn a blind eye to something and take no action
> it must regard it as legal? If not how can they be justified in taking
> no action against a crime?

See above.

> > It might mean they're exercising discretion possibly/probably due to
> > the numbers involved and inconvenience to them of processing those
> > breaking the law.
> >
> Doesn't seem to have deterred the police in the past when 20 cycle
> police regularly accompanied and controlled the ride and issued
> tickets. But they seemed to have changed their tune somewhat since
> loosing out against CM by the Law Lords decision.

So? They've moderated their policy towards cm. Still doesn't make
corking legal, or anyone, anytime could do it with impunity.

--
Paul - xxx mobile ....

[Paul - xxx[_2_]]

Doug wrote:


> OK maybe the exercise of police discretion does not make an act legal

So now you change your mind and agree corking isn't legal ... jeez but
you're a twister when it suits.

--
Paul - xxx mobile ....

[Marc[_5_]]

On 07/11/2010 07:51, Doug wrote:
> On Nov 6, 10:04 am, "Paul - > wrote:
>> Doug wrote:
>>> Seems the anti-CM motorists here are completely wrong, as usual. The
>>> cops are using their 'discretion' on corking, which makes it perfectly
>>> legal.
>>
>> No. Discretion does NOT make it perfectly legal at all.
>>
> Oh really. So when the police used to do the corking themselves that
> was illegal? Or do you assert that ANYTHING the police do MUST be
> legal?
>
> Surely if the police turn a blind eye to something and take no action
> it must regard it as legal? If not how can they be justified in taking
> no action against a crime?
Will you use the same argument about car drivers who speed,or those that
"ram" at CM, or those that are involved in collisions? If the police
take no action against them then their actions are "legal"?
You really are so stupid that you don't realise what you have done to
your own arguments, or is it that you have so many opposing and
contradicting points of view that you lose track?

[Paul - xxx[_2_]]

Marc wrote:

> ... is it that you have so many opposing and
> contradicting points of view that you lose track?


*** Dingly ding ding ding ***

.... ;)

--
Paul - xxx mobile ....

[Doug[_3_]]

On Nov 7, 8:58*am, "Paul - xxx" > wrote:
> Doug wrote:
> > OK maybe the exercise of police discretion does not make an act legal
>
> So now you change your mind and agree corking isn't legal ... jeez but
> you're a twister when it suits.
>
While you, apparently, like to stick to your guns regardless of right
or wrong and only think in black or white.

Do you know what the word 'maybe' means?

BTW I have had a thought arising from this...

http://www.torontocranks.com/?p=2236

Maybe one of the most important roles of CM is to focus attention on
the inherent conflict between motorists and cyclists which is mainly
ignored by the media and the authorities.

Critical Mass London.
http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
"Get out of my way you communist Effing scum, dole cheats”

[Doug[_3_]]

On Nov 7, 8:57*am, "Paul - xxx" > wrote:
> Doug wrote:
> > On Nov 6, 10:04*am, "Paul - xxx" > wrote:
> > > Doug wrote:
> > > > Seems the anti-CM motorists here are completely wrong, as usual.
> > > > The cops are using their 'discretion' on corking, which makes it
> > > > perfectly legal.
>
> > > No. *Discretion does NOT make it perfectly legal at all.
>
> > Oh really. So when the police used to do the corking themselves that
> > was illegal?
>
> No. *Police officers do it with full authority to do so. *They're
> merely letting cmers do it, effectively turning a blind eye towards the
> law being broken. *Practicality.
>
Glad someone here agrees the cops are deliberately turning a blind eye
to corking. Maybe they recognise that it improves the safety of a
procession.
>
> > Or do you assert that ANYTHING the police do MUST be legal?
>
> I'm asserting nothing of the sort
>
Good.
>
> > Surely if the police turn a blind eye to something and take no action
> > it must regard it as legal? If not how can they be justified in taking
> > no action against a crime?
>
> See above.
>
> > > It might mean they're exercising discretion possibly/probably due to
> > > the numbers involved and inconvenience to them of processing those
> > > breaking the law.
>
> > Doesn't seem to have deterred the police in the past when 20 cycle
> > police regularly accompanied and controlled the ride and issued
> > tickets. But they seemed to have changed their tune somewhat since
> > loosing out against CM by the Law Lords decision.
>
> So? *They've moderated their policy towards cm.
>
Changed their minds? So now the cops are turning a blind eye to riding
on pavements, RLJ and corking where CM is concerned?
>
>*Still doesn't make
> corking legal, or anyone, anytime could do it with impunity.
>
But why would they need to if they are only a small group and not on a
procession?.

Critical Mass London.
http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
"Get out of my way you communist Effing scum, dole cheats”

[Tony Dragon]

On 08/11/2010 05:45, Doug wrote:
> On Nov 7, 8:57 am, "Paul - > wrote:
>> Doug wrote:
>>> On Nov 6, 10:04 am, "Paul - > wrote:
>>>> Doug wrote:
>>>>> Seems the anti-CM motorists here are completely wrong, as usual.
>>>>> The cops are using their 'discretion' on corking, which makes it
>>>>> perfectly legal.
>>
>>>> No. Discretion does NOT make it perfectly legal at all.
>>
>>> Oh really. So when the police used to do the corking themselves that
>>> was illegal?
>>
>> No. Police officers do it with full authority to do so. They're
>> merely letting cmers do it, effectively turning a blind eye towards the
>> law being broken. Practicality.
>>
> Glad someone here agrees the cops are deliberately turning a blind eye
> to corking. Maybe they recognise that it improves the safety of a
> procession.

Glad you at last admit that corking is illegal.

>>
>>> Or do you assert that ANYTHING the police do MUST be legal?
>>
>> I'm asserting nothing of the sort
>>
> Good.
>>
>>> Surely if the police turn a blind eye to something and take no action
>>> it must regard it as legal? If not how can they be justified in taking
>>> no action against a crime?
>>
>> See above.
>>
>>>> It might mean they're exercising discretion possibly/probably due to
>>>> the numbers involved and inconvenience to them of processing those
>>>> breaking the law.
>>
>>> Doesn't seem to have deterred the police in the past when 20 cycle
>>> police regularly accompanied and controlled the ride and issued
>>> tickets. But they seemed to have changed their tune somewhat since
>>> loosing out against CM by the Law Lords decision.
>>
>> So? They've moderated their policy towards cm.
>>
> Changed their minds? So now the cops are turning a blind eye to riding
> on pavements, RLJ and corking where CM is concerned?

What!

>>
>> Still doesn't make
>> corking legal, or anyone, anytime could do it with impunity.
>>
> But why would they need to if they are only a small group and not on a
> procession?.
>
> Critical Mass London.
> http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
> "Get out of my way you communist Effing scum, dole cheats”
>


--
Tony Dragon

[Tony Dragon]

On 08/11/2010 05:38, Doug wrote:
> On Nov 7, 8:58 am, "Paul - > wrote:
>> Doug wrote:
>>> OK maybe the exercise of police discretion does not make an act legal
>>
>> So now you change your mind and agree corking isn't legal ... jeez but
>> you're a twister when it suits.
>>
> While you, apparently, like to stick to your guns regardless of right
> or wrong and only think in black or white.
>
> Do you know what the word 'maybe' means?
>
> BTW I have had a thought arising from this...
>
> http://www.torontocranks.com/?p=2236
>
> Maybe one of the most important roles of CM is to focus attention on
> the inherent conflict between motorists and cyclists which is mainly
> ignored by the media and the authorities.
>
> Critical Mass London.
> http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
> "Get out of my way you communist Effing scum, dole cheats”
>

Maybe CM is nothing more that a tourist attraction.

--
Tony Dragon

[Doug[_3_]]

On Nov 8, 6:47*am, Tony Dragon > wrote:
> On 08/11/2010 05:45, Doug wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 7, 8:57 am, "Paul - > *wrote:
> >> Doug wrote:
> >>> On Nov 6, 10:04 am, "Paul - > *wrote:
> >>>> Doug wrote:
> >>>>> Seems the anti-CM motorists here are completely wrong, as usual.
> >>>>> The cops are using their 'discretion' on corking, which makes it
> >>>>> perfectly legal.
>
> >>>> No. *Discretion does NOT make it perfectly legal at all.
>
> >>> Oh really. So when the police used to do the corking themselves that
> >>> was illegal?
>
> >> No. *Police officers do it with full authority to do so. *They're
> >> merely letting cmers do it, effectively turning a blind eye towards the
> >> law being broken. *Practicality.
>
> > Glad someone here agrees the cops are deliberately turning a blind eye
> > to corking. Maybe they recognise that it improves the safety of a
> > procession.
>
> Glad you at last admit that corking is illegal.
>
Wrong. You on the other hand refuse to admit that it may not be under
certain circumstances. More of your black or white so-called
reasoning.
>
>
> >>> Or do you assert that ANYTHING the police do MUST be legal?
>
> >> I'm asserting nothing of the sort
>
> > Good.
>
> >>> Surely if the police turn a blind eye to something and take no action
> >>> it must regard it as legal? If not how can they be justified in taking
> >>> no action against a crime?
>
> >> See above.
>
> >>>> It might mean they're exercising discretion possibly/probably due to
> >>>> the numbers involved and inconvenience to them of processing those
> >>>> breaking the law.
>
> >>> Doesn't seem to have deterred the police in the past when 20 cycle
> >>> police regularly accompanied and controlled the ride and issued
> >>> tickets. But they seemed to have changed their tune somewhat since
> >>> loosing out against CM by the Law Lords decision.
>
> >> So? *They've moderated their policy towards cm.
>
> > Changed their minds? So now the cops are turning a blind eye to riding
> > on pavements, RLJ and corking where CM is concerned?
>
> What!
>
What?
>
>
> >> * Still doesn't make
> >> corking legal, or anyone, anytime could do it with impunity.
>
> > But why would they need to if they are only a small group and not on a
> > procession?.
>
> > Critical Mass London.
> > *http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
> > "Get out of my way you communist Effing scum, dole cheats”

[Tony Dragon]

On 08/11/2010 07:22, Doug wrote:
> On Nov 8, 6:47 am, Tony > wrote:
>> On 08/11/2010 05:45, Doug wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 7, 8:57 am, "Paul - > wrote:
>>>> Doug wrote:
>>>>> On Nov 6, 10:04 am, "Paul - > wrote:
>>>>>> Doug wrote:
>>>>>>> Seems the anti-CM motorists here are completely wrong, as usual.
>>>>>>> The cops are using their 'discretion' on corking, which makes it
>>>>>>> perfectly legal.
>>
>>>>>> No. Discretion does NOT make it perfectly legal at all.
>>
>>>>> Oh really. So when the police used to do the corking themselves that
>>>>> was illegal?
>>
>>>> No. Police officers do it with full authority to do so. They're
>>>> merely letting cmers do it, effectively turning a blind eye towards the
>>>> law being broken. Practicality.
>>
>>> Glad someone here agrees the cops are deliberately turning a blind eye
>>> to corking. Maybe they recognise that it improves the safety of a
>>> procession.
>>
>> Glad you at last admit that corking is illegal.
>>
> Wrong. You on the other hand refuse to admit that it may not be under
> certain circumstances. More of your black or white so-called
> reasoning.

If the police do it, as they direct traffic it would be legal.
If the police do not allow it it is illegal, whether they do something
about it makes no difference to it's legality.


>>
>>
>>>>> Or do you assert that ANYTHING the police do MUST be legal?
>>
>>>> I'm asserting nothing of the sort
>>
>>> Good.
>>
>>>>> Surely if the police turn a blind eye to something and take no action
>>>>> it must regard it as legal? If not how can they be justified in taking
>>>>> no action against a crime?
>>
>>>> See above.
>>
>>>>>> It might mean they're exercising discretion possibly/probably due to
>>>>>> the numbers involved and inconvenience to them of processing those
>>>>>> breaking the law.
>>
>>>>> Doesn't seem to have deterred the police in the past when 20 cycle
>>>>> police regularly accompanied and controlled the ride and issued
>>>>> tickets. But they seemed to have changed their tune somewhat since
>>>>> loosing out against CM by the Law Lords decision.
>>
>>>> So? They've moderated their policy towards cm.
>>
>>> Changed their minds? So now the cops are turning a blind eye to riding
>>> on pavements, RLJ and corking where CM is concerned?
>>
>> What!
>>
> What?

Yes, what, what are you talking about?

>>
>>
>>>> Still doesn't make
>>>> corking legal, or anyone, anytime could do it with impunity.
>>
>>> But why would they need to if they are only a small group and not on a
>>> procession?.
>>
>>> Critical Mass London.
>>> http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
>>> "Get out of my way you communist Effing scum, dole cheats”
>
>


--
Tony Dragon

[Doug[_3_]]

On Nov 8, 6:48*am, Tony Dragon > wrote:
> On 08/11/2010 05:38, Doug wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 7, 8:58 am, "Paul - > *wrote:
> >> Doug wrote:
> >>> OK maybe the exercise of police discretion does not make an act legal
>
> >> So now you change your mind and agree corking isn't legal ... jeez but
> >> you're a twister when it suits.
>
> > While you, apparently, like to stick to your guns regardless of right
> > or wrong and only think in black or white.
>
> > Do you know what the word 'maybe' means?
>
> > BTW I have had a thought arising from this...
>
> >http://www.torontocranks.com/?p=2236
>
> > Maybe one of the most important roles of CM is to focus attention on
> > the inherent conflict between motorists and cyclists which is mainly
> > ignored by the media and the authorities.
> >
> Maybe CM is nothing more that a tourist attraction.
>
Its much more than that, though at times it sounds as if it is.

> > Critical Mass London.
> > http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
> > "Get out of my way you communist Effing scum, dole cheats”

[Tony Dragon]

On 08/11/2010 13:14, Doug wrote:
> On Nov 8, 6:48 am, Tony > wrote:
>> On 08/11/2010 05:38, Doug wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 7, 8:58 am, "Paul - > wrote:
>>>> Doug wrote:
>>>>> OK maybe the exercise of police discretion does not make an act legal
>>
>>>> So now you change your mind and agree corking isn't legal ... jeez but
>>>> you're a twister when it suits.
>>
>>> While you, apparently, like to stick to your guns regardless of right
>>> or wrong and only think in black or white.
>>
>>> Do you know what the word 'maybe' means?
>>
>>> BTW I have had a thought arising from this...
>>
>>> http://www.torontocranks.com/?p=2236
>>
>>> Maybe one of the most important roles of CM is to focus attention on
>>> the inherent conflict between motorists and cyclists which is mainly
>>> ignored by the media and the authorities.
>>>
>> Maybe CM is nothing more that a tourist attraction.
>>
> Its much more than that, though at times it sounds as if it is.
>
>>> Critical Mass London.
>>> http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
>>> "Get out of my way you communist Effing scum, dole cheats”

But you posted a ling that said it was.

--
Tony Dragon

[Doug[_3_]]

On Nov 8, 5:46*pm, Tony Dragon > wrote:
> On 08/11/2010 13:14, Doug wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 8, 6:48 am, Tony > *wrote:
> >> On 08/11/2010 05:38, Doug wrote:
>
> >>> On Nov 7, 8:58 am, "Paul - > * *wrote:
> >>>> Doug wrote:
> >>>>> OK maybe the exercise of police discretion does not make an act legal
>
> >>>> So now you change your mind and agree corking isn't legal ... jeez but
> >>>> you're a twister when it suits.
>
> >>> While you, apparently, like to stick to your guns regardless of right
> >>> or wrong and only think in black or white.
>
> >>> Do you know what the word 'maybe' means?
>
> >>> BTW I have had a thought arising from this...
>
> >>>http://www.torontocranks.com/?p=2236
>
> >>> Maybe one of the most important roles of CM is to focus attention on
> >>> the inherent conflict between motorists and cyclists which is mainly
> >>> ignored by the media and the authorities.
>
> >> Maybe CM is nothing more that a tourist attraction.
>
> > Its much more than that, though at times it sounds as if it is.
> >
> But you posted a ling that said it was.
>
Please do stop deliberately misrepresenting the posts of others.

> >>> Critical Mass London.
> >>> http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
> >>> "Get out of my way you communist Effing scum, dole cheats”

[Tony Dragon]

On 09/11/2010 07:26, Doug wrote:
> On Nov 8, 5:46 pm, Tony > wrote:
>> On 08/11/2010 13:14, Doug wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 8, 6:48 am, Tony > wrote:
>>>> On 08/11/2010 05:38, Doug wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Nov 7, 8:58 am, "Paul - > wrote:
>>>>>> Doug wrote:
>>>>>>> OK maybe the exercise of police discretion does not make an act legal
>>
>>>>>> So now you change your mind and agree corking isn't legal ... jeez but
>>>>>> you're a twister when it suits.
>>
>>>>> While you, apparently, like to stick to your guns regardless of right
>>>>> or wrong and only think in black or white.
>>
>>>>> Do you know what the word 'maybe' means?
>>
>>>>> BTW I have had a thought arising from this...
>>
>>>>> http://www.torontocranks.com/?p=2236
>>
>>>>> Maybe one of the most important roles of CM is to focus attention on
>>>>> the inherent conflict between motorists and cyclists which is mainly
>>>>> ignored by the media and the authorities.
>>
>>>> Maybe CM is nothing more that a tourist attraction.
>>
>>> Its much more than that, though at times it sounds as if it is.
>>>
>> But you posted a ling that said it was.
>>
> Please do stop deliberately misrepresenting the posts of others.
>
>>>>> Critical Mass London.
>>>>> http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
>>>>> "Get out of my way you communist Effing scum, dole cheats”
>

I don't

--
Tony Dragon