Inside the brains of cycle haters

[Alycidon]

Quote:
"Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in danger from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is so remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included in policy.

In the vast majority of accidents involving cars and cyclists, the driver is at fault. While some cyclists misbehave, cyclists in general pose next to no threat.

But in the debate about the new policies it is clear that there is a very strong anti-cycling segment in the community."

http://www.southburnetttimes.com.au/news/why-cyclists-make-drivers-see-red/2968639/

[jnugent]

On 18/03/2016 15:34, Alycidon wrote:

> Quote:
> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in danger from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is so remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included in policy.
> In the vast majority of accidents involving cars and cyclists, the driver is at fault. While some cyclists misbehave, cyclists in general pose next to no threat.
> But in the debate about the new policies it is clear that there is a very strong anti-cycling segment in the community."
> http://www.southburnetttimes.com.au/news/why-cyclists-make-drivers-see-red/2968639/

So even in Australia, the community doesn't like cyclists?

Can you think of any reason why that would be?

Is it "just one of those things"?

[Mr Pounder Esquire]

JNugent wrote:
> On 18/03/2016 15:34, Alycidon wrote:
>
>> Quote:
>> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in
>> danger from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the
>> risk is so remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been
>> included in policy. In the vast majority of accidents involving cars
>> and cyclists, the driver is at fault. While some cyclists misbehave,
>> cyclists in general pose next to no threat. But in the debate about
>> the new policies it is clear that there is a
>> very strong anti-cycling segment in the community."
>> http://www.southburnetttimes.com.au/news/why-cyclists-make-drivers-see-red/2968639/
>
> So even in Australia, the community doesn't like cyclists?
>
> Can you think of any reason why that would be?
>
> Is it "just one of those things"?

So the Welsh people also hate cyclists.
New South Wales being near Cardiff.

[skate]

On Fri, 18 Mar 2016 08:34:01 -0700 (PDT), Alycidon
> wrote:

>Quote:
> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in danger from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is so remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included in policy.
>
>In the vast majority of accidents involving cars and cyclists, the driver is at fault. While some cyclists misbehave, cyclists in general pose next to no threat.
>
>But in the debate about the new policies it is clear that there is a very strong anti-cycling segment in the community."
>
>http://www.southburnetttimes.com.au/news/why-cyclists-make-drivers-see-red/2968639/

In this Australian news report the question was asked: "Given that
cyclists pose very little threat to pedestrians, are rarely the cause
of accidents with vehicles and are not the main cause of frustration
for drivers, are the perceived problems with cyclists all in the
mind?"

Are Britain drivers that different from Australian ones?

[Alycidon]

On Friday, 18 March 2016 18:40:52 UTC, skate wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Mar 2016 08:34:01 -0700 (PDT), Alycidon
> > wrote:
>
> >Quote:
> > "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in danger from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is so remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included in policy.
> >
> >In the vast majority of accidents involving cars and cyclists, the driver is at fault. While some cyclists misbehave, cyclists in general pose next to no threat.
> >
> >But in the debate about the new policies it is clear that there is a very strong anti-cycling segment in the community."
> >
> >http://www.southburnetttimes.com.au/news/why-cyclists-make-drivers-see-red/2968639/
>
> In this Australian news report the question was asked: "Given that
> cyclists pose very little threat to pedestrians, are rarely the cause
> of accidents with vehicles and are not the main cause of frustration
> for drivers, are the perceived problems with cyclists all in the
> mind?"
>
> Are Britain drivers that different from Australian ones?

The Anglo Saxon mentality, USA, Oz, NZ seems to be remarkably similar regarding the irrational hatred of a benign form of transport that totally baffles Dutch, German, Danes, French, Belgians and many other more civilised peoples.

The Daily Mail comments are typical of this insular Little Ingulander mentality.

[MrCheerful]

On 18/03/2016 18:40, skate wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Mar 2016 08:34:01 -0700 (PDT), Alycidon
> > wrote:
>
>> Quote:
>> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in danger from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is so remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included in policy.
>>
>> In the vast majority of accidents involving cars and cyclists, the driver is at fault. While some cyclists misbehave, cyclists in general pose next to no threat.
>>
>> But in the debate about the new policies it is clear that there is a very strong anti-cycling segment in the community."
>>
>> http://www.southburnetttimes.com.au/news/why-cyclists-make-drivers-see-red/2968639/
>
> In this Australian news report the question was asked: "Given that
> cyclists pose very little threat to pedestrians, are rarely the cause
> of accidents with vehicles and are not the main cause of frustration
> for drivers, are the perceived problems with cyclists all in the
> mind?"
>
> Are Britain drivers that different from Australian ones?
>
>

Have you been to Australia? It is very different to here, both in
people and infrastructure.

In the UK studies show that per mile travelled bicycles run into
pedestrians almost as often as cars, and when you consider how few
bicycles there are, and that many collisions are unreported, the
situation is even worse.

[TMS320]

"MrCheerful" > wrote in message
...
> On 18/03/2016 18:40, skate wrote:
>> On Fri, 18 Mar 2016 08:34:01 -0700 (PDT), Alycidon
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Quote:
>>> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in danger
>>> from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is so
>>> remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included in
>>> policy.
>>>
>>> In the vast majority of accidents involving cars and cyclists, the
>>> driver is at fault. While some cyclists misbehave, cyclists in general
>>> pose next to no threat.
>>>
>>> But in the debate about the new policies it is clear that there is a
>>> very strong anti-cycling segment in the community."
>>>
>>> http://www.southburnetttimes.com.au/news/why-cyclists-make-drivers-see-red/2968639/
>>
>> In this Australian news report the question was asked: "Given that
>> cyclists pose very little threat to pedestrians, are rarely the cause
>> of accidents with vehicles and are not the main cause of frustration
>> for drivers, are the perceived problems with cyclists all in the
>> mind?"
>>
>> Are Britain drivers that different from Australian ones?
>
> Have you been to Australia? It is very different to here, both in people
> and infrastructure.
>
> In the UK studies show that per mile travelled bicycles run into
> pedestrians almost as often as cars, and when you consider how few
> bicycles there are, and that many collisions are unreported, the situation
> is even worse.

And it proves that stupid people can use calculators.

[Brian 'Glug' Smith[_2_]]

JNugent > wrote:
> On 18/03/2016 15:34, Alycidon wrote:

>> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in danger
>> from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is
>> so remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included
>> in policy. In the vast majority of accidents involving cars and
>> cyclists, the driver is at fault. While some cyclists misbehave,
>> cyclists in general pose next to no threat. But in the debate about
>> the new policies it is clear that there is a very strong anti-cycling
>> segment in the community."
>> http://www.southburnetttimes.com.au/news/why-cyclists-make-drivers-see-red/2968639/

> So even in Australia, the community doesn't like cyclists?
>
> Can you think of any reason why that would be?
>
> Is it "just one of those things"?

Substitute 'Jews' for 'cyclists' above, and you have the discourse from
1930s Germany.

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

[Brian 'Glug' Smith[_2_]]

Alycidon > wrote:

> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in danger
> from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is so
> remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included in
> policy.

Yet, to read the ranting by the moronic thugs on this newsgroup, cycling is
a menace to the British way of life.

Solution: every single cyclist needs to carry a D-lock in his belt.
--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

[jnugent]

On 21/03/2016 15:00, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:
> JNugent > wrote:
>> On 18/03/2016 15:34, Alycidon wrote:
>
>>> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in danger
>>> from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is
>>> so remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included
>>> in policy. In the vast majority of accidents involving cars and
>>> cyclists, the driver is at fault. While some cyclists misbehave,
>>> cyclists in general pose next to no threat. But in the debate about
>>> the new policies it is clear that there is a very strong anti-cycling
>>> segment in the community."
>>> http://www.southburnetttimes.com.au/news/why-cyclists-make-drivers-see-red/2968639/
>
>> So even in Australia, the community doesn't like cyclists?
>>
>> Can you think of any reason why that would be?
>>
>> Is it "just one of those things"?
>
> Substitute 'Jews' for 'cyclists' above, and you have the discourse from
> 1930s Germany.

But we (well, most of us - there might just be one exception in the form
of Glug) are not talking about Jews.

We are talking about *yobs* who *choose* to commit their knaveries
wilfully, often on footways and in other pedestrian-only areas.

[jnugent]

On 21/03/2016 15:03, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:

> Alycidon > wrote:

>> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in danger
>> from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is so
>> remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included in
>> policy.

> Yet, to read the ranting by the moronic thugs on this newsgroup, cycling is
> a menace to the British way of life.

> Solution: every single cyclist needs to carry a D-lock in his belt.

Cyclists are thugs in your opinion.

If they weren't...

[MrCheerful]

On 21/03/2016 15:14, JNugent wrote:
> On 21/03/2016 15:00, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:
>> JNugent > wrote:
>>> On 18/03/2016 15:34, Alycidon wrote:
>>
>>>> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in
>>>> danger
>>>> from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is
>>>> so remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included
>>>> in policy. In the vast majority of accidents involving cars and
>>>> cyclists, the driver is at fault. While some cyclists misbehave,
>>>> cyclists in general pose next to no threat. But in the debate about
>>>> the new policies it is clear that there is a very strong
>>>> anti-cycling
>>>> segment in the community."
>>>>
>>>> http://www.southburnetttimes.com.au/news/why-cyclists-make-drivers-see-red/2968639/
>>>>
>>
>>> So even in Australia, the community doesn't like cyclists?
>>>
>>> Can you think of any reason why that would be?
>>>
>>> Is it "just one of those things"?
>>
>> Substitute 'Jews' for 'cyclists' above, and you have the discourse from
>> 1930s Germany.
>
> But we (well, most of us - there might just be one exception in the form
> of Glug) are not talking about Jews.
>
> We are talking about *yobs* who *choose* to commit their knaveries
> wilfully, often on footways and in other pedestrian-only areas.

They are a good comparison. The jews also pushed their weight about and
then screamed 'it's not fair' when repercussions came. Their big
mistake was their declaration of war on Germany in 1933

[jnugent]

On 21/03/2016 15:21, MrCheerful wrote:
> On 21/03/2016 15:14, JNugent wrote:
>> On 21/03/2016 15:00, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:
>>> JNugent > wrote:
>>>> On 18/03/2016 15:34, Alycidon wrote:
>>>
>>>>> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in
>>>>> danger
>>>>> from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the
>>>>> risk is
>>>>> so remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been
>>>>> included
>>>>> in policy. In the vast majority of accidents involving cars and
>>>>> cyclists, the driver is at fault. While some cyclists misbehave,
>>>>> cyclists in general pose next to no threat. But in the debate
>>>>> about
>>>>> the new policies it is clear that there is a very strong
>>>>> anti-cycling
>>>>> segment in the community."
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.southburnetttimes.com.au/news/why-cyclists-make-drivers-see-red/2968639/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>> So even in Australia, the community doesn't like cyclists?
>>>>
>>>> Can you think of any reason why that would be?
>>>>
>>>> Is it "just one of those things"?
>>>
>>> Substitute 'Jews' for 'cyclists' above, and you have the discourse from
>>> 1930s Germany.
>>
>> But we (well, most of us - there might just be one exception in the form
>> of Glug) are not talking about Jews.
>>
>> We are talking about *yobs* who *choose* to commit their knaveries
>> wilfully, often on footways and in other pedestrian-only areas.
>
> They are a good comparison. The jews also pushed their weight about and
> then screamed 'it's not fair' when repercussions came. Their big
> mistake was their declaration of war on Germany in 1933

I am not associated with a word of that.

Comparing Jews with cyclists is about as foolish a comparison as may be
made.

Cycling is a choice. Cycling selfishly is another choice.

[skate]

On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 15:21:38 +0000, MrCheerful
> wrote:

>On 21/03/2016 15:14, JNugent wrote:
>> On 21/03/2016 15:00, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:
>>> JNugent > wrote:
>>>> On 18/03/2016 15:34, Alycidon wrote:
>>>
>>>>> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in
>>>>> danger
>>>>> from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is
>>>>> so remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included
>>>>> in policy. In the vast majority of accidents involving cars and
>>>>> cyclists, the driver is at fault. While some cyclists misbehave,
>>>>> cyclists in general pose next to no threat. But in the debate about
>>>>> the new policies it is clear that there is a very strong
>>>>> anti-cycling
>>>>> segment in the community."
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.southburnetttimes.com.au/news/why-cyclists-make-drivers-see-red/2968639/
>>>>>
>>>
>>>> So even in Australia, the community doesn't like cyclists?
>>>>
>>>> Can you think of any reason why that would be?
>>>>
>>>> Is it "just one of those things"?
>>>
>>> Substitute 'Jews' for 'cyclists' above, and you have the discourse from
>>> 1930s Germany.
>>
>> But we (well, most of us - there might just be one exception in the form
>> of Glug) are not talking about Jews.
>>
>> We are talking about *yobs* who *choose* to commit their knaveries
>> wilfully, often on footways and in other pedestrian-only areas.
>
>They are a good comparison. The jews also pushed their weight about and
>then screamed 'it's not fair' when repercussions came. Their big
>mistake was their declaration of war on Germany in 1933

A good comparison? Really?

Anyway, the Jews never did declare war on Germany in 1933:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Nazi_boycott_of_1933

[Brian 'Glug' Smith[_2_]]

JNugent > wrote:
> On 21/03/2016 15:00, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:
>> JNugent > wrote:
>>> On 18/03/2016 15:34, Alycidon wrote:
>>
>>>> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in danger
>>>> from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is
>>>> so remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included
>>>> in policy. In the vast majority of accidents involving cars and
>>>> cyclists, the driver is at fault. While some cyclists misbehave,
>>>> cyclists in general pose next to no threat. But in the debate about
>>>> the new policies it is clear that there is a very strong anti-cycling
>>>> segment in the community."
>>>> http://www.southburnetttimes.com.au/news/why-cyclists-make-drivers-see-red/2968639/
>>
>>> So even in Australia, the community doesn't like cyclists?
>>>
>>> Can you think of any reason why that would be?
>>>
>>> Is it "just one of those things"?
>>
>> Substitute 'Jews' for 'cyclists' above, and you have the discourse from
>> 1930s Germany.

> But we (well, most of us - there might just be one exception in the form
> of Glug) are not talking about Jews.

You're an idiot.

> We are talking about *yobs* who *choose* to commit their knaveries
> wilfully, often on footways and in other pedestrian-only areas.

No, you are victim-blaming.

As always.

**** off to a motoring newsgroup, you thick ****.

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

[MrCheerful]

On 21/03/2016 16:40, skate wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 15:21:38 +0000, MrCheerful
> > wrote:
>
>> On 21/03/2016 15:14, JNugent wrote:
>>> On 21/03/2016 15:00, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:
>>>> JNugent > wrote:
>>>>> On 18/03/2016 15:34, Alycidon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in
>>>>>> danger
>>>>>> from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is
>>>>>> so remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included
>>>>>> in policy. In the vast majority of accidents involving cars and
>>>>>> cyclists, the driver is at fault. While some cyclists misbehave,
>>>>>> cyclists in general pose next to no threat. But in the debate about
>>>>>> the new policies it is clear that there is a very strong
>>>>>> anti-cycling
>>>>>> segment in the community."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.southburnetttimes.com.au/news/why-cyclists-make-drivers-see-red/2968639/
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> So even in Australia, the community doesn't like cyclists?
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you think of any reason why that would be?
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it "just one of those things"?
>>>>
>>>> Substitute 'Jews' for 'cyclists' above, and you have the discourse from
>>>> 1930s Germany.
>>>
>>> But we (well, most of us - there might just be one exception in the form
>>> of Glug) are not talking about Jews.
>>>
>>> We are talking about *yobs* who *choose* to commit their knaveries
>>> wilfully, often on footways and in other pedestrian-only areas.
>>
>> They are a good comparison. The jews also pushed their weight about and
>> then screamed 'it's not fair' when repercussions came. Their big
>> mistake was their declaration of war on Germany in 1933
>
> A good comparison? Really?
>
> Anyway, the Jews never did declare war on Germany in 1933:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Nazi_boycott_of_1933
>
>
There are newspapers and pictures and statements that say they did.

[jnugent]

On 21/03/2016 17:21, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:
> JNugent > wrote:
>> On 21/03/2016 15:00, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:
>>> JNugent > wrote:
>>>> On 18/03/2016 15:34, Alycidon wrote:
>>>
>>>>> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in danger
>>>>> from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is
>>>>> so remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included
>>>>> in policy. In the vast majority of accidents involving cars and
>>>>> cyclists, the driver is at fault. While some cyclists misbehave,
>>>>> cyclists in general pose next to no threat. But in the debate about
>>>>> the new policies it is clear that there is a very strong anti-cycling
>>>>> segment in the community."
>>>>> http://www.southburnetttimes.com.au/news/why-cyclists-make-drivers-see-red/2968639/
>>>
>>>> So even in Australia, the community doesn't like cyclists?
>>>>
>>>> Can you think of any reason why that would be?
>>>>
>>>> Is it "just one of those things"?
>>>
>>> Substitute 'Jews' for 'cyclists' above, and you have the discourse from
>>> 1930s Germany.
>
>> But we (well, most of us - there might just be one exception in the form
>> of Glug) are not talking about Jews.
>
> You're an idiot.

No, that's you, if you "think" that this is about Jewish people. It
isn't. It just isn't. Being Jewish isn't something you can choose to be
or not to be. being a yob cyclist is entirely voluntary.

>> We are talking about *yobs* who *choose* to commit their knaveries
>> wilfully, often on footways and in other pedestrian-only areas.

> No, you are victim-blaming.

I am fully *in* *support* of the pedestrians who are the victims of the
cycling chavs. As always.

> **** off to a motoring newsgroup, you thick ****.

Glug "Tourettes" Smith, eh?

[Brian 'Glug' Smith[_2_]]

JNugent > wrote:
> On 21/03/2016 17:21, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:
>> JNugent > wrote:
>>> On 21/03/2016 15:00, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:
>>>> JNugent > wrote:
>>>>> On 18/03/2016 15:34, Alycidon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in danger
>>>>>> from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is
>>>>>> so remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included
>>>>>> in policy. In the vast majority of accidents involving cars and
>>>>>> cyclists, the driver is at fault. While some cyclists misbehave,
>>>>>> cyclists in general pose next to no threat. But in the debate about
>>>>>> the new policies it is clear that there is a very strong anti-cycling
>>>>>> segment in the community."
>>>>>> http://www.southburnetttimes.com.au/news/why-cyclists-make-drivers-see-red/2968639/
>>>>
>>>>> So even in Australia, the community doesn't like cyclists?
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you think of any reason why that would be?
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it "just one of those things"?
>>>>
>>>> Substitute 'Jews' for 'cyclists' above, and you have the discourse from
>>>> 1930s Germany.
>>
>>> But we (well, most of us - there might just be one exception in the form
>>> of Glug) are not talking about Jews.
>>
>> You're an idiot.
>
> No, that's you, if you "think" that this is about Jewish people.

Of course it isn't 'about Jewish people', you idiotic oaf. It's about
victim-blaming.

Now **** off to a motoring newsgroup.

{ snipped unread }

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

[Brian 'Glug' Smith[_2_]]

MrCheerful > wrote:
> On 21/03/2016 16:40, skate wrote:
>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 15:21:38 +0000, MrCheerful
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> On 21/03/2016 15:14, JNugent wrote:
>>>> On 21/03/2016 15:00, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:
>>>>> JNugent > wrote:
>>>>>> On 18/03/2016 15:34, Alycidon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in
>>>>>>> danger
>>>>>>> from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is
>>>>>>> so remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included
>>>>>>> in policy. In the vast majority of accidents involving cars and
>>>>>>> cyclists, the driver is at fault. While some cyclists misbehave,
>>>>>>> cyclists in general pose next to no threat. But in the debate about
>>>>>>> the new policies it is clear that there is a very strong
>>>>>>> anti-cycling
>>>>>>> segment in the community."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.southburnetttimes.com.au/news/why-cyclists-make-drivers-see-red/2968639/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> So even in Australia, the community doesn't like cyclists?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can you think of any reason why that would be?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is it "just one of those things"?
>>>>>
>>>>> Substitute 'Jews' for 'cyclists' above, and you have the discourse from
>>>>> 1930s Germany.
>>>>
>>>> But we (well, most of us - there might just be one exception in the form
>>>> of Glug) are not talking about Jews.
>>>>
>>>> We are talking about *yobs* who *choose* to commit their knaveries
>>>> wilfully, often on footways and in other pedestrian-only areas.
>>>
>>> They are a good comparison. The jews also pushed their weight about and
>>> then screamed 'it's not fair' when repercussions came. Their big
>>> mistake was their declaration of war on Germany in 1933
>>
>> A good comparison? Really?
>>
>> Anyway, the Jews never did declare war on Germany in 1933:
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Nazi_boycott_of_1933
>>
>>
> There are newspapers and pictures and statements that say they did.

Hahahahahahahaha !!!!!!!!

You.

****ing.

Mongol.

Please someone . .do the world a favour and find this ****, and off him.

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

[jnugent]

On 21/03/2016 17:39, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:
> JNugent > wrote:
>> On 21/03/2016 17:21, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:
>>> JNugent > wrote:
>>>> On 21/03/2016 15:00, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:
>>>>> JNugent > wrote:
>>>>>> On 18/03/2016 15:34, Alycidon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in danger
>>>>>>> from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is
>>>>>>> so remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included
>>>>>>> in policy. In the vast majority of accidents involving cars and
>>>>>>> cyclists, the driver is at fault. While some cyclists misbehave,
>>>>>>> cyclists in general pose next to no threat. But in the debate about
>>>>>>> the new policies it is clear that there is a very strong anti-cycling
>>>>>>> segment in the community."
>>>>>>> http://www.southburnetttimes.com.au/news/why-cyclists-make-drivers-see-red/2968639/
>>>>>
>>>>>> So even in Australia, the community doesn't like cyclists?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can you think of any reason why that would be?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is it "just one of those things"?
>>>>>
>>>>> Substitute 'Jews' for 'cyclists' above, and you have the discourse from
>>>>> 1930s Germany.
>>>
>>>> But we (well, most of us - there might just be one exception in the form
>>>> of Glug) are not talking about Jews.
>>>
>>> You're an idiot.
>>
>> No, that's you, if you "think" that this is about Jewish people.
>
> Of course it isn't 'about Jewish people', you idiotic oaf. It's about
> victim-blaming.

You are the one blaming the pedestrians who are the victims of yob cyclists.

[Brian 'Glug' Smith[_2_]]

MrCheerful > wrote:

> They are a good comparison. The jews also pushed their weight about and
> then screamed 'it's not fair' when repercussions came. Their big mistake
> was their declaration of war on Germany in 1933

The soft, visceral underbelly of the hate-filled, psychotic car driver,
laid bare.

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

[Brian 'Glug' Smith[_2_]]

JNugent > wrote:
> On 21/03/2016 15:03, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:
>> Alycidon > wrote:

>>> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in danger
>>> from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is so
>>> remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included in
>>> policy.
>
>> Yet, to read the ranting by the moronic thugs on this newsgroup, cycling is
>> a menace to the British way of life.
>
>> Solution: every single cyclist needs to carry a D-lock in his belt.
>
> Cyclists are thugs in your opinion.

Try again - this time for comprehension.

> If they weren't...

Talk sense.

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

[jnugent]

On 21/03/2016 17:51, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:
> JNugent > wrote:
>> On 21/03/2016 15:03, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:
>>> Alycidon > wrote:
>
>>>> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in danger
>>>> from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is so
>>>> remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included in
>>>> policy.
>>
>>> Yet, to read the ranting by the moronic thugs on this newsgroup, cycling is
>>> a menace to the British way of life.
>>
>>> Solution: every single cyclist needs to carry a D-lock in his belt.
>>
>> Cyclists are thugs in your opinion.
>
> Try again - this time for comprehension.
>
>> If they weren't...
>
> Talk sense.

We all know that there's no point in exhorting law-abiding citizens to
commit murderous assaults.

So indeed, you only urge cyclists to do it.

You know your own business best.

[skate]

On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 17:23:05 +0000, MrCheerful
> wrote:

>On 21/03/2016 16:40, skate wrote:
>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 15:21:38 +0000, MrCheerful
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> On 21/03/2016 15:14, JNugent wrote:
>>>> On 21/03/2016 15:00, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:
>>>>> JNugent > wrote:
>>>>>> On 18/03/2016 15:34, Alycidon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in
>>>>>>> danger
>>>>>>> from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is
>>>>>>> so remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included
>>>>>>> in policy. In the vast majority of accidents involving cars and
>>>>>>> cyclists, the driver is at fault. While some cyclists misbehave,
>>>>>>> cyclists in general pose next to no threat. But in the debate about
>>>>>>> the new policies it is clear that there is a very strong
>>>>>>> anti-cycling
>>>>>>> segment in the community."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.southburnetttimes.com.au/news/why-cyclists-make-drivers-see-red/2968639/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> So even in Australia, the community doesn't like cyclists?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can you think of any reason why that would be?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is it "just one of those things"?
>>>>>
>>>>> Substitute 'Jews' for 'cyclists' above, and you have the discourse from
>>>>> 1930s Germany.
>>>>
>>>> But we (well, most of us - there might just be one exception in the form
>>>> of Glug) are not talking about Jews.
>>>>
>>>> We are talking about *yobs* who *choose* to commit their knaveries
>>>> wilfully, often on footways and in other pedestrian-only areas.
>>>
>>> They are a good comparison. The jews also pushed their weight about and
>>> then screamed 'it's not fair' when repercussions came. Their big
>>> mistake was their declaration of war on Germany in 1933
>>
>> A good comparison? Really?
>>
>> Anyway, the Jews never did declare war on Germany in 1933:
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Nazi_boycott_of_1933
>>
>>
>There are newspapers and pictures and statements that say they did.

From what I have read online, some took one newspaper headline
literally, and kind of ran with it. The Nazis and some outside Germany
saw the boycott as an act of aggression, with the British newspaper
the Daily Express going so far as to use the headline: "Judea Declares
War on Germany".

That wikipedia article which I have linked, for example, doesn't
suggest such a declaration of war on Germany - do you have a better
cite which substantiates your claim?

[MrCheerful]

On 21/03/2016 18:08, skate wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 17:23:05 +0000, MrCheerful
> > wrote:
>
>> On 21/03/2016 16:40, skate wrote:
>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 15:21:38 +0000, MrCheerful
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 21/03/2016 15:14, JNugent wrote:
>>>>> On 21/03/2016 15:00, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:
>>>>>> JNugent > wrote:
>>>>>>> On 18/03/2016 15:34, Alycidon wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in
>>>>>>>> danger
>>>>>>>> from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is
>>>>>>>> so remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included
>>>>>>>> in policy. In the vast majority of accidents involving cars and
>>>>>>>> cyclists, the driver is at fault. While some cyclists misbehave,
>>>>>>>> cyclists in general pose next to no threat. But in the debate about
>>>>>>>> the new policies it is clear that there is a very strong
>>>>>>>> anti-cycling
>>>>>>>> segment in the community."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.southburnetttimes.com.au/news/why-cyclists-make-drivers-see-red/2968639/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So even in Australia, the community doesn't like cyclists?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can you think of any reason why that would be?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is it "just one of those things"?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Substitute 'Jews' for 'cyclists' above, and you have the discourse from
>>>>>> 1930s Germany.
>>>>>
>>>>> But we (well, most of us - there might just be one exception in the form
>>>>> of Glug) are not talking about Jews.
>>>>>
>>>>> We are talking about *yobs* who *choose* to commit their knaveries
>>>>> wilfully, often on footways and in other pedestrian-only areas.
>>>>
>>>> They are a good comparison. The jews also pushed their weight about and
>>>> then screamed 'it's not fair' when repercussions came. Their big
>>>> mistake was their declaration of war on Germany in 1933
>>>
>>> A good comparison? Really?
>>>
>>> Anyway, the Jews never did declare war on Germany in 1933:
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Nazi_boycott_of_1933
>>>
>>>
>> There are newspapers and pictures and statements that say they did.
>
> From what I have read online, some took one newspaper headline
> literally, and kind of ran with it. The Nazis and some outside Germany
> saw the boycott as an act of aggression, with the British newspaper
> the Daily Express going so far as to use the headline: "Judea Declares
> War on Germany".
>
> That wikipedia article which I have linked, for example, doesn't
> suggest such a declaration of war on Germany - do you have a better
> cite which substantiates your claim?
>
>


https://archive.org/stream/JewsDeclareWarOnGermany1933/JewsDeclareWarOnGermany1933_djvu.txt

http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/wars/witness2history/10.html

[Alycidon]

On Monday, 21 March 2016 18:08:43 UTC, skate wrote:

>
> From what I have read online, some took one newspaper headline
> literally, and kind of ran with it. The Nazis and some outside Germany
> saw the boycott as an act of aggression, with the British newspaper
> the Daily Express going so far as to use the headline: "Judea Declares
> War on Germany".

There were some nutters when I was at Auschwitz who insisted that the site was knocked up after WWII to get people to have sympathy with the Jews.

[colwyn[_2_]]

>>>
>>> They are a good comparison. The jews also pushed their weight about and
>>> then screamed 'it's not fair' when repercussions came. Their big
>>> mistake was their declaration of war on Germany in 1933
>>
>> A good comparison? Really?
>>
>> Anyway, the Jews never did declare war on Germany in 1933:
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Nazi_boycott_of_1933
>>
>>
> There are newspapers and pictures and statements that say they did.

"Der Stürmer" ?
https://www.historisches-lexikon-bayerns.de/Lexikon/Der_St%C3%BCrmer._Deutsches_Wochenblatt_zum_Kampf_ um_die_Wahrheit

(It must be true !)

[MrCheerful]

On 21/03/2016 20:13, colwyn wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>> They are a good comparison. The jews also pushed their weight about
>>>> and
>>>> then screamed 'it's not fair' when repercussions came. Their big
>>>> mistake was their declaration of war on Germany in 1933
>>>
>>> A good comparison? Really?
>>>
>>> Anyway, the Jews never did declare war on Germany in 1933:
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Nazi_boycott_of_1933
>>>
>>>
>> There are newspapers and pictures and statements that say they did.
>
> "Der Stürmer" ?
> https://www.historisches-lexikon-bayerns.de/Lexikon/Der_St%C3%BCrmer._Deutsches_Wochenblatt_zum_Kampf_ um_die_Wahrheit
>
>
> (It must be true !)
>
http://rense.com/general84/declare.htm

[Kerr Mudd-John]

On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 17:50:37 -0000, Brian 'Glug' Smith
> wrote:

> MrCheerful > wrote:
>
>> They are a good comparison. The jews also pushed their weight about and
>> then screamed 'it's not fair' when repercussions came. Their big
>> mistake
>> was their declaration of war on Germany in 1933
>
> The soft, visceral underbelly of the hate-filled, psychotic car driver,
> laid bare.
>

Brian (or is it John?) calm down! These trolls are getting to you.
PS be careful or that Yitzak fellow will be here ranting if you don't let
up.


--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug

[skate]

On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 18:45:37 +0000, MrCheerful
> wrote:

>On 21/03/2016 18:08, skate wrote:
>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 17:23:05 +0000, MrCheerful
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> On 21/03/2016 16:40, skate wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 15:21:38 +0000, MrCheerful
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 21/03/2016 15:14, JNugent wrote:
>>>>>> On 21/03/2016 15:00, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:
>>>>>>> JNugent > wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 18/03/2016 15:34, Alycidon wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in
>>>>>>>>> danger
>>>>>>>>> from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is
>>>>>>>>> so remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included
>>>>>>>>> in policy. In the vast majority of accidents involving cars and
>>>>>>>>> cyclists, the driver is at fault. While some cyclists misbehave,
>>>>>>>>> cyclists in general pose next to no threat. But in the debate about
>>>>>>>>> the new policies it is clear that there is a very strong
>>>>>>>>> anti-cycling
>>>>>>>>> segment in the community."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.southburnetttimes.com.au/news/why-cyclists-make-drivers-see-red/2968639/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So even in Australia, the community doesn't like cyclists?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Can you think of any reason why that would be?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is it "just one of those things"?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Substitute 'Jews' for 'cyclists' above, and you have the discourse from
>>>>>>> 1930s Germany.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But we (well, most of us - there might just be one exception in the form
>>>>>> of Glug) are not talking about Jews.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We are talking about *yobs* who *choose* to commit their knaveries
>>>>>> wilfully, often on footways and in other pedestrian-only areas.
>>>>>
>>>>> They are a good comparison. The jews also pushed their weight about and
>>>>> then screamed 'it's not fair' when repercussions came. Their big
>>>>> mistake was their declaration of war on Germany in 1933
>>>>
>>>> A good comparison? Really?
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, the Jews never did declare war on Germany in 1933:
>>>>
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Nazi_boycott_of_1933
>>>>
>>>>
>>> There are newspapers and pictures and statements that say they did.
>>
>> From what I have read online, some took one newspaper headline
>> literally, and kind of ran with it. The Nazis and some outside Germany
>> saw the boycott as an act of aggression, with the British newspaper
>> the Daily Express going so far as to use the headline: "Judea Declares
>> War on Germany".
>>
>> That wikipedia article which I have linked, for example, doesn't
>> suggest such a declaration of war on Germany - do you have a better
>> cite which substantiates your claim?
>
>
>https://archive.org/stream/JewsDeclareWarOnGermany1933/JewsDeclareWarOnGermany1933_djvu.txt
>
>http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/wars/witness2history/10.html

The primary definition of a war is a state of armed conflict between
different countries or different groups within a country.

To describe the call to boycott German goods in 1933 as a declaration
of war is hyperbole - it's just an emotive figure of speech which is
not meant to be taken literally.

[MrCheerful]

On 21/03/2016 23:02, skate wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 18:45:37 +0000, MrCheerful
> > wrote:
>
>> On 21/03/2016 18:08, skate wrote:
>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 17:23:05 +0000, MrCheerful
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 21/03/2016 16:40, skate wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 15:21:38 +0000, MrCheerful
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 21/03/2016 15:14, JNugent wrote:
>>>>>>> On 21/03/2016 15:00, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>> JNugent > wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 18/03/2016 15:34, Alycidon wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in
>>>>>>>>>> danger
>>>>>>>>>> from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is
>>>>>>>>>> so remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included
>>>>>>>>>> in policy. In the vast majority of accidents involving cars and
>>>>>>>>>> cyclists, the driver is at fault. While some cyclists misbehave,
>>>>>>>>>> cyclists in general pose next to no threat. But in the debate about
>>>>>>>>>> the new policies it is clear that there is a very strong
>>>>>>>>>> anti-cycling
>>>>>>>>>> segment in the community."
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.southburnetttimes.com.au/news/why-cyclists-make-drivers-see-red/2968639/
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So even in Australia, the community doesn't like cyclists?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Can you think of any reason why that would be?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Is it "just one of those things"?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Substitute 'Jews' for 'cyclists' above, and you have the discourse from
>>>>>>>> 1930s Germany.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But we (well, most of us - there might just be one exception in the form
>>>>>>> of Glug) are not talking about Jews.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We are talking about *yobs* who *choose* to commit their knaveries
>>>>>>> wilfully, often on footways and in other pedestrian-only areas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They are a good comparison. The jews also pushed their weight about and
>>>>>> then screamed 'it's not fair' when repercussions came. Their big
>>>>>> mistake was their declaration of war on Germany in 1933
>>>>>
>>>>> A good comparison? Really?
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyway, the Jews never did declare war on Germany in 1933:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Nazi_boycott_of_1933
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> There are newspapers and pictures and statements that say they did.
>>>
>>> From what I have read online, some took one newspaper headline
>>> literally, and kind of ran with it. The Nazis and some outside Germany
>>> saw the boycott as an act of aggression, with the British newspaper
>>> the Daily Express going so far as to use the headline: "Judea Declares
>>> War on Germany".
>>>
>>> That wikipedia article which I have linked, for example, doesn't
>>> suggest such a declaration of war on Germany - do you have a better
>>> cite which substantiates your claim?
>>
>>
>> https://archive.org/stream/JewsDeclareWarOnGermany1933/JewsDeclareWarOnGermany1933_djvu.txt
>>
>> http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/wars/witness2history/10.html
>
> The primary definition of a war is a state of armed conflict between
> different countries or different groups within a country.
>
> To describe the call to boycott German goods in 1933 as a declaration
> of war is hyperbole - it's just an emotive figure of speech which is
> not meant to be taken literally.
>
>

However, the effect was equal to a sea blockade.

[jnugent]

On 21/03/2016 22:28, Kerr Mudd-John wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 17:50:37 -0000, Brian 'Glug' Smith
> > wrote:
>
>> MrCheerful > wrote:
>>
>>> They are a good comparison. The jews also pushed their weight about and
>>> then screamed 'it's not fair' when repercussions came. Their big
>>> mistake
>>> was their declaration of war on Germany in 1933
>>
>> The soft, visceral underbelly of the hate-filled, psychotic car driver,
>> laid bare.
>>
>
> Brian (or is it John?) calm down! These trolls are getting to you.
> PS be careful or that Yitzak fellow will be here ranting if you don't
> let up.

:-)

Nice one (as they used to say on the adverts).

[Anthony 'Piss_Taker' Janssen]

JNugent > wrote:
> On 21/03/2016 17:51, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:
>> JNugent > wrote:
>>> On 21/03/2016 15:03, Brian 'Glug' Smith wrote:
>>>> Alycidon > wrote:
>>
>>>>> "Studies have shown that the perception of pedestrians being in danger
>>>>> from cyclists is far greater than actual risks. In fact, the risk is so
>>>>> remote that cyclist-pedestrian regulations have not been included in
>>>>> policy.
>>>
>>>> Yet, to read the ranting by the moronic thugs on this newsgroup, cycling is
>>>> a menace to the British way of life.
>>>
>>>> Solution: every single cyclist needs to carry a D-lock in his belt.
>>>
>>> Cyclists are thugs in your opinion.
>>
>> Try again - this time for comprehension.
>>
>>> If they weren't...
>>
>> Talk sense.
>
> We all know that there's no point in exhorting law-abiding citizens to
> commit murderous assaults.
>
> So indeed, you only urge cyclists to do it.
>
> You know your own business best.

Yeah, so you keep saying. An allegation which you have yet to
substantiate, despite dozens of requests to do so. Indeed, your usual
response when asked to demonstrate where I exhort anyone to commit
'murderous assaults', is silence.

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))