On Saturday about 50 unwashed dole-scounging motorists demonstrated in
London against the extension of the Congestion Zone. They held up
traffic for hours by driving very slowly in their balloon-festooned,
gas guzzling CO2 emitting 4x4s, adding yet more to their already
massive carbon footprint and air pollution where they live. Other
drivers were annoyed by the delay caused by this protest, which was
marshalled by policemen on mountain bikes. The demonstrators finances
already stretched to the limit by their addiction this new £8 charge
is the "last straw", these car junkies claim.

On 19 Feb 2007 00:02:19 -0800 someone who may be "Doug"
<jagmad> wrote this:-

>On Saturday about 50 unwashed dole-scounging motorists demonstrated in
>London against the extension of the Congestion Zone. They held up
>traffic for hours by driving very slowly in their balloon-festooned,
>gas guzzling CO2 emitting 4x4s, adding yet more to their already
>massive carbon footprint and air pollution where they live.

Indeed.

>Other drivers were annoyed by the delay caused by this protest,

Surely not. We are told that motorists are only annoyed by
cyclists:-)

>which was marshalled by policemen on mountain bikes.

That was a nice touch.

"Doug" <jagmad> wrote in message



Nothing worth replying to.

On 19 Feb, 09:33, David Hansen <SENDdavidNOhS>
wrote:
> On 19 Feb 2007 00:02:19 -0800 someone who may be "Doug"
> <jag> wrote this:-
>> Indeed.
>> Surely not. We are told that motorists are only annoyed by
> cyclists:-)
>> That was a nice touch.
>
Yes and to cap it all there is a picture of them pushing a broken down
car!

LOL.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/e...on/6371553.stm

On 19 Feb, 09:39, "gazzafield"
<rufty_tufty_hoolyt> wrote:
> "Doug" <jag> wrote in message
>
> Nothing worth replying to.

Then why respond?

Doug wrote:
> On Saturday about 50 unwashed dole-scounging motorists demonstrated in
> London against the extension of the Congestion Zone. They held up
> traffic for hours by driving very slowly in their balloon-festooned,
> gas guzzling CO2 emitting 4x4s,

In so many posts you complain about wealthy fashion victims buying 4x4's
for town use, and yet now you claim they're dole scroungers. Which is
right?

On 19 Feb, 10:46, The Caretaker <the_careta> wrote:
> Doug wrote:
> > On Saturday about 50 unwashed dole-scounging motorists demonstrated in
> > London against the extension of the Congestion Zone. They held up
> > traffic for hours by driving very slowly in their balloon-festooned,
> > gas guzzling CO2 emitting 4x4s,
>
> In so many posts you complain about wealthy fashion victims buying 4x4's
> for town use, and yet now you claim they're dole scroungers. Which is
> right?
>
I've never associated 4x4s with wealth, in this age of unlimited
credit and debt, ostentatious posturing perhaps.

"Doug" <jagmad> wrote in message
news:4320
> On 19 Feb, 09:39, "gazzafield"
> <rufty_tufty_hoolyt> wrote:
>> "Doug" <jag> wrote in message
>>
>> Nothing worth replying to.
>
> Then why respond?



Just letting others know it was your usual verbal diahorrea.

On 19 Feb, 10:03, "Doug" <jag> wrote:
> On 19 Feb, 10:46, The Caretaker <the_careta> wrote:> Doug wrote:
> > > On Saturday about 50 unwashed dole-scounging motorists demonstrated in
> > > London against the extension of the Congestion Zone. They held up
> > > traffic for hours by driving very slowly in their balloon-festooned,
> > > gas guzzling CO2 emitting 4x4s,
>
> > In so many posts you complain about wealthy fashion victims buying 4x4's
> > for town use, and yet now you claim they're dole scroungers. Which is
> > right?
>
> I've never associated 4x4s with wealth, in this age of unlimited
> credit and debt, ostentatious posturing perhaps.
>
Well, cut and pasted from the evening standard artical you used is the
following snippet.

"Addison Road, where the protesters meet, is populated with opulent
Victorian villas where even the gravel in the drives is immaculately
coiffured. The houses go for £4m, although "for sale" signs are rare."

Worlds away from Catford, Jealous??

On 19 Feb, 08:02, "Doug" <jag> wrote:

> gas guzzling

Irrelevant.

> CO2 emitting

Irrelevant.

> 4x4s

Irrelevant.

> carbon footprint

Irrelevant.

> air pollution

The one valid point of this post.

Doug, why do you continue to populate 80% of your posts with
irrelevant rubbish with absolutely no evidence to back it up?

Do you think you'll ever do some actual reading of scientific
procedures and research to figure out for yourself what is going on
with the environment rather than just being a mug and listening to
someone else who quite clearly doesn't understand science?

The environment, in terms of CO2, is fine. We have very low levels of
atmospheric CO2, and the heating and cooling of the environment is
perfectly natural and there is absolutely nothing we can do about it.
Certainly, lumbering residents of inner London with a charge to drive
their cars on top of the already existing charges is a bit unfair.

Anthropogenic climate change is a myth. It's spouted by those who
don't understand science, and those who are looking for a new religion
to follow.

However, I commend your interest in trying to improve air quality.
That's something I whole-heartedly support.

conkersack wrote:

> However, I commend your interest in trying to improve air quality.
> That's something I whole-heartedly support.

So you whole-heartedly support efforts to dissuade people from using their
cars in congested city centres?

On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 11:41:38 -0000, Brimstone wrote:

> So you whole-heartedly support efforts to dissuade people from using their
> cars in congested city centres?

I do, indeed I suggest anyone who lives in a city should have their car
taken from them and that it should then be scrapped. I also suggest that a
large tax should be levied on the movements of vehicles into cities, all
vehicles, no matter what type. Yes, that includes trains, planes, goods
vehicles and automobiles.

Furthermore anyone resident in a city who wishes to travel outside the
city should pay a tax at least twice the value of the tax for importation
of vehicles into the city.

We should set up a trial area around Catford.

In message <1171874864.197934.105750>, Doug
<jagmad> writes
>[..]
As many as 50 cars. What a vast number, people must have come from all
over the country in aid of the defenceless people of Chelsington.

On 19 Feb, 11:41, "Brimstone" <brimst> wrote:

> So you whole-heartedly support efforts to dissuade people from using their
> cars in congested city centres?

No. Where have I said that? You fucking idiot. You've caught
craplogicitis from Doug.

In message <1171882446.703602.245090>, NM
<nik.morgan> writes
>Worlds away from Catford, Jealous??
I don't think that's in doubt.