Shocking video appears to show motorist driving into cyclist who fell off his bike

Gkam84 wrote:

Captain Badger wrote:

Being pissed off doesn't excuse a direct attack on someone else.

Correct, that is why I started my comment with "While there is no excuse for what the driver did"...

And then continued to justify the attack -

Gkam84 wrote:

Well, how about you ride responsibly and not like a c**t pissing drivers off and hitting their car...

Do you ever find yourself using phrases like "I'm not racist but......."?

Captain Badger wrote:

Gkam84 wrote:

Captain Badger wrote:

Being pissed off doesn't excuse a direct attack on someone else.

Correct, that is why I started my comment with "While there is no excuse for what the driver did"...

And then continued to justify the attack -

Gkam84 wrote:

Well, how about you ride responsibly and not like a c**t pissing drivers off and hitting their car...

Do you ever find yourself using phrases like "I'm not racist but......."?

I didn't justify anything, I gave a suggestion that the rider needs to be responsible for their actions aswell. As for your next part, go f**king boil your head. Why would you even bring racism into the conversation, that just shows the level you are coming from, maybe go f**k off elsewhere, don't need that shit here.

Gkam84 wrote:

I didn't justify anything, I gave a suggestion that the rider needs to be responsible for their actions aswell. As for your next part, go f**king boil your head. Why would you even bring racism into the conversation, that just shows the level you are coming from, maybe go f**k off elsewhere, don't need that shit here.

Of course it does. Have a great weekend dude

Do you always get your news from the Daily Mail? 

Oh dear.  You were doing so well, such a shame your trolling has relapsed to what can only be described as poor, very poor.  Must try much harder.

So apparently 5 years means it is Khans London. How about 10 years of Tories Auterity cutting funding left right and centre which means youth and after school actrivities lost their funding? How about 10 years of Austerity cuts which means Police have had to cut back lots of funding? Nope, it is Khans London at fault for someone being almost run over as a driver decides if someone is under my wheels bad luck. 

I don't think Rudi has covered himself in glory recently...

So 20k less Police Officers in the UK has nothing to do with rising crime? The closure of Youth Centres and a 70% reduction in spending there since 2010 has nothing to do with youths deciding to gang together and expend energy antisocially? 

Nope, it is all Khans fault and nothing outside at all. And btw, I'm not saying Khan hasn't got certain stuff wrong, just that it is not all down to him either. I suppose he could have spent money on a Garden Bridge, illegal water cannons or his bit on the side.
 

Yep, ,matches the UK one as well. Unless you are saying that 2million extra crimes since 2015 only happened in London in 2020?

https://www.statista.com/statistics/283069/crimes-in-the-uk/

Oh look, London's change in crime rate mirrors that of the UK as a whole. I presume that's Khan's fault too?

And I'm pretty sure last week it was all these LTN's that was the sole reason the Tories got pretty much the same percentage of the vote in the London Mayor elections as last time. 

Anyway, maybe this spending chart on the London Councils website (So all three parties if the Libs have any) also goes along way to show the differences in spending in London in 2014 to 2020  which can show why crime is rising. Remember closure of alternative facilities can also send bored kids out on the streets or mean people being treated for addictions aren't helped so fall back into their old ways. 

And I'm, surprised you also haven't accused Cycling Mikey and Jeremey Vine as all the attacks on cyclists they prompt must be putting the figures up massively. It will be the perfect trifecta for you.

Nigel Garrage wrote:

Today, while it's true that there is an element of covariance, crime is rising more rapidly in London than over the rest of the UK under Khan, which is all the more amazing when you consider the degree of gentrification London has seen over the same period and its relative prosperity and growth vs the rest of the country.

Crime rates rose from 82.36 to 101.46 from 2015/16 to 2019/20 in London - 23%.

Crime rates rose from 74.7 to 96.4 from 2015/16 to 2019/20 in the UK - 29%.

Damn that Khan.

AlsoSomniloquism wrote:

So 20k less Police Officers in the UK has nothing to do with rising crime? The closure of Youth Centres and a 70% reduction in spending there since 2010 has nothing to do with youths deciding to gang together and expend energy antisocially?

Just a coincidence; it would have been much worse under Corbyn.

Nigel Garrage wrote:

Why Khan? Because he's the mayor that campaigned to remove stop and search, has undermined the police, has presided over a gigantic rise in violent crime, and spends his days tweeting and posturing with blimps rather than leading.

£600M cut from the Met budget by coalition/Tory government since 2010 and demanding another 400M by 2023. Violent crime has risen across the nation (again, under a Tory government) and in London at a far lower level than many other cities and regions. All Khan did with the Trump blimp, to which one assumes you are referring, was refuse to ban it, he didn't "posture" with it. Like every other major politician he has a Twitter account (probably not even run by himself) to keep the public informed of what he's doing on their behalf. If he didn't people like you would doubtless accuse him of hiding from the public. Other than that, spot on.

Nigel Garrage wrote:

Haha jog on - Khan even recently bought the blimp to display in a museum. Who needs police when you've spent the money to get a blimp on display?

Typical bollocks from the poundshop Socrapi; the Museum of London bought the blimp for its London Protests collection. The GLA appoints half of the museum's directors (the other half being appointed by the CoLC). Khan has not the slightest say over the museum's acquisitions policy.

Nigel Garrage wrote:

And who funds the Museum of London? Oh, the Mayor of London and his party. You'll get there in the end. Out of interest - leaving aside who was responsible for the purchase (and it does beg the question exactly what you think the Mayor is responsible for, as according to you he's just a helpless bystander), do you think buying the blimp was in the public interest? The museum laughably claimed that it was in the public interest by ranking it alongside the women's suffrage movement 😄

You really can't be this obtuse, can you? The MoL is run by an independent board of directors and funded jointly by the GLA (whomever holds power at City Hall at any given time, not just one party) and the Corporation of London, the GLA has no executive power over its decisions. You and your rightist ilk continually deride the BBC as being leftwing, but who funds the BBC? Oh, the Prime Minister and his party (as you would say). Go and take a civics course and come back and comment when you understand the mechanisms of corporate governance in state and city-run institutions.

Sorry, where's the bit where he says "And I look forward to directing its agenda and overseeing its acquisitions"? If public body funding equals control, why are you lot always frothing about the BBC? Surely as it's government funded they control it?

As it happens no I don't think it was a good use of public funds, but I also know that however much you say "rubbish" Khan had nothing to do with it and so your assertion "Khan even recently bought the blimp to display in a museum" is a lie.

And with that I'm out, any further response will elicit none from me. As Professor Dawkins so sagely remarked, don't bother arguing with idiots; the best you can hope for is to say you won an argument with an idiot. 

Nigel Garrage wrote:

And as Socrates (yep Socrates) said: "When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the losers." Have a great day 👍

Oh, this is so brilliant I must immediately break my resolve not to reply. Socrates never said anything of the sort, that quote has only been around since 2008 and only very, very stupid people (Eric Trump being its most notable populariser) trying to look clever claim it was Socrates. Thank you for the best laugh of the year so far.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/socrates-debate-lost-slander-loser/

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2018/oct/08/viral-image/no-socrate...

Nigel Garrage wrote:

Clearly he couldn't have said those exact words as English didn't exist.

That is utterly hilarious in its desperation. As Confucius said, when a man has had his arse handed him on a plate, he'd be well advised to zip it instead of making himself look even more stupid (obviously we can't know he said that because English didn't exist but if I want to attribute it to him I will).

So because people use all available "current" facts to debunk something mentioned online, we shouldn't believe them in anything else? So not one Texan has died from Covid in three months since they lifted the mask mandate? So we are all being tracked by 5G masts if you have had the vaccine?

My totally unsupported facts include Our Nige here is our old "friend" booboo and DaveDave is our other old "friend" Socrati. (Note the spelling OurNige).

"Let me guess - tried, but failed?"

The press release stated they have tried to contact the owners of the other blimp. They didn't state anything else. Maybe the owners wanted too much money? Maybe they didn't want to have it in a museum. Maybe it has been destroyed. Lots of reasons why but as it took 2 years between the museum mentioning getting them in and mentioning that they now have the Blimp it could still be negotiated.

"By taking the Covid Lab-leak theory, which has always had sensible sources backing it, journalists and (a minority of) scientists behind it, and declaring it "a conspiracy theory"

There is a difference between stating the virus is manmade which is what you linked to, and whether it was one discovered and accidently leaked from the lab which is what the investigations are trying to find. The former has very little buy-in from the whole scientific community due to them all having access to the Genomes and not seeing anything manmade in it at all. 

"That it is faring well in vaccinations is entirely down to Donald Trump"

Well I would like to know how Donald "I didn't tell anyone I was vaccinated in January, because my fanbase doesn't believe in them" Trump  is the total reason they are faring so well with nothing down to the actual logistics and addtional purchaes under Biden. Donald "This will disappear in two weeks" Trump did help rush through developments by removing some USA guidelines but then so did alot of other countries worldwide. Still Donald "HydroxyChloroquin" Trump also caused unneccesary deaths during this and since as he spouted wrong nonsense about treatments which, as shown with his Voting nonsense, his fanbase believes him not matter what he states. 

Anyway thanks for confirming you are Booboo-no-clue. I mean he was pretty much one of the only people on this site that swallowed everything from Donald "Lets Inject Disinfectant to Clean Covid Out of the Body" Trump.

Nigel Garrage wrote:

And as Socrates (yep Socrates) said: "When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the losers."

Have a great day 👍

Did you mean Socrati, cos that sounds
like some of his rubbish?

You didn't answer my question by the way - do you think buying the blimp was a good use of public funds?

They tried to get the Khan Blimp as well to show the same thing. Personally I don't rate much "art" etc but I suspect from reading the point of it being a memory of protests in London that they will have other things like Poll Tax riots memorabilia, newspaper headlines and artwork and other items on show. But something that attracts visitors to a museum (and Tourists when that area recovers) or £320k on illegal to use Water Cannons. I wonder what the bigger waste of public funds will be. 

But you have not mentioned the ridiculous amount wasted on the non existent garden bridge.

Well as Khan might be doing the same with the new Tunnel, I thought I would just pick something which is still more then the blimp costs but also we have examples on both sides. 

I had to pay to visit one of the exhibitions - am I due a refund?

Nigel Garrage wrote:

Why Khan? Because he's the mayor that campaigned to remove stop and search, has undermined the police, has presided over a gigantic rise in violent crime, and spends his days tweeting and posturing with blimps rather than leading. London needs a Rudi Giuliani style figure to clean it up.

What, drain the swamp?.....

Nigel Garrage wrote:

Unless you see the full footage (which was obviously clipped on purpose) you can't draw any conclusions. For all you know they might have been threatening with knives or damaging the car - it looks like Khan's London after all.

course they did. They're yooves innit

Nigel Garrage wrote:

*Edit* If you look closely you'll see a dickhead on a bike ahead of the lights trying to block in the car.

Yeah, someone's tried to run someone over, but look over there! kid with a bike!

Nigel Garrage wrote:

This is what happens when you have an entirely lawless city I guess.

If you mean drivers running over kids who've pissed them off, then that's happening all over the country, and nothing to do with Khan.