Another reason to avoid critical mass...

On May 20, 12:54*am, (Tom Keats) wrote:
In article ,
* * * * Brent P writes:



http://articles.citypages.com/2008-0.../moles-wanted/

Seems the old police and federal moles infiltrating groups and then
possibly starting violence is still alive and well.

/Avoid/ Critical Mass?!

Yes, why avoid critical mass? After all, the best way to get people
to see your point of view is to act like a complete dick and break a
bunch of laws.

nate

On 2008-05-20, Tom Keats wrote:
In article ,
Brent P writes:

But it sounds more to me like you're trying to
scare-off "upstart" cyclists from claiming our
due space on the streets.

Nice one there Tom. Still the same I see. Considering I have oh
probably a few thousand posts defending a bicyclist's right to road,
you're just well, full of ****.

And you're cyclists' official spokesperson (in r.a.d.)
Yeah, right.

LOl. Still making stuff up. You replied to me and made a claim about
what I was 'trying to' do. It's not my fault you didn't rub two brain
cells together before spewing.

Go spread your FUD in your garden, where it belongs.

aww... poor baby.

On 2008-05-20, Tom Keats wrote:
In article ,
Brent P writes:
On 2008-05-20, Tom Keats wrote:
In article ,
Brent P writes:

http://articles.citypages.com/2008-0.../moles-wanted/


Seems the old police and federal moles infiltrating groups and then
possibly starting violence is still alive and well.

/Avoid/ Critical Mass?!
Hell, it seems like we've gotta rush to its aid!

It was a bit of humor, because there are all sorts of reasons to avoid
it that it didn't need government moles. Went over your head I
suppose.

Excuses -- Faah! Nischt gefloygen.

Humour, eh? Nobody's laffin'.

I takes you two posts to do this?

...

I propose Critical mass stop being assholes who run red signals and
generally make asses of themselves by ignoring even the most basic
rules of the roads, those rules that even allow bicyclists to use the
same road system as other bicyclists. Like I posted a few weeks ago or
so, I think it would be amusing to assert right of way (green signal)

ROW is always given; never taken.

If that's the case, then might makes right and motorists need not give
right of way and just use the size of their vehicles to run those on
smaller ones off the road or run red signals in front of them, etc. You
didn't really think that out did you?

while bicycling as these critical massholes are running the red.
Either their heads would asplode or they would just react with
violence.

Your own reaction sounds pretty violent, itself.

LOL.... it's violent to want to go on green instead of sitting there
waiting for a bunch of asshats.

You're pretty mad at Critical Mass, aren't you?

No. Just tired of asshats like CM, wrong way riders, red light runners,
gutter passers etc who **** off other people who then, when they see a
lone bicyclist take out their frustations on that lone bicyclist. It's a
group that makes things worse, not better.

But I ask you to bear these thoughts in mind:

wrt Critical Mass, we're talking about urban streets,
not the open road. It's a completely different environment.

Yeah, it's an environment where timing green signals is important,
especially to a bicyclist, otherwise he ends up stopping every few
hundred feet!

Have you ever been a non-driver in a city, trying to get from
A to B, but can't because of the steady stream of commuters
transiting from their job in one suburb, to their home in another
suberb, and they're just blasting through your neighbourhood
and would knock you down like a bowling pin if you got in
their way? In /your/ own bailywick?

I've ridden in chicago and suburban chicago since I could ride a
bicycle. I got my first adult sized bicycle in 1982. That's 26 years of
urban and suburban street riding. So, give up the stupid argument that
because I also drive a car I don't know what's it like to bike.

Another amusing thing about CM's idiotcy is that they go around ****ing
off drivers in downtown chicago, in the loop. That's the most bicycle
friendly part of this area IMO because traffic speeds are bicycle
speeds. Hell I've cruised in the left lane pasing traffic to my right
keeping up with the car in front of me in the loop for blocks on end and
had no problems from drivers.

Critical Mass is a
reaction against that selfishness. In its best incarnations,
it transcends selfishness, while reminding drivers they can
also transcend their own selfishness, and maybe cheer up
a little.

See here you go again slipping into this 'us vs. them' crapola. Here's
the thing Tom, your critical massholes aren't making conditions better.
I've had drivers try to knock me off the road or ignore my left turn
signal and pass me on the left and other asshattery and you know how
they justify their actions to me when I catch up to them? They justify
it with 'you bicycle riders don't follow the law' type bull****. So,
here's a clue, when you purposely go out and decide to take revenge on
the few motorists who are a problem by ****ing off anyone who happens to
be driving all you accomplish is to make more motorists who are going to
be a problem to bicyclists. It's basically GWB's offical war-on-terror
idea that by bombing people, by killing civilians and making a mess of
people's lives in general that's going to get them to stop being
terrorists. In reality it ****es people off who had no axe to grind and
causes them to pick up the fight.

At its worst, Critical Mass is a mirror that reflects
the behaviours of selfish people back at themselves.

No, what that is doing is ****ing off people by their choice of vehicle.
They aren't mirror to the individuals that being a mirror to is
effective. That CM behavior gives justification to those drivers that
are a problem and then adds more to their ranks when drivers who weren't
a problem mirror CM back to every bicyclist they see.

No wonder they get ****ed off. Too bad those selfish
people are too selfish to realize they're ****ing off
a bunch of other people too.

What about the driver like me who is a bicyclist too? What about the
driver who has always respected bicyclists right to the road? Why ****
them off? Because they drive?

So what happens when these drivers who weren't doing wrong towards
bicyclists decide to 'mirror' CM's behavior to anyone on a bicycle? What
then? I've encountered those people on the road. They use the same
reasoning you give for critical mass's behavior.

Brent, I think you're a good and decent guy.
shrug maybe a little too affected by car people,
but maybe that can be remedied.

I like cars and bicycles. Sorry that shorts out your circuits. I drive
and bike and follow the rules of right of way with each.

The ****ed-offedness you experience once a month
by CM rides is the ****ed-offedness we non-drivers
experience ~daily~ as you drivers blithely steal our
ROWs, and cut us off from where we need to go.

I bike a good deal Tom. You keep forgeting that. I don't gutter pass. I
don't run red signals, I even signal. I also assert my right of way. I
realized ****ing off people just because they drove was the height of
stupidity, but then people like you keep doing just that.

If you really want to get back at those drivers who make life miserable
for bicyclists for sport, the ones that are the problem, without turning
other drivers to their ranks, ride 100% to the vehicle code. Simple as
that. It ****es them off and they have nothing to argue with. Plus no
collateral damage.

But don't listen to me. I'm just full o' ****.

Silly me, I don't want more drivers gunning for a lone bicyclist because
some group of riders ****ed them off.

Brent P writes:

I propose Critical mass stop being assholes who run red
signals and generally make asses of themselves by ignoring
even the most basic rules of the roads, those rules that
even allow bicyclists to [yada yada yada] ...

=v= Same old same old. *Yawn!*

=v= Proposals work better when they're not based on false
presuppositions, and also when they don't call people names.
Despite the occasional media-exaggerated incidents of road
rage (things that happen the other 353 days of the year, too),
Critical Mass has continued to thrive for 15 years and has
spread to over 400 locations worldwide.
_Jym_

P.S.: Your ongoing "Critical Mas is blah blah blah" tirades
have nothing to do with the news item that you posted.

http://articles.citypages.com/2008-0.../moles-wanted/

Seems the old police and federal moles infiltrating groups
and then possibly starting violence is still alive and well.
/Avoid/ Critical Mass?!
Hell, it seems like we've gotta rush to its aid!

=v= Exactly right. If one thing good came out of the NYPD's
attack on bicyclists during the 2004 RNC, it was the great
outpouring of support from some of the best people in their
fields: from civil rights lawyers to Pulitzer-prize winners
to moviemakers and the many other creative talents who live
in New YorK City.

=v= The NYPD got a pile of "anti-terrorist" money and nasty
toys in 2004, which they've used to harrass dissenters with ever
since. The Minneapolis police has already shown a particular
tendency to misuse their toys as well. You can support their
CM's current legal struggle he

http://cmsupport.wordpress.com/

_Jym_

Not only was C-M not mentioned in the alleged "news story" (I
say alleged and punctuate "news story" because it wasn't news,
just the unsubstantiated claims of a pseudonymous "source"
accompanied some thinly veiled editorializing by the writer
and the predictable outrage of a C-M attorney) but the *only*
mention of bicycles in the "news" portion appeared in the
first sentence ...

=v= Given the nature of the meeting under discussion, there can
only be a sole unsubstantiated claim for it. His story can be
found in slightly different form by a web search for "vegan
potluck." The lawyer is part of the National Lawyers Guild,
not "a CM attorney," whatever that's supposed to mean.

=v= The article did mention CM later on, in particular the role
of _agents_provocateur_ in the August 2007 Minneapolis ride,
though it failed to point out that there are multiple sources
corroborrating that information. It also mentioned videotaped
evidence of one such infiltrator in the New York City ride; in
fact there are mulitple videotapes of multiple such incidents.
_Jym_

On 2008-05-20, Jym Dyer wrote:
Brent P writes:

I propose Critical mass stop being assholes who run red
signals and generally make asses of themselves by ignoring
even the most basic rules of the roads, those rules that
even allow bicyclists to [yada yada yada] ...

=v= Same old same old. *Yawn!*

=v= Proposals work better when they're not based on false
presuppositions, and also when they don't call people names.
Despite the occasional media-exaggerated incidents of road
rage (things that happen the other 353 days of the year, too),
Critical Mass has continued to thrive for 15 years and has
spread to over 400 locations worldwide.

****ing off drivers world wide... It's classic GWB diplomacy. Anger
everyone that looks like your enemy to get your enemy to stop doing bad
things. Result = more enemy. Endless war. The Jesse Jackson theory of
activism.

P.S.: Your ongoing "Critical Mas is blah blah blah" tirades
have nothing to do with the news item that you posted.

There might be a whole half dozen threads I've been in regarding CM over
the last decade and this is the only one I started... just a tad bit of
exaggeration there.

In article ,
Bill Sornson wrote:

That why you DELETED the rest of what Bob wrote? The article DID NOT
MENTION C-M!

Yes, it does. Third paragraph from the bottom.

(Just checked to make sure. Whole piece seems a little /too/
blatant; cops/feds wouldn't be so cavalier.)

As long as people like you keep believing that, their very audacity is
their protection.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

On May 20, 7:22 am, N8N wrote:
On May 20, 12:54 am, (Tom Keats) wrote:

In article ,
Brent P writes:

http://articles.citypages.com/2008-0.../moles-wanted/

Seems the old police and federal moles infiltrating groups and then
possibly starting violence is still alive and well.

/Avoid/ Critical Mass?!

Yes, why avoid critical mass? After all, the best way to get people
to see your point of view is to act like a complete dick and break a
bunch of laws.

Westboro Baptist is growing by leaps and bounds!

On May 20, 10:36*am, Jym Dyer wrote:
Not only was C-M not mentioned in the alleged "news story" (I
say alleged and punctuate "news story" because it wasn't news,
just the unsubstantiated claims of a pseudonymous "source"
accompanied some thinly veiled editorializing by the writer
and the predictable outrage of a C-M attorney) but the *only*
mention of bicycles in the "news" portion appeared in the
first sentence ...

=v= Given the nature of the meeting under discussion, there can
only be a sole unsubstantiated claim for it. *His story can be
found in slightly different form by a web search for "vegan
potluck." *The lawyer is part of the National Lawyers Guild,
not "a CM attorney," whatever that's supposed to mean.

It means exactly what it sounds like, an attorney that represents
Critical Mass. That was how the article described him, not as a member
of the National Lawyers Guild. If you find that offensive, blame the
CityPages author or better yet, just lighten up a little.

=v= The article did mention CM later on, in particular the role
of _agents_provocateur_ in the August 2007 Minneapolis ride,
though it failed to point out that there are multiple sources
corroborrating that information. *It also mentioned videotaped
evidence of one such infiltrator in the New York City ride; in
fact there are mulitple videotapes of multiple such incidents.

Reread what I wrote before getting bent out of shape. Did the
*article* mention C-M? Yes, but only after the writer stopped writing
a "news story" and started editorializing. If that sounds like
hairsplitting, it isn't. It's merely accuracy. If my placement of
quotation marks around "news" when I wrote, "...the *only* mention of
bicycles in the "news" portion appeared in the first sentence.",
wasn't clear enough I'm not sure how to make it any clearer.

Regards,
Bob Hunt