Blocking the ports like Dover etc with the help of FRENCH hauliers would be the best way to hit Gordon Brown !!!

The fuel tax would be lowered tomorrow and Brown would go up his own backside and into total reverse!!!

wheel.

Yeah. Let's use innocent people in our fight with him.

What about the 'Innocent' hard working people Brown is milking dry with tax!

wheel.

So you object to what he is doing to people yet want to use those same people for your own ends?

Short pain for Long gain

wheel.

Tell you what, I don't like the current bank base rate, so I proopose to come around to your house and barricade you in to put pressure on the government. I know you'll support me in this. Short term pain for long term gain.

What has the current bank base rate got to do with the price of fish?

 

But, as you mention it, what has it got to do with anything?

 

You don't have to take out a loan.

 

If you do, you can shop around for the rate you like.

 

You don't even have to take t out with a UK lender.

 

However, only 22% of the electorate voted for Labour.

 

The majority in England voted against them.

 

Oh, and if the electoral wards weren't grossly biased towards Labour they probably wouldn't have got in anywhere.

 

So what right has to to rob one section of society to fund his social engineering?

 

 

 

Now, your point was?

 

 

Sorry you didn't understand it. The point was quite obvious unless you choose to miss it; it was clearly explained, especially in the context of the previous posts. it was what we call an example. i.e. a demonstration of the daftness of the same kind of action / thinking designed to show up the flaws in it. Sort of RAA if you like.

Please demonstrate the "daftness" and show the "flaws". I was referring to the form of argument. If you wish you can substitute VAT at 17.5% or anything you wish for bank base rate.
Of course you could simply resort to name-calling.
I note that you do use a variety of fallacious arguments in your posts and wonder what your purpose is. Is it to persuade or just to shout down?
Yo0u may find this site instructive

http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/index.htm

What about the 'Innocent' hard working people Brown is milking dry with tax!

So you object to what he is doing to people yet want to use those same people for your own ends?

So, since when was Gordy blocking ports?

And how are the protesters milking people dry?

 

Tell you what, I don't like the current bank base rate, so I proopose to come around to your house and barricade you in to put pressure on the government. I know you'll support me in this. Short term pain for long term gain.

I don't set bank base rates.

No one is barricading people in anywhere.

No one (except Gordon) is even stopping anyone getting fuel.

Please demonstrate the "daftness" and show the "flaws". I was referring to the form of argument. If you wish you can substitute VAT at 17.5% or anything you wish for bank base rate.

OK

Tell you what, I don't like VAT at 17.5%, so I propose to come around to your house and barricade you in to put pressure on the government.

I don't have anything to do with VAT.

No one is barricading people in anywhere.

No one (except Gordon) is even stopping anyone getting fuel.

Oh, and before you say that the fuel companies don't have anything to do with duty and VAT:

They collect and forward the VAT to Gordy.

They don't (they aren't allowed to, but they don't complain about it) publicise the Duty levels and VAT regime.

It helps to mask any price rises they care to introduce (if petrol, including all the taxes within its cost of exploration, extraction, production transportation and distribution was a penny, and duty and VAT and VAT on Duty was 99p, they could double the real price of petrol without anyone noticing.

Of course you could simply resort to name-calling.

I note that you do use a variety of fallacious arguments in your posts and wonder what your purpose is. Is it to persuade or just to shout down?

Yo0u may find this site instructive

http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/index.htm

Why, is there a section there on the pot calling the kettle black by any chance?

All your arguments are fallacious and all you are doing is trying to shout people down.

Have you managed to prove any of the points you have posted so far?

 

Yo0u may find this site instructive

http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/index.htm

You might find it instructive to see how many of those fallacies exist in the Speed Kills, Cars Pollute, man causes Global Warming, Trams will save the planet, etc, etc arguments.

 

 

What a pity that you could not simply reply without adding abuse.

<Why, is there a section there on the pot calling the kettle black by any chance?>

No, and there is none of that in the post we are discussing

<All your arguments are fallacious>

You have not demonstrated that, in fact you have not responded to the ppoint I was making

<and all you are doing is trying to shout people down.>

No. That is untrue

<Have you managed to prove any of the points you have posted so far?>

Yes, and they have been strengthened by your failure to deal with them

Reading my posts before posting would probably help you out of your confused state.

It's funny how no-one reads a word you ever say.

I did. Pity you simply have to reply with insults instead if reason or discussion.
What is your purpose here, to persuade or simply to win?

Let me see now.

There's thousands of threads here full of posts packed with references, facts, information, articles, opinions, statistics, news, reason, discussion, persuasion.

And people still come back with "Speed Kills", Cars are the anti-christ, lock up all speedophiles for doing 31mph on the motorway, the automobile is destroying the planet (all by itself, and causing global warming throughout the galaxy).

And you want a reply to that post?

 

Yes actually, but I suspect that you will continue to evade.

What is YOUR purpose? It seems that you want to win rather than persuade.

Duh?

 

What would be the point of losing?

 

Except letting the anti-car freaks destroy western society as we know it.

Which is the only thing that can save the rest of the world for them.

 

What a bunch of pillocks.

 

They want the west to stop producing.

But to produce enough to give aid to the entire rest of the world at the same time.

 

You really are rattled now aren't you Bog? Name calling in almost all your posts.

Once you've lost the arguments then all that's left is to call your opponents:

pillocks

morons

scum

etc....etc...etc..

He isn't very smart (why else would he be fighting so much for unlimited car-liberty?), so forgive him his childish outbursts of name-calling.

TPG - FIGHTING THE NAME-CALLING - FIGHTING FOR YOU!

If certain groups want to destroy a society, but expect it to still carry the rest of the world:

Then moron, pillock, is merely a statement of fact.

 

And, if you want to use the term scum to describe them, I won't argue with you.

Though I doubt you will be able to find an instance of my using the word.

 

Who ever said anything about helping the peoples of other countries?

It's clear you think we should let them all die in pain, misery, hunger and disease. But I don't remember seeing anyone else say we should be giving them everything... or anything..

The kind of people who militate against motorists.

Are the same ones who campaign against capitalism.

Are the kind who advocate loadsa aid.

 

And if you bothered to read my posts.

You would know that one of the reasons I'm against silly speed limits.

Is that.

As well as the fact that they cost the motorist more in time.

And kill pedestrians.

They strangle the arteries of the nation.

Through which the life blood of the economy is trying to flow.

So preventing us from funding everything from proper pensions.

Through the NHS.

To international aid.

 

And they wonder why I call them morons!

 

You said:

"The kind of people who militate against motorists.
Are the same ones who campaign against capitalism.
Are the kind who advocate loadsa aid."

I really think you are terribly confused.. I think you should perhaps consider that your logic is flawed. Neither the first and second, nor second and third statements
follow. I'm sure they do sometimes.. but..

The fact that you'd post that, after all I've read from you in the past, demonstrates beyond all reasonable doubt that you have indeed lost your grip on reality. We do _*not*_ live inside an episode of Top Gear. Don't believe it.

TPG - FIGHTING FOR SANITY - FIGHTING FOR YOU!

If you'd said:

"The kind of people who advocate loadsa aid.
Are the same ones who campaign against capitalism.
Are the kind who militate against motorists."

You might have been closer ot the truth.

And the difference is?

 

TPG said:

     You said:

               "The kind of people who militate against motorists.
               Are the same ones who campaign against capitalism.
               Are the kind who advocate loadsa aid."

     I really think you are terribly confused..

Are you saying that, for example, your typical swampy anti-car type is typically pro-car and anti-aid?

I hardly think so.

 

I think you should perhaps consider that your logic is flawed. Neither the first and second, nor second and third statements follow.

I never said it was logical.

In fact, I'd be happy to agree it was entirely illogical.

And I never said it followed.

I merely said it was a fact.

 

I'm sure they do sometimes.. but..

Go on then.

Give me a few examples of the typical anti-motorist pro-capitalist anti-aid activist.

Or even "normal" person.

George Painter, Freda Woodyard and good Ol' Aggie from here and the Beeb Nottingham forum perhaps?

Red Ken, Steven Byers, Barbara Castle, Gwyneth Dunwoody, Gordon Brown and "Prof" Begg?

Jane Fonda, Glenda Jackson, and the Redgraves?

Swampy and your typical anti-roads campaigner and your typical animal libber?

Your typical cord trousered, baggy jumpered, besandalled, bearded or facially mutilated anti-car teacher or lecturer?

And that's just the women.

Your typical kamikaze urban cyclo-guerrilla?

 

The fact that you'd post that, after all I've read from you in the past, demonstrates beyond all reasonable doubt that you have indeed lost your grip on reality.

The fact that you've posted that demonstrates beyond all reasonable doubt that you have never had a grip on reality in the first place.

 

We do _*not*_ live inside an episode of Top Gear. Don't believe it.

Not only have you never observed real life.

You've obviously never watched Top Gear either.

 

What a pointless rant that was. You really do not have a clue.

TPG - FIGHTING FOR FUEL TAX - FIGHTING FOR YOU!

If that were true:

You wouldn't have had a problem demolishing my argument.

Would you?

 

None at all.. I have watched Top Gear, lots of it. You may cross-question.

TPG - FIGHTING FOR JUSTICE - FIGHTING FOR YOU!