>That article doesn't mention even smith or his encouragement of the
>perversion of justice, and the article from the FT doesn't encourage
>the perversion of justice.
>
>………..
>
>See the difference?
Are you being deliberately obtuse or just plain stupid? Seriously!
I already that that particular article didn't encourage; I actually
said that all someone need do is reply to such a story via an opinion
column - I notice you are avoiding a direct response to that by doing
your 'stuck record' trick and not properly quoting me. I ask again: do
you agree that could indeed happen?
Besides, I don't need to find the specific report (and it would be
unreasonable to expect me to do so). You actually said that no news
report would contain such a phrase, I replied by demonstrating how you
could be wrong. Now you are twisting your own words.
See the difference?
>People are dying on the roads because of arrogant, selfish boy racers
>like Smith.
Prove he is a 'boy racer' - I know you cant! (1)
People are also dying on the roads because of inattentive drivers, are
these the same road users who have "a near miss virtually every day" -
people like yourself?
>He has a long record of disregard for any traffic laws
'Any'? So do you mean all traffic laws? Please show us this 'long
record' (2)
>a history of threats and abuse against anyone who disagrees with him.
Many disagree with him on the forums yet I've never seen any threats
against those who are polite, unless you can prove otherwise? (3)
>which is why he never shows his face on open forums
How ironic, you post your **** only on cycling sites - go figure!
> and prefers his toady acolytes to use his
>own dishonest tactics instead, like you smegma, claiming that the FT
>encourage the perversion of justice.
Oh please tell me where I said "the FT encourage the perversion of
justice" (4)
>Smith has no partner
Lol you are such a loser - obviously you're not doing your homework,
either that or you are a liar! Prove that claim! (5)
>Every time he speaks publicly he embarrasses himself and confirms his
>position among the media contacts I have as vain
I suspect you have absolutely no media contacts, I say this because
his opinion is obviously so respected in the media; how else could he
appear in it soooo many times? How many times do you think he's
appeared on TV stating his case? Does that in itself not tell you
anything? (6)
>drunken …..
Oooh, is this a real sign of desperation?
Oh please elaborate…… (7)
I rank this next to your other lies such as: "he started safespeed cos
he got a speeding ticket" and "he was previously a delivery driver"
>He is an irrelevance, but the fact that you have your tongue so far up
>his fundament that you refuse to even admit his despicable
>announcements are illegal
You are yet to prove they are/were illegal, you're still at square
one…..
In fact I could turn that against you and say "You have an irrational
dislike of PS. The fact you've been showing it for 2.5 years shows
just how unbalanced you really are, the fact you've been unsuccessful
shows how stupid/wrong you are"
The fact that my belief is aligned with his doesn't mean I'm a
sycophant; I'm defending SS because I believe you to be a liar
(something which is easy to demonstrate because you simply can't prove
your claims - any of them - let alone all of them). Allowing you to
succeed with your lies could jeopardise what I wish to have achieved.
>The police think he's a joke
And how do you know that? Do you have police contacts too (or are they
pretend contacts like you've already alleged PS to have?) (8)
Funny that, most here - on a cycling newsgroup - think the same about
you. Check out just how many times you were ****** upon and kill-filed
by your comrades here:
"more on the war on drivers" - author: spindrift
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.rec.cycling/browse_frm/thread/b52c2ee05fbf98d6
LOL you are too easy :c)
>the media laugh behind their hands every
>time smith's terribly pompous and self important "Press releases" are
>despatched
Can I assume there is absolutely no way you can prove any of that? If
so how can you stand by that statement? If you can't, how can you
disprove yourself to be a liar or a charletan? (9)
>But smith depends for credibility on fake coppers like In Gear (you do
>realise that In Gear posts as two other people on crapspeed, don't
>you?) or besotted lying half wits like you.
Oh the irony - ben potter, martin crow, cathy browne, bike clips(s)……
I've asked you this sooo many times before and not once did you give
any answer so it's worth repeating: How does PS depend on IG?
OK, I count 9 separate claims in total (the numbers in the brackets),
I expect you will be able to substantiate all 9 otherwise you leave
yourself open to being called what you have been calling PS so much: a
liar!
Time for my own stuck record trick…..
So how is your prosecution of the 'pretend policeman' coming along?
How is your correspondance with Essi Ahari going?
Have you had your near misses every day this week? It would seem odd
that someone of your claimed knowledge about issues of road safety
would suffer"'a near miss vrtually every day" [quoted from spindrift
on Sheffield forums 2 week ago] - this isn't something you've denied!
