first Critical Mass

MartinM said:

I joined the London CM at the start for the first time last night.
After the usual (apparently) meander round the London eye it got going
over Waterloo Bridge before winding round the back of Mayfair. The
police riders were very easy going; they stopped all cars trying to
drive into the road where the riders were coming down. But many of the
riders were just flounting just about every rule in the book; riding
down a one -way street, ignoring red lights even when the police asked
them to stop, stopping right in the middle of Oxford Circus (the copper
next to me said he wasn't going in there to sort them out as he didn't
want to get hit by a bus), ignoring no right turns, not allowing taxis
to drive off after stopping to pick up fares (also contrary to police
requests)

Not condoning the above, but I imagine many riders were irritated by
the letter handed out by police at the start (reported elsewhere - I
wasn't there). Letter was on the subject of illegal processions,
demonstrations, and other assemblies.

Colin McKenzie

Colin McKenzie said:

Not condoning the above, but I imagine many riders were irritated by
the letter handed out by police at the start (reported elsewhere - I
wasn't there). Letter was on the subject of illegal processions,
demonstrations, and other assemblies.

Yes I saw them handing them out but didn't read one, got a naked bike
ride one!. Don't get me wrong I'm not anti-CM it's a harmless bit of
fun with a good message which aims to show alternatives to the car etc
etc. Just seemed that riding around aimlessly at walking pace doesn't
IMO show bikes up as a good alternative.

"Colin McKenzie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

MartinM said:

I joined the London CM at the start for the first time last night.
After the usual (apparently) meander round the London eye it got going
over Waterloo Bridge before winding round the back of Mayfair. The
police riders were very easy going; they stopped all cars trying to
drive into the road where the riders were coming down. But many of the
riders were just flounting just about every rule in the book; riding
down a one -way street, ignoring red lights even when the police asked
them to stop, stopping right in the middle of Oxford Circus (the copper
next to me said he wasn't going in there to sort them out as he didn't
want to get hit by a bus), ignoring no right turns, not allowing taxis
to drive off after stopping to pick up fares (also contrary to police
requests)

Not condoning the above, but I imagine many riders were irritated by the
letter handed out by police at the start (reported elsewhere - I wasn't
there). Letter was on the subject of illegal processions, demonstrations,
and other assemblies.

Whereabouts did you read this? Am interested in reading what was passed out.

Personally, I also like the ideals, but not the reality of the critical
mass. A nice gentle cycle is fine, but snails pace and then the obligatory
stop and hold your bike over your head is a little, sorry, a lot OTT.

elyob said:

"Colin McKenzie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

MartinM said:

I joined the London CM at the start for the first time last night.
... ignoring no right turns, not allowing taxis
to drive off after stopping to pick up fares (also contrary to police
requests)

Not condoning the above, but I imagine many riders were irritated by the
letter handed out by police at the start (reported elsewhere - I wasn't
there). Letter was on the subject of illegal processions, demonstrations,
and other assemblies.

Whereabouts did you read this? Am interested in reading what was passed out.

LCC-issues mailing list.

Apparently, it was this:

Quoted message said:

Metropolitan Police Service
CO11 Public Order Branch
New Scotland Yard
Broadway
London
SW11 OBG

Your reference: - Our reference: -
Date: 29/09/2005

Critical Mass Cycle Demonstrations

Organisers of public processions are required by law to notify
police at least 6 days before the event occurs of the date, time,
proposed route and the name and address of an organiser.
Failure to do so makes the event unlawful

Demonstrations within a designated area around Parliament
must also be notified, and anyone taking part in an unauthorised
demonstration commits an offence.

Police can impose conditions on processions, demonstrations
and other assemblies, and participants render themselves liable
to arrest if they fail to comply with those conditions.

These cycle protests are not lawful because no organiser has
provided police the with the necessary notification. Your
participation in this event could render you liable to prosecution.
Police policy in facilitating these events is currently under review.

If you intend to organise a future similar event please refer to the
Metropolitan Police website, www.met.police.uk for details. It is
preferable for all parties if a lawful event can be safely facilitated,
rather than the Police having to enforce legislation.

[signed]

Superintendent Gomm,
New Scotland Yard

Colin McKenzie said:

elyob said:

"Colin McKenzie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

MartinM wrote:
>I joined the London CM at the start for the first time last night.
>... ignoring no right turns, not allowing taxis
>to drive off after stopping to pick up fares (also contrary to police
>requests)

Not condoning the above, but I imagine many riders were irritated by the
letter handed out by police at the start (reported elsewhere - I wasn't
there). Letter was on the subject of illegal processions, demonstrations,
and other assemblies.

Whereabouts did you read this? Am interested in reading what was passed out.

LCC-issues mailing list.

Apparently, it was this:

Quoted message said:

Metropolitan Police Service
CO11 Public Order Branch
New Scotland Yard
Broadway
London
SW11 OBG

Your reference: - Our reference: -
Date: 29/09/2005

Critical Mass Cycle Demonstrations

Organisers of public processions are required by law to notify
police at least 6 days before the event occurs of the date, time,
proposed route and the name and address of an organiser.
Failure to do so makes the event unlawful

Demonstrations within a designated area around Parliament
must also be notified, and anyone taking part in an unauthorised
demonstration commits an offence.

Police can impose conditions on processions, demonstrations
and other assemblies, and participants render themselves liable
to arrest if they fail to comply with those conditions.

These cycle protests are not lawful because no organiser has
provided police the with the necessary notification. Your
participation in this event could render you liable to prosecution.
Police policy in facilitating these events is currently under review.

If you intend to organise a future similar event please refer to the
Metropolitan Police website, www.met.police.uk for details. It is
preferable for all parties if a lawful event can be safely facilitated,
rather than the Police having to enforce legislation.

[signed]

Superintendent Gomm,
New Scotland Yard

[censored]! good job I turned up it could have been the last one.

Colin McKenzie said:

Apparently, it was this:

Seems an eminently reasonable statement of the facts and reasonable
request but what do I know?

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon

Tony Raven said:

Colin McKenzie said:

Apparently, it was this:

Seems an eminently reasonable statement of the facts and reasonable
request but what do I know?

well if it was properly organised with an pre-advertised route it would
be better IMO but that goes against the CM principles as I see it.

elyob said:

Quoted message said:

Whereabouts did you read this? Am interested in reading what was passed
out.

Personally, I also like the ideals, but not the reality of the critical
mass. A nice gentle cycle is fine, but snails pace and then the obligatory
stop and hold your bike over your head is a little, sorry, a lot OTT.

What sort of 'democracy' is scared of 82 year old men and a bunch of
cyclists?

Nothing to do with Critical Mass,
but if I think my government are doing something wrong I have every right
to stand up and shout this at the top of my lungs.

Look at the footage shown on TV at every turn on Tiananmen Square - what
stops this happening in this country now?

Tony Raven said:

Quoted message said:

Seems an eminently reasonable statement of the facts and reasonable
request but what do I know?

Errr, sorry, no.
I think Paster Neidermoller (sp?) had a lot to say on this one.

John Hearns said:

Tony Raven said:

Seems an eminently reasonable statement of the facts and reasonable
request but what do I know?

Errr, sorry, no.

Sorry Tony, that was a bit agressive.

But my point remains - what the hell shouldn't we stand outside Parliamemt
ans should blue murder at our leaders?

pps.
I left the Mass when it tried to circle Parliament Square for the second
time. One ciruit was OK, but no point in getting caught up threading
through traffic. I think the bike cops thought the same way.

Off to a meal in a Lebanese cafe on Edgware road. Yum.

John Hearns said:

pps.
I left the Mass when it tried to circle Parliament Square for the second
time. One ciruit was OK, but no point in getting caught up threading
through traffic. I think the bike cops thought the same way.

Off to a meal in a Lebanese cafe on Edgware road. Yum.

I had to go to a leaving do so left as it went the non-pubwards
direction down Oxford St; just as well as it started to chuck it down
at that point. I got a nice taste of riding back in the real world on
the way as I had the temerity to use the official black cab route from
the West End to Paddington, primary riding position was essential there
to avoid getting splatted ;-(

John Hearns said:

Tony Raven said:

Seems an eminently reasonable statement of the facts and reasonable
request but what do I know?

Errr, sorry, no.
I think Paster Neidermoller (sp?) had a lot to say on this one.

If I had a clue who you were thinking of it might help.

First it is an eminently reasonable statement of the facts - there is a
legal requirement, police can impose restrictions, you are laying
yourself open to prosecution and I presume the police are reviewing
their policy. You are arguing whether those facts are acceptable to you
not whether the letter is a reasonable summary of them.

Second there is for better or worse, a legal procedure for organised
mass demonstrations and the police seem to be inviting the organisers to
go into cooperation rather than risk confrontation.

Of course CM organisers say that CM is not organised but just a
happenstance convergence of like minded individuals in the same way as
by happenstance some people are finding themselves out riding their
horses together with a pack of dogs and coincidentally all in similar
red coats, and, well you know what dogs are like.

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon

"Colin McKenzie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

LCC-issues mailing list.

What's the join address for this list?

Thanks

in message <[email hidden]>, John Hearns

(') said:

Tony Raven said:

Seems an eminently reasonable statement of the facts and reasonable
request but what do I know?

Errr, sorry, no.
I think Paster Neidermoller (sp?) had a lot to say on this one.

For once, the .sig file says it all.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; First they came for the asylum seekers,
;; and I did not speak out because I was not an asylum seeker.
;; Then they came for the gypsies,
;; and I did not speak out because I was not a gypsy...
;; Pastor Martin Niemöller, translated by Michael Howard.

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>, John Hearns

(') said:

Tony Raven said:

Seems an eminently reasonable statement of the facts and reasonable
request but what do I know?

Errr, sorry, no.
I think Paster Neidermoller (sp?) had a lot to say on this one.

Ah the Niemoller who commanded the crew of his U-boat not to rescue the
drowning sailors from a torpedoed ship? I'm sure he did have a lot to say.

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon

hey; what happened to Sunday? GG2 appears to have opened a wormhole in
the space time continuum. And my watch still thinks it's September. Oh
well saves me getting up tomorrow to do the Falling Leaves ride (or was
it yesterday?)

16. Jon Senior Oct 3, 12:05 am show options

In article <[email hidden]>, Jon Senior

Quoted message said:

And as for rescue; U-boats were not exactly spacious. To take onboard
survivors from an attack on the enemy would have exposed his crew to
danger. I wouldn't applaud his actions there, but I can certainly
understand them!

I remember talking to man I worked with who had served in the British
Navy on some kind of above the water boat during WWII. He said it was,
sadly, the norm to leave the crews of enemy vessels in the water after
sinking.

--
Sara

iChat: sarakirk (AIM)
So, what are you going to do? Sucker me to death?

Jon Senior said:

It appears that his opinion of [censored] was changeable. With the vague
possibility that you don't actually know the poem in question:

First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—
because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me—
and there was no one left to speak out.

That is but one version of a poem although the one generally thought to
be closest to the original, if there was one, because it is the
historical sequence of [censored]'s attack. No-one can trace what it was
that he might have said or when or whether he said it at all and it is
available in many different corruptions with many different groups and
orders and wording depending on the agenda of the person telling it.
Indeed when asked in later life about the inclusion of Roman Catholics
in one version he said "I never said it. They can take care of
themselves." pointing more to it being a historical account of his
downfall rather than professing an underlying personal philosophy. This
is reinforced by his wife's claim that it was originally said in
response to a student's question "How did it happen?". Nevertheless the
philosophical angle it has now been imbued with is worth thinking about.

YMMV

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon