Neil Mitchell at it again

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

Quoted message said:

Did anyone here read Neil Mitchells column in yesterdays Herald Sun?
(Page 19, Tuesday 11th May)

The article starts off as a criticism of the transport policies of Peter
Bachelor, but swiftly declines into yet another of his rants against
cyclists, I'll quote the first and last paragraphs,

"It isn't too difficult to get a taxi licence these days, so here's an
idea for our bicycle obsessed Minister for Transport: try some real life
experience, and drive a cab for a month"

"Cars are heavily taxed and ridiculously expensive to run. They are also
secure, convient, and here to stay. Let the lentil-eaters put off their
berets over their helmets and ride to work at the book shop. But,
please, govern for the rest as well"

Apart from the arguments presented in his column big enough to drive a
B-double through, the rest of the article is a badly researched,
childish Strawman argument.

A couple of contridictions, 3AW and the Herald Sun sponsor/support the
Bike Paths Guide, the Herald Sun Tour and Bicycle Victoria events.

Ahh, but that's the strategy: he says this and it looks like his comments
are independant of the commercial aspects of the station!

Personally, people like Neil Mitchell and Derryn Hinch ("Hinche"? "Hunch"?
"Hynche"?) bug me as all they really do is express their own opinion without
any form of genuine disagreement. "If I don't like what you say, I'll just
disconnect you" type of thing.

--
Alan Erskine
We can get people to the Moon in five years,
not the fifteen GWB proposes.
Give NASA a real challenge
[email hidden]

flyingdutch said:

Best to ignore him even tho sadly, badly informed ignorant gits like him
have far too big an audience as it is...

Nah, I like having free speech as long as there's a Right Of Reply.

These pompous twits really believe they're above it all, hence Alan
Jones talking s**t after he quaffed a couple of chardies....and John
Laws waiting until a convenient time arose to repeat it all.

Anyway, a old saying, todays headlines wraps tomorrows fish n' chips.

--

I flicked thru this at work and ended up tearing it out and its sitting
on my desk now....

I debated typing back a reply to the Hun (and his listed personal email
at 3AW) but realised him for what he is. A shock-jock!

Besides he looks like he could use the side-effects of getting on a bike
himself. He was the same [censored] who harumphed when I suggested on radio
that we dont really need to manufacture cars/vehicles that can travel
fater than the speed limit "How am I going to passs that truck on the
highway" was his response. "You mean the truck travelling ON the speed
limit?" i responded He quickly changed the subject

Best to ignore him even tho sadly, badly informed ignorant gits like him
have far too big an audience as it is...

--

cfsmtb said:

Did anyone here read Neil Mitchells column in yesterdays Herald Sun?
(Page 19, Tuesday 11th May)

The article starts off as a criticism of the transport policies of Peter
Bachelor, but swiftly declines into yet another of his rants against
cyclists, I'll quote the first and last paragraphs,

"It isn't too difficult to get a taxi licence these days, so here's an
idea for our bicycle obsessed Minister for Transport: try some real life
experience, and drive a cab for a month"

"Cars are heavily taxed and ridiculously expensive to run. They are also
secure, convient, and here to stay. Let the lentil-eaters put off their
berets over their helmets and ride to work at the book shop. But,
please, govern for the rest as well"

Apart from the arguments presented in his column big enough to drive a
B-double through, the rest of the article is a badly researched,
childish Strawman argument.

A couple of contridictions, 3AW and the Herald Sun sponsor/support the
Bike Paths Guide, the Herald Sun Tour and Bicycle Victoria events.

I cannot understand the "logic" behind criticising the policies of a
state Transport Minister, and potentially promoting aggression
towards cyclists?

Discuss.

--

Mitchell is just a professional stirrer. The problem is that
brainless fools who cannot generate an original thought of
their own listen to him and some even act out his fantasies,
to the detriment and danger of the rest of the community.

Recently he ran a rant session on bike paths and should
cyclists pay registration to fund them. The whole argument
was founded on a misconception because there are no bike
paths, they are all shared paths, so by his own argument,
pedestrians, dog walkers, horse riders etc should all pay
registration too.

I'm sorry I don't have a solution to dealing with he and his
kind, but I wonder when someone will successfully hold one of
them culpable for an act that they have incited.

Alan.

I was a bit upset reading his article as well. Somehow he doesn't seem
to realise that for every cyclist or person taking public transport he
sees that is one less car in his way. You can have the best road network
imaginable, but at the end of the day its only going to get you to next
bottleneck quicker.

He does his best to ostracize cyclists (and vegetarians). I no longer
have the article but remember him refering to helmets as 'silly hats'
and even the article title summed up his purpose.

For some reason he was even arguing that the cost of imported cars was
too high. Wtf does that have to do with improving the city's transport?
Besides shouldn't he be supporting Australian jobs/the working class he
thinks he is representative of? Maybe he needs another BMW or something.

--

"Alan Hutchison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]

[...]

Quoted message said:

Mitchell is just a professional stirrer.

True.

[...]

Quoted message said:

Recently he ran a rant session on bike paths and should
cyclists pay registration to fund them. The whole argument
was founded on a misconception because there are no bike
paths, they are all shared paths,

Not true. Some paths are shared, some are not. You see this all along the
foreshore, sometimes there's one shared path and sometimes there's two
paths, one for pedestriand and one for cyclists/rollerbladers.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

Alan Hutchison said:

Mitchell is just a professional stirrer. The problem is that brainless
fools who cannot generate an original thought of their own listen to him
and some even act out his fantasies, to the detriment and danger of the
rest of the community.
Recently he ran a rant session on bike paths and should cyclists pay
registration to fund them. The whole argument was founded on a
misconception because there are no bike paths, they are all shared
paths, so by his own argument, pedestrians, dog walkers, horse riders
etc should all pay registration too.
I'm sorry I don't have a solution to dealing with he and his kind, but I
wonder when someone will successfully hold one of them culpable for an
act that they have incited.
Alan.

It is the 'Hun' after all. It aint shakespeare and it sure-as-[censored] aint
aimed at people with anything resembling intelligence Almost spat out my
weeties the other morning when i heard Mitchell was being muted as the
next Editor-in-chief of 'The Age'!!!

As for solving/dealing with NM, how does one apply for a Bus licence???

--

cfsmtb said:

Did anyone here read Neil Mitchells column in yesterdays Herald Sun?
(Page 19, Tuesday 11th May)
The article starts off as a criticism of the transport policies of Peter
Bachelor, but swiftly declines into yet another of his rants against
cyclists, I'll quote the first and last paragraphs,
"It isn't too difficult to get a taxi licence these days, so here's an
idea for our bicycle obsessed Minister for Transport: try some real life
experience, and drive a cab for a month"
"Cars are heavily taxed and ridiculously expensive to run. They are also
secure, convient, and here to stay. Let the lentil-eaters put off their
berets over their helmets and ride to work at the book shop. But,
please, govern for the rest as well"
Apart from the arguments presented in his column big enough to drive a
B-double through, the rest of the article is a badly researched,
childish Strawman argument.
A couple of contridictions, 3AW and the Herald Sun sponsor/support the
Bike Paths Guide, the Herald Sun Tour and Bicycle Victoria events.
I cannot understand the "logic" behind criticising the policies of a
state Transport Minister, and potentially promoting aggression
towards cyclists?
Discuss.

I certainly did read it and also contemplated writing to the Hun. But i
am well aware that the lentil/latte reference is only there to incite
folk to respond to the egotistical twit. I am sure that the more
responses he gets means he can justify whatever exorbitant fee he
charges to put pen to paper.

Even better is todays response in the Hun from someone in surrey hills
saying that cycle commuting isnt feasable for them and that they drive
as they find purchasing a ticket too hard.

Give me a break. Zone one daily or 2 hour mate.. Hello.!!! Its not
rocket science.

It frightens me that people like that are behind the wheel when people
like me are trying to ride to work safely.

I wonder if he was the ignorant jerk who abused me on st kilda rd this
morning, revving his engine, flipping the bird and swearing at me to get
over to the other side of the f'ing road.

I would gladly, but the two lanes to my immediate left were turning
lanes at the arts centre and his ute was sitting over the designated
waiting bike box, where cyclists are supposed to be wait safely when
heading straight.

Honestly, it makes me wonder why i bother sometimes. Being a female i
must admit that i do find it daunting to challenge men like this as i am
always worried that they may take it to another level and hit me. I am
not having a go at men here either. Its just another added worry that we
women cyclists face sometimes.

Lets see who else decides to join the Hun debate in tomorrow's paper..

--

coowoowoo said:

Being a female i must admit that i do find it daunting to challenge men
like this as i am always worried that they may take it to another level
and hit me. I am not having a go at men here either. Its just another
added worry that we women cyclists face sometimes.

Dont think youre special, coowoo! We male cyclists get abused too ya
know Altho admittedly I'll be more ready for argy-bargy A well phrased
comment inevitably gets a better result tho

Summat like... "Compensating for something, perhaps?" (much better
coming from a woman no doubt too)

--

"coowoowoo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]

[...]

Quoted message said:

I wonder if he was the ignorant jerk who abused me on st kilda rd this
morning, revving his engine, flipping the bird and swearing at me to
get over to the other side of the f'ing road.

I would gladly, but the two lanes to my immediate left were turning
lanes at the arts centre and his ute was sitting over the designated
waiting bike box, where cyclists are supposed to be wait safely when
heading straight.

Heh. I've been there, done that many a time at that particular
intersection. Whenever a car parks itself in the bicycle zone at
intersectons like that I make a point of stopping in front of them so they
must wait for me to take off when the lights change - and no amount of
honking will get me to move any faster.

Quoted message said:

Honestly, it makes me wonder why i bother sometimes. Being a female i
must admit that i do find it daunting to challenge men like this as i
am always worried that they may take it to another level and hit me.
I am
not having a go at men here either. Its just another added worry that
we women cyclists face sometimes.

You have to stand up for yourself. If you don't then who will?

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

cfsmtb said:

Did anyone here read Neil Mitchells column in yesterdays Herald Sun?
(Page 19, Tuesday 11th May)

I looked online to find the article but couldn't. If anyone has found it
online, has a transcript or could scan it that'd be great. I'd be happy
to put it on my site under a link "wankiest misinformation about
bicycles ever".

Tamyka

--

______________________________________

Tamyka Bell, PhD Student
School of Human Movement Studies
The University Of Queensland
w: +61-7-33656105
m: +61-4-00782972
e: [email hidden]
______________________________________

DRS said:

"Alan Hutchison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]

Quoted message said:

[...]

Quoted message said:

Recently he ran a rant session on bike paths and should
cyclists pay registration to fund them. The whole argument
was founded on a misconception because there are no bike
paths, they are all shared paths,

Not true. Some paths are shared, some are not. You see this all along the
foreshore, sometimes there's one shared path and sometimes there's two
paths, one for pedestriand and one for cyclists/rollerbladers.

Oops, I stand corrected. I haven't ridden on those paths.
Where I usually ride, on the Yarra, Diamond Valley, Rail
Trails etc. they are all shared. It only slightly blunts the
point of my argument though.

Alan.