Matthew Parris apologises

Quoting wafflycat <w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com>:

Quoted message said:

Right at the end he says, "I offended many with my Christmas attack on
cyclists. It was meant humorously but so many cyclists have taken it
seriously that I plainly misjudged. I am sorry. "

Right, because a _humorous_ incitement to murder is fine.
--
David Damerell <[email hidden]> Kill the tomato!
Today is First Teleute, January.

David Damerell said:

Quoting wafflycat <w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com>:

Quoted message said:

Right at the end he says, "I offended many with my Christmas attack on
cyclists. It was meant humorously but so many cyclists have taken it
seriously that I plainly misjudged. I am sorry. "

Right, because a _humorous_ incitement to murder is fine.

Yes it is, humour is completely fine and good.

Jim.

In article <[email hidden]>, wafflycat
w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com says...

Quoted message said:

Matthew Parris apologises:-

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris/article3123486.ece

Right at the end he says, "I offended many with my Christmas attack on
cyclists. It was meant humorously but so many cyclists have taken it
seriously that I plainly misjudged. I am sorry. "

I wonder if he did it of his own volition or with prompting from the
editor.

In message <[email hidden]>, Rob Morley
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, wafflycat
w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com says...

Quoted message said:

Matthew Parris apologises:-

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris/arti
cle3123486.ece

Right at the end he says, "I offended many with my Christmas attack on
cyclists. It was meant humorously but so many cyclists have taken it
seriously that I plainly misjudged. I am sorry. "

I wonder if he did it of his own volition or with prompting from the
editor.

It was a pretty pathetic apology and I suspect he was prompted by the
editor. I would have liked to have seen an apology for both his
advocating stringing piano wire across roads *and* his completely
ignorant, prejudiced and totally wrong assertion that we are responsible
for the littering of our country roads, which I wholeheartedly agree is
a very serious problem, but caused in the vast majority of cases by
*motorists*.
--
David Bentley

David Bentley said:

In message <[email hidden]>, Rob Morley
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, wafflycat
w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com says...

Quoted message said:

Matthew Parris apologises:-

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris/arti
cle3123486.ece

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Right at the end he says, "I offended many with my Christmas attack on
cyclists. It was meant humorously but so many cyclists have taken it
seriously that I plainly misjudged. I am sorry. "

Quoted message said:

I wonder if he did it of his own volition or with prompting from the
editor.

It was a pretty pathetic apology and I suspect he was prompted by the
editor.  I would have liked to have seen an apology for both his
advocating stringing  piano wire across roads  *and* his completely
ignorant, prejudiced and totally wrong assertion that we are responsible
for the littering of our country roads, which I wholeheartedly agree is
a very serious problem, but  caused in the vast majority of cases  by
*motorists*.
--
David Bentley

I offended many with my Christmas attack on cyclists. It was meant
humorously but so many cyclists have taken it seriously that I plainly
misjudged. I am sorry.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...cle3123486.ece

Bravo that man, it takes guts to admit you were wrong, a quality
Clarkson, that weedy bloke who used to be married to Julie Burchill,
Havers and Hoey clearly lack.

All of them said they would use their vehicles as weapons to driver
cyclists off the roads.

In article <97e80c8b-8b56-44c2-bf6e-
[email hidden]>, spindrift
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Bravo that man, it takes guts to admit you were wrong, a quality
Clarkson, that weedy bloke who used to be married to Julie Burchill,
Havers and Hoey clearly lack.

All of them said they would use their vehicles as weapons to driver
cyclists off the roads.

I don't know about the others, but Clarkson probably said it in an
amusing way, and AFAIK he didn't incite anyone else to commit dangerous
criminal acts.

Rob Morley said:

In article <97e80c8b-8b56-44c2-bf6e-
[email hidden]>, spindrift
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Bravo that man, it takes guts to admit you were wrong, a quality
Clarkson, that weedy bloke who used to be married to Julie Burchill,
Havers and Hoey clearly lack.

Quoted message said:

All of them said they would use their vehicles as weapons to driver
cyclists off the roads.

I don't know about the others, but Clarkson probably said it in an
amusing way, and AFAIK he didn't incite anyone else to commit dangerous
criminal acts.

"Clarkson probably said it in an amusing way, "

Nope.

Clarkson said if any cyclist dares use an ASL ahead of him he will
crush them to death with his car.

This was in The Sun, read by people like this gentleman:

From The Sun discussion pages, an example of Clarkson's audience:

13/12/2007 15:00:13
Re:Canadian Muslim father kills 16yr old daughter for, guess what?

"She's ugly anyway. At least its one less mussie in the world."

http://www.thesun.co.uk/discussions/posts/list/9/Canadian_Muslim_fath...

That's Clarkson's audience, when he "jokes" about killing people.

wafflycat w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com said:

Matthew Parris apologises:-

<http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris/
article3123486.ece>

Right at the end he says, "I offended many with my Christmas attack on
cyclists. It was meant humorously but so many cyclists have taken it
seriously that I plainly misjudged. I am sorry. "

Good man. Sure, he could have apologised in stronger terms but I am
willing to accept that it was a case of misjudgment.

Cheers,
Luke

--
Red Rose Ramblings, the diary of an Essex boy in
exile in Lancashire <http://www.shrimper.org.uk>

Ekul Namsob said:

wafflycat w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com said:

Matthew Parris apologises:-

<http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris/
article3123486.ece>

Right at the end he says, "I offended many with my Christmas attack
on cyclists. It was meant humorously but so many cyclists have taken
it seriously that I plainly misjudged. I am sorry. "

Good man. Sure, he could have apologised in stronger terms but I am
willing to accept that it was a case of misjudgment.

Same here. I will now resume listening to his radio programmes.

- Nigel

--
Nigel Cliffe,
Webmaster at http://www.2mm.org.uk/

Nigel Cliffe said:

Ekul Namsob said:

wafflycat <w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Matthew Parris apologises:-

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

<http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris/
article3123486.ece>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Right at the end he says, "I offended many with my Christmas attack
on cyclists. It was meant humorously but so many cyclists have taken
it seriously that I plainly misjudged. I am sorry. "

Quoted message said:

Good man. Sure, he could have apologised in stronger terms but I am
willing to accept that it was a case of misjudgment.

Same here.  I will now resume listening to his radio programmes.

- Nigel

--
Nigel Cliffe,
Webmaster athttp://www.2mm.org.uk/

Blimey:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_east/7168530.stm

Cycling fury at beheading 'joke'

Hundreds of people have complained to the press watchdog about a
newspaper column which they claimed encouraged the beheading of
cyclists. The Press Complaints Commission has had 200 objections to
comments by The Times columnist and former MP Matthew Parris.

Rhyl Cycling Club in Denbighshire, which lost four members in a crash
two years ago, accused him of being vicious and ignorant.

Mr Parris has now apologised for an article he said was meant to be
funny.

In his column on 27 December, he wrote: "A festive custom we could do
worse than foster would be stringing piano wire across country lanes
to decapitate cyclists".

Under the headline "What's smug and deserves to be decapitated?" he
wrote of cyclists' "brutish disregard for all other road users".

He also said that "the lynching of a cyclist by a mob of mothers with
pushchairs would be a joy to witness".

A Press Complaints Commission (PCC) spokesman said: "We have probably
had about 200 complaints about it and we are currently in the process
of considering whether there are any issues under the code."

He said that, based on last year's figures, 200 protests would place
the article among the commission's three most complained-about
stories.

The column prompted outrage at Rhyl Cycling Club, which lost four
members when a car skidded out of control in icy conditions near
Abergele on 8 January, 2006.

Thomas Harland, 14, Maurice Broadbent, 61, Dave Horrocks, 55, and
Wayne Wilkes, 42, died while on a practice ride.

Club president Bill Twigg said: "From a club that lost four cyclists,
anything that brings more conflict between cyclists and motorists is a
bad thing.

"If it wasn't for the first sentence, I could have dismissed the
article as bad journalism."

Mr Twigg accused Mr Parris of "vicious pig ignorance".

Roy Spilsbury, vice chair of CTC Cymru - the Welsh arm of the
Cyclists' Touring Club - said he was "closely associated" with the
deaths of the four Rhyl cyclists, and had written to the PCC to
complain.

In his complaint, he wrote: "Less than two years ago four members of
Rhyl Cycling Club, ages ranging over three generations, were killed on
a public highway.

Matthew Parris has now used his Times column to apologise

"Messages of sympathy arrived from the four corners of the world - and
the world's press reported the personal tragedies involved with
appropriate sensitivity.

"That Parris believes that such people should be beheaded beggars
belief."

He added: "Parris and The Times editor must be held to account. If
necessary, through due process of law."

The article prompted dozen of complaints from Times readers, and the
newspaper has printed a response by triathlete Alison Steed, who said
she knew of fishing line being stretched across roads at head height.

She wrote: "What may seem a joke could end up killing someone - and
for what, because you don't like cyclists, or cycling?"

A spokeswoman for The Times said Mr Parris was out of the country.

But in his latest column, Mr Parris, who was a Conservative MP from
1979 - 86, wrote: "I offended many with my Christmas attack on
cyclists.

"It was meant humorously but so many cyclists have taken it seriously
that I plainly misjudged. I am sorry."

I've not seen this report mentioned here:-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_east/7168530.stm

The heading is "Cycling fury at beheading 'joke'
Hundreds of people have complained to the press watchdog about a
newspaper column which they claimed encouraged the beheading of cyclists."

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

Rob Morley said:

In article <[email hidden]>, wafflycat
w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com says...

Quoted message said:

Matthew Parris apologises:-

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris/article3123486.ece

Right at the end he says, "I offended many with my Christmas attack
on cyclists. It was meant humorously but so many cyclists have taken
it seriously that I plainly misjudged. I am sorry. "

I wonder if he did it of his own volition or with prompting from the
editor.

I got this from the editor yesterday:

Dear Mr Randell,

Thank you for taking the time to write to me about Matthew Parris's
article (My Week, December 7).

As someone who regularly rides to work and who likes to go on cycling
holidays, I shared your alarm, initially fearing that Matthew had it in
for me too. But I think it was immediately clear that he was
exaggerating for effect - and for a good cause: cyclists, as much as
anyone else, must share his determination to protect the natural world
from litter and pollution.

I have received many similar e-mails and take note of the heartfelt
indignation. You may also have seen the piece that ran in the paper on
Monday in defence of the cyclist. While I admire the passion of the
cycling lobby and count myself one of their number, I think we do
ourselves no favours when we lose our sense of humour and I hope that
you, like me, will continue to enjoy Matthew Parris's excellent writing.
That said, two wheels good etc.

Yours,

James Harding

Maybe he did have a word or two.

--

Nigel

"Nigel Randell" <nigel_randell@_1.web> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I got this from the editor yesterday:

Dear Mr Randell,

Thank you for taking the time to write to me about Matthew Parris's
article (My Week, December 7).

As someone who regularly rides to work and who likes to go on cycling
holidays, I shared your alarm, initially fearing that Matthew had it in
for me too. But I think it was immediately clear that he was
exaggerating for effect - and for a good cause: cyclists, as much as
anyone else, must share his determination to protect the natural world
from litter and pollution.

I have received many similar e-mails and take note of the heartfelt
indignation. You may also have seen the piece that ran in the paper on
Monday in defence of the cyclist. While I admire the passion of the
cycling lobby and count myself one of their number, I think we do
ourselves no favours when we lose our sense of humour and I hope that
you, like me, will continue to enjoy Matthew Parris's excellent writing.
That said, two wheels good etc.

Yours,

James Harding

Maybe he did have a word or two.

That was the standard reply from the editor going out to those who emailed
him.

"wafflycat" <w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Matthew Parris apologises:-

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris/article3123486.ece

Right at the end he says, "I offended many with my Christmas attack on
cyclists. It was meant humorously but so many cyclists have taken it
seriously that I plainly misjudged. I am sorry. "

I regard his apology as totally inadequate and agree with the sentiments
expressed in the message I've just received from our local CTC section.
Fred

Quote:
This apology from Parris is inadequate. It effectively marginalises
cyclists by continuing to provide a platform for discriminatory and ill
informed comment.

It was an editorial decision to both print the article, and emphasise the
heading in the way it did. There should be an apology from THE TIMES itself
..

Also Parris's response seeks to treat cyclists as a group separate from the
rest of society. At the time of the four Rhyl funerals and the Coroner's
enquiry I attended, it was from the non-cycling friends and family that the
anger, frustration, and distress was seen to be equally palpable to those
riders amongst the congregation.

The death of a cyclist impacts on grandparents, a wife, husband, children,
grandchildren, colleagues, friends, and all to whom the loss is a tragedy -
sometimes lifelong.

This issue will go nowhere unless it opens up debate that in attacking
cyclists gratuitously as a group, the public is inflicting great harm on
itself at a time when cycling must be given breathing space to resolve some
of the most serious challenges it faces. That debate can be started if THE
TIMES acknowledges in these terms. Gratitude could come from Anger.

On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 04:39:32 -0800 (PST) someone who may be spindrift
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_east/7168530.stm

Hundreds of people have complained to the press watchdog about a
newspaper column which they claimed encouraged the beheading of
cyclists. The Press Complaints Commission has had 200 objections to
comments by The Times columnist and former MP Matthew Parris.

I will be very surprised if they hold the writer or "news"paper to
account for this vile article. This organisation has a long record
of dismissing complaints raised by sustainable transport interests.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

fred2 said:

"wafflycat" <w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Matthew Parris apologises:-

Quoted message said:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris/ar...

Quoted message said:

Right at the end he says, "I offended many with my Christmas attack on
cyclists. It was meant humorously but so many cyclists have taken it
seriously that I plainly misjudged. I am sorry. "

I regard his apology as totally inadequate and agree with the sentiments
expressed in the message I've just received from our local CTC section.
Fred

Quote:
This apology from Parris is inadequate.  It effectively marginalises
cyclists by continuing to provide a platform for discriminatory and ill
informed comment.

It was an editorial decision to both print the article, and emphasise the
heading in the way it did.  There should be an apology from THE TIMES itself
.

Also Parris's response seeks to treat cyclists as a group separate from the
rest of society.  At the time of the four Rhyl funerals and the Coroner's
enquiry I attended, it was from the non-cycling  friends and family thatthe
anger, frustration, and distress was seen to be equally palpable to those
riders amongst the congregation.

The death of a cyclist impacts on grandparents, a wife, husband, children,
grandchildren, colleagues, friends, and all to whom the loss is a tragedy -
sometimes lifelong.

This issue will go nowhere unless it opens up debate that in attacking
cyclists gratuitously as a group, the public is inflicting great harm on
itself at a time when cycling must be given breathing space to resolve some
of the most serious challenges it faces.  That debate can be started if THE
TIMES acknowledges in these terms.  Gratitude could come from Anger.

Great post fred.

Yes, this was the reply I got too.

The point being made, really, is that it was a "JOKE" (ha, ha!) and we're
going way over the top by being upset. Regardless of whether this is aimed
at cyclists, pedestrians, pushchairs, old ladies, joggers, etc. etc., it is
NOT FUNNY to string a wire across a path to behead (.. or, in reality,
injure or maim ..) them! Which includes putting this activity into the
minds of the thick and bored ...

Can't they see this? Are they so totally removed from reality in their
cushy, self-important, pontificating, well-paid journalist jobs? A pretty
sick sense of humour. The sort of silly thing you could say when you've had
a few pints and are propping up the bar ... NOT for public consumption!

Still angry ... Barb UK

"Nigel Randell" <nigel_randell@_1.web> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Rob Morley said:

In article <[email hidden]>, wafflycat
w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com says...

Quoted message said:

Matthew Parris apologises:-

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris/article3123486.ece

Right at the end he says, "I offended many with my Christmas attack
on cyclists. It was meant humorously but so many cyclists have taken
it seriously that I plainly misjudged. I am sorry. "

I wonder if he did it of his own volition or with prompting from the
editor.

I got this from the editor yesterday:

Dear Mr Randell,

Thank you for taking the time to write to me about Matthew Parris's
article (My Week, December 7).

As someone who regularly rides to work and who likes to go on cycling
holidays, I shared your alarm, initially fearing that Matthew had it in
for me too. But I think it was immediately clear that he was
exaggerating for effect - and for a good cause: cyclists, as much as
anyone else, must share his determination to protect the natural world
from litter and pollution.

I have received many similar e-mails and take note of the heartfelt
indignation. You may also have seen the piece that ran in the paper on
Monday in defence of the cyclist. While I admire the passion of the
cycling lobby and count myself one of their number, I think we do
ourselves no favours when we lose our sense of humour and I hope that
you, like me, will continue to enjoy Matthew Parris's excellent writing.
That said, two wheels good etc.

Yours,

James Harding

Maybe he did have a word or two.

--

Nigel

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

Quoted message said:

Yes, this was the reply I got too.

The point being made, really, is that it was a "JOKE" (ha, ha!) and we're
going way over the top by being upset. Regardless of whether this is
aimed at cyclists, pedestrians, pushchairs, old ladies, joggers, etc.
etc., it is NOT FUNNY to string a wire across a path to behead (.. or, in
reality, injure or maim ..) them! Which includes putting this activity
into the minds of the thick and bored ...

Can't they see this? Are they so totally removed from reality in their
cushy, self-important, pontificating, well-paid journalist jobs? A pretty
sick sense of humour. The sort of silly thing you could say when you've
had a few pints and are propping up the bar ... NOT for public
consumption!

Still angry ... Barb UK

"Nigel Randell" <nigel_randell@_1.web> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Rob Morley said:

In article <[email hidden]>, wafflycat
w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com says...
> Matthew Parris apologises:-
>
> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris/article3123486.ece
>
> Right at the end he says, "I offended many with my Christmas attack
> on cyclists. It was meant humorously but so many cyclists have taken
> it seriously that I plainly misjudged. I am sorry. "
>
I wonder if he did it of his own volition or with prompting from the
editor.

I got this from the editor yesterday:

Dear Mr Randell,

Thank you for taking the time to write to me about Matthew Parris's
article (My Week, December 7).

As someone who regularly rides to work and who likes to go on cycling
holidays, I shared your alarm, initially fearing that Matthew had it in
for me too. But I think it was immediately clear that he was
exaggerating for effect - and for a good cause: cyclists, as much as
anyone else, must share his determination to protect the natural world
from litter and pollution.

I have received many similar e-mails and take note of the heartfelt
indignation. You may also have seen the piece that ran in the paper on
Monday in defence of the cyclist. While I admire the passion of the
cycling lobby and count myself one of their number, I think we do
ourselves no favours when we lose our sense of humour and I hope that
you, like me, will continue to enjoy Matthew Parris's excellent writing.
That said, two wheels good etc.

Yours,

James Harding

Maybe he did have a word or two.

--

Nigel

remember: he used to be a Tory MP.

I've tipped off Jeremy Vine (by emailing his show on Radio 2) about this
as this would be a good discussion for his lunchtime show . Perhaps he
could get Matthew Parris in to the studio or on the phone to try and
defend his vile views and maybe get good old Boris Johnson to put him
right on a few things.

n message <[email hidden]>, Barb
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Yes, this was the reply I got too.

The point being made, really, is that it was a "JOKE" (ha, ha!) and we're
going way over the top by being upset. Regardless of whether this is aimed
at cyclists, pedestrians, pushchairs, old ladies, joggers, etc. etc., it is
NOT FUNNY to string a wire across a path to behead (.. or, in reality,
injure or maim ..) them! Which includes putting this activity into the
minds of the thick and bored ...

Can't they see this? Are they so totally removed from reality in their
cushy, self-important, pontificating, well-paid journalist jobs? A pretty
sick sense of humour. The sort of silly thing you could say when you've had
a few pints and are propping up the bar ... NOT for public consumption!

Still angry ... Barb UK

"Nigel Randell" <nigel_randell@_1.web> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Rob Morley said:

In article <[email hidden]>, wafflycat
w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com says...
> Matthew Parris apologises:-
>
>
>http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris/ar
>ticle3123486.ece
>
> Right at the end he says, "I offended many with my Christmas attack
> on cyclists. It was meant humorously but so many cyclists have taken
> it seriously that I plainly misjudged. I am sorry. "
>
I wonder if he did it of his own volition or with prompting from the
editor.

I got this from the editor yesterday:

Dear Mr Randell,

Thank you for taking the time to write to me about Matthew Parris's
article (My Week, December 7).

As someone who regularly rides to work and who likes to go on cycling
holidays, I shared your alarm, initially fearing that Matthew had it in
for me too. But I think it was immediately clear that he was
exaggerating for effect - and for a good cause: cyclists, as much as
anyone else, must share his determination to protect the natural world
from litter and pollution.

I have received many similar e-mails and take note of the heartfelt
indignation. You may also have seen the piece that ran in the paper on
Monday in defence of the cyclist. While I admire the passion of the
cycling lobby and count myself one of their number, I think we do
ourselves no favours when we lose our sense of humour and I hope that
you, like me, will continue to enjoy Matthew Parris's excellent writing.
That said, two wheels good etc.

Yours,

James Harding

Maybe he did have a word or two.

--

Nigel

--
David Bentley