Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Ferry Action Group!
26 views
Skip to first unread message
Steerpike
Aug 28, 2012, 3:18:51 AM8/28/12
to
The economy of the IOW is very adversely affected by the most costly ferry crossing in the world! There has been no concerted and properly organised campaign of direct action to alter this situation, or to temper the greed of the ferry operators in any way.
In effect the ferry operators are pirates, and concerned only with ever increasing profits. This being the case is there any good reason not to set up a Ferry Action Group, and organise some direct action, which might make them think twice before the next price hike?
In effect the ferry operators are pirates, and concerned only with ever increasing profits. This being the case is there any good reason not to set up a Ferry Action Group, and organise some direct action, which might make them think twice before the next price hike?
Qwight
Aug 28, 2012, 6:06:46 AM8/28/12
to
protester.
And while you are at it, go and protest in Whitehall about the war in
Afghanistan that you are always bitching about.
Or are you just full of wind and piss?
Steerpike
Aug 28, 2012, 8:47:48 AM8/28/12
to
As to the various terrorist conflicts the UK is currently involved in, I guess the reason no one seems to care very much about these, is pretty much the same as one, which means IOW residents seem happy to get fucked over by greedy ferry operators?
Qwight
Aug 28, 2012, 9:42:51 AM8/28/12
to
On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 05:47:48 -0700 (PDT), Steerpike
Yup, just wind and piss.
Steerpike
Aug 28, 2012, 2:04:32 PM8/28/12
to
Seriously though IOW residents seem to be pretty close to the most apathetic in the the whole of the UK, as they all seem quite content to pay through the nose for the most costly ferry crossing in the world.................
Message has been deleted
Steerpike
Aug 31, 2012, 2:22:50 AM8/31/12
to
On Friday, August 31, 2012 12:56:12 AM UTC+1, Attack wrote:
>
> then. Ah, I forgot that your mouth is is bigger than your brain and you
>
> couldn't even organise a piss-up with your only mate - - - - - - - that
>
> computer of yours.
>
> think the residents are going to get on and off the island when the ferry
>
> operators call the bluff of any action group and stop the their ferries for
>
> a few days - swim?
>
>
>
> Bloody hell, sitting in front of that computer bashing away on its keyboard
>
> for hours on end, day-after-day must have addled what's left of your brain
>
> cell with all the shit that you type (or more likely copy and paste) with
>
> it. FFS get a bloody life, find a decent blow-up doll, and call it *TROLL*
>
> and then use 'troll' to get rid your frustrations - sexual or otherwise.
>
>
>
> Argh, I forgot there's already a troll in your hovel - - - - - *YOU* you
>
> prat!
>
>
>
>
>
> I met a traveller from an antique land
>
> Who said: "Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
>
> Stand in the desert. Near them on the sand,
>
> Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown
>
> And wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command
>
> Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
>
> Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
>
> The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed.
>
> And on the pedestal these words appear:
>
> `My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
>
> Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!'
>
> Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
>
> Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
>
> The lone and level sands stretch far away".
>
>
>
> Shelley
A gutless and anonymous troll into poetry..........how quaint!
Maybe also a shareholder in one of the IOW ferry companies, and very supportive of them continuing to rip off IOW people unopposed ?
Apathy does seem to rule throughout the UK though, as not sure there is anywhere else where people would be happy to pay through the nose to assist dodgy bankers, or to finance a pantomime investigation to prove Iraq did indeed have WMDs trained on the UK, and bliar wasnt guilty of serious war crimes!
> Steerpike wrote:
>
> > The economy of the IOW is very adversely affected by the most costly
>
> > ferry crossing in the world! There has been no concerted and properly
>
> > organised campaign of direct action to alter this situation, or to
>
> > temper the greed of the ferry operators in any way.
>
>
>
> Steerprick - get of that rather old and large arse of yours and organise it
>
> > The economy of the IOW is very adversely affected by the most costly
>
> > ferry crossing in the world! There has been no concerted and properly
>
> > organised campaign of direct action to alter this situation, or to
>
> > temper the greed of the ferry operators in any way.
>
>
>
>
> then. Ah, I forgot that your mouth is is bigger than your brain and you
>
> couldn't even organise a piss-up with your only mate - - - - - - - that
>
> computer of yours.
>
>
>
> > In effect the ferry operators are pirates, and concerned only with
>
> > ever increasing profits. This being the case is there any good reason
>
> > not to set up a Ferry Action Group, and organise some direct action,
>
> > which might make them think twice before the next price hike?
>
>
>
> Hey dumbo As there are no commercial airports on the IOW just how do you
>
>
> > In effect the ferry operators are pirates, and concerned only with
>
> > ever increasing profits. This being the case is there any good reason
>
> > not to set up a Ferry Action Group, and organise some direct action,
>
> > which might make them think twice before the next price hike?
>
>
>
>
> think the residents are going to get on and off the island when the ferry
>
> operators call the bluff of any action group and stop the their ferries for
>
> a few days - swim?
>
>
>
> Bloody hell, sitting in front of that computer bashing away on its keyboard
>
> for hours on end, day-after-day must have addled what's left of your brain
>
> cell with all the shit that you type (or more likely copy and paste) with
>
> it. FFS get a bloody life, find a decent blow-up doll, and call it *TROLL*
>
> and then use 'troll' to get rid your frustrations - sexual or otherwise.
>
>
>
> Argh, I forgot there's already a troll in your hovel - - - - - *YOU* you
>
> prat!
>
>
>
>
>
> I met a traveller from an antique land
>
> Who said: "Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
>
> Stand in the desert. Near them on the sand,
>
> Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown
>
> And wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command
>
> Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
>
> Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
>
> The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed.
>
> And on the pedestal these words appear:
>
> `My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
>
> Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!'
>
> Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
>
> Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
>
> The lone and level sands stretch far away".
>
>
>
> Shelley
A gutless and anonymous troll into poetry..........how quaint!
Maybe also a shareholder in one of the IOW ferry companies, and very supportive of them continuing to rip off IOW people unopposed ?
Apathy does seem to rule throughout the UK though, as not sure there is anywhere else where people would be happy to pay through the nose to assist dodgy bankers, or to finance a pantomime investigation to prove Iraq did indeed have WMDs trained on the UK, and bliar wasnt guilty of serious war crimes!
Tickety-BooHoo
Aug 31, 2012, 2:27:03 PM8/31/12
to
Watch out, watch out the gloomy....@gmail.com is about - and what a
bloody nuisance of a *TROLL* he is.
This *TROLL* must be starved at all times - or if you must, feed him on the
bullshit that he spews out.
Up the Freemasons.
Roger
Aug 31, 2012, 5:45:26 PM8/31/12
to
Apathy does seem to rule throughout the UK though, as not sure there is
anywhere else where people would be happy to pay through the nose to assist
dodgy bankers, or to finance a pantomime investigation to prove Iraq did
indeed have WMDs trained on the UK, and bliar wasnt guilty of serious war
crimes!
And you want to know how Tony Blair could decide to join the coalition in
invading Iraq, and then get elected again?
Not because of apathy, as half a million people turned up in London to
protest.
Because the opposition to the war was ineffectual and full of halfwits like
Chris who repeatedly call Blair 'Bliar' and shows the level of intellect in
some of those who opposed the invasion in Iraq.
No wonder Tony Blair ran rings around the opposition with people like Chris
to 'contend' with.
Roger
Ken
Sep 1, 2012, 2:58:14 AM9/1/12
to
Ken
Sep 1, 2012, 3:02:44 AM9/1/12
to
Tickety-BooHoo
Sep 18, 2012, 6:09:31 PM9/18/12
to
modern technology [1], two things appear to have occured here in that time:
1 Someone has been up their old tricks of morphing headers and names
(something that used to happen in UKLSW quite often) - and the post that
Chris Stevens is replying to is not one of mine (I wonder who the real
author is).
2 After checking the post headers, I see Christopher Stevens has morphed
from the pseudo name of "steerpike" back to the pseudo name of "ken" - which
by the way, was the 'name' that he used whilst attacking John Bunt a few
years ago. It's quite farcical to see that he has turned a full circle back
to this name after using many others trying to hide is real identity.
So for those who are not au fait with his many names *steerpike* is now
*ken* - and he is still just as nasty!
[1] I left the mobile 'phone and laptop at home and enjoyed the holiday
Chris.
TBH
Ken
Sep 19, 2012, 3:30:19 AM9/19/12
to
As to being on holiday, I would imagine a short stretch at HMP is far more likely.........
Tickety-BooHoo
Sep 20, 2012, 6:28:48 PM9/20/12
to
Ken wrote:
> SNIPPED>>>>
ROTFLMAO - You still think that I'm John Bunt then Chris?
As it's impossible for John Bunt to be in two places at once (even you can't
do that Chris), I would suggest that you contact him (or someone who knows
him) and ask when he last left the country - just to get that rather sticky
egg off your face!
One <vbg> at your stupidity Christopher!
> SNIPPED>>>>
As it's impossible for John Bunt to be in two places at once (even you can't
do that Chris), I would suggest that you contact him (or someone who knows
him) and ask when he last left the country - just to get that rather sticky
egg off your face!
One <vbg> at your stupidity Christopher!
Ken
Sep 21, 2012, 5:18:36 AM9/21/12
to
Tickety-BooHoo
Sep 24, 2012, 7:55:26 PM9/24/12
to
Ken wrote:
<SNIPPED>>
'covering my tracks here', what about the rather persistent (and
unsuccessful) attempts of *YOU* trying to cover" *your* tracks on here" and
*ALL* the Usenet groups you subscribe to? You're a blood hypocrite
Christopher!
>Its also worth remembering that other than a tax dodger who has fled to
>Canada,
Do you have proof of that Christopher?
If you have (or had) that proof, why on earth didn't you report Andrew
Taylor to the HMRC prior to his emigration to Canada if you were that
concerned?
Remember, you have a history of making vexatious, unproven and false
allegations against various persons.
>that you are the one and only person with a word of support for bunty,
>subsequent to his ridiculous legal
> action getting kicked into touch back in 2006...........
I have not '"supported" John Bunt, I merely asked you to prove your
allegations against him (which you could not, or would not do) - and after
having spent a great deal of my time searching for that proof myself in the
various courts and media in all of the counties of the South West (at the
request of another party), and finding *NONE* - it is obvious that you are
being rather vexatious for your own personal and nefarious reasons.
As for the court action "getting kicked into touch", that wasn't really true
was it? That is just one of the bits of misinformation you enjoy spreading
around - again for your own personal and nefarious reasons.
BTW Christopher, *YOU* *ARE* *THE* ONLY* *PERSON* keeping this subject alive
on nearly all the Usenet groups that you post on - to everyone's
exasperation - (apart from one or two 'sheep' as your supporters).
So why not let the subject die a natural death and get on with your life?
<vbg>
TBH
<SNIPPED>>
>>
>>
>> One <vbg> at your stupidity Christopher!
>
> If you are not bunty, then why on earth go to such lengths to cover
> your tracks on here?
No *IF* about it Christopher, I really am not John Bunt - and as for
>>
>> One <vbg> at your stupidity Christopher!
>
> If you are not bunty, then why on earth go to such lengths to cover
> your tracks on here?
'covering my tracks here', what about the rather persistent (and
unsuccessful) attempts of *YOU* trying to cover" *your* tracks on here" and
*ALL* the Usenet groups you subscribe to? You're a blood hypocrite
Christopher!
>Its also worth remembering that other than a tax dodger who has fled to
>Canada,
If you have (or had) that proof, why on earth didn't you report Andrew
Taylor to the HMRC prior to his emigration to Canada if you were that
concerned?
Remember, you have a history of making vexatious, unproven and false
allegations against various persons.
>that you are the one and only person with a word of support for bunty,
>subsequent to his ridiculous legal
> action getting kicked into touch back in 2006...........
allegations against him (which you could not, or would not do) - and after
having spent a great deal of my time searching for that proof myself in the
various courts and media in all of the counties of the South West (at the
request of another party), and finding *NONE* - it is obvious that you are
being rather vexatious for your own personal and nefarious reasons.
As for the court action "getting kicked into touch", that wasn't really true
was it? That is just one of the bits of misinformation you enjoy spreading
around - again for your own personal and nefarious reasons.
BTW Christopher, *YOU* *ARE* *THE* ONLY* *PERSON* keeping this subject alive
on nearly all the Usenet groups that you post on - to everyone's
exasperation - (apart from one or two 'sheep' as your supporters).
So why not let the subject die a natural death and get on with your life?
<vbg>
TBH
Qwight
Sep 25, 2012, 5:53:15 AM9/25/12
to
On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 00:55:26 +0100, "Tickety-BooHoo"
<b...@invalid.invalid.invalid.com> wrote:
>
>So why not let the subject die a natural death and get on with your life?
>
Could it possibly be because his life is not otherwise worth living?
<b...@invalid.invalid.invalid.com> wrote:
>
>So why not let the subject die a natural death and get on with your life?
>
Ken
Sep 25, 2012, 7:48:27 PM9/25/12
to
You seem to go to extreme lengths to hide your identity, and there is obviously a good reason for that.
In 2006 the lunatic legal action started by bunt, which had caused a good deal of distress to the 3 individual defendants, was struck out at Exeter District Registry, after the Judge was forced to consider the implications of alowing the matter to proceed, even though by that time it was in breach of 2 earlier unless orders.
Next time you post, why dont you use your real name, and advise why exactly you have such a liking for bunt?
Tickety-BooHoo
Sep 26, 2012, 5:24:57 PM9/26/12
to
Tickety-BooHoo
Sep 26, 2012, 6:37:43 PM9/26/12
to
Ken wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 25, 2012 12:55:28 AM UTC+1, Tickety-BooHoo
> wrote:
>> Ken wrote:
>>
>> <SNIPPED>>
>>
<SNIPPED AGAIN>>>
> On Tuesday, September 25, 2012 12:55:28 AM UTC+1, Tickety-BooHoo
> wrote:
>> Ken wrote:
>>
>> <SNIPPED>>
>>
>>
>>
>> BTW Christopher, *YOU* *ARE* *THE* ONLY* *PERSON* keeping this
>> subject alive
>>
>> on nearly all the Usenet groups that you post on - to everyone's
>>
>> exasperation - (apart from one or two 'sheep' as your supporters).
>>
>>
>>
>> So why not let the subject die a natural death and get on with your
>> life?
>>
>> <vbg>
>>
>>
>>
>> TBH
>
> You are pretty much the only person who has provided bunt any sort of
> support since all his previous supporters deserted him in 2006.
Chris, are you so illiterate that you cannot understand what I wrote?
>>
>> BTW Christopher, *YOU* *ARE* *THE* ONLY* *PERSON* keeping this
>> subject alive
>>
>> on nearly all the Usenet groups that you post on - to everyone's
>>
>> exasperation - (apart from one or two 'sheep' as your supporters).
>>
>>
>>
>> So why not let the subject die a natural death and get on with your
>> life?
>>
>> <vbg>
>>
>>
>>
>> TBH
>
> You are pretty much the only person who has provided bunt any sort of
> support since all his previous supporters deserted him in 2006.
> You seem to go to extreme lengths to hide your identity, and there is
> obviously a good reason for that.
dialogue without resorting to abuse and/or libellous statements. Just look
at your comments (past and present) over the various Usenet groups that you
have subscribed to - along with the angry responses to you by other users of
them.
> In 2006 the lunatic legal action started by bunt, which had caused a
> good deal of distress to the 3 individual defendants, was struck out
> at Exeter District Registry, after the Judge was forced to consider
> the implications of alowing the matter to proceed, even though by
> that time it was in breach of 2 earlier unless orders.
libellous statements made by the 3 individual defendants (of which you were
one) - and the option to proceed against those three defendants was left
open in the Approved Judgement by Mr Justice Eady - dated 10th of March
2006.
--------
"79. The Claimant is not deprived of access to justice. His remedies lie
against the first to third Defendants (if he can establish the necessary
ingredients in respect of each). They may not be persons of substance, such
as to make it worthwhile pursuing them. Even if that is right, it is clearly
not a sufficient reason for bringing in the present applicants. I therefore
accede to the submissions of the applicants and will grant orders
accordingly."
-------
A fact that you always seem to ignore.
> Next time you post, why dont you use your real name, and advise why
> exactly you have such a liking for bunt?
and many other titles?
After reading a large number of the posts you made in various Usenet groups
dating from early 2000 to date, I have yet to see one attributed with your
given birth name - why is that then?
I use my 'real' initials - and as for "liking" John Bunt that is not my
concern.
All I have been tasked to do is find the proof of the allegations that you
have persistently made against him - and there is *none* whatsoever [1].
What others wish to do with that information is entirely at their
discretion, and a decision *WILL* be made sometime in the new year when all
the data is collated by a qualified legal practitioner.
[1] You have been offered the option on many occasions to provide that
proof (or links to it) but you have ignored that option for whatever reasons
you may have.
*NOTE*
As you are just regurgitating the same old garbled statements on a
continuous process (and getting extremely boring in doing so), it is the
intention that I and others will continue to monitor the various Usenet
groups that you subscribe to, but not to respond to your diatribe - but note
it along with the relevant post headers for possible future reference.
Good evening to you.
TBH
Ken
Sep 27, 2012, 4:39:03 AM9/27/12
to
You seem unable to understand that going to extreme lengths to hide your identity on here suggests you have something to hide.
As to posts regarding bunt, if anything that wasnt accurate or which could have been construed as being damaging to him in any way had been posted, then it was up to him to denote what this was, and provide details to the court.
He was for one reason or another unable to do this, which seems to either indicate the claims made about him on here were correct, or he was unable to grasp the simple fact that winning a legal action, when what was being complained of had not been defined, would have been quite impossible.
As you seem to be such a fan of bunts and have undoubted talents in the area of cut and pasting legal documents (which you dont seem to understand very well!), its perhaps a shame you werent around in 2005 when bunt war coerced into taking legal action over playground taunts, as you may have been able to assist him with providing the court some idea of what he was actually complaining about?
Finally making veiled threats on here, seemingly on behalf of an Exeter lunatic, does you no favours, and appears to suggest you are a figure of fun, who seems interested in taking the first faltering steps toward legal action, of the same type that brought so much trouble knocking at bunts door.
Tickety-BooHoo
Sep 27, 2012, 6:14:46 PM9/27/12
to
Ken
Sep 28, 2012, 3:03:17 AM9/28/12
to
Bunt has no possible course of action in this matter, as bearing in mind the appalling way he conducted himself in earlier dealings with the law, I would imagine it would be very easy to have him declared a "vexatious litigant" if he should choose to waste the courts time again.
As to yourself you would do well to remember its impossible to libel or defame a sock, as this is quite impossible without an identity.
0 new messages