More from Oxford's sanctimonious eco Nazis.

I suppose now they will be 'targetting' people with large families as overpopulation is the root cause of most environmental damage/ concerns?

http://antigreen.blo
gspot.com/


Motives: Many people would like to be kind to others so Leftists exploit that with their nonsense about equality. Most people want a clean, green environment so Greenies exploit that by inventing all sorts of far-fetched threats to the environment. But for both, the real motive is generally to promote themselves as wiser and better than everyone else, truth regardless.


Policies: The only underlying theme that makes sense of all Greenie policies is hatred of people. Hatred of other people has been a Greenie theme from way back. In a report titled "The First Global Revolution" (1991, p. 104) published by the "Club of Rome", a Greenie panic outfit, we find the following statement: "In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.... All these dangers are caused by human intervention... The real enemy, then, is humanity itself." See here for many more examples of prominent Greenies saying how much and how furiously they hate you.


"The desire to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it" -- H L Mencken

Total eco-rubbish yet again!! I don't like 4x4's particularly but many diesel 4x4 cars are as fuel efficient or more fuel efficent as ordinary petrol saloon cars, no worse than MPV's and certainly better for the environment than a large petrol powered saloon car but do these get targeted???

No because "eco warriors" are never aware of the true facts.

I could drive around Oxford in a mid 1980's Rover with a 3.5 litre V8 under the bonnet struggling to make 20mpg but because it looks like a shed, nobody would bat an eyelid. Drive round in a diesel 4x4 maybe achieving 40mpg and you become a target for hate.
It is not based on the environment, it is based on 4x4's being a perceived symbol of wealth .

The way oxfordshire is going we will all need 4x4's to get through the frequent floods.
I hope they get caught and charged with criminal damage. There is no need for this behaviour, it tars all environmentalists with the same brush. All cars are very dirty why dont they try targeting the car manufacturers to make cleaner cars they have the technology but are hand in hand with the oil producers.

Well at least they all made you think!

Some people may need larger cars, especially if they need to carry wheelchairs. It's probably too much to hope that these vandals are checking before mucking about with the cars.

So called environmental campaigners are most often of low intelligence. A large 4x4 being driven on just the school run is not as bad as a small car that does 12,000 miles a year, but it is no good telling these goons that. They do not have the brain to think for themselfs.

Whatever their beliefs these kind of terrorist campaigns are going to backfire on them.
I assume that it is provably the work of eco warriors and not just lowlifes in general.

DanOxford wrote:
More from Oxford's sanctimonious eco Nazis. I suppose now they will be 'targetting' people with large families as overpopulation is the root cause of most environmental damage/ concerns? http://antigreen.blo gspot.com/ Motives: Many people would like to be kind to others so Leftists exploit that with their nonsense about equality. Most people want a clean, green environment so Greenies exploit that by inventing all sorts of far-fetched threats to the environment. But for both, the real motive is generally to promote themselves as wiser and better than everyone else, truth regardless. Policies: The only underlying theme that makes sense of all Greenie policies is hatred of people. Hatred of other people has been a Greenie theme from way back. In a report titled "The First Global Revolution" (1991, p. 104) published by the "Club of Rome", a Greenie panic outfit, we find the following statement: "In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.... All these dangers are caused by human intervention... The real enemy, then, is humanity itself." See here for many more examples of prominent Greenies saying how much and how furiously they hate you. "The desire to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it" -- H L Mencken

Wheras hatred of foreigners has been a classic british trait irrespective of politics.

Their behaviour is outrageous. What gives them the right to go around letting down people's tyres just because they disapprove of the vehicle being driven. It really gets my goat when people think it's OK to force their views down other people's throats. Anyway - I hope one of them was the chap in the SUV who cut me up in the cycle lane at the St. Clement's lights on Wednesday morning!

I live in East Oxford and had the same thing happen to me. these people are no different to petty vandals (if they have conviction in their beliefs then why not knock on my door and have an intelligent conversation about the merits of reducing CO2 emissions?). They left a note on my windscreen which was either photocopied or printed and appeared to be on non-recycled paper which i would have thought caused further damage to the environment!
i also chose to get the RAC out to re-inflate my tyres which again was probably damaging to the environment!

to the person who commented that it got people thinking i would agree but it appears the majority of comments have got people thinking about what small-minded imbeciles these so called eco-warrior people are.
I am also on 24 hours call-out through my job and fortunately was not called out yesterday evening as vulnerable people i work for would have been left with out their needed support!!
so well done eco-cretins what a victory you scored today!!

MercMan wrote:
So called environmental campaigners are most often of low intelligence. A large 4x4 being driven on just the school run is not as bad as a small car that does 12,000 miles a year, but it is no good telling these goons that. They do not have the brain to think for themselfs.

Wouldn't it be better though if those 4x4 owners using their vehicle purely for the school run swapped it for a small car?

But I suppose the "I'm alright Jack" mentality applies here.

MercMan wrote:
So called environmental campaigners are most often of low intelligence. A large 4x4 being driven on just the school run is not as bad as a small car that does 12,000 miles a year, but it is no good telling these goons that. They do not have the brain to think for themselfs.

I don't support this action, but I’d like to point out that your logic is flawed. Do you really think people would buy a car specifically for the school run? And if a parent has the time to drive kids to school and then go back home again with all respect the kids, and the parent, would be far better off walking.

And that person driving 12,000 miles would do the same mileage regardless of what car they drive.

As much as I think urban 4x4’s are a waste of resources, more dangerous for the driver (high centre of gravity), a bigger danger to other road users (mass of impact), your diet has a bigger impact, in terms of carbon emissions, than the car you drive. I wonder what the culprits had for supper?

Use has a great effect on vehicles, personally I have a 2.5 litre car which is not exactly "green" but I do a very small amount of miles each year, less than 6,000 I reckon and I commute by public transport or my bike to work, so my output is actually fairly low. Now a sales rep may have a diesel car which is more fuel efficent on paper, but they do 30-40k miles a year. Who is the worst offender??

There is no such thing as a "green" car, if you use a car you pollute. The more you use, the more you pollute. Singling out one type of car based on nothing more than personal opinion and not fact will not help.

Phil, I have to aggree finally some one who is talking a little sense! OK so yes it's not the best idea in the world to go round letting peoples tyres down with out knowing what the vehicle is used for, however in my experiance I generally see this type being driven very short distances by people who seem to to have little awareness for the other road users in an environment where they are highly unlikely to actually need the 4x4 capacity of the vehicle. Also yes we should look at what we eat and where it is sourced from as food miles play such a large part in increasing our carbon emmissions, it is not environmentaly friendly to employ a spanish farmer to organicly grow tomatoes which are then flown here moved by road to the supermarket which you then transport the possibly less than a mile down the road in your shiney new 4x4! How Green!

Come and let my tyres down, while I watch, and then we will see who is 'friendly' or not. Cowards the lot of you. Tax is paid through Petrol and Road Fund. What makes me laugh, is that these so called 'Environmental' celebrities usually have 2 or 3 houses, fly around the world, use massive 6 miles per gallon limosines, Musicians transport their gear from country to country, ......... and then tell you what car you should have......makes me think

Bogota Bob wrote:
Use has a great effect on vehicles, personally I have a 2.5 litre car which is not exactly "green" but I do a very small amount of miles each year, less than 6,000 I reckon and I commute by public transport or my bike to work, so my output is actually fairly low. Now a sales rep may have a diesel car which is more fuel efficent on paper, but they do 30-40k miles a year. Who is the worst offender??

There is no such thing as a "green" car, if you use a car you pollute. The more you use, the more you pollute. Singling out one type of car based on nothing more than personal opinion and not fact will not help.

If you had a 1 litre car you would produce even less.

I'm not saying you should change cars, but the argument is flawed. Your lifestyle dictates the miles you drive, not the type of car you have.

I was stunned by a poster displayed in a giant Range Rover parked in Jericho demanding "Action on Asthma". Anyone who does a bit of research will find a conclusive evidence linking asthma with traffic fumes.

Next thing they’ll be complaining about traffic, after driving to the city centre!

I think they probably did it to themselves.

Alan Page wrote:

DanOxford wrote: More from Oxford\'s sanctimonious eco Nazis. I suppose now they will be \'targetting\' people with large families as overpopulation is the root cause of most environmental damage/ concerns? http://antigreen.blo gspot.com/ Motives: Many people would like to be kind to others so Leftists exploit that with their nonsense about equality. Most people want a clean, green environment so Greenies exploit that by inventing all sorts of far-fetched threats to the environment. But for both, the real motive is generally to promote themselves as wiser and better than everyone else, truth regardless. Policies: The only underlying theme that makes sense of all Greenie policies is hatred of people. Hatred of other people has been a Greenie theme from way back. In a report titled \"The First Global Revolution\" (1991, p. 104) published by the \"Club of Rome\", a Greenie panic outfit, we find the following statement: \"In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.... All these dangers are caused by human intervention... The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.\" See here for many more examples of prominent Greenies saying how much and how furiously they hate you. \"The desire to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it\" -- H L Mencken

Wheras hatred of foreigners has been a classic british trait irrespective of politics.

Ah- but it all depends if they were bourgeois junkie capitalist environmentalists with qualifications or disabled black Muslim single mother illegal immigrant lesbian environmentalists you see Alan- the Devil's in the detail! ;oP

Phil wrote:

Bogota Bob wrote: Use has a great effect on vehicles, personally I have a 2.5 litre car which is not exactly "green" but I do a very small amount of miles each year, less than 6,000 I reckon and I commute by public transport or my bike to work, so my output is actually fairly low. Now a sales rep may have a diesel car which is more fuel efficent on paper, but they do 30-40k miles a year. Who is the worst offender?? There is no such thing as a "green" car, if you use a car you pollute. The more you use, the more you pollute. Singling out one type of car based on nothing more than personal opinion and not fact will not help.

If you had a 1 litre car you would produce even less. I'm not saying you should change cars, but the argument is flawed. Your lifestyle dictates the miles you drive, not the type of car you have.

and I'd be even better if I had no car at all.

What I said was, even though on paper I might be seen to have a bad car, actually I'm no worse than a person who does 8 or 9 times my annual mileage.

The pollution is more dependant on usage which as you state is dependant on lifestyle, not the stereotype of any particular kind of vehicle.

Useage of cars is far more relevant than type of car as Bogota Bob correctly points out.
I'm sick of the whining green mung bean eaters who moan about larger cars without examing usage. Even if you have a Mercedes Smart car or Toyota hybrid Prius or an electric car - if you use it for say 30,000 miles pa you will have a larger carbon footprint than someone in an older 2 litre petrol car doing say 5,000 miles pa.
The Governments car policy is fundamentally flawed in that it's become a tax on ownership and not usage. Car tax should be on fuel - the more you drive, the more you pay. Simple.

Why don't the stupid tosspot greenies target people who live in Oxford and drive to Birmingham in say a Vauxhall Vectra? The fact is a 4 X 4 (and I don't particularly like them)is more noticeable irrespective of its actual use.

woke this morning to go to work trailer loaded on back of car, two tryes had been let down note in window explaining why they had been let down, what a shame i had to wake my neighbours up at 6-45am to pump them back up! as for 3 in marston there was 4 in ferry road alone!

I would put money on these 'activists' being from the middle- class meddling classes, reacting against their life of over- privilege provided by wealthy mummy and daddy- just as the vast majority of special (self) interest groups are.

Yesterday, (NuLabour) Lord Mayor Susanna Pressel waffled on about how we should all drive around at 20mph- while she lives in Jericho and cycles around her former haunts of Oxford University and local people are pushed out onto the greenbelt as 4,000 houses are built on Grenoble Road- very 'green'.

Once you understand that there is a strident 'do as I say, not as I do' culture amongst the spoon fed Socialists running our nanny state, then it suddenly makes sense why someoen feels they have the right to take away your ability to judge a safe speed (20mph urban limit, 50mph Eastern bypass limit), govern your own fruit or alcohol intake, deny you a right for an EU referendum, determine what the ethnic and National make up of your Country is going to be and let down your tyres.

It's because they know better than you- and it's for your own good- and if you disagree, you'll be 'excluded' or 're-educated' until you get it 'right'.

This is creeping totalitarianism.

I pity the fool.

They probably needed the air for their heads.

DanOxford wrote:

Alan Page wrote:

DanOxford wrote: More from Oxford\'s sanctimonious eco Nazis. I suppose now they will be \'targetting\' people with large families as overpopulation is the root cause of most environmental damage/ concerns? http://antigreen.blo gspot.com/ Motives: Many people would like to be kind to others so Leftists exploit that with their nonsense about equality. Most people want a clean, green environment so Greenies exploit that by inventing all sorts of far-fetched threats to the environment. But for both, the real motive is generally to promote themselves as wiser and better than everyone else, truth regardless. Policies: The only underlying theme that makes sense of all Greenie policies is hatred of people. Hatred of other people has been a Greenie theme from way back. In a report titled \"The First Global Revolution\" (1991, p. 104) published by the \"Club of Rome\", a Greenie panic outfit, we find the following statement: \"In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.... All these dangers are caused by human intervention... The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.\" See here for many more examples of prominent Greenies saying how much and how furiously they hate you. \"The desire to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it\" -- H L Mencken

Wheras hatred of foreigners has been a classic british trait irrespective of politics.

Ah- but it all depends if they were bourgeois junkie capitalist environmentalists with qualifications or disabled black Muslim single mother illegal immigrant lesbian environmentalists you see Alan- the Devil's in the detail! ;oP

So if the former claim some degree of supremacy over the other that is valid?
Hmm interesting.