Lumme! I almost forgot to tell you that all 55 Ramsgate millionaires eventually signed my 10 Downing Street e-petition asking Our Gordon Master to instruct Thanet District Council to impose proper regulation on RAF London Kent Ramsgate Manston International Airport. What a stunning achievement!My thanks to all of you leading Ramsgatonians who voted with your green fingers to put an end to the polluting oozalum flights by those knackered old 747s, along with other abuses such as night flights and a total lack of noise monitoring. I'll be treating you all to a champagne supernova (obviously not in the sky) just as soon as that cheque from presenting The Amazing World of Offroad Unicycling arrives.
Click here for more on offroad unicycling
24 comments:
Well done ER! Have you thought of standing for the council?
55 a success? Out of how many people? The mind boggles! According to your logic the Liberals were very successful at the last election then, and should be running the country.
Why not just admit defeat.
BTW Happy New Year.
I know this is a little off topic (unless plane drunkenness counts), but what with you authoring the most popular blog in the World, probably, and with our beer festival about to 'heave to' for it's third year, would it be possible to be moved back into your list of undead bloggers?
I'm sure a good portion of your millions of readers will want to know what treats are in store for them, this year! :-)
If you take out the fictitious signatures, it would appear contrary to popular belief few Ramsgatonians are barking bonkers enough sign your partition.
10.51, Most people just can't be 'arsed' to stand up for themselves, because they know bigots like you will just slag them off.
So, sour grapes all round then! Don't forget, Tony Flaig is the man who complained about train noise, and he works on the tracks!
Whats that you say ECR old boy? something about beer! now then listen up everyone, you have my full attention! hic... todays times (Thanet) slips from hand, falls back to sleep...zzz
not true, the facts are worse, I complained originally about Roger Gale's campaign to have quieter horns on trains, also suggesting that the MP in question gets experience on track, only to be informed that he has London underground experience as a special constable. Therefore I issued a grovelling apology, and at some later point had to agree that train horns are possibly too loud still as someone whose life depends avoiding trains I'd prefer too loud to too quiet.
12:26 what me a bigot surely not
Perhaps the noise was Sir Roger Wind letting one go in a Tube tunnel. Nasty!
Manston is a dead duck and one that cannot even fly or swim or even quack.
I think that the lack of support for your petition implies that most Thanetonians are happy to see Manston becoming a thriving airport. I personally, would be delighted to see Oasis Hong Kong run their flights out of Manston rather than Gatwick!
Firstly it's Thanetians, not Thanetonians.
Secondly, 55 people in Ramsgate signed the petition, which had very little publicity. That has to be regarded as a significant protest against the airport.
Thirdly, if you think Oasis or any other major airline is going to relocate to Manston you must be out of your tiny mind. The connections to London are lousy, the infrastructure is non-existent.
Fourthly anyone who believes that a stonking great airport on our doorstep represents the future for Thanet is insane. When will dinosaurs like you take your heads out of your own arses and realise that the environment is our future - wind farms, ecology, beautiful beaches, eco-holidays, that kind of thing. Hulking great jumbo jets flying over every ten minutes polluting the environment is a sure way to kill the Thanet economy once and for all.
Fifthly I suspect you are over 50 and consequently addicted to hydrocarbons - please hurry up and die so that the next generation can get on with sorting out the mess you have left our planet in.
Yes, Tony Flaig is over 50.
Green Fingers, as I've said to others on this blog before, can you back up your statement by telling us which part of the environment in Thanet, has been proved to have been polluted by the aircraft?
As for the under 50's they alresdy seem content in making their own mess ie: graffiti and vandalism.
I do not approve of graffiti or vandalism but at least those activities do not have the potential to destroy all life on this planet.
As for evidence of pollution from the airport you only have to use your own eyes, ears and nose to work that one out.
I could go on to mention airlines not having to pay any kind of carbon tax, Manston being molly coddled by Tory TDC with no restrictions put on its operations whatsoever, the sheer futility and waste of the training circuits by Oasis which are probably subsidised by Infratil and therefore us the taxpayer because it's the only way they can keep their ATC licences, but I'm sure you would be deaf and blind to those too.
Green fingers, I believe probably means maybe, so you confirm your previous statement was not based on fact. As for pollution I asked you to prove it, by using your own eyes ears and nose if need be, and so far you have not been able to do so. If you do I'll conceed, but meanwhile let the aircraft use what airports were made for, and keep people in employment.
I am more certain than 'maybe' that we the Thanet and Kent taxpayers are subsidising Manston and thus paying to compromise our own environment which is madness. There are clearly some people within a small radius of the airport who find it convenient to fly from it to its very small number of destinations but this does not justify the subsidy in my view. I have said before that the training, which we also almost certainly indirectly subsidise, is also counter productive and polluting. The argument which many seem to trot out that Manston has been an airport since 1916 is like arguing for slavery because we always had it, a nonsense. Nobody in 1916 could have given a stuff about pollution, inconvenience, etc we were fighting a war, and they wouldn't even have known about global warming. The point being that if somebody wanted to build an aiport at Manston today it would never get permission in a million years.
As for your rather weird suggestion about me not being able to prove my point about pollution using my own nose and ears I can assure you I have heard the Oasis training flights and smelt the exhaust and aviation fuel spewing out of them. That's good enough for me.
Slavery/airport?? where on earth did that connection come from? The other point about if anybody applied for an airfield now, move on, it's there accept it. If you have proof that we are subsidising the training flights, print it. I also see and hear it, as its about 150-200ft above our garden before landing, and still yet to smell anything.
'Move on, accept it'. Like I said the anti-slavery protesters probably heard that one 200 years ago. My point being that just because something has become common practice or existed for a long time (like an airport) does not automatically make it right or a good thing. The feeble minded pro-airport brigade, however, seem to think it's a clincher.
As for you not being able to see, hear or smell the pollution from these planes, I suggest you go and get your eyes, ears and nose tested.
Please read again, I CAN see, I CAN hear, I CANNOT smell anything as it goes overhead. I am not pro or anti airport. You actually print the proof that the aircraft are being detrimental to the area and I will side with you, though I do think it a rather bigoted outlook that if people disagree with you , they are automatically classed as having "feeble" minds. Different strokes for different folks.
Tony, you remind me of one of those 70s union leaders I studied at school who used to argue that the reason for not getting rid of outdated, outmoded working practices was 'because we've always done it like that'. Your reason for keeping the airport is 'because it's always been there' and it will protect a few jobs at the risk of destroying our environment. That is not a reason, it is not even a justification. Right now the world needs fewer aircraft and fewer airports, not more. Thanet's environment has already been brought to the brink of ruin by overdevelopment and poor planning, subsidising the airport so that it can tip the area over the egde is so shortsighted, no wonder you cannot see what is in front of your eyes.
Green Fingers, outmoded and outdated, I agree with you get rid of it and make progress. The airport will hopefully progress and have an increase in aircraft and employment. Whether you like it or not the world is going to get more aircraft, with the expansion of Heathrow etc. I agree about the overplanning, producing more housing, which means more cars which in turn produces more pollution than the airport will ever do.
Grren fingers, you are a moron!
If you do not like airplanes and airports, then don't live near one!!
Simple really when you think about it!
So Tony, you are neither for nor against the airport eh? Funny, that's not what you sound like now.
Interesting argument, that one. Justifying more airport pollution by saying cars are worse. That's like saying 'Oh dear, we're doing something really bad for the planet, but it's OK because there's someone over there doing something much worse.' At least car drivers are being taxed for the privilege of burning up the planet, unlike the aircraft industry.
And if being a moron means not wanting future generations to live in a world that has shrivelled to a husk because of people like you, anon 10:53, then yes, I am a moron. Although may I suggest that if you cared to take a look in the mirror, you would see an even bigger one.
Post a Comment