 SENSE wrote:
You keep asking questions to which we have already supplied answers and proof in our newsletters and mailings, I am not going to post them on here for your benefit. You do not acknowledge any of the links or information that I send you, you are argumentative and you keep firing back question after question after question, so why should I bother engaging you further? |
Have you actually published admission figures for every school in the village? I doubt that very much. Judging by the various tenuous claims, which you have made so far, I would find that very hard to believe, bearing in mind much of that information is highly confidential and I doubt very much the likes of John Underwood would have told you very much of anything relating to admissions. If it is true that you have published this information, produce the evidence, but then I suspect you can't.
You are wasting mine and your own time, I am not going to give credibility to your arguments by continuing these discussions.
You do not represent anyone in the village, you are not part of an action group to oppose SENSE, you are acting alone and to date you have not shown anyone any information that would prove otherwise. |
How very arrogant of you. Just because I don't have the financial resources of SENSE to be able to set up a group to oppose you , you are not going to address these very important issues? This alone shows that my assessment of your objectives to be accurate.
Talking of financial resources, what about those accounts, I don't suppose you would also publish a list of your members and financial backers, would you ?
| When I address you, I am only making comments about you and your misinformation, do not take these comments as addressing anyone else in the village. Please stop polluting this forum with your poor quality arguments, they do not have any credibility and I think I speak for everyone else who reads this forum, I look forward to being challenged by your hoards of anti-SENSE followers. |
Your comments on this forum have been aimed at all those who are unemployed, "mentally impaired" as you prefer to call them (what an awful way to describe anyone who suffers from a mental illness or a learning disability), single parent families, people who were not born in the UK and any other section of society who do not fit in with your vision of a Utopian society.
As far as misinformation is concerned, I think you have that upper hand on that. Very little of what you have predicted has actually come true, or ever likely to. You keep saying that you have no problem with some homes being built, but on other posts you insist that you don't want ANY homes built at all. You continue to attempt to play on the imagined fears of the villagers, for which there is no basis at all. You assume that the population of Chalfont Saint Peter are prejudiced bigots and xenophobes by assuming they will object to having the unemployed, "foreigners" (as you call them), the mentally ill and single parent families living amongst them. You frighten them into thinking that the new development will be some sort of ghetto for the dregs of life, imported from London, when there is no foundation for truth in any of this.
When this was exposed as lies, you then tried to make them believe that they would have no option to occupy any of the properties being built. Yet you have been unable to produce a single document that would back up your claims that this has been planned. It is nothing more that conjecture, lies, hyperbole and reactionary nonsense.
Have you addressed these issues with any of the retailers and traders in the village, have you taken any of their views into account? What about the people who work for these businesses and the jobs that will be created, due to the economic growth this development would inevitably bring?
Dismiss me as much as you like, but it will not change the fact that your "campaign" is based on nothing more than self-serving xenophobia and selfish NIMBYism and your desire to ignore the real people of Chalfont Saint Peter.
Edited by Flyboy - 05 July 2010 at 12:00pm
Low Cost Housing - what it really means
Topic Options
