On Aug 20, 9:16*am, James Farrar wrote:
On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:25:36 -0700 (PDT), MIG





wrote:
On Aug 19, 10:55*pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
"Edward Cowling London UK" wrote in . ..

In message
, Boltar
writes
.. with a Bob Crowe here and a dodgy ballot there , hey ho hey ho etc
etc

Mr Bobbys performance related bonus must be due soon. Obviously the
strike quota hasn't been met this year so something needs to be done!

He does seem like a drunk on a Saturday night strutting up the street with
his medallion swinging and shouting "who you looking at" at the passers
by. Just out to cause trouble !!

According to the BBC he's got them a better off which he's recommending be
accepted...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7571141.stm

It's very unfair of you to use facts like this to spoil everyone's
game of coming up with non-sequiturs for the gratuitous abuse of Bob
Crow.

Abuse of Crow is never gratuitous.-

He is a rare example of a union leader who actually does his job
instead of chasing a knighthood.

Obviously, a lot of people wish that union leaders wouldn't ever do
their job, and have political reasons for disagreeing with their aims.

But their inability to come up with reasoned arguments when faced with
a union leader who actually supports his members, and constant resort
to random personal abuse, is not very impressive.

I'd be interested to know what the arguments against Bob Crow's
position on supporting his members might be, but no such reasoned
argument seems to be forthcoming.