On 22 Nov, 21:13, CJB wrote:
There's lies, damned lies, statistics and claims by Spanish-owned BAA
about not wanting a third runway if it got a T5. HOWEVER the latest
Govt. Consultation is for a new SHORT runway at Heathrow, and already
(during the Climate Camp) BAA announced that what it really wants is a
FULL-length runway. So the Govt. Consultation is a con. - it is for a
short runway. A full-length runway will hugely increase pollution,
noise and disruption; and will entail the demolition of Harmondsworth,
Sipson, Harlington and Cranford - about 35,000 houses, 7 schools, and
at least four historic churches. CJB.

Your irrelevant mentioning of BA's foreign ownership proves that
you're an ignorant bigot, and can therefore safely be ignored.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 00:36:56 -0800 (PST), John B
wrote:

Your irrelevant mentioning of BA's foreign ownership proves that
you're an ignorant bigot, and can therefore safely be ignored.

It did, however, emphasize that BAA is no longer the state-owned
British Airports Authority, and thus should not receive any
consideration that it is, but instead should be treated like the
profiteering private company that it is, and thus not pandered to at
all.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

On Nov 23, 8:36 am, John B wrote:
On 22 Nov, 21:13, CJB wrote:

There's lies, damned lies, statistics and claims by Spanish-owned BAA
about not wanting a third runway if it got a T5. HOWEVER the latest
Govt. Consultation is for a new SHORT runway at Heathrow, and already
(during the Climate Camp) BAA announced that what it really wants is a
FULL-length runway. So the Govt. Consultation is a con. - it is for a
short runway. A full-length runway will hugely increase pollution,
noise and disruption; and will entail the demolition of Harmondsworth,
Sipson, Harlington and Cranford - about 35,000 houses, 7 schools, and
at least four historic churches. CJB.

Your irrelevant mentioning of BA's foreign ownership proves that
you're an ignorant bigot, and can therefore safely be ignored.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot orgwww.johnband.org

Hello? Yes - BA is UK-owned. But I said BAA - which is owned by
Spanish property development co. Ferovial - well actually two Spanish
who are billionaires. They couldn't be bothered to change its name
thereby allowing the less clear thinking public to believe that BAA
still means British Airports Authority.

Incidentally when Ferovial bought BAA it is rumoured that they also
inherited grandfather rights of compulsory purchase of properties in
the way of any development or expansion of their business. They are
thought to be the ONLY foreign owned company operating in the UK that
can compulsorily purchase UK citizen's property for demolition.

CJB.

On 26 Nov, 00:47, CJB wrote:
On Nov 23, 8:36 am, John B wrote:





On 22 Nov, 21:13, CJB wrote:

There's lies, damned lies, statistics and claims by Spanish-owned BAA
about not wanting a third runway if it got a T5. HOWEVER the latest
Govt. Consultation is for a new SHORT runway at Heathrow, and already
(during the Climate Camp) BAA announced that what it really wants is a
FULL-length runway. So the Govt. Consultation is a con. - it is for a
short runway. A full-length runway will hugely increase pollution,
noise and disruption; and will entail the demolition of Harmondsworth,
Sipson, Harlington and Cranford - about 35,000 houses, 7 schools, and
at least four historic churches. CJB.

Your irrelevant mentioning of BA's foreign ownership proves that
you're an ignorant bigot, and can therefore safely be ignored.

Hello? Yes - BA is UK-owned. But I said BAA - which is owned by
Spanish property development co. Ferovial - well actually two Spanish
who are billionaires. They couldn't be bothered to change its name
thereby allowing the less clear thinking public to believe that BAA
still means British Airports Authority.

Bother, that was a massively unhelpful typo on my part, sorry. The
point I was trying to make was that it's entirely irrelevant that BAA
is Spanish-owned - who cares whether the shareholders are British or
Spanish pension funds?

Incidentally when Ferovial bought BAA it is rumoured that they also
inherited grandfather rights of compulsory purchase of properties in
the way of any development or expansion of their business. They are
thought to be the ONLY foreign owned company operating in the UK that
can compulsorily purchase UK citizen's property for demolition.

1) rumoured by whom, thought by whom?
2) either it's acceptable for private companies to have compulsory
purchase rights or it isn't, but that has bugger-all to do with
nationality. Why the hell should it make a blind bit of difference
whether the chap who turfs me out of my house to build an airport is
called Dave or José?

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org