Ulysses v. Rebels

Conehead wrote:
::
::::: The "rockers" have also been "discouraged". The U.C. doesn't
::::: actually have the power to rule against them.
:::
::: but Commandant Bedford seems to think he has the power
::: and has ruled that U.C. members who wear rockers will be expelled
:::
::
:: Where? When?

at the Ulysses so-called Annual General Meeting in Cantberra
during this last week
as a result of the Cantberra Rebels OMCG threatening to remove
the rockers from garments worn by UC members
attending the UC annual get together in Cantberra

apparently the Rebs invited any UC member
who did not wish to remove the rockers
to visit Rebel HQ for an enlightenment session

bjbear
off his rocker
( but not wearing one ) ,,,

 

manson wrote:
:::
::: but Commandant Bedford seems to think he has the power
::: and has ruled that U.C. members who wear rockers will be expelled
::: ...
::
:: Oh goodie!

seems he made quite an impression at the AGM - standing room only


:: Isn't he the one who thinks that him saying, in a very loud voice,
:: the U.C. is not a motorcycle club, makes it true?

the same one
like most megalomaniacs
he believes he says the same thing often enough
it will become true


:: I keep thinking that the U.C. is kinda like americans........
:: individually, many of the nicest people that you could possibly meet,
:: but, as an organised group, seriously silly.

up until now Natcom has ensured that the UC is NOT an organised group
but that could become a different scenario
with the fallout from today's Annual General Meeting


::
::::: The U.C. members who have ignored this have made their decision
::::: and now may have to face the consequences of it. <shrug>
:::
::: I suspect that the U.C. Annual General Meeting tomorrow
::: will be a memorable occasion - for several reasons
::
:: Could be. :-|

from all accounts it sure was ...

it'll be verrrrrry interesting to see how long it will be
before the revolution starts with the calling of a special General Meeting
and possibly the call for a new National Committee

bjbear
pushing the rocker
(not wearing one)

 

I would think that the 'Rebels' actually mispelled their name. It should be
'Retards' but nobody was/is intelligent enough to have noticed the mispelled
word.


| F*ck those knuckle dragging c*nts who are only tough in gangs. This is a
| free country last ime I looked. Sure if they were wearing a Rebels badge
I
| could see them being pissed off. But they do not own the fucking town.
|
| We need to stand up to these tossers.
|
|

 

wonder what would happen if 4900 UC riders fronted up

**** all I spose, the Rebels already have an accountant

 

In aus.motorcycles on Sun, 13 Mar 2005 01:23:02 +1100

<Another bunch of insults>

Hmm.. brave as all hell when using handles on usenet.

And saying how the Rebels are cowards who are only tough in gangs too.

Somehow I doubt these two gentlemen would be saying those sorts of
things face to face with even one Rebel.

Zebee

 

Hello, barry!
You wrote on Sun, 13 Mar 2005 00:00:09 +1000:

bt> up until now Natcom has ensured that the UC is NOT an organised group
bt> but that could become a different scenario
bt> with the fallout from today's Annual General Meeting

This I don't understand. They have lots of clubs nationally, they have a national committee, paid membership, a trademark... and I bet some of them are accountants. How the **** are they NOT organised??

 

Hello, Zebee!
You wrote on Sat, 12 Mar 2005 19:55:41 GMT:

ZJ> In aus.motorcycles on Sun, 13 Mar 2005 01:23:02 +1100

ZJ> And saying how the Rebels are cowards who are only tough in gangs too.

Well, I kinda agree with him on this point. It's only the fact that there's more than one of them that makes them difficult to handle. I mean really, would you give two shits about some dude who stood up and said remove your rockers if he didn't have a gang behind him? I don't think so. I don't follow the politics of patches or 'colours', however, if the 3 piece patch is supposed to signify something special and if the UC patch doesn't come with rockers, it seems pretty cut and dried to me. Then again, I'm probably missing the point because as I said, I don't follow BS club politics, I just go for rides

 

Lock up yer Mothers!

-----sharks

 

In aus.motorcycles on Sun, 13 Mar 2005 08:37:42 +1100

Umm... would you give two shits about some dude who said "police, pull
over" if he didn't have some gang behind him?

In the end, that's how society works.

Mind you, I very much doubt that most people would be willing to fight
even one Rebel, gang or no gang. Why? Because those blokes learn what
fighting is. It isn't posing, it isn't yelling, it isn't the stuff you
learn in boxing gyms or kung fu dojos with rules and getting ready and
stances and all that shit.

It's going in hard, and being willing to hurt the other guy. And being
willing to get hurt and being able to handle being hurt.

Schoolyard tussles don't prepare you for real fighting, only real
fighting does that. A full patch 1%er will have had more fighting than
pretty well any keyboard jockey, and gang or no gang, and that is going to
show.

Sure, if they can have their mates help they will, but that's because
they know it's the best way to not get hurt. Just as cops know the best
way to not get hurt is to have the numbers. But given one Rebel, and
one usenet poster with a foul mouth and a fake handle, well I know who I
bet on to be standing at the end when push comes to knuckle sandwich.

Boils down to it, the 1%ers are willing to fight and hurt (and to be
hurt) to protect what they see as their rights. Any number of foul
mouthed anon usenet posters aren't going to change that. If the rockers
are worth enough to the UC guys who sport them to make those UC guys
stand up and fight, then good oh. If they aren't then when asked by
someone who *is* so willing they had better take them off.

They can, of course, go crying to daddy about it, which is even funnier.
That the UC isn't crying to daddy about "rights" shows the UC has more
brains and integrity than said foulmouthed usenet posters. Of course
the UC guys are there, not hiding behind keyboards. Whole different
thing when you really have to stand up for what you say.

Patch clubs are not my kink. I've met some good folk wearing colours,
I've met some wankers. Same same any group of people. They don't bother
me, I don't bother them, we both get to do our thing without problems.
I have my own opinions about why folk join such things, but those and
$1 won't even get you a litre of Optimax. I see no reason to pretend
to be a 1%er, just as I see no reason to pretend to be a soldier,
a footballer, or a ballet dancer. If the soldiers, the footballers,
or the ballet dancers tell the pretender "you think you are one of us,
then prove it", can't see a problem.

Zebee
- who thinks the ballet dancer pretence would be the hardest for
most normal humans to pull off. All that muscle and grace and stamina
and a stunning ability to handle pain.

 

Farque Khantz wrote:
:: Hello, barry!
:: You wrote on Sun, 13 Mar 2005 00:00:09 +1000:
::
:: bt> up until now Natcom has ensured that the UC is NOT an organised
:: group
:: bt> but that could become a different scenario
:: bt> with the fallout from today's Annual General Meeting
::
:: This I don't understand.

quite so - and obviously

:: They have lots of clubs nationally,

nope ! there is only the one club
and lotsa branches
which have no say whatsoever in the operation of Ulysses Club Inc


:: they have a national committee,

which does what it likes, how it likes, when it likes

:: paid membership,

makes one wonder what they do with the membership fees of 22,000+ registered
members

:: a trademark...

which is part of the current kerfuffle

:: and I bet some of them are accountants.

don't accountants automagically become members of HOG ?


:: How the **** are they NOT organised??

because normally the members are about riding motor cycles and having fun
not about power politics

can you think of any organisation
(except for the Roman Catholic Church)
which would impose a rule without in any way, shape or form
consulting with the membership of the organisation ???

bjbear

-----

barry j taylor < >
ICQ# 21309897: Ulysses #25871: netrider 549
Yahoo:
AIM: ursus australis
__ __ __ _ __
/__/ / /__/ /_ /_\ /_ /
/_ / _ / /__/ /__ / \ / \ ...Vrroooom!

bear on a CX500 Sports -------> ----------->Vroom!!

 

So, there was no "ruling", and your post was crap?
There was no "expulsion", and your post was crap?
The AGM isn't "so-called", and your post was crap?
"The Rebels invited" isn't compulsion, expulsion, nor a ruling, and your
post was crap.

You are a fuckwit "apparently".

 

Like people who use MTB for mountain bike?
When they really mean BMX for homosexuals?
[/QUOTE]

 

Pfffffffft.

 

What about the guys that live in Prospect, NSW? Do they ever get confused as
to who's who?

 

Yeah but I wouldn't a Gorilla names to his face either. Doesn't mean he's
not one dumb, ugly, stinkin mutha fucka.

 

Actually one of my mates knocked out one of these bikie idiots out at the
pub a while back. They not as tough as they'd like you to think. Of course
my mate was an ex state champ kickboxer, and he had to lay low for a few
months as the bikie ran back home to mummy and got his buddies to help out.
But the point still remains. No amount of Harley riding will save you from a
well aimed elbow to the skull.

 

They have a say each year at the AGM (or, in your words, "so-called AGM").
So does any member who wants to.

which follows the dictates of the membership

You sound like a stupid prick who would join a bowls club and demand the
right to play golf on the green, or rink, or whatever it is.

As long as I've been a Ulysses member (member # in the 7,000's), people have
joined and then decided that the Ulysses Club would be far better off if it
did exactly what the new member decided it should.

Dumb pricks who sit at home and pontificate about what "apparently" happened
at a meeting they didn't attend deserve scorn and derision. So, Barry, cop
a bit of scorn & derision to go with your jumped-up ideas that you have the
right to bitch about a club that you chose to join. Better still....do us
all a favour and resign. I'll personally refund your membership fee.

 

Hello, barry!
You wrote on Sun, 13 Mar 2005 15:01:28 +1000:

//big snip//

All what you say may be true Barry, but my point was simple - in giving a group a name you are telling people that in someway or form you are organised. The name Ulysses Club _Incorporated_ says that much and more.

As to branches not having a say in the operation or policies of UCI, why the hell would you pay a membership fee or even why would you want to become a member of an organisation that asks for your hard earned cash but doesn't give you a voice just a patch of a guy with a big nose. Your right, I don't understand. I just can't get my head around that.

Just so you know, I am old enough to join UCI but yet haven't found a good enough reason to part with a shitload of cash (more so than many other clubs I have been associated with I might add). Maybe, when I start seeing more results from a _disorganised_ group of 20000+ members that benefit motorcycle riders Australia wide, I might need to reconsider, but until then...

Oh, and I have to disagree on one point. The trademark isn't part of the current kafuffle, it's plain and simple. The kafuffle is that some UCI members have added bits to the trademark - they are part of the kafuffle, not the trademark itself.

 

G-S said....

Well, sort of....

When I booked rooms at a pub in Apollo Bay, the woman asked if we were
with a "club". I said, no, just a group of mates and workmates. No
worries, then.

 

Yeah? Well, I've never heard of you.

-----sharks