Jetpilot

And there's the mentality I just don't understand; you're happy to remove your helmet, so ultimately what difference does it really make what anyone else is or isn't asked to remove? I'm not saying you're wrong, I just don't understand that at all. Incidentally, they are able to ask for burkas to be removed, just as they are able to refuse to serve anybody for any reason they want. Why don't they? Well, you'd have to ask them. I have no doubt that the reality is that some people chose to respect their religious beliefs just as others are afraid of the fallout from doing so. Why should it be one rule for one, and one for another, helmet, balaclava, ski mask, burkha, its all the same, its concealing ones identity?? Yes they are entitled to ask, but you know as well as i do why they wont, because as Ekona says they would be subject of probably front page press (at the least) because everyone in this country is so damn scared of being branded a racist because of political correctness, when fact of the matter is its nothing to do with racism.

And who knows what tyre the car behind is running when your stopping a few metres quicker than him, allegedly

Watching the news this morning and it suggests the opinion polls are down to the wire, neck and neck! Does this also have reprocussions if they dont get the Yes vote?

Ultimately because the proprietor of the business you are frequenting has asked you to do so if you chose to frequent that business. And there In is the answer, the proprietor has asked for helmets to be removed, obviously for reasons of security and Identity, no issue or problem what so ever, helmet removed, so why should that same proprietor not be able to also ask for burkhas to be removed for the very same reasons! As you also say, Muslims are under no obligation to use, you pays your money.....

Hardly a "get out clause". More "the reason for wearing the burka in the first place" and, more importantly, "the difference between wearing a burka and a crash helmet"; the purpose of wearing a crash helmet is removed when not riding the bike, the purpose of wearing a burka is not removed when entering a petrol station. You don't have to agree with it, but then you don't have to buy petrol from places that do agree with it either. Assuming it's a like-for-like swap, i.e. an established practice of an established and recognised religion then; no of course not. But only because of the pre-existing decency laws in this country. There are no laws broken in wearing a burka, even in a petrol station, so it's an irrelevant comparison. Of course its a get out clause, their religion doesnt state they MUST wear burkhas, its worn through choice, not all Muslims wear burkhas Its not an irrelevant comparison at all, lets look at the the wearing of a motorbike helmet law, its compulsory to wear a helmet, its the law, whether is still relevant today i am not sure, but as mentioned elsewhere, sikhs didnt have to wear helmets because of their turbans, so the question stands, if a religion stated you to be naked, would that be accepted, even though its against the law? Its not against the law to wear a crash helmet, so why should i remove it when filling up, regardless of its designed purpose?

Fixed that for you

Ah religion, the good old get out clause. What about "if" a religion was the exact opposite and it was against you wearing clothes, would they be allowed to wander around naked, would they f... The simple answer to the op's question is just, no one has the spine to say, burkhas must be removed when entering petrol stations/banks etc because they would all be up in arms shouting "racist" at the top of their voices. 2nd post on the thread says it all, be careful of what you say. If wearing a burkha is a security issue, remove it, its not racist, its just the way it is for the same reason as you would have to remove a crash helmet, cant see the problem myself, unless they want to make it a problem

If the issue is one of security, I.e facial recognition, then yes, anything that covers or obscures the face should be removed, one rule for all. I dont walk into petrol stations wearing a balaclava and wouldnt expect to get away with doing so. I hear what Ekona is saying, bike helmets are associated with crime as a means of hiding your identity, but under the same logic we would all be branded racists if we associate burkha wearers as being terrorists or suicide bombers.

Couldnt Salmond just sell off some more sand dunes to make golf courses if they are down on revenue?

Sell an Escort Cosworth to buy a Zed, curious choice, drive it and enjoy it, they will never make cars like that again

But they arent going to know from the offset and as is mentioned in quite a few posts, it doesnt seem the Police have to much of a clue anyway, you would have to really p*****d a copper off or found a really bored one who is going to bother checking with Dvla if your car is an import and as for the Police being able to identify from vin numbers..............

There is a lot mentioned here about "import" size plates, regardless of whether the dvla states this regulation, how does any policeman know if your car has been imported when your driving down the road or for that matter even when you have been stopped??

Not going to be cheap to split down 3 piece rims and rebuild buddy, its very time consuming, thats where most of your cost will be. Why dont you split them down and rebuild them yourself?

Your missing a pot on the Rs.

Do i seem to remember on early Gtr owners were advised not to use launch control or it would void the warranty and blow transmissions? yea void warranty if it was used more than 3 times or something i think That probably goes to explain why those Gtr's werent using it then I absolutely see no point in it anyway, when would you ever get the opportunity to use it, pull up at some lights and something pulls up next to you that you want to race, right let me just do this sequence and.........oh, the lights have changed and he has gone anyway

Do i seem to remember on early Gtr owners were advised not to use launch control or it would void the warranty and blow transmissions?

I would imagine that was a TT with nothing more than a Rs badge

Same here, it definitely needs two

I must admit i do like the sound of a 5 cylinder, something slightly off beat about them

No one abused you just said your wrong I'm never wrong so suggesting I am IS abuse There was no suggesting

No one abused you just said your wrong

Just been trolling google images for exactly that, a tt rs that looks "special" and there isnt much at all. The gtr was reeling it in and passing it, it certainly wouldnt stay remotely close on a track and the one in the vid is tuned, put it up against the same in gtr and would be a different story imho Std 1/4 mile for tt rs is 12.6 (apparently), 1 sec slower than a Gtr

Reality is, i guess this would be a lot of peoples answer, no need for justifying why, just no, especially at £25k plus!

A buddy was talking about one of these the other day and was pretty surprised when he told me how quick they were, 0-60 etc,

I thought that was spectacular personally, some of the things that kid does with that bike is breathtaking To change the subject slightly, did anyone catch the brief Fogarty chat on the grid, whilst i know he was an awesome talent i just hate his arrogance and particularly his poor excuse not to have gone to MotoGp