Re: Hunters' secret memo blows apart 'pest control' myth

From: Jim Webster (Jim_at_zerospam.oik.pet)
Date: 10/06/04 

Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2004 16:14:50 +0100

On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 14:43:43 +0000 (UTC), "Joe Taylor"
<joe.taylor1@btinternet.com> wrote:

>
>"J Smytje" <JSmythe@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:vnm7m01rjl6hbc4r05o2namikih4aa4nsk@4ax.com...
>> Hunters' secret memo blows apart 'pest control' myth
>>
>> A leaked Countryside Alliance memo has blown apart the myth that the
>> fox is a pest and needs to be controlled.The memo from Simon Hart,
>> chairman of the Countryside Alliance, to Lord Daresbury, chairman of
>> the Master of Fox Hounds Association, refers to a letter that
>> Daresbury sent in March this year complaining about the 'shortage of
>> foxes' - and criticising landowners for not doing enough to encourage
>> foxes to breed on their land.
>>
>> Hart claims in the email, printed in Sunday's Mirror that if this
>> letter was made public, "we would be ridiculed in Parliament and the
>> media".
>>
>> This latest revelation comes as no surprise to CPHA. It confirms what
>> we have always known -- that hunting is a cruel sport and has nothing
>> to do with pest control. It deals another blow to the Countryside
>> Alliance's doomed campaign to keep this barbaric practice alive. The
>> truth is out now -- the pro-hunt lobby can never again resort to the
>> lie that hunting controls fox numbers.
>>
>>
>> Prescott blasts pro-hunt protestors at Labour Party Conference
>>
>> Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott spoke boldly about the pro-hunt
>> protests in Brighton last week: "Who could miss the braying people
>> defending hunting with hounds?" he asked delegates. "The savage
>> tearing apart of foxes by packs of dogs just for enjoyment?
>>
>>
>> "How can people who claim to care for the countryside drag dead horses
>> through the streets of this city and call it a legitimate protest? Why
>> do they always kill animals?"
>>
>>
>> His message to the hunters was stark: "You live in a parliamentary
>> democracy. You lost the argument. Now respect what is soon to be the
>> law of the land."
>>
>>
>> Lords debate Hunting Bill next week
>>
>> The Hunting Bill is now in the House of Lords and is to have its
>> Second Reading next Tuesday, 12th October. Some peers have threatened
>> to amend the Bill from an outright ban to allow a licensing system.
>> However this compromise will never be accepted by the Commons and
>> there has been assurances by the Government that the Parliament Act
>> will be used to ensure that the Bill reaches the statute books.
>>
>>
>> Many thanks for your continued support
>>
>> CPHA
>> Campaigning to Protect Hunted Animals
>>
>> RSPCA www.rspca.org.uk
>> League Against Cruel Sports www.league.uk.com
>> IFAW (International Fund for Animal Welfare) www.ifaw.org
>> www.banhunting.com

>I'm reading this post on "uk.rec.fishing.coarse".Do you consider Stocking of
>fish into rivers and ponds to be wrong?

If it leads to wanton animal abuse I am sure many of us would. It's
quite possible to stock rivers and lakes without going on to abuse the
fish for a little kinky pleasure afterwards. 

--
              *******************
*You can't win 'em all.* 
     Lord Haw Haw.    
Newsgroup ettiquette
1) Tell everyone the Trolls don't bother you.
2) Say you've killfiled them, yet continue to respond.
3) Tell other people off who repsond despite doing so yourself.
4) Continually talk about Trolls while maintaining 
    they're having no effect.
5)  Publicly post killfile rules so the Trolls know 
    how to avoid them.
6)  Make lame legal threats and other barrel scraping
    manoeuvres when your abuse reports are ignored.
7)  Eat vast quantities of pies.
8)  Forget to brush your teeth for several decades.
9)  Help a demon.local poster with their email while 
    secretly reading it.
10) Pretend you're a hard *** when in fact you're
    as bent as a roundabout.
11) Become the laughing stock of Usenet like Mabbet
12) Die of old age
13) Keep paying Dr Chartham his fees and hope one day you
    will have a penis the girls can see.
We have received an allegation that you have posted an article/s to
newsgroups demon.local,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,talk.politics.animals,
uk.environment.conservation,uk.rec.birdwatching,scot.birds,uk.rec.gardening,
uk.business.agriculture,uk.rec.fishing.coarse,sci.agriculture.poultry
[<kmfdljArhNO5EwYq@4AX.com and others>] which our external solicitors
believe to bear a defamatory meaning and as such we have had to remove
the article from our servers. 
The part in question is the comment "Pete is a fraud, a liar and
a cheat." as well as some other comments in your article.
We cannot and do not make any judgement as to whether such material is
defensible.  However, the state of the law at the moment means that if
we are put on notice that defamatory material is being published through
our systems, Thus plc may be liable for damages, along with you, if it
does not take action to prevent that material being published. Those
damages could be substantial and we could both incur heavy legal
expenses.
In addition, the current state of the law could leave Thus plc
liable if it failed to take action and you disseminated any further
material through our systems which was later found to be defamatory.
While we do not necessarily agree with the current legal position we
must accept it, and have therefore removed the posting in question.
Please reply to this email acknowledging that you understand the problem
and that you will not, in future, publish further material which
could be considered defamatory of Pete through Demon's systems. 
We attach below a suggested form of acknowledgement for your
convenience.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT
I acknowledge receipt of your email and confirm that I understand your
explanation of the legal situation regarding material which is
considered defamatory.
I confirm that I will not publish such material in future using my Demon
service, and will not publish further material which could be considered
defamatory of Pete.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Demon Legal Team.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
go to:  http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.
Loading