Why Labour lost the election – A Christmas tale

It was Christmas morning 2018 and little Johnny was up early bristling with excitement. This is the moment he had been waiting for all year, would his pestering have paid off he thought to himself? He was about to find out. His parents were up as well to watch the delight on his face when he opened his main present, they had worked hard all year to pay for this moment and they wanted to be around to watch his eyes light up.

Johnny’s father worked all the hours he could get at the local warehouse and his mum held down two jobs, they were a good, honest, hard-working northern family.

Johnny knew what to go for first and dove straight under the tree to retrieve a small box wrapped up in Christmas paper, its size though could only mean one thing, a new phone. He unwrapped it with glee, his parents savouring the moment of their son’s pleasure. It was a brand-new shiny iPhone 9, better than he could possibly have imagined.

He danced around the room and hugged his parents, no more cast-offs that didn’t work properly, even to send a message. He would have good Internet access now and he soon set about configuring the phone, downloading games and chatting to his mates on messenger.

In the evening both sets of grandparents came around for Christmas tea and Johnny showed off his phone like it was the only thing that mattered in the world.

They all moved to the living room to watch the Christmas film, Johnny joined them but he thought he must try this Twitter out, his friends had spoken of it. It wasn’t too long before he called out to his mum:

“Mum someone just asked me how I voted in the referendum, I told them I’m too young so they asked how you and Dad voted?”

“We voted Leave, son.”, his mum replied.

“Mum, what’s a gammon?”, asked Johnny.

“It’s a bit of meat, it’s your Dad’s favourite with an egg on top.”

That’s funny thought Johnny as he called out to his mum again:

“Are you sure it doesn’t come with racist bigots instead of an egg?”

Johnny’s Mum and Dad and both sets of grandparents looked at Johnny in shocked surprise. His mum spoke up:

“Tell them, whoever they are, they are very rude and should learn some manners.”

Little Johnny typed away the reply before announcing:

“Mum, they said it would be great if we all died a slow agonising death.”

Johnny’s Dad turned to his mum and said, I hope we have a general election soon, so do I she nodded back in agreement.

The Lies of Killing Just For Fun

The truth is out Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour party do not have sound policies, instead they have narrative’s based on lies.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/legal-removal/10501848/jeremy-corbyn-extremist-network/

We examine Labours animal rights narrative for the General Election and show that to be nothing more than a pack of lies.

Anti-hunt fanatics claim the main reason for supporting a ban on hunting is they believe they can save foxes and are appalled at them being killed just for fun, sport or pleasure. However the vast majority of these antis are from the left and are really using the aforementioned as an excuse as it helps conceal the primary motive, their hatred of those they perceive as ‘Snobs’ or those they see as better off.

These antis have ideological possession and are given a script by clever con men that corroborates with the same narrative they provide to the Labour Party. Labour would prefer a dictatorship or one party state but are currently forced to adhere to a democratic process. This brake of democracy removes the typical Marxist response against those that express a differing political position to their own. If left to their own devices they would seek  too ruin folks lives and make them as miserable as possible for having differing views. So the con men from the animal rights groups and charities invent a deflection. They target the activity of the ‘snobs’ and concentrate on ‘old’ practices to generalise and infer fox breeding, artificial earths and bagged foxes are all part of the norm in hunting. Thus they can claim legal trail hunting is a cover for killing of foxes and is carried out purely for sport and fun.

The fabrications by animal rights charities and groups is a strategy specifically designed to instill hatred that benefits the Labour party. They know through marketing techniques what trigger words people are susceptible too, they know people think in pictures so provide them with graphical images and words that exaggerate a situation I.E Blood Thirsty Sadists, Blood lusting pervert. This is a result of triggering:

And yet these animal rights groups and charities gave evidence at the Burns inquiry in 2000, they know they are lying they knew for a fact a ban would not save the life of a single fox and Lord Burns head of the inquiry stated just that, not once but twice.

Lord Burns House of Lords 12th Mar 2001 – At the same time we should also recognise that we are dealing with species where landowners believe that the population numbers must be managed. If hunting were subject to a ban, I have little doubt that at least an equivalent number of foxes, deer and hares would be killed by other means. The number of deaths is not likely to be reduced by banning hunting. Instead we are talking about alternative means of killing and whether they are more or less humane.

Lord Burns portcullis Hearings 2002 – Indeed it is one of the striking issues of the debate, and not one that we were able to resolve, as to just how firmly the view of the farmers is that they need to have a capacity to control numbers. Indeed they will control them. What we said quite clearly in the Report and nothing has happened subsequently to change my view about it, is that farmers will control the number of foxes by one means or another whether there is a hunting ban or there is not a hunting ban. I think we make the case in the Report that whether there is a hunting ban or not it is unlikely to change very substantially the number of foxes that die. What we are talking about is the alternative methods by which they die.

Of course if foxes need to be killed by other methods then they are not being killed by mounted hunting purely for fun, sport, pleasure or amusement. It was a free fox control service. Put another way  – If you were offered a free service that would find and dispatch a fox, with the alternative of waiting up night after night for a fox to show or paying someone to do it, what option would you take?

Lord Burns also evaluated the available evidence and compared the various methods of control from a welfare perspective before concluding:

“Our tentative conclusion is that lamping using rifles, if carried out properly and in appropriate circumstances, has fewer adverse welfare implications than hunting, including digging-out. However, in areas where lamping is not feasible or safe, there would be a greater use of other methods. We are less confident that the use of shotguns, particularly in daylight, is preferable to hunting from a welfare perspective. We consider that the use of snaring is a particular cause for concern”

Lets face it you wouldn’t pick hunting to ban first if animal welfare was your primary motive, its obvious people are the target.

Conclusion – The animal rights charities and groups are running a scam that involves the legal activity of trail hunting and surrounds making out foxes can be saved. This provides Labour with a narrative that targets people they naturally despise because of their marxist ideology. The scam is sold to useful  idiots with ideological possession and triggers their hatred of those they perceive as ‘snobs’ . Useful idiots are used as shills because of the financial incentives that line the wallets of the con men and fraudsters  .

Professor Bruno de Souza explains the financial incentives Ideological possession.  

“When said ideology spreads to the point of providing some level of social influence and power to the leaders of the movement, there can even be economic incentives to following the script.“

 

Burglars & Conmen

While politicians have been squabbling with their post war affluence and narcissism over Brexit and the new definition of democracy that suits the ideological possession of the left we the public have been made to suffer as a consequence. Equally important issues have been put aside and the criminals and the conmen have exploited the situation.

We now have a gang roaming our estate looking for easy pickings, they try door handles and see if they have been left unlocked. They came on Saturday and found a gate unlocked further up the street and broke in the back, stole the car keys and where away with the car. Sure they were caught on the ring door cams but they had face coverings and simply avoided going to those houses. A few nights later they were back, without a care in the world getting caught again on camera looking in windows and trying the door handles. A day later back again this time they tried to gain access through the back door of a house, it held or they were disturbed. This lot have it down pat, they were targeting the homes of followers of a particle religion recently knowing they will be storing money and gifts in the home.

This is now common practise so I am told, gangs just randomly pick areas and spend the long winter nights going from street to street checking doors and windows for opportunities of access. They hit a neighbouring town not so long ago so have moved into our area.

The behaviour of the burglars reminded me so much of the behaviour of a fox, old slinky lurks around in the shadows waiting till after dark. When the lights go out, he quietly and efficiently goes about his business, he checks to make sure the rabbit hutch is closed and the chicken coop is secure. He does this religiously, I know I have had friends heartbroken at the loss of family rabbits, it’s always the same comment, “the night I forget to check the kids have put the bolt on”, old slinky checks most nights, he is an opportunist just like our burglars.

Thoughts of the fox we can now move onto the conmen that have proliferated because of Brexit, the claimed fox saviours the hunt saboteurs and monitors. Despite being informed in 2000 as a result of a hunting ban fox numbers would drop, and they have, their long con centres around telling people they are saving foxes despite the fact they were responsible for the drop in numbers in the first place.

The Countryside Alliance warning Hunt sab and monitors in 2000 of a drop in fox numbers:

“Accordingly, the Alliance submits that there are real grounds for concern that, if hunting with dogs were to be banned, the fox population in lowland areas would decline. Such a decline would be likely to take place with a corresponding decline in the welfare of the species.”

Interestingly the burglars and conmen dress in similar fashion:

Another part to the long con involves making out ordinary law abiding citizens are breaking the law, this fabrication is published on face book along with carefully edited videos and is used to gather donations from the unsuspecting public.

In reality they stick cameras in folk’s faces, hide in the undergrowth, capture footage from camera angles to show no guns available to shoot the fox, swing rocks in socks near children on horseback. They swear, abuse and shout in an attempt to frighten the horses, one female hunt saboteur delighted in telling one women of the hunt she was banging her husband. And of course this long con has a history of violence proving beyond doubt it only gets worse if left unchecked, there were 31 hunt related bombs planted in 1994 to prove that out.

So when Field sports TV showed their outrageous behaviour to the Conservative party they immediately contacted the Daily Telegraph to say if they won the election they will consider making trespassing a criminal offence.

Should the proposed new trespass law apply to both saboteurs and monitors after all Charities monitor hunts?

In 1993 a well-known monitor was seen wearing an arm band with HSA written on it (Hunt Saboteurs Association), he was in a group of saboteurs attacking hunt cars, they let down the tyres and tried to smash their way in to the terrified occupants inside. In 2019 the same hunt saboteur was working for the charity the League Against Cruel Sports as a monitor, it`s he who pays the piper with this lot.

What if no trespass law is passed and we carry on as before? The problem will only escalate and saboteurs/monitors will be laying siege to anything hunt related with baseball bats.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/hunters-are-hunted-as-saboteurs-go-to-the-ball-1273081.html

Boris we are waiting.

 

The Anti-Hunt Collective & Cyber Trolling

Ideological Possession – “It’s the perfect recipe for total stupidity“

The Anti-Hunt brigade are a collective with ideological possession. Those lucky enough to break free from its mind numbing shackles like Ex-Saboteur Miles Cooper describe it as a cult. He was one of the lucky ones.

Below, the behaviour that so typifies the anti-hunt brigade is laid bare as Professor Bruno de Souza explains Ideological possession.

Ideological Possession:

It means that they have internalized a pre-programmed script of statements and responses to promote a specific narrative about how things are that, due to logical fallacy (usually tautology, but there are many others), is applicable to any situation. Once one accesses that “script” and begins to execute it, a series of automatic behaviors emerges that involve no deliberation, judgement, inquiry or, God forbid, personal perspective or creativity. It’s just pattern recognition and rote memory (IF → GOTO).

In such a state, people become unable to perform any form of higher-order thinking regarding the subject in question. This makes them impervious to any logic and evidence, to which they react simply following the particular script they internalized, even when doing so is contradictory, tangential, off-topic, non sequitur, observably wrong, etc., for such shortcomings will simply be ignored, dismissed or altogether unperceived.

It’s the perfect recipe for total stupidity, at least while the script is being run, and, in some cases, it never stops running.

It is quite hard to win an argument against people who are ideologically possessed, for, as the saying goes:

The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits,

-Alexandre Dumas, fils.

The reason why an ideological script gets internalized in the first place has to do with its ability to reduce anxiety by simplifying one’s understanding of the world and their associated decision-making, as well as the emotional gratification coming from the collective approval of those who share the ideology. When said ideology spreads to the point of providing some level of social influence and power to the leaders of the movement, there can even be economic incentives to following the script.

All in all, ideological possession is a dangerous and viral process that must be nipped in the bud when possible, for it is very hard to cure and often intellectually fatal.

The Anti-Hunting, Climate Change Collective

It’s often been said it does not matter how good the quality of your evidence it will be  ignored or ridiculed for the narrative of the left. This caused such great frustration and  bewilderment amongst those defending hunting in early 2000 as science and logic was ignored for hearsay and conjecture.  In fact it caused such frustration Charlie Pye-Smith wrote a report called “The abuse and misuse of science to support the hunting act”

Click to access mwgabusebooklet7-07.pdf

The question was why? Then along came twitter with the answer – After a number of years on twitter you begin to recognise a certain type of response and soon it takes just two replies from a person for a pattern to be recognised, it’s as if they are reading from a pre-programed script, a list with no thought or deliberation. This leads one to a bit of research on the pattern of behaviour and not before long academics like Bruno Campello de Souza professor at Federal University of Pernambuco turn up with some key comments.

“It’s just pattern recognition and rote memory (IF → GOTO)”

Campello de Souza is talking about ideological possession and the left is racked with it. There is no better example than the climate change warriors or the anti-hunt brigade, both single issue left wing extremist. You only have to read the below passage from Campello de Souza and it all becomes apparent.

“The reason why an ideological script gets internalized in the first place has to do with its ability to reduce anxiety by simplifying one’s understanding of the world and their associated decision-making, as well as the emotional gratification coming from the collective approval of those who share the ideology. When said ideology spreads to the point of providing some level of social influence and power to the leaders of the movement, there can even be economic incentives to following the script”

We know for instance the fox hunting argument is complex being a management tool in mainly lowland areas and a pest control tool in the uplands, that gets simplified by the left to they don’t kill enough foxes. Rather an absurd claim from folk calling themselves fox lovers, but it’s in the script and that’s what they follow.

There is certainly emotional gratification from the feeling you are saving foxes with the collective approval of all those loaded opinion polls carried out on a regular basis, it’s as much to convince themselves, everyone agrees with what they are doing.

Of course the anti-hunt movement has spread and so has social influence, the economic incentives of following the script are in the form of charities and animal rights groups.

Just watch an ideologically possessed climate change MEP from the UK tell the world’s leading climate change scientists they have got it all wrong over the non-climate emergency:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SxNqttt5Qw

It has to be pointed out to the MEP the scientists have agreed climate change in part is man made, she has not listened and thinks they are deniers. Someone kindly points out she has been driven by emotion in which case perhaps a better career choice would have been a nurse, in reality she is ideologically possessed.

Bruno de Souza explaining Ideological possession 

It means that they have internalized a pre-programmed script of statements and responses to promote a specific narrative about how things are that, due to logical fallacy (usually tautology, but there are many others), is applicable to any situation. Once one accesses that “script” and begins to execute it, a series of automatic behaviors emerges that involve no deliberation, judgement, inquiry or, God forbid, personal perspective or creativity. It’s just pattern recognition and rote memory (IF → GOTO).

In such a state, people become unable to perform any form of higher-order thinking regarding the subject in question. This makes them impervious to any logic and evidence, to which they react simply following the particular script they internalized, even when doing so is contradictory, tangential, off-topic, non sequitur, observably wrong, etc., for such shortcomings will simply be ignored, dismissed or altogether unperceived.

It’s the perfect recipe for total stupidity, at least while the script is being run, and, in some cases, it never stops running.

It is quite hard to win an argument against people who are ideologically possessed, for, as the saying goes:

The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits,

-Alexandre Dumas, fils.

The reason why an ideological script gets internalized in the first place has to do with its ability to reduce anxiety by simplifying one’s understanding of the world and their associated decision-making, as well as the emotional gratification coming from the collective approval of those who share the ideology. When said ideology spreads to the point of providing some level of social influence and power to the leaders of the movement, there can even be economic incentives to following the script.

All in all, ideological possession is a dangerous and viral process that must be nipped in the bud when possible, for it is very hard to cure and often intellectually fatal.

Hunt Saboteurs & Monitors complain of Cyber-Bullying

Hunt Saboteurs/monitors that terrorise and malign reputable businesses and make people’s lives a misery with cyber bullying and swarming had the bare faced cheek and hypocrisy to complain to YouTube of Cyber-Bullying.  YouTube in turn requested Field Sports TV remove the video showing what Hunt saboteurs are about, terrorising and harassing innocent members of the public including children.

So Field sports TV placed it back up here:

Watch “Armed antis step up war on hunting” on #Vimeo https://vimeo.com/376322962?ref=tw-share

Well done Charlie & the team!