Driven Grouse Shooting – Again as Predicted

So here we are again as predicted, the walking personality disorders, scammers, liars and fraudsters with their unenviable array of weird traits warping their perception of reality are dragging us back to Parliament.

All this was predicted by us in our first parliamentary submission on DGS in 2016 as we compared the utter fiasco over fox hunting that started in 1951 and finished in 2005 to the latest scam over Driven Grouse Shooting.

It’s fairly obvious fraudsters and scammers can make money from selling lies to the walking personality disorders over Driven Grouse Shooting. The benefit of targeting walking personality disorders is their inability to reason consequences, so because they are the ones duped into campaigning they will believe only good can be spawned by their actions. 

If we take the fox hunting ban as their perceived ‘good action’ let’s see what really happened since the ban: 

• Lord Burns chairman of the one million pound fox hunting inquiry told Parliament a ban will not save the life of a fox, indeed since the ban their numbers have reportedly fallen.
• Incidents of illegal hare coursing have increased while again the numbers of hares has reportedly fallen.
• Labour deliberately dithering caused the spread of bTB in badgers. The badger crisis and fox hunting debacle blew up in 1997 with Labour obtaining power. The animal rights groups wanted them separated so they could line their wallets from two separate campaigns. Another reason is because they wanted to sell the use of rifles as a humane alternative to hunting with dogs and they couldn’t have another campaign running at the same time where the use of rifles to shoot badgers is then inhumane, even a three year old can spot the duplicity.

Labour came to power in 1997, as they dithered bTB spread .

So hare numbers down, fox numbers down, illegal coursing up and billions of your hard earned tax payers money  wasted because they wanted to separate campaigns, and what does Luke Pollard of the Labour Party say?

“The Hunting Act was one of Labour’s proudest achievements in government, putting an end to the cruel “sport” of fox hunting.”

Luke Pollard’s comment against the back drop of evidence is very retarded to say the least. 

Here is what we wrote in 2016 to the first ever Driven Grouse Shooting debate: 

Report to Petitions Committee on Driven Grouse Shooting – thealdenham

1) We are delighted to be given the opportunity to submit evidence in support of driven grouse shooting and hope our 30 plus years of experience in discourse with prohibitionists and their campaigns against field sports will be of some value to the petitions committee. We recognise popular scientific research from both sides of the debate will be produced for the committee however it is our intention not to repeat this research but take a different approach to show how unreliable the reasoning behind a campaign to ban driven grouse shooting can be. We have a deep understanding of the hunting debate and this has shown us that it’s often not the best scientific evidence that wins the day but the one that can persuade politicians with information that sounds sufficiently plausible.

2) To this end we have decided to draw parallels between the current drive to ban driven grouse shooting to the fox hunting debacle both of which are characterised by a relatively small number of people making it appear their views are shared by a large number of the population. This tactic was copied directly from the actions of anti-hunting groups and it’s no surprise to find the League Against Cruel Sports supporting this current campaign.

3) The prohibitionist’s campaign for a ban on driven grouse shooting is being carried out in the same manner as it was for fox hunting. Simply provide information that is incomplete, or economical with the truth, leading people who don’t know much about driven grouse shooting to believe a terrible travesty is occurring.

4) Whatever this committee or the following debate decides over driven grouse shooting it is almost certain other campaigns will follow as there are people that rely on campaigns to generate income by selling books and merchandise off the back of the campaign so we can expect them to carry on regardless.

5) The next evolutionary step in their campaign will be twofold after this outing to parliament. Firstly, encourage the small band of believers they have picked up along the way to intensively write a continuous stream of letters to their urban MP. Secondly, encourage this same band of devoted believers to hand out leaflets in urban areas until such time they believe they have garnered enough support to claim a majority are in favour of their cause. Then simply conduct an opinion poll using a definition that includes as many urban areas as possible. This is against a backdrop of only having a few thousand devoted believers they now claim the majority support their cause and pressure politicians into believing they could either win elections or at least gain votes by supporting the cause.

6) Of course, the longer the campaign goes on the better for those relying on it for a source of income. Over the long period of a campaign memories fade so old evidence can be recycled to a new generation along with new invented evidence. As in the case of fox hunting the new evidence spawned more campaigns and these campaigns conflict with each other as we will discuss below.

Trophy Hunting 2nd Consultation Submission

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am delighted you have given additional time to allow me to formulate a second submission to the UK Consultation on the Import and Export of Hunting Trophies. In keeping with my first submission I am not proposing to provide a list of reasoned scientific responses in defence of the aforementioned although many exist, such as:

https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/cobi.12643

I will however express a heartfelt sympathy for those individuals and groups from African Nations and our own wise academics whose knowledge and first hand field experience should bring professional advice to a consultation but in reality will be ignored in favour of an uninformed opinion poll. 

Boris Johnson announced in Parliament before the consultation published its findings there would be a ban; his father Stanley once earned a substantial fee as a consultant for IFAW; Zac Goldsmith the environment minister is an avid supporter and spoke at their 50th year celebration, and George Eustice the new DEFRA minister stated recently we are going to virtue signal internationally, so a done deal then?

Leading up to the culmination of the consultation we have witnessed a tsunami of fake news and lies in the tabloid press against trophy hunting, no doubt funded by animal rights groups. The usual heavily-biased articles with “killed for sport” and a picture of some overweight American gurning behind a dead animal is all the science the government needs, apparently. During this wall of fake news and lies an opinion poll is held, and having only ever seen dead animals and gurning Americans the public plump for a ban. It’s this fake news/opinion poll scam the U.K. government will use to push through the ban, by claiming the majority are in favour.

So really no point in continuing this submission then only to use it as an invite to a celebration. I’m inviting DEFRA and the UK government to the anniversary of the above scam, did you know it is now 70 years old?

First reported in the first ever fox hunting inquiry in 1951, suggesting it would have been used the previous year, this scam surely has longevity built in. See Appendix 1.

There is plenty to celebrate down the years, it’s every sociopath’s dream. The suffering, stress, intimidation, bullying, harassment and violence and drama it provides can all be masked by ‘doing it for Bambi’.

The wall of lies and fake news kept young huntsmen and their families stressing about their future for a full five years in early 2000, not bad. During the nineties in one year alone it triggered fanatics to plant over 30 bombs targeting just hunts, where will the next one come, through the post, under the car? 

The public were triggered into sending the innocent circus folk, a letter bomb, a jar of jam laced with arsenic, razor blades and gutless cowardly politicians stood by allowing them to be harassed, smeared and bullied as they moved from town to town trying to earn a living.

Not to mention the fanatic who died on hunger strike, another under the wheels of a horse box another innocent man had his head chopped up by a gyrocopter, driven by another triggered lunatic.

Just so many, but the pièce de résistance has to be our very own upholders of the law, the Crown Prosecution Service. Having seen a wall of fake news and lies against the circus supremo, Bobby Roberts, the CPS decided to act in the ‘public’ interest. They obtained a prosecution using a convicted criminal with business links to a firebombing terrorist and a fraudster. The group that supplied the criminal to set up the innocent Bobby Roberts had used a paid plaintiff previously to generate fake news and Zac Goldsmith is an avid supporter of theirs, now that’s class and worth a double gin.

Bobby Roberts Was Set Up

 The scam has brought misery and suffering into countless U.K. homes and yet our government will trot it out every time they need to pay back some extremist nut for a donation to their party, make that a treble gin.

Appendix 1:

The 70 year old scam from the first ever government inquiry into hunting 1951

‘There are, on the other hand, some organisations which have been formed solely for the purpose of securing the prohibition of a particular sport or all field sports. In the main such organisations seek to convert public opinion to their point of view by pamphlet, advertisements and press propaganda, and by Parliamentary action instigated by pressure on Members of Parliament which is both direct and indirect, through letters which constituents are invited to send to their representatives. Such organisations do not as a rule themselves investigate the facts of the practices to which they object, and the evidence they placed before us was for the most part based on reports appearing in the Press or other publications`. 

How the UK turned toxic

Sure social media plays its part but it is not entirely to blame, instead it must come from a shift in politics and then become ingrained over decades, then taken as normal by a large swathe of the populace.

For that we need good honest free speech, not least because it has a wonderful fail-safe and allows people to fall on their swords, as Nick Griffin from the BNP found out. However, manipulated and used sublimely to provide a wall of fabrications it becomes a terrifying tool of oppression and hate that divides the nation. Currently fake news and outright lies in the press is doing a good job of that. 

This toxicity is an invention of the left, they have in the last two decades promoted animal rights, environmental and climate issues to push their socialist agendas. “Doing it for Bambi”, who is going to argue? Gone are the picket lines, walk outs and 3 day weeks and its genuine grounding in fighting working class oppression, they have been replaced by environmental terrorists, extremists, fraudsters, cheats and liars.

They made their causes divisive so they can draw in the majority populations in towns and cities and involves telling rural people, with their traditional way of life, they have got it all wrong and don’t know what they are doing. 

So if we take hunting and fox control as the perfect example – It’s written into parish records 300 years ago farmers were losing a huge amount of lambs to a burgeoning fox population and they had to employ fox hunters to slay the ‘noxious’ animal. A few years later it is written, the fox problem has greatly diminished and lambs are once again safe.

So a very hard lesson is learnt by farmers they must keep fox populations under control yearly or lose livestock, this knowledge of fox control and recognising a fox attack is passed down the generations and becomes traditional knowledge.

So for ban on hunting to progress the extremists, fraudsters, cheats and liars from the left wing animal rights groups must come up with an alternative and sell that to people who don’t know any better. They fund generously a Machiavellian from Bristol University for falsified research and they twist that still further and tell the people in the towns and cities ‘the fox doesn’t need controlling they control their own numbers through food availability’. Not an outright lie because all living creatures number are controlled by food availability but once applied to UK sheep farming and the need to protect livestock from fox predation, highly deceitful.

Of course people in towns and cities are sold ‘new research’ that shows outdated farmers and their old traditional practices of fox control are no longer needed and yet they keep on slaughtering foxes, they must have a blood-lust, hatred ensues. This happened two decades ago and heralded the start of the campaign of hate we see today waged against our farmers and countryside practitioners in general.

This deceit worked, Labour banned hunting and their urban base swallowed wholesale the fabrication ‘foxes control their own number‘. However the real reason –  Labour took a million pound bung from IFAW/PAL, and this succinct point, ignored by urbanites,  is not so by those living and working in the countryside, the hatred and divisiveness intensifies.

As the ban becomes law, and to rub rural people’s noses in it still further, Labour allow the two main proponents of the skullduggery to become charities. That’s IFAW and LACS. So they integrate themselves into the establishment over a few years, their mischief  in obtaining the hunting ban is forgotten by a new generation. Not before long they are around a negotiating table advising police officers and the CPS on how best to uphold the hunting act, but do you see the problem?

THEY ARE STILL THE SAME OLD EXTREMISTS AND FRAUDSTERS only they are now advising on the law of the land, the evil liars and criminals have now become the good guys, what could possibly go wrong? 

We end up in situations where a violent convicted criminal with working links to a fire bombing terrorists working in conjunction with a hunt monitor linked to charity, the League Against Cruel Sports set up an innocent Circus Supremo Bobby Roberts and the CPS use the evidence of the convicted criminal to obtain the  prosecution of Roberts. 

That’s what could go wrong, what a joke!  The establishment has become so corrupted and are driving the left’s hatred for its new establishment members. So please politicians, CPS and DEFRA etc, don’t come crying over social media hate targeted at you, it’s your fault it is happening and the current Conservative policy on green/animal rights issues will only mean it intensifies.

In social media parlance, good riddance and suck it up.

ReplyForward