# Our Opening meet cut short by Sabs



## Springs (31 October 2010)

Well we got to the first meet, Jaz doing her best to dump me at the first fence and then charging around if she were a 6 yo and pulling like the flying scotsman, But I can excuse her as shes 17 and I haven't taken her out for a few years!

After about 1 hour I had just started to get her going ok wilth some level of control the day was cut short. Someone turned up with a live fox in a box with some other friends with cameras etc! the Master called the day off as it had become evident that the sabs were going to let the fox free by the hounds and film the after events!

What some lengths people go to!

I had just started to get her under control as wall. Bugger


----------



## combat_claire (31 October 2010)

That is a real bugger and no mistake. Sorry to hear your day was curtailed.


----------



## Simsar (31 October 2010)

The scum should get reported for that, they are just unbelievable.  Such a shame for you Springs.  How's the boy??


----------



## EAST KENT (31 October 2010)

Obviously huge animal lovers were`nt they? Quite prepared to sacrifice a fox for some good footage and a court case.


----------



## skint1 (31 October 2010)

That's terrible! How can they call themselves animal lovers?


----------



## GeeGeeboy (31 October 2010)

That is crazy! Stupid idiots!


----------



## joe_carby (31 October 2010)

skint1 said:



			That's terrible! How can they call themselves animal lovers?
		
Click to expand...

they cant cause theyre not which pack was this?


----------



## Paddydou (31 October 2010)

EAST KENT said:



			Obviously huge animal lovers were`nt they? Quite prepared to sacrifice a fox for some good footage and a court case.

Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly. These people claim that they are doing good yet they are prepared to do this sort of thing. Was probably a city fox as well that would have been frightened half to death by the lack of roads and buildings.

Evil. Thats what Sabs are - evil.


----------



## JenHunt (31 October 2010)

ditto Paddydou.... 

shame your day was cut shourt - hope she settles next time Springs!


----------



## skewby (31 October 2010)

That is horrifying.  And horrifyingly cruel.  What on earth is their motivation?


----------



## MissySmythe (31 October 2010)

Absolutely appalling! Rest of my thoughts unprintable......................


----------



## Ravenwood (31 October 2010)

Good grief - just how low will they sink?  

What a shame


----------



## 3DE (31 October 2010)

Just proves that they are just a bunch of idiots out for a fight - not animal lovers at all!


----------



## levantosh (31 October 2010)

Why did your huntsman or secretary not call the athorities (maybe they did but no mention in your post)? Catching a wild animal and having it in your possesion with the INTENT of causing UN-NESSISARY suffering to the poor charlie fox is a criminal offence, it's times like these that us hunters need to use are heads. These people could have been arrested an charge with this offence, if someone saw the fox in a box.

My other comments about sabs cannot be printed, its such a shame that the sport we all enjoy is being ruined.  Poor you good luck for next time.


----------



## Hollyberry (31 October 2010)

Unfortunately there are total prats in all walks of life and these are not animal lovers or even anti hunt protestors, they are idiots out for a bit of trouble and obviously think they are so clever!  This is what makes most situations a nightmare, people who just join in for the trouble that they can cause, nothing to do with hunting, more to do with their warped sense of what's a good idea.


----------



## muddy boots (31 October 2010)

Proves to me that it's more about jelousy and inaccurate views of "class" involved in hunting than animal welfare.

Idiots! (Thats the censored word I'm using)


----------



## Christmas Crumpet (31 October 2010)

Heard something about this today but heard that huntsman was sent home by master. Must be the same pack because both in Shrops. I hope this gets some terrible press - certainly deserves to. Which Shrops pack was this?


----------



## xwp (31 October 2010)

Thats disgusting, as someone else has said how can they call themselves animal lovers!?!

Ive always thought the same since i saw some Anti's carrying round a stuffed fox at one boxing day meet i went to...


----------



## MiJodsR2BlinkinTite (31 October 2010)

The very same thing happened here a few seasons back; it was right next to a major trunk road - one minute hounds were quiet and just mooching around, the next minute all hell was let loose and someone shouted they'd seen the sabs with a live fox in a cage running around and saying they were gonna let it loose.

I can't understand the mentality of these people; isn't it cruel in the extreme to (a) put a fox in a cage in the first place, and (2) take it to where there are going to be prey creatures such as hounds. I really struggle to see how these people describe themselves as saviours of animals. To me, that's downright cruel.

Luckily on this occasion hounds were able to be controlled (just!) and disaster was averted - but if this had got out of hand there might have been an awful accident; hounds running across four lanes of busy traffic, doesn't bear thinking about.


----------



## Judgemental (31 October 2010)

Clearly there was a deceit being perpetrated.

In my opinion, it is important to guard one's identity and location, because there is a real risk that those who carry out such dishonest acts, are quite capable of turning their attentions and unsavoury actions against those they can identify.

Possibly by tracking them down via this forum.

I believe such dishonest acts will escalate in order to discredit all of us who are of kindred spirit where hunting is concerned.

A strong sense of esprit de corps, vigilance and coded secrecy is vital at all times.


----------



## noodle_ (31 October 2010)

i get the gist but whos sabs???


totally wrong... ive nothing against hunting, but threatening to let a fox out like that? cruel.


----------



## spotty_pony (31 October 2010)

That's awful! And if that's not 'barbaric' then I don't know what is...


----------



## Judgemental (31 October 2010)

noodle_ said:



			i get the gist but whos sabs???


totally wrong... ive nothing against hunting, but threatening to let a fox out like that? cruel.
		
Click to expand...

&#8216;Sabs&#8217; is the colloquial or shortened term used by hunting folk for Hunt Saboteur. Those who actually disrupt hunts or perpetrate foul acts against hunts, hounds and horses.

There are also &#8216;Antis&#8217;, they are Anti Hunt protagonists but generally are less violent.

Fundamentally they are both scum, the dregs of humanity and thoroughly unpleasant individuals. Often they are high on drugs in order to have the 'bottle' to carry out their evil deeds.

Hunt Saboteurs are in many instances dressed in military style camouflage jackets, trousers and wear black balaclava terrorist style headgear in order to intimidate and conceal their identity. They are normally carrying some type of weapon. 

Hat Pins are a favoured weapon of choice for sticking in horses when they are in close proximity. 

I was nearly killed in such a confrontation.


----------



## rubysmum (31 October 2010)

_Fundamentally they are both scum, the dregs of humanity and thoroughly unpleasant individuals. Often they are high on drugs in order to have the 'bottle' to carry out their evil deeds._

sorry - not quite sure how to do a quote thingy

i have No personal take on hunting whatsover - But surely this statement borders on the libellous - my 2 delghtful Quaker colleagues who have protested against hunting for many yrs would be quite distraught to be described in such a way


----------



## MerrySherryRider (31 October 2010)

Judgemental said:



			Sabs is the colloquial or shortened term used by hunting folk for Hunt Saboteur. Those who actually disrupt hunts or perpetrate foul acts against hunts, hounds and horses.

There are also Antis, they are Anti Hunt protagonists but generally are less violent.

Fundamentally they are both scum, the dregs of humanity and thoroughly unpleasant individuals. Often they are high on drugs in order to have the 'bottle' to carry out their evil deeds.

Hunt Saboteurs are in many instances dressed in military style camouflage jackets, trousers and wear black balaclava terrorist style headgear in order to intimidate and conceal their identity. They are normally carrying some type of weapon. 

Hat Pins are a favoured weapon of choice for sticking in horses when they are in close proximity. 

I was nearly killed in such a confrontation.
		
Click to expand...

Gosh, thank you for that information. You are clearly very knowledgeableabout such matters, as you speak with such authority. Now I know to beware of drug crazed 'sabs' brandishing hat pins.

BTW, how old are you ?


----------



## x1xpixiex1x (1 November 2010)

Judgemental is a very respected member of the forum and is a knowledgable poster. Usually found within the hunting forum.

O dear i feel an argument coming on.

I can understand why Sabs do not like to be cateogorized but if how described is how they are know then what do you expect. Sabs call themselves animal rights etc etc. How can you take a fox into that situation?! defeats the object and you are putting the fox in more danger and suffering than if they were hunted. O and as for the hat pins, stabbing a horse with one is also cruelty, idiots!!

I dont understand them honestly! And after what i have read today, now think they are pretty pathetic to do such a thing! This has made me pretty angry!


----------



## Judgemental (1 November 2010)

Just to remind those who have heard me on this point before and for those of a youthful disposition -

In July 1934, Adolf Hitler's 'government' banned hunting.

Indeed the ban was comprehensive.

So much so that he sent his police (later called the Gestapo), mainly drawn from Bavaria, to every single hunt kennels and ordered the hunt staff to shoot all the hounds.

In a number of instances the hunt staff refused.

Those who refused were shot in the back of the head by these henchmen at the various kennels.

Frankly Hunt Saboteurs are nothing better and now since the Hunting Act 2004 professes to be Hunt Monitors looking for illegal hunting. 

*If they can engineer or contrive an incident, as described that occurred in Shropshire they will do so*.

They are the latter-day 'henchmen' of the dishonest and discredited Labour Government.  

There were some in the Labour Party who wanted the hounds similarly disposed of, as part of the Hunting Act 2004 in order to 'remove' hunting and the participants from the British Isles. A sort of 'equine' cleansing.

Don't forget the above and don't forget, that many men and women went to war in WWII because of Hitler's actions concerning hunting, not because he invaded Poland.

Those 'police' and/or Gestapo later went on to round up millions of Jews and sent them to the gas chambers of the contentration camps.

*HUNT SABOTEURS ARE THROUGHLY DISHONEST, DEVIOUS AND EVIL PEOPLE OF THE LOWEST SCUM IMAGINABLE*


----------



## Addicted to Hunting (1 November 2010)

JM I too don't like the sans and the way they deal with things, they are mainly just wanting to cause trouble!! But I do think it was unfair in one off your posts to put that most antis and sabs are drug crazed, some may be but there is also alot off antis who are peaceful and just want to get there point across, to put that most of them are on drugs is like them saying that we are all upper class toffs with lots of money, neither off which is true, and it doesn't help either side!!


----------



## Charem (1 November 2010)

What a truly awful thing to do, as said above so much for caring about the fox's welfare! Though have to say it doesn't surprise me, yes there are a few who genuinely feel that fox hunting is cruel and will peacefully protest against it, to which I have no bother. But the majority seem to be weapon wielding, foul mouthed thugs. 

My dad used to be a keen huntsmen when he was younger but he stopped going because he feared that someone would get killed. He saw sabs pull children off their ponies, horse's and ponies beaten with thorny sticks and in one particularly horrible case the sabs got hold of a hunting horn and called the pack on to a rail way line...yep that's how you show your passion for animal welfare.


----------



## Crackerz (1 November 2010)

What a cruel cruel thing for them to even THINK about doing


----------



## EAST KENT (1 November 2010)

So JM,in your deluded old(?) mind WW11 was actually about HUNTING!!!!!!
    I think you need to TALK and LISTEN to some Jewish people and get real.The persecution started way before that war,and in fact our dear Government turned a blind eye  to the "Jewish problem" aided and abetted  by Sir Antony Eden...our Government knew full well what was going on in those Death Camps..shame on them.
  WW11 about foxhunting


----------



## Judgemental (1 November 2010)

JumpinBeckeyJane said:



			JM I too don't like the sans and the way they deal with things, they are mainly just wanting to cause trouble!! But I do think it was unfair in one off your posts to put that most antis and sabs are drug crazed, some may be but there is also alot off antis who are peaceful and just want to get there point across, to put that most of them are on drugs is like them saying that we are all upper class toffs with lots of money, neither off which is true, and it doesn't help either side!!
		
Click to expand...

Clearly you have never been on the sharp end of a real saboteurs - you are being throughly wet!

Furthermore unless it has escaped your attention, this is a hunting forum and hunting as we knew it was banned in 2004 - whose side are you on?


----------



## Addicted to Hunting (1 November 2010)

The thing is that most sabs do want to cause trouble and it shows by doing things like are mentioned above, that is not for the sake of animal welfare! I can rember seeing them kick hounds when I was younger whilst shouting at our huntsman that he was cruel?! And yes alot will target children, I think that it is cos they hope that they/parents will be scared enough not too come out again, pathetic really tho!!

I have no problem with Antis who do care and are peaceful though they are entailed to there view!


----------



## Judgemental (1 November 2010)

JumpinBeckeyJane said:



			I have no problem with Antis who do care and are peaceful though they are entailed to there view!
		
Click to expand...

Thin end of wedge springs to mind - so it was alright for Blair and his mob to ban hunting peacefully?

There are only two sides to this - frankly you astonish me, that you can write such drivel on this particular forum and thread.


----------



## EAST KENT (1 November 2010)

Sabotage,as it says "to sabotage" or destroy something.  Not much would be sabotaged by standing around with placards ..would it?  It`s a bit like ALF, don`t join unless you want a bit of action.Simplez.


----------



## Charem (1 November 2010)

Judgemental said:



			Thin end of wedge springs to mind - so it was alright for Blair and his mob to ban hunting peacefully?

There are only two sides to this - frankly you astonish me, that you can write such drivel on this particular forum and thread.
		
Click to expand...

No it was not alright for Blair to ban hunting, imo I dont think he did it for fox welfare...however, and this is comming from someone who once was anti, I too have no problem with peaceful demonstrations against hunting. Everyone is entitled to speak what they believe and if they believe fox hunting is cruel, like I once did, then why should they not speak up? As long as it's not hurting anybody/anything then imo there's no problem.


----------



## Addicted to Hunting (1 November 2010)

No I don't think that it should off been banned, all I was tryin to say is that it is unfair to say that most antis and sabs are drug crazed, there is a difference between them, sorry that you have taken my posts the wrong way! But believe me I love hunting and think the hunting act should be repealed, and yes I may be younger that you and not seen as much but remember that it is the younger generation which is Huntings future, don't upset the wrong people!


----------



## magicgirl (1 November 2010)

I am very pro hunting and can not stand what the sabs, particularly the hardcore, get up to.  I do however feel differently about the anti hunt people who genuienly care about animal welfare.  They do have a right to an opinion as do I. I have met several out hunting who may be holding banners but have always been polite and certainly not out to cause damage.  I have always made a point of speaking politely to them and have had many interesting exchanges of views.


----------



## Sanolly (1 November 2010)

Which is why she said 'Anti's' and not 'Sabs'... And I happen to agree with her, half my family don't agree with Hunting, however they agree that I am entitled to my view (pro) and I know they are anti hunt, we are able to sit and debate both sides like rational, mature adults. There are (admittedly few and far between these days) peaceful Antis, however since the Ban in 2004 things have got out of hand. Bear in mind though that pre-ban I was a teenager with enough other things to be worrying about so don't really know anything about what things were like.

IMO the Hunting Act is a very dangerous piece of legislation, because it is practically unenforceable by the Police it has left the door wide open for the vigilante and  "animal rights"* protesters who quite frankly will use any way they can think of to cause trouble. I have heard the stories about people being pulled of horses, child being verbally abused, citronella being sprayed at hounds etc. I personally haven't seen any of this.

The way I see it even if the Hunting Act is repealed things won't improve, they might even get worse as a lot of people will be quite peeved that the Act is abolished. I think the hunts need to ask their foot followers for help, ask them to record the behaviour of the Anti's/Sab's, and use that against them with the Police. I haven't heard of any anti's/sab's being pulled up on animal cruelty/abuse/threatening behaviour/assault/anything else you can think of, charges, IMO the hunts need to be a be more proactive against them. As long as they are hunting within the law they are well within their rights to defend themselves and their field.

*yes I know they are not really animal rights activists hence the ""


----------



## MerrySherryRider (1 November 2010)

magicgirl said:



			I am very pro hunting and can not stand what the sabs, particularly the hardcore, get up to.  I do however feel differently about the anti hunt people who genuienly care about animal welfare.  They do have a right to an opinion as do I. I have met several out hunting who may be holding banners but have always been polite and certainly not out to cause damage.  I have always made a point of speaking politely to them and have had many interesting exchanges of views.
		
Click to expand...

What a breath of fresh air. You are an ambassador for the hunt and your approach is more likely to have an effect on objectors than the hang 'em and flog 'em brigade who only polarise and inflame opinions.


----------



## Judgemental (1 November 2010)

EAST KENT said:



			So JM,in your deluded old(?) mind WW11 was actually about HUNTING!!!!!!
    I think you need to TALK and LISTEN to some Jewish people and get real.The persecution started way before that war,and in fact our dear Government turned a blind eye  to the "Jewish problem" aided and abetted  by Sir Antony Eden...our Government knew full well what was going on in those Death Camps..shame on them.
  WW11 about foxhunting

Click to expand...

I said "don't forget, that many men and women went to war in WWII because of Hitler's actions concerning hunting, not because he invaded Poland."

There are many old hunting men still alive - just - who will tell one that they were preprared to fight because of the hunting ban in Germany and the way it was implimented.

I did not say we this nation (if that what you are implying) went to war because of Nazi Germany's banning of hunting.

I was saying that many people justified their actions in their own minds because of the ban, I know them and could name them!

On the subject of the Jews. What Anthony Eden's government knew or did not know is irrelevant. 

The point I made was the it was Hitler's police, in 1934 later called the Gestapo who implimented the hunting ban.

Generally they came from Bavaria because Hitler considered them to have his 'interests' at heart. The hunting ban was implimented in July 1934 and WWII started in October 1939 between those dates, yes it is probable that Jewish people were rounded up etc and were sent to the concentration camps - yes they were before WWII actually started - but they were not deported to the camps by the military.

But the point was it was the same people who implimented the hunting ban in 1934 that were spearheading the Jewish situation. The so called 'final solution'.

Perhaps I need to be crystal clear as to my argument.

Jewish people had their freedoms and lives taken by the Nazis.

Our freedom to hunt was taken by Tony Blair and his henchmen in the Labour Party! 

Oh and whilst I am on this subject - who invaded the Sudaten Land and Poland - soverign sates without a legal madate i.e. illegally in 1939, Adolf Hitler - the man who banned hunting.

Who invaded Iraq a soverign state without a legal mandate i.e. illegally in 2002 (is that the correct date?). Tony Blair - the man who banned hunting here.

The only two people to have banned hunting - ever!

Antis Sabs, call them what you will, they are the dregs of society.


----------



## tootsietoo (1 November 2010)

JM - "There are only two sides to this"

I think the hunting issue is one of the least black and white, most complex issues there is!

And if there were fewer people with opinions like yours, on both sides, we might not be in the mess that we're in.


----------



## Judgemental (1 November 2010)

tootsietoo said:



			JM - "There are only two sides to this"

I think the hunting issue is one of the least black and white, most complex issues there is!

And if there were fewer people with opinions like yours, on both sides, we might not be in the mess that we're in.
		
Click to expand...

Rubbish. I suggest Tootsietoo you push off to another forum if you don't support hunting as we knew it before our freedom was taken!

We are not in a mess - the only mess is the Hunting Act 2004  

Seemingly the word FREEDOM does not resonate with the younger elements because they have been brainwashed by twleve years of Labour rule.

To hell with whether one is killing a fox or two, or the way they are killed or not, as the case may be, it is the FREEDOM to do so or not, as the case may be - not to have that right and freedom interfered with. 

That is the issue and there are no two sides to the issue and it is completely black and white - FREEDOM


----------



## MiJodsR2BlinkinTite (1 November 2010)

Gosh this thread is getting interesting!!! "Judgemental", you raise some very interesting points and put forward a compelling case ..... I'd certainly never thought to link the two politicians who "banned" hunting, i.e. Adolf Hitler and Tony Blair!! with the "final solution", invasion of another country etc, but yes, I do believe there is a very real link between the two.

I think the point you make very clearly and succinctly is that if one particular leader, be it Hitler, Blair, etc etc, thinks they have a god-given mandate if you like, to just go ahead and in spite of public opionion, enforce their will on the people, then they have shown a total disregard for humanity in general. End result: holocaust/carnage/Iraq/human rights abuses.

I know some friends went up to London for the Countryside March to express support for hunting; and they said that basically the police took off their epaulettes so they couldn't be identified and just went in to what was basically a peaceful demo, with everything they had, batons the lot. If this had happened at any other demo, be it Anti-Nuke, Anti-War or whatever, there would have quite rightly been a public outcry, but because hunting and the countryside way of life was the issue, and hunting people were all seen as toffs and yuppies playing in the countryside, nothing was done. 

And what about bullfighting? (sorry to throw another spanner in the works!!!); because of European cultural subsidies etc WE are helping to finance this, which I think is the most barbaric so-called sport that one could think of. But Brits quite happily trundle off to Spain on holiday and go to see a bullfight - as someone who supports "proper" hunting I find the whole thing totally barbaric. 

So why not an outcry over bullfighting? Why pick on those of us who have for many years been responsible for pest-control in the countryside through natural selection, i.e. foxhunting? I just don't understand priorities sometimes.


----------



## tootsietoo (1 November 2010)

JM you don't make it very easy for people to have a discussion with you.  And this is a discussion forum, after all!  You aren't interested in listening - a bit like a lot of the politicians who banned us.


----------



## The Dunner (1 November 2010)

I back judgemental 100%.He speaks the truth!!!!!!


----------



## DragonSlayer (1 November 2010)

tootsietoo said:



			JM you don't make it very easy for people to have a discussion with you.  And this is a discussion forum, after all!  You aren't interested in listening - a bit like a lot of the politicians who banned us.
		
Click to expand...

JM has a talent. And THAT is being able to debate. I see clearly what he is saying. Shame others don't either.


----------



## EAST KENT (1 November 2010)

Personally I find the invented reason for WW11 being "becase Hitler banned hunting"both abhorrent and upsetting.

    How ANYONE could be so deluded certainly escapes me.

    DISGUSTED


----------



## DragonSlayer (1 November 2010)

EAST KENT said:



			Personally I find the invented reason for WW11 being "becase Hitler banned hunting"both abhorrent and upsetting.

    How ANYONE could be so deluded certainly escapes me.

    DISGUSTED

Click to expand...

~Sigh~

You need to read it again.

It was not said that THAT was the reason. 

It was merely used to show that people went to war for different reasons.


----------



## tootsietoo (1 November 2010)

Thing is, I am completely with you on the freedom argument.  Totally.  But to mix it all up with stuff about Hitler and the holcaust and Iraq is (as East Kent said) pretty horrible and I find it hard to appear to be on the same side as you!


----------



## PaddyMonty (1 November 2010)

Judgemental said:



			Rubbish. I suggest Tootsietoo you push off to another forum if you don't support hunting as we knew it before our freedom was taken!

We are not in a mess - the only mess is the Hunting Act 2004  

Seemingly the word FREEDOM does not resonate with the younger elements because they have been brainwashed by twleve years of Labour rule.

To hell with whether one is killing a fox or two, or the way they are killed or not, as the case may be, it is the FREEDOM to do so or not, as the case may be - not to have that right and freedom interfered with. 

That is the issue and there are no two sides to the issue and it is completely black and white - FREEDOM
		
Click to expand...

JM - I see little difference between your attidtude and that of the sabs you so dispise.  I firmly believe given your responses on this thread that you would indeed BE a sab if you held an opposing view to hunting.

I too am anti-hunting (guess that makes me scum). However, I'm hardly young and raised on Blair mis-information as it were.  I hunted for many years during the 60's with the Eridge both mounted and working terriers, was blooded at 6 etc. So it would seem reasonable to assume I do know something about hunting yet now choose not to support it.  However, I also respect your right to engage in hunting.

Now if the powers that be would allow hunting of the narrow minded arrorgant yobs (scum already been taken) on both sides of the debate I would get my horse out tomorrow.


----------



## EAST KENT (1 November 2010)

tootsietoo said:



			Thing is, I am completely with you on the freedom argument.  Totally.  But to mix it all up with stuff about Hitler and the holcaust and Iraq is (as East Kent said) pretty horrible and I find it hard to appear to be on the same side as you!
		
Click to expand...

It is extremely offensive in my opinion.My family was a Service one,and heavily involved in hunting;I know that the hunting issue would not even to have occured to my father as any part of a reason for the war,and nor to anyone else either,absolutely absurd.

  If JM can ever be persuaded to read something other than stuff about hunting and etiquette he will find that the deportation to "work camps" of Jewish people was going on long long before he thinks.There is plenty of documentation on the matter.

  To even put the shooting of a few hounds in the same context as mass extermination is totally abhorrent.


----------



## Simsar (1 November 2010)

skint1 said:



			That's terrible! How can they call themselves animal lovers?
		
Click to expand...

They are not animal lovers at all, all they are is Anti Establishment!  Come for £25 quid and a punch up and the money comes from the likes of the late Linda MCartney.


----------



## Simsar (1 November 2010)

rubysmum said:



_Fundamentally they are both scum, the dregs of humanity and thoroughly unpleasant individuals. Often they are high on drugs in order to have the 'bottle' to carry out their evil deeds._

sorry - not quite sure how to do a quote thingy

i have No personal take on hunting whatsover - But surely this statement borders on the libellous - my 2 delghtful Quaker colleagues who have protested against hunting for many yrs would be quite distraught to be described in such a way
		
Click to expand...

We are not describing your mates they are probably doing it for their own reasons, we are describing the others that comes and don't give a **** about animals, cause if they did care they wouldn't spray hounds in the eyes and put glass on the ground!  Oh I could go on I don't think people realise what this bunch of Scum can do, I won't even mention on par with terrorist, yes bomb's have been planted on many occasions!


----------



## Judgemental (1 November 2010)

I just popped into my office and had a read of all the posts.

As a matter of courtesy I will respond individually around 21:15 hrs today.

Save to say, I am intrigued by the comments such as those folk who once supported hunting etc but now don't.

However it is very clear I have touched a very raw nerve, when it is clearly and graphically pointed out that Hitler is the only other person, along with Tony liar to ban hunting.

I shall rejoin the debate this evening.


----------



## rosie fronfelen (1 November 2010)

Judgemental said:



			I just popped into my office and had a read of all the posts.

As a matter of courtesy I will respond individually around 21:15 hrs today.

Save to say, I am intrigued by the comments such as those folk who once supported hunting etc but now don't.

However it is very clear I have touched a very raw nerve, when it is clearly and graphically pointed out that Hitler is the only other person, along with Tony liar to ban hunting.

I shall rejoin the debate this evening.
		
Click to expand...

can you not leave the Hitler thing alone?Why harp on about something relating to 70 odd years ago, what has it to do with the hunting of today- please answer in syllables that i might understand rather than the pompous drivel!!


----------



## DragonSlayer (1 November 2010)

rosiefronfelen said:



			that i might understand rather than the pompous drivel!!
		
Click to expand...

'Pompous drivel' that JM is speaking, is actually intelligent conversation, whether you agree with what he says or not.


----------



## tootsietoo (1 November 2010)

Yes, I'd like to know why it's relevant to the discussion about sabs.  I can see that you are comparing Blair to Hitler, which is one thing.  But it seems to me that you might also be suggesting that anyone who wants to ban hunting is potentially a genocidal maniac.

Really??????!

Maybe JM IS a troll, this is all a bit ridiculous!


----------



## DragonSlayer (1 November 2010)

tootsietoo said:



			Yes, I'd like to know why it's relevant to the discussion about sabs.  I can see that you are comparing Blair to Hitler, which is one thing.  But it seems to me that you might also be suggesting that anyone who wants to ban hunting is potentially a genocidal maniac.

Really??????!

Maybe JM IS a troll, this is all a bit ridiculous!
		
Click to expand...

I DID post something earlier as what I read into it, but I believe that no-one bothered to read that, so I won't waste my time again.


----------



## tootsietoo (1 November 2010)

I read it Dragon Slayer, and it is an interesting fact, but still not sure how it relates to sabs and antis!


----------



## EAST KENT (1 November 2010)

rosiefronfelen said:



			can you not leave the Hitler thing alone?Why harp on about something relating to 70 odd years ago, what has it to do with the hunting of today- please answer in syllables that i might understand rather than the pompous drivel!!
		
Click to expand...

Not that often I agree with you Rosie....but this time you`re right on


----------



## levantosh (1 November 2010)

IMO this thread has become a joke original post was also telling us about their horse. 

Lets face it Hunting has been banned, Antis and SABS should just get  jobs and leave us get on with drag hunting. It's been banned, so there is no need for protests and criminal activity (lets face it on the SABS part) hunts are staying with-in the law and we have monitors, so just get lost you tree hugging hippies!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Simsar (1 November 2010)

LMAO for 20 mins. xx


----------



## MerrySherryRider (1 November 2010)

JunoXV said:



			Now if the powers that be would allow hunting of the narrow minded arrorgant yobs (scum already been taken) on both sides of the debate I would get my horse out tomorrow. 

Click to expand...

I'll join you. JM's hysterical bigotry is cringe worthy and remarks about soldiers going to war because of Hitlers hunting ban are shameful. Comments like this bring the forum into disrepute.


----------



## Judgemental (1 November 2010)

Springs said:



			Well we got to the first meet, Jaz doing her best to dump me at the first fence and then charging around if she were a 6 yo and pulling like the flying scotsman, But I can excuse her as shes 17 and I haven't taken her out for a few years!

After about 1 hour I had just started to get her going ok wilth some level of control the day was cut short. Someone turned up with a live fox in a box with some other friends with cameras etc! the Master called the day off as it had become evident that the sabs were going to let the fox free by the hounds and film the after events!

What some lengths people go to!

I had just started to get her under control as wall. Bugger
		
Click to expand...

One has to go to the originating post to understand why a remarkable number of folk we don't often see on this particular forum are suddenly posting.

Clearly there is blind panic in the ranks of the antis that they were rumbled in Shropshire and this particular thread has taken off, indeed has exploded in the faces of the Sabs/Antis and clearly there is a damage limitation exercise in action.

Let us look at the facts, a group of Sabs went along to a hunt on Saturday with a live fox in a box. 

*A live fox in a box with the intention of letting it out in front of hounds!* 

They the Sabs were armed with a camera clearly the intention was to try and frame, fit up, entrap the master and hunt staff as they, the Sabs were going to let the fox out infront of the hounds.

A live fox in a box .... me gently what the hell was going on, where did they get the fox, was it dug out, trapped, wired, did it come from a laboratory? Why have these people not been arrested?

Yet, there are people who have said on this thread, but one must see both sides of the argument and that I must not become hysterical. All I suspect a smoke screen to divert attention as to what was being perpetrated. The massive damage that this has been done to the LACS, SABs and ANTIS cause. 

Some, who profess to support hunting (I think they like trail hunting and only trail hunting) take exception to my raising Adolf Hitler's 1934 ban in the context of Tony Blair&#8217;s 2004 ban. Could it be that the Sabs and Antis find themselves suddenly embarrased that they are being associated with the world's worst mass murderer Adolf Hitler who banned hunting. The only other person to do so being the Sabs other hero Tony Blair, both of who invaded sovereign states illegally!

Oh dear have I touched a raw nerve, trust me you aint seen nothing yet!

As we know Google crawls all these posts so all of this is being whacked around the world as one writes.


----------



## rubysmum (1 November 2010)

you are of course quite right in saying that releasing a live fox at a hunt from a cage is a dangerous act & possibly illegal if it could  be proved that the action was commited to endanger life - i only responded to your description of sabs & antis as drug takers as it simply did not mesh with the folks i have met over the years who oppose fox hunting - i would hate to be seen as bandwaggon jumping [ my jumping accuracy just aint that good]

ps - if i wear tweed [ as opposed to nasty synthetic black] to simply take [my very clean  hogged ID] mare to a meet  should i expect social death?


----------



## Judgemental (1 November 2010)

rubysmum said:



			you are of course quite right in saying that releasing a live fox at a hunt from a cage is a dangerous act & possibly illegal if it could  be proved that the action was commited to endanger life - i only responded to your description of sabs & antis as drug takers as it simply did not mesh with the folks i have met over the years who oppose fox hunting - i would hate to be seen as bandwaggon jumping [ my jumping accuracy just aint that good]

ps - if i wear tweed [ as opposed to nasty synthetic black] to simply take [my very clean  hogged ID] mare to a meet  should i expect social death?
		
Click to expand...

Of course it was illegal - these sabs were procuring a hunt after a fox!

Depends on the hunt. Depends how old you are. Have a word with your secretary. Look, all these secretaries are e-mailable, that is what they are there for, ask the question and do as they instruct. At the end of the day it is the secretary who has the final say so far as turnout and dress code is concerned.


----------



## Eagle_day (1 November 2010)

"At the end of the day it is the secretary who has the final say so far as turnout and dress code is concerned."

It bloody well isn't.  My job is to strike a balance between encouraging the most people out possible following hounds and maximising income.  I have said in the past that you can come out with your arse painted blue as far as I'm concerned as long as you're not a danger to yourself and others, and you pay your cap.  But it is a case of leading by example and if followers are keen enough to come out regularly, they will conform to an acceptable dress code.


----------



## RunToEarth (1 November 2010)

Eagle_day said:



			I have said in the past that you can come out with your arse painted blue as far as I'm concerned as long as you're not a danger to yourself and others, and you pay your cap.
		
Click to expand...

Watch this space...


----------



## newalclover (1 November 2010)

Thank you Eagle_day think that is the right attitude ok excuse me have no idea I came out for the 1st time and had a ball!! And was told as long as was as smartly turned out as I could and not loads of bling then would be ok!! TBH think some judgmentals past posts on correct dress would put compleate newbies like myself off!! Can't wait to go again!! watch this space will almost look proper!! 
Oh by the way for the OP think is horrendous that they would cage an animal then set it loose near the hounds!! they call themselves animal rights people are clearly not and just out to cause trouble!!


----------



## Judgemental (2 November 2010)

Eagle_day said:



			"At the end of the day it is the secretary who has the final say so far as turnout and dress code is concerned."

It bloody well isn't.  My job is to strike a balance between encouraging the most people out possible following hounds and maximising income.  I have said in the past that you can come out with your arse painted blue as far as I'm concerned (oh dear but what do the other members of the Field feel who are conforming to custom and normal procedure/recommendation) as long as you're not a danger to yourself and others, and you pay your cap.  But it is a case of leading by example and if followers are keen enough to come out regularly, they will conform to an acceptable dress code.
		
Click to expand...

Clearly one does not know where you fit into the hieracy of your hunt.

But from where I come from our secretary deals with matters of turn out and dress code for the newcomers. I am pleased to say very high standards are set and seem to be welcomed by all.

Anyway this is getting off the suject of these Sabs in Shropshire. 

What's your take on this event Mr Eagle Day?


----------



## Judgemental (2 November 2010)

newalclover said:



			Thank you Eagle_day think that is the right attitude ok excuse me have no idea I came out for the 1st time and had a ball!! And was told as long as was as smartly turned out as I could and not loads of bling then would be ok!! TBH think some judgmentals past posts on correct dress would put compleate newbies like myself off!! Can't wait to go again!! watch this space will almost look proper!! 
Oh by the way for the OP think is horrendous that they would cage an animal then set it loose near the hounds!! they call themselves animal rights people are clearly not and just out to cause trouble!! 

Click to expand...

All my posts in essence say, talk to the secretary. I have my own standards but for new boys and girls, talk to the secretary.


----------



## EAST KENT (2 November 2010)

Some, who profess to support hunting (I think they like trail hunting and only trail hunting) take exception to my raising Adolf Hitler's 1934 ban in the context of Tony Blairs 2004 ban. Could it be that the Sabs and Antis find themselves suddenly embarrased that they are being associated with the world's worst mass murderer Adolf Hitler who banned hunting. The only other person to do so being the Sabs other hero Tony Blair, both of who invaded sovereign states illegally!

Oh dear have I touched a raw nerve, trust me you aint seen nothing yet!

As we know Google crawls all these posts so all of this is being whacked around the world as one writes.
		
Click to expand...

 You disgust me,touch a nerve ? Oh yes and anyone else with compassion equally so.


----------



## Eagle_day (2 November 2010)

Judgemental said:



			Anyway this is getting off the suject of these Sabs in Shropshire. 

What's your take on this event Mr Eagle Day?
		
Click to expand...

I'll believe it when someone assures me first-hand that they saw such a thing.

There's a saying in hunting that,' you never tell the huntsman something you haven't seen yourself'.  That goes for an awful lot of hunting gossip and rumour.


----------



## Judgemental (2 November 2010)

EAST KENT said:



			Some, who profess to support hunting (I think they like trail hunting and only trail hunting) take exception to my raising Adolf Hitler's 1934 ban in the context of Tony Blair&#8217;s 2004 ban. Could it be that the Sabs and Antis find themselves suddenly embarrased that they are being associated with the world's worst mass murderer Adolf Hitler who banned hunting. The only other person to do so being the Sabs other hero Tony Blair, both of who invaded sovereign states illegally!

Oh dear have I touched a raw nerve, trust me you aint seen nothing yet!

As we know Google crawls all these posts so all of this is being whacked around the world as one writes.
		
Click to expand...

 You disgust me,touch a nerve ? Oh yes and anyone else with compassion equally so.[/QUOTE]


Compassion for whom?

Oh East Kent I don't really think you are one of us. I think you have been rumbled.

Hitler banned hunting Tony Blair banned hunting fact - yes.

So what's the problem, are you a Tony Blair lover (in the admiration sense) or are you a follower of the Nazi cause?

Or is it you are disgusted because are very embarrassed, probably because of your youthfulness, that you did not know Hitler banned hunting and therefore in my world all Sabs and Antis are part and parcel of Hitler's philosophy.  

That of course is borne out by the fact that Hitler persecuted a minority, namely the Jews who were deported to the concentration camps and gassed.

He, Hitler was able to order the extermination, because he had a huge governmental majority and for all the hunts to be wiped off the face of Germany by shooting the hounds and a considerable number of the hunt staff were also shot by what became to be know as the Gestapo.

Suggest you read Hitler's speech in Obersalzberg, when he dealt with hunting policies and that of the Jews and The Final Solution contemporaneously. 

Tony Blair had a huge governmental majority to have hunting banned - some in the Labour party wanted all the hounds shot too. John Prescott said it was a totemic policy of the Labour party to ban hunting and so it was with Hitler's Nazi party and the extermination of the Jews.  

Now we have a situation were hunts are monitored and interfered with by Saboteurs - the equivalent of the latter day Gestapo because they, the sabs will immediately report any infringements by the hunt of the Hunting Act 2004 to the Police.

In the same way the Jews were informed upon.

Yes we hunting people are a minority rammed into a concentrated legal box by Tony Blair and his henchmen, so that our freedom to hunt is taken from us.

Then we have a situation as described in Shropshire where sabs were trying to 'experiment' upon a hunt, a hunt in a concentrated legal position in order to derive gratification from the suffering of the hunt and those attending.

So East Kent where's the compassion from all that.

Yes, I have to say that you are highly suspect. Whose side are you on?


----------



## boneo (2 November 2010)

There was a Victorian father's advise to his daughter, " Never trust a man who hunts south of the Thames, or who wears suede shoes"    Any thoughts or comments?


----------



## Simsar (2 November 2010)

rubysmum said:



			you are of course quite right in saying that releasing a live fox at a hunt from a cage is a dangerous act & possibly illegal  Of Course its illegal!! if it could  be proved that the action was committed to endanger life WTF!  That fox would have been hunted by the hounds and that was the intention, what does it prove?  The huntsman around the country do an amazing job as it is to stop hound coming across and hunting a scent.  I hope this whole situation is brought to light big time.-
 i only responded to your description of sabs & antis as drug takers yes most who follow are stoned of their boxes you can smell it its not normal tobacco and I have also seen Stella can dropped by the Scum whilst out hunting, and I will call them that as I have been called far worse. as it simply did not mesh with the folks i have met over the years who oppose fox hunting - No they are tree huggers i would hate to be seen as bandwagon jumping [ my jumping accuracy just ain't that good]

PS - if i wear tweed [ as opposed to nasty synthetic black] to simply take [my very clean  hogged ID] mare to a meet  should i expect social death? No but give it 20 yrs when you all are dressing none traditionally it will be heard "Where did all the traditional clothing go"

Click to expand...

Lets not argue amongst us we can pull together on this one.


----------



## Simsar (2 November 2010)

boneo said:



			There was a Victorian father's advise to his daughter, " Never trust a man who hunts south of the Thames, or who wears suede shoes"    Any thoughts or comments?
		
Click to expand...

If that is pointed at JM I don't think he is southern or Brogue shoe man.

I bet a northerner said that!


----------



## DragonSlayer (2 November 2010)

Here is an old report to do with what JM is talking about, You will notice that people talk about it here in a calm and adult way, no screaming about 'bringing Hitler into it is disgusting'...blah blah blah....

Some of you will do well to listen to what JM has to say, but I fear you react as you do because you feel intimidated by the fact he is intelligent, and can hold a conversation together.

There is a direct reference in this report to Tony Blair and Hitler. I suggest you read it, take note, and realise that JM is NOT some ill-informed yokel as some of you seem to suggest...

Ref - A spokesman for the Countryside Alliance said: "Hitler banned fox hunting partly because he wanted to attack the aristocracy's way of life and further his own ambitions. It would appear that Tony Blair's reasons for banning foxhunting are not dissimilar - a curious mixture of class envy, spite and a curious understanding of animal welfare."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...er-hunting-with-hounds-is-still-verboten.html


----------



## outandabout (2 November 2010)

'Bringing Hitler into it' is not disgusting.  There is a valid point of comparison between Blair and Hitler in the context of the banning of hunting - potentially both can be viewed upon an attack on a particular class of society and various other interesting considerations on this issue.  Hitler may well have dealt with foxhunting and the Final Solution contemporaneously; this does not mean that Blair had the murder of various groups of society in his mind when he acted regarding foxhunting.  To compare Blair to Hitler in the context of the Holocaust and the murder of 15 million people, including 6 million children, does both you and him a disservice - it's at least a poor use of deductive reasoning.

And I'm neither a bunny hugger, a sab, a Labour voter or 'intimidated by JM's (or anyone else's) intelligence'.  I do however think that people who post on this thread would do well to think about how this makes the hunting community appear to the public at large.  There are lots of good arguments for repealing the Act; this one is definitely at the sillier end of the scale!


----------



## MerrySherryRider (2 November 2010)

Judgemental said:



			Don't forget the above and don't forget, that many men and women went to war in WWII because of Hitler's actions concerning hunting, not because he invaded Poland.
		
Click to expand...

This is the comment that I find incredulous. According to you, JM, many men and women went to war because of Hitlers' hunting ban and not because of the persecution of the Poles ?? Not even because of the persecution of the elderly infirm, the mentally ill, the handicapped, Black and Asian minorities, Catholics, JW's, gypsies,homosexuals, etc, etc..and of course, the small matter of the Jews ?
 Interestingly, Hitler and the Nazi party considered themselves environmentalists and introduced policies for animal welfare and conservation. The banning of hunting animals was one such policy.
 However, I find it obscene that, you state that the reason that motivated 'many men and women' to go to war was because of a ban on a sport and not because of the persecution of millions of people.


----------



## DragonSlayer (2 November 2010)

horserider said:



			This is the comment that I find incredulous. According to you, JM, many men and women went to war because of Hitlers' hunting ban and not because of the persecution of the Poles ?? Not even because of the persecution of the elderly infirm, the mentally ill, the handicapped, Black and Asian minorities, Catholics, JW's, gypsies,homosexuals, etc, etc..and of course, the small matter of the Jews ?
 Interestingly, Hitler and the Nazi party considered themselves environmentalists and introduced policies for animal welfare and conservation. The banning of hunting animals was one such policy.
 However, I find it obscene that, you state that the reason that motivated 'many men and women' to go to war was because of a ban on a sport and not because of the persecution of millions of people.
		
Click to expand...

I believe JM used this analogy to show that there are many different reasons for the choices people make when going to war. You may think it an extreme way to put it, but I see what he is getting at.


----------



## MerrySherryRider (2 November 2010)

DragonSlayer said:



			I believe JM used this analogy to show that there are many different reasons for the choices people make when going to war. You may think it an extreme way to put it, but I see what he is getting at.
		
Click to expand...

Really ?
 Having nursed many ex British POW's and elderly Polish men and women over the last 30 years, their stories are horrific. Not one ever mentioned the hunting ban though. I could tell you what they endured, but I don't think you'd sleep well tonight.


----------



## DragonSlayer (2 November 2010)

horserider said:



			Really ?
 Having nursed many ex British POW's and elderly Polish men and women over the last 30 years, their stories are horrific. Not one ever mentioned the hunting ban though. I could tell you what they endured, but I don't think you'd sleep well tonight.
		
Click to expand...

My dear, firstly you have no reason to patronise me, as you have NO CLUE who I am. As I said, there are people here who cannot seem to get their heads round a point without raising merry hell, as for the rest of your comment, it is not worth responding to as this is the point I am making. People seem to have the distinct lack of ability these days to be able to read between the lines and see a message for what it is.

If you wish to go back and forth all day with references that indeed I don't know what was suffered then we can do. However, I am going again to Auschwitz once more in February (notice the AGAIN) to try to educate young people into the horrors of what went on.


----------



## MissySmythe (2 November 2010)

horserider said:



			Really ?
 Having nursed many ex British POW's and elderly Polish men and women over the last 30 years, their stories are horrific. Not one ever mentioned the hunting ban though. I could tell you what they endured, but I don't think you'd sleep well tonight.
		
Click to expand...

Whatever the veracity of JM's thoughts here, I find it astonishingly bad taste to put them across in this manner. 

Thank you horserider for putting this rather obscene thread of discussion into perspective. And let us not forget that going to war and fighting for one's country was a DUTY, not a choice. As Nov 11th approaches, let us remember them.


----------



## FairyLights (2 November 2010)

Has anyone actually find out which hunt this was,whoes opening meet was sabotaged,and did the MFH contact the police about the sabs?


----------



## rosie fronfelen (2 November 2010)

DragonSlayer said:



			My dear, firstly you have no reason to patronise me, as you have NO CLUE who I am. As I said, there are people here who cannot seem to get their heads round a point without raising merry hell, as for the rest of your comment, it is not worth responding to as this is the point I am making. People seem to have the distinct lack of ability these days to be able to read between the lines and see a message for what it is.

If you wish to go back and forth all day with references that indeed I don't know what was suffered then we can do. However, I am going again to Auschwitz once more in February (notice the AGAIN) to try to educate young people into the horrors of what went on.
		
Click to expand...

Its nice to know that JM has at least one friend- when you go back to that horror camp in feb. are you going to mention these facts about Hitler banning hunting et al. Why WW11 and Hitler have to be dragged into these posts defeats me but i find it all abhorrant, and dont dare patronise others by saying that there is an inability to read between the lines, i for one dont wish to, what you and JM write is enough without that!!!!


----------



## DragonSlayer (2 November 2010)

rosiefronfelen said:



			Its nice to know that JM has at least one friend- when you go back to that horror camp in feb. are you going to mention these facts about Hitler banning hunting et al. Why WW11 and Hitler have to be dragged into these posts defeats me but i find it all abhorrant, and dont dare patronise others by saying that there is an inability to read between the lines, i for one dont wish to, what you and JM write is enough without that!!!!
		
Click to expand...

Don't I dare? Are you going to stop me? No, I am tired of trying to reason with people who obviously cannot stand to have an adult discussion about things BEYOND the horror. We know what the Nazi party did. It doesn't have to be spelled out. WHY did he come to power? WHAT was the reasoning behind the sudden increase in the popularity of the Nazi Party? I am a historian, therefore I feel compelled to explore ALL avenues. If you all wish to sit and discuss 'happy fluffy bunnies' and bury your heads in the sand to dispel the WHY it all happened, then you go ahead.

By the way, I do not know JM. It's just nice to find another intelligent person here, oh, wait for it, your going to accuse me of something in a minute, aren't you?


----------



## rosie fronfelen (2 November 2010)

DragonSlayer said:



			Don't I dare? Are you going to stop me? No, I am tired of trying to reason with people who obviously cannot stand to have an adult discussion about things BEYOND the horror. We know what the Nazi party did. It doesn't have to be spelled out. WHY did he come to power? WHAT was the reasoning behind the sudden increase in the popularity of the Nazi Party? I am a historian, therefore I feel compelled to explore ALL avenues. If you all wish to sit and discuss 'happy fluffy bunnies' and bury your heads in the sand to dispel the WHY it all happened, then you go ahead.

By the way, I do not know JM. It's just nice to find another intelligent person here, oh, wait for it, your going to accuse me of something in a minute, aren't you? 

Click to expand...

I am far from being a fluffy bunny but do you honestly think that when anyone prepares to go and have an enjoyable hunting day they are going to think of Hitler and his evil ways? You, and he come to that i find are 2 very sad people, nothing wrong with being an historian, but do we want this stuff rammed down our throats on the hunting forum which as it says, is on here to discuss experiences on the hunting field?


----------



## DragonSlayer (2 November 2010)

rosiefronfelen said:



			I am far from being a fluffy bunny but do you honestly think that when anyone prepares to go and have an enjoyable hunting day they are going to think of Hitler and his evil ways? You, and he come to that i find are 2 very sad people, nothing wrong with being an historian, but do we want this stuff rammed down our throats on the hunting forum which as it says, is on here to discuss experiences on the hunting field?
		
Click to expand...

Oh, for goodness sake, THIS is getting ridiculous.

If you are NOT mature enough to understand why such a statement was made, then THAT is not anyone elses fault. 

Seeing what was said, and understanding it, does NOT make me agree with what the Nazis did. Did you READ that link? Did you not see a member of the CA actually made a statement about Hitler and Blair in it? 

I am not sad, I have a balanced view on the world. Can you not think of anything better to call me, seeing as we are about to go down the road of slinging insults?

'We don't want this stuff rammed down our throats'....I feel sorry for you because you seem to be incapable of accepting that maybe somewhere, someone can link things together to see simliarities. It does not make them bad, evil people, it shows their ability to THINK.

And with this, I bug out of this argument.


----------



## MissySmythe (2 November 2010)

As I said before JM And DS, a lot of what you are posting is in extremely bad taste. As another from a military family, I feel that especially. Furthermore DS as AN historian ('an' not 'a', as Rosie so rightly points out) you should know that fighting the second world war was not a question of 'choice' as you keep referring to it. 

Finally, please stop making these abhorrent comments to and about other posters otherwise I shall report you.


----------



## WonderPone (2 November 2010)

I am a historian
		
Click to expand...

I doubt it. People who work with words day in, day out in a professional context rarely make basic 3rd grade grammatical errors, since correct English becomes second nature ! 




			It's just nice to find another intelligent person here, oh, wait for it, your going to accuse me of something in a minute, aren't you?
		
Click to expand...

I think anybody can hide behind an internet persona and make grand claims for themselves, but your (note the correct usage here) bad taste and poor judgement shines through in your diatribes here. 

(and yes, I know, I lose the argument .... first to invoke grammar loses, right ? ....but..... to be fair, didn't you and Judge Mental fail at the first, according to Godwin's Law ?

p.s. here's your hero in a similarly unfortunate predicament : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKlTAxTvKkY 

)


----------



## WonderPone (2 November 2010)

Oh - Darn it, that'll teach me, I missed one !! 

DragonSlayer, did you just flounce ?  




			And with this, I bug out of this argument.
		
Click to expand...

Excellent ! A full-on, panties-in-a-wad flounce  

Just about as mature as leaving on a 'ner ner nah ner ner' or perhaps a "your all rong im rite", or, my personal internet tantrummy-kiddy-stomping-foot favourite ... 

"<<my parting opinion>>. End Of. Simplez"


----------



## rosie fronfelen (2 November 2010)

DragonSlayer said:



			Oh, for goodness sake, THIS is getting ridiculous.

If you are NOT mature enough to understand why such a statement was made, then THAT is not anyone elses fault. 

Seeing what was said, and understanding it, does NOT make me agree with what the Nazis did. Did you READ that link? Did you not see a member of the CA actually made a statement about Hitler and Blair in it? 

I am not sad, I have a balanced view on the world. Can you not think of anything better to call me, seeing as we are about to go down the road of slinging insults?

'We don't want this stuff rammed down our throats'....I feel sorry for you because you seem to be incapable of accepting that maybe somewhere, someone can link things together to see simliarities. It does not make them bad, evil people, it shows their ability to THINK.

And with this, I bug out of this argument.
		
Click to expand...

oh, please do bug out, whatever that means- thislast thread has proved one thing to me though about you- haha! Anyhow, i must now make sure hubby says a prayer for all the atrocities AH caused before he hunts tomorrow, and i trust all the thousands out there do the same! Now i am going to buzz off out of this arguement as its getting boring.


----------



## Amymay (2 November 2010)

Don't forget the above and don't forget, that many men and women went to war in WWII because of Hitler's actions concerning hunting, not because he invaded Poland.
		
Click to expand...

God, I've read it all now.......................


----------



## Jim Moriarty (2 November 2010)

DragonSlayer said:



			If you are NOT mature enough to understand why such a statement was made, then THAT is not anyone elses fault.
		
Click to expand...

I think I'm _mature_ enough to see it for what it was; second rate rhetoric from a third rate pretentious, self-appointed Master of the Hunt(ing) board cum orator (but I shall refrain from any Hitlarian comparison there).

Been here two minutes and deigns to chastise members who choose to join the fray, purely because they haven't posted here previously! Pomposity in extremis.

Clearly, reasoning's not a strong point (nor understanding the art of debate), but evidence would suggest that filibuster and flannel are in no short supply.


----------



## Sleighfarer (2 November 2010)

MissySmythe said:



			AN historian ('an' not 'a', as Rosie so rightly points out) you should know that fighting the second world war was not a question of 'choice' as you keep referring to it.
		
Click to expand...

'A historian' is regarded as correct in modern usage.


----------



## rosie fronfelen (2 November 2010)

SF- i am of the old school,unfortunately alot of "modern usage" is down to bad education and second rate teaching.


----------



## DragonSlayer (2 November 2010)

Gosh! Knickers in a twist now, eh?

Bug-out - leave an argument when I am perfectly happy in what I say, I'm leaving because I can see this moving into the first stages of insults. Take what you will from that, and let the insults fly!


----------



## DragonSlayer (2 November 2010)

WonderPone said:



			I doubt it. People who work with words day in, day out in a professional context rarely make basic 3rd grade grammatical errors, since correct English becomes second nature ! 



I think anybody can hide behind an internet persona and make grand claims for themselves, but your (note the correct usage here) bad taste and poor judgement shines through in your diatribes here. 

(and yes, I know, I lose the argument .... first to invoke grammar loses, right ? ....but..... to be fair, didn't you and Judge Mental fail at the first, according to Godwin's Law ?

p.s. here's your hero in a similarly unfortunate predicament : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKlTAxTvKkY 

)
		
Click to expand...


Spotted 2 mistakes in your post dear, so don't waste your breath on mine. 

....and whose hero? I guess you didn't read the part of my post where it said that when people can think about something that is said, then it does not mean they agree? Please do take the time to read correctly, saves alot of time later....


----------



## Sleighfarer (2 November 2010)

rosiefronfelen said:



			SF- i am of the old school,unfortunately alot of "modern usage" is down to bad education and second rate teaching.
		
Click to expand...

I gave this some thought and consulted a couple of style manuals before posting (I'm an editor for a living) and there are arguments for and against, but my Penguin bible says:

'Most modern authorities recommend that words beginning with h should be preceded by a [where the h is hard]'.


----------



## rosie fronfelen (2 November 2010)

DragonSlayer said:



			Gosh! Knickers in a twist now, eh?

Bug-out - leave an argument when I am perfectly happy in what I say, I'm leaving because I can see this moving into the first stages of insults. Take what you will from that, and let the insults fly! 

Click to expand...

you said you were going before my dear-i am not going to insult anybody, why should i?Isaid i was going before and that is what i am doing, and let the insults fly, by the way, why did you not answer any of my questions?


----------



## Battyoldbint (2 November 2010)

To be honest judgmental, its people like you that do your sport the worst harm, if i wasnt anti already i would be from reading your posts.
You come across as so up yourself


----------



## rosie fronfelen (2 November 2010)

Seafarer said:



			I gave this some thought and consulted a couple of style manuals before posting (I'm an editor for a living) and there are arguments for and against, but my Penguin bible says:

'Most modern authorities recommend that words beginning with h should be preceded by a [where the h is hard]'. 



Click to expand...

i stick by what i say, and also this has gone miles away from the OP, so can we possibly return as all this is irrelevent to her post?


----------



## Paddydou (2 November 2010)

On the topic of hunt Sabs, I was one for a day. I expected to be holding placards not be given a can of pepper spray (God only knows where that came from) to spray at the dogs and horses. Needless to say I figured that such attempts would not be good for animal welfare and decided to sit that one out and take a closer look at hunting. I went with a very good friend of mine. She is still anti (she has the right to that decision) whereas I turned pro. Neither of us wanted to harm anyone or thing that day and we were both disgusted by what we saw.

JM I have not met ANY ex servicemen who went to fight in either of the world wars because of a ban on hunting. A ban on liberty yes but not hunting. To equate the vast majority of people who disagree with your opinion with Hitler is crass and a rather pathetic argument on your behalf. I had expected better from you but then I am still deluded about some things. There are so many ways in which you could educate and help to make Hunting a less antagonisic subject to discuss but you are deluded. There is more to life than hunting, that is just part of the rich tapestry we all weave. Now stop making all pro hunting folk look like pompus prats and let the new commers relax and enjoy.

East Kent and Rosie have made far too many points that I agree with for me to quote as have Simsar and Jim. But as is customary - "Wot they said".

Back to the OP. Which hunt was it? Better luck next time and thank goodness no one was hurt!


----------



## EAST KENT (2 November 2010)

Well then,if I am "not one of us"  (thank God if you are typical) JM..lets ask a few questions as to what ,exactly,contribution to your hunt/hunting in general have you done. Anything??? Nothing??? Apart from attend on a horse,and actually I doubt you do that in truth.

    Me??? Well I have walked eleven couple of hounds,reared one little hound on one of my bull terriers..as her dam had fourteen whelps and she was precious being by a Peterborough Champion. So,What truthfully have YOU done ,Eh??

   And of course ,if it takes vile bigoted comments like yours of late to be "one of us" then count me,for one, out.You are exactly why hunting has this appalling image ..and one of the main reasons a ban was fuelled so well.

  You ask "compassion for who"..incredibly..for all those wasted lives in WW11 of course,the innocents who were annihilated...actually amazed you even ask.


----------



## rosie fronfelen (2 November 2010)

EAST KENT said:



			Well then,if I am "not one of us"  (thank God if you are typical) JM..lets ask a few questions as to what ,exactly,contribution to your hunt/hunting in general have you done. Anything??? Nothing??? Apart from attend on a horse,and actually I doubt you do that in truth.

    Me??? Well I have walked eleven couple of hounds,reared one little hound on one of my bull terriers..as her dam had fourteen whelps and she was precious being by a Peterborough Champion. So,What truthfully have YOU done ,Eh??

   And of course ,if it takes vile bigoted comments like yours of late to be "one of us" then count me,for one, out.You are exactly why hunting has this appalling image ..and one of the main reasons a ban was fuelled so well.

  You ask "compassion for who"..incredibly..for all those wasted lives in WW11 of course,the innocents who were annihilated...actually amazed you even ask.
		
Click to expand...

you do realise EK, that you wont get answers to your questions-well, you'll be lucky if you do- bothhe and Dragon slayer need putting in room 101.


----------



## MissySmythe (2 November 2010)

rosiefronfelen said:



			i stick by what i say, and also this has gone miles away from the OP, so can we possibly return as all this is irrelevent to her post?
		
Click to expand...

On the first point Rosie I also stick by what I said to back up your view. As an historian (albeit this is only part of my job), who works with other historians, I feel perfectly justified in taking that view and my colleagues agree.
On the second I think this thread has gone far too far already to return to what basically seems to be an unsubstantiated report, but there you go, ignition. Let's see whether H&H has anything to report on the matter.

Have a good evening everyone.


----------



## EAST KENT (2 November 2010)

rosiefronfelen said:



			you do realise EK, that you wont get answers to your questions-well, you'll be lucky if you do- both he and Dragon slayer need putting in room 101.
		
Click to expand...

Oh absolutely Rosie..after all I very much doubt if JM or DS have contributed anything at all to hunting in their lifetime (in the singular) I,however ,am not anonymous at all,and do not need to pathetically hide behind an internet persona.
   Room 101..oh you`re too kind!!!!


----------



## rosie fronfelen (2 November 2010)

I think "an" sounds better than "a" historian anyway!!


----------



## Springs (2 November 2010)

Wow! whats been going on in here!!!

There are quite a few different and diverse ideas popping up!

I am not going to name the hunt, but you may work out from my location which one it was, or the ones cloes by. I am going out again in a week or twos time and I hope to be able to stay out a little longer than 1 a bit hours. I know jaz will too and I would prefer that day not to be interupted by some idiot!


Was the pereson or persons reported to the police - I have no idea.

I'll pop back when I get a chance 

Springs


----------



## Judgemental (2 November 2010)

This has become a really exciting ride!

Have only just seen all this after a cracking day's hunting.

Simsar  and Dragon Slayer thank you for your support.

I am going to contemplate the position/debate and return shortly with some fresh invective.

In the mean time my friends, be mindful of _agent provocateurs_. 

This thread is probably one of the most dangerous for those opposed to hunting, that has ever appeared on this forum.


----------



## EAST KENT (2 November 2010)

Judgemental said:



			This has become a really exciting ride!

Have only just seen all this after a cracking day's hunting.

Simsar  and Dragon Slayer thank you for your support.

I am going to contemplate the position/debate and return shortly with some fresh invective.

In the mean time my friends, be mindful of _agent provocateurs_. 

This thread is probably one of the most dangerous for those opposed to hunting, that has ever appeared on this forum.
		
Click to expand...

Oh , please don`t bother.


----------



## rosie fronfelen (2 November 2010)

EAST KENT said:



			Oh absolutely Rosie..after all I very much doubt if JM or DS have contributed anything at all to hunting in their lifetime (in the singular) I,however ,am not anonymous at all,and do not need to pathetically hide behind an internet persona.
   Room 101..oh you`re too kind!!!!

Click to expand...

i dont see the point of remaining anonymous as is obvious with my name-unless there is something to hide or you are part of MI6!!!


----------



## Dobby (2 November 2010)

Haven't read this whole thread, but I am a whole hearted supporter of the Hunt Sabs and hope one day to take part in one, even if it's just holding a placard and shouting a bit. Well done to all those who stopped this hunt!


----------



## bonnie93 (2 November 2010)

Dobby said:



			Haven't read this whole thread, but I am a whole hearted supporter of the Hunt Sabs and hope one day to take part in one, even if it's just holding a placard and shouting a bit. Well done to all those who stopped this hunt!
		
Click to expand...

dear me, if you think being a hunt sabs involves holding a placard you are sadly mistaken, they are scum of the earth who unfortunately cause more pain to animals on the hunt field than the hounds will to the fox!!!

i am all for people having their own opinion and PEACEFULLY showing their views, but sabs are violent, up for a fight thugs.  they say its cruel to hunt a fox, but will catch a couple of hounds and hang them on a gate, disgusting.

the posts on here have intrigued me, but the simple OP shows just how low the sabs are


----------



## Paddydou (2 November 2010)

Judgemental said:



			In the mean time my friends, be mindful of _agent provocateurs_.
		
Click to expand...

Oh get over yourself JM - it really is dull.

How very sad that you feel the need to intice argument with inflamitory remarks that are contrived to spark anger. 

And google "Agent Provocateur" you will find that time has moved on and you have just brought kinky underwear into the equasion!

As for this being "dangerous" I suggest you take up a new sport such as white water rafting, bungee jumping etc if you are not getting enough kicks on the field.

Dobby its not that people are anti hunting that most hunting folk have a problem with - its causing unneccessary harm to an animal. A point which both sides agree on and seem to have totally forgotten about in their arguments with each other! Hold up your placard believe in what you think is right but don't go causing harm to animals that you are claiming to protect!


----------



## nativetyponies (2 November 2010)

"He", JM, is actually a "she"..so in truth,  no balls at all.


----------



## Battyoldbint (2 November 2010)

nativeponies said:



			"He", JM, is actually a "she"..so in truth,  no balls at all.


Click to expand...

apart from the loads she talks lol


----------



## JanetGeorge (2 November 2010)

Springs said:



			I am not going to name the hunt, but you may work out from my location which one it was, or the ones cloes by. I am going out again in a week or twos time and I hope to be able to stay out a little longer than 1 a bit hours. I know jaz will too and I would prefer that day not to be interupted by some idiot!
		
Click to expand...

Shropshire is actually not that much help!  The fact you posted on October 31st (and probably didn't wait a week to post about Opening Meet) is a clear indication it wasn't the Shropshire hunt that my OH is Jt. Master of - as their Opening Meet was a week earlier.

And strange that news of this hasn't reached him - after all, professional huntsmen gossip more than almost any other professionals I know - and our huntsman hasn't heard a dicky bird about these goings on.

I WISH hunt supporters could stick to the facts.  The fact that Hitler banned hunting has NOTHING to do with today's arguments in the UK.  The FACT that some hunt sabs are more into class warfare than animal welfare does NOT mean that many people are not opposed to hunting for genuine animal welfare reasons.  We may think they're misguided - or not acquainted with all the facts - but they are entitled to hold their views without us insulting them (as long as they don't resort to violence in an attempt to get those views across to us!)

A lot of people BECOME opposed to hunting because SOME hunting supporters present ludicrous arguments in support of hunting - often in an offensive or insulting way.  Others become opposed to hunting because they have been victims of thoughtless and arrogant behaviour by hunts and/or hunting people!

This thread has strayed WAY off topic and probably done more harm to hunting than a lot of anti activities could hope to!  I - for one - would be very surprised if sabs DID take a live fox to a meet.  Sabs are a very mixed group - and such an act could easily alienate their own supporters - as well as proving a very expensive own goal if they were caught!

If I'm wrong, then I hope that the hunt concerned reported the incident to the MFHA Sab hotline - along with the registration numbers of vehicles involved!  That information would then be circulated to other hunts who can be on theiur guard if those vehicles appear at their location.

In the meantime, can we STOP scoring own goals by insulting those who disagree with us - and bringing up ancient (and irrelevent) history in support of hunting.  The FACT is that the vast majority of hunts ARE hunting within the (ridiculous) law that currently prevails!  And MOST hunts are having little or no problems with sabs (only a hardcore remain from the old days!)


----------



## MerrySherryRider (2 November 2010)

Judgemental said:



			This thread is probably one of the most dangerous for those opposed to hunting, that has ever appeared on this forum.
		
Click to expand...

Its ok, as long as you keep quiet, the debate may continue to salvage some of the damage you've done to the reputation of the hunting faternity.


----------



## Judgemental (2 November 2010)

The impression given by many of the posts today, that there are a remarkable number of folk appearing out of the woodwork to defend the action of these Sabs/Gestapo.

All my hunting friends were talking about the incident and were saying it was a useful wake-up call, that these scum will try an act as agent provocateurs. The definition of it in the Oxford Dictionary; person employed to tempt somebody into self-incriminating action.

Clearly that is what was attempted with the hunt concerned.

However, my whole argument is that our freedom has been taken to hunt a fox, wherever, whenever and howsoever.  

FREEDOM is important. Tony Blair took our freedom to hunt as did Hitler.

Now leaving aside the incident in Shropshire but I take the report at face value, (what else can one do on this forum) we are all aware of these self-appointed Hunt Monitors. Former Saboteurs who attend hunts with the sole intention of hoping that hounds will hunt a fox either by accident or deliberately, film it and give the evidence to the police.

I have been told that there is a financial reward from Anti-Hunting organisations if a criminal conviction can be secured  indeed the figure I have been given is at least £1,000.00

That attitude is exactly similar to the conduct of Hitlers Gestapo.

Remarkably there are people on this forum who purport to support fox hunting, who think I should not be saying these things.

Why not?

It appears a significant damage limitation exercise is being mounted by those who are clearly embarrassed that what seems to be a ham fisted incident, by what sounds like inexperienced Sabs, has found its way onto this forum.

That has caused the sleepers  i.e. those we think support hunting and chatter about this forum as if they are of kindred spirits, when in truth they are spies and informers looking for information to indentify illegal hunting. 

However this event has flushed a number out into the open.


----------



## JanetGeorge (2 November 2010)

Judgemental said:



			Remarkably there are people on this forum who purport to support fox hunting, who think I should not be saying these things.

Why not?
		
Click to expand...

Um - because it makes you look/sound like an idiot - which I don't think you are!


----------



## Battyoldbint (2 November 2010)

Judgemental said:



			It appears a significant damage limitation exercise is being mounted by those who are clearly embarrassed that what seems to be a ham fisted incident, by what sounds like inexperienced Sabs, has found its way onto this forum.

That has caused the sleepers  i.e. those we think support hunting and chatter about this forum as if they are of kindred spirits, when in truth they are spies and informers looking for information to indentify illegal hunting. 

However this event has flushed a number out into the open.
		
Click to expand...


OMG do you realise just how paranoid you sound?


----------



## Judgemental (2 November 2010)

JanetGeorge said:



			Um - because it makes you look/sound like an idiot - which I don't think you are!

Click to expand...

You mean that you are content for Sabs and their ilk, to follow hunts filming everybody in the field etc which is an invasion of their privacy?

Notwithstanding the action of agent provocateurs with a £1,000.00 incentive to catch a hunt illegally hunting, a new feature rolled out this season.

So Mrs George, I would be interested in your views on FREEDOM SO FAR AS HUNTING IS CONCERNED?

(I am well aware of your former professional interest in the former BFSS)


----------



## Judgemental (2 November 2010)

Whilst I am on the subject, my sources have suggested that The League are financing their supporters to infitrate hunt's as members - indeed even mounted and to look the part.


----------



## MerrySherryRider (2 November 2010)

Judgemental said:



			That has caused the sleepers  i.e. those we think support hunting and chatter about this forum as if they are of kindred spirits, when in truth they are spies and informers looking for information to indentify illegal hunting. 

However this event has flushed a number out into the open.
		
Click to expand...

How bizarre.


----------



## deicinmerlyn (2 November 2010)

horserider said:



			How bizarre.
		
Click to expand...


Quite

Delusions of grandeur and a paranoid/persecutory thought disorder


----------



## M_G (2 November 2010)

Judgemental said:



			I said "don't forget, that many men and women went to war in WWII because of Hitler's actions concerning hunting, not because he invaded Poland.
		
Click to expand...

PMSL I cant believe you really wrote this


----------



## Paddydou (2 November 2010)

I think I want to kiss Janet George. Its ok Janet I won't use tounges.

Its so nice when someone is so clear and to the point with out being a total and utter *I am not allowed to swear in public so shall refrain insert your own here*.

I think somebody actually needs to get a life rather than posting a load of twaddle on t'internet that causes inflamitory responses anda bad name for the masses. 

There is always one bad apple in the cart isn't there.


----------



## Paddydou (2 November 2010)

Judgemental said:



			Whilst I am on the subject, my sources have suggested that The League are financing their supporters to infitrate hunt's as members - indeed even mounted and to look the part.
		
Click to expand...

I hear that there are drugs you can take for this.


----------



## Judgemental (2 November 2010)

Dragon Slayer was on the receiving end of all the Antis invective during the morning.

Seems I am the fox this evening.

At least we now know who all the Antis are on this forum!

They have been neatly flushed out


----------



## Paddydou (2 November 2010)

Dear God I am now a balaclava clad anti... 

If I didn't know better I would say I have gone mad! I am so glad that this world is full of a wonderful spectrum of people but seriously this is taking that spectrum far too far!

I can not even begin to comprehend just what you think you are achiveing here? I am just so glad that you really are as unique as you are or this world would be in serious trouble...

Can we please please get some common sense and basic sanity back into this forum? Pretty please????


----------



## Alec Swan (2 November 2010)

Judgemental said:



			Dragon Slayer was on the receiving end of all the Antis invective during the morning.

Seems I am the fox this evening.

At least we now know who all the Antis are on this forum!

They have been neatly flushed out
		
Click to expand...

JM old bean,  

I think that it's time for a deep breath,  perhaps.

Alec.


----------



## sms (2 November 2010)

Judgemental said:



			Dragon Slayer was on the receiving end of all the Antis invective during the morning.

Seems I am the fox this evening.

At least we now know who all the Antis are on this forum!

They have been neatly flushed out
		
Click to expand...

I think you are an anti! You've flushed yourself out and done a fabulous job in convincing me never to set hoof on a hunting field! Bravo I wonder how many other potential newcomers you've put off!


----------



## rubysmum (2 November 2010)

sms said:



			I think you are an anti! You've flushed yourself out and done a fabulous job in convincing me never to set hoof on a hunting field! Bravo I wonder how many other potential newcomers you've put off!
		
Click to expand...

.....


----------



## rubysmum (2 November 2010)

Judgemental said:



			Dragon Slayer was on the receiving end of all the Antis invective during the morning.

Seems I am the fox this evening.

At least we now know who all the Antis are on this forum!

They have been neatly flushed out
		
Click to expand...

sorry - but this reads like a John Bucchan pastiche - is this really your perception of how people think & behave??


----------



## rosie fronfelen (2 November 2010)

I hope and pray this thread is pulled sooner than later- lunacy and paranoia are taking over and its getting ugly.


----------



## MissySmythe (2 November 2010)

rosiefronfelen said:



			I hope and pray this thread is pulled sooner than later- lunacy and paranoia are taking over and its getting ugly.
		
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. Enough said.


----------



## rosie fronfelen (3 November 2010)

nativeponies said:



			"He", JM, is actually a "she"..so in truth,  no balls at all.


Click to expand...

seriously, how do you know?


----------

