"Sacha" wrote in message
k...
On 24/11/04 8:31, in article ,
"Kay"
wrote:

In article , Sacha
writes
On 23/11/04 10:32 pm, in article ,
"Mike Lyle"
wrote:


The Telegraph piece wasn't about Labour Party policy, it was
about an
MP's view of the attitudes of those who opposed him. As I said
upthread, it's an interesting point of view if you take it along
with
reactions to "right-to-roam" and such.

I can see why some people are angry about the decision, sure;
but
there's no point in being inaccurate about it.


I don't see what is inaccurate. All along the Labour party has
presented
this as a concern for animal welfare. Now they admit it isn't.
To me,
that's very simple.

Not to me. For the second time you have talked about the Labour
Party
admitting that it is class war, and I don't understand where you
have
got this from. Even if you interpret Peter Bradley's article that
way
(and I think you are wrong to do so), that is still the views of a
single MP, and not, as Mike has said, a statement of Labour
policy.

From The Shropshire Star
"Labour MP Peter Bradley has admitted that class warfare lay at the
heart of
the battle over the future of fox hunting, which was finally
outlawed by
Parliament last week. "

Your cognitive powers need honing. Neither the Shropshire Star not
Mr. Peter Bradley are organs of the Labour Party. Mr. Peter Bradley's
rantings are not Labour Party policy.

I take it that within your belief system you also believe that the
Conservative Party policy is advocating the return of hanging.
Dear me, it has just occurred to md that you actually might well be of
that opinion.

[snip]

Franz