On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 10:59:44 +0000,
wrote:

In message ,
writes
On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 22:33:59 +0000,
wrote:

In message , Christina Websell
writes

wrote in message
...
In message ,
writes
On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 15:01:52 +0000,
wrote:

In message ,
writes
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 22:38:29 +0000,
wrote:

In message ,
writes
Press Release 19th Feb 2007

SHAMEFUL ADMISSION BY SCOTLAND'S SHOOTING INDUSTRY

LEAGUE AGAINST CRUEL SPORTS CONDEMNS TREATMENT OF GAME BIRDS

The Game Conservancy Trust has admitted the welfare of many game birds
was jeopardised this season by transporting the birds hundreds of
miles in hot weather.

I was sure you had always held the view that translocation wasn't
harmful to animals.

Are you suggesting you were wrong?




Since you've decided not to be sensible and discontinue posting your
rubbish,

Angus I do not consider giving in to attempts to brow beat, bully or
intimidate me into silence sensible. So in your terms no I haven't
decided to be sensible - which I assumes means I haven't given in to
your attempts to silence me ;-))))

I notice however your resorting to abuse is getting greater. Surely you
realise abuse is the last refuge of the coward and the bully.


Since you've decided not to be sensible and discontinue posting your
rubbish, I

Angus I do not consider giving in to attempts to brow beat, bully or
intimidate me into silence sensible. So in your terms no I haven't
decided to be sensible - which I assumes means I haven't given in to your
attempts to silence me ;-))))

I notice however your resorting to abuse is getting greater. Surely you
realise abuse is the last refuge of the coward and the bully.


I really do appreciate how you take him on so bravely. It might be the best
thing to do ignore completely now, yes?


I am sorry but now is not the time to ignore Angus.

At the moment he is trying to coerce/bully/intimidate me into not
posting.

I'm not trying to intimidate you Malcolm.

So you admit to the coercing and bullying :-))))))


Not at all.


You seldom post any meaningful responses and just act as a sock puppet
for Dr Thick with an endless flow of garbage such as the most recent
concerning relocation. You are comparing the relocation of hedgehogs
for their own benefit with the transport of pheasant chicks by truck
where large numbers die before they reach their destination. That is
just plain stupid.

Angus I am afraid that translocation is translocation. Calves
transported suffer sometimes from "transit fever" or shock pneumonia.


Not for their own good.

Why the animal as being moved doesn't remove the problem. The problem
remains.

Not at all. The reason behind the removal determines whether it is a
problem or not.


You seem to think that because they are being moved "for their own good"
they will not suffer.


It has been shown that the hedgehogs don't.

This is not so.

See above.



This I **WILL NOT** do.

Ok.


I am sorry for all concerned I have suggested that kill filing the pair
of us would be best as I intend to keep on for months or years rather
than be silenced.

Another stupid statement. If people do as you suggest, the effect
will be the same as not posting at all. :-))



I see you haven't answered this because you probably realise how
stupid you are being by backing yourself into a corner like this :-))


As I have said in the past I have no objection to answering you posts
if they are not stupid sniping like the one above.

Angus I am not going to change usenet practice just because you don't
like it.


I'm not asking you to change usenet practice, merely to look at the
responses I've given to Dr Thick.


You appear to have snipped what Christina said and find that acceptable.


No I haven't . This is a separate post

And you, like
Malcolm Ogilvie are not capable of arguing your case in a coherent
manner without attacking me on a personal basis - to which I shall
respond in.kind.

What personal attack have I launched?


On many occasions you falsely attack me rather than the issue,
"intellectually challenged" springs to mind among a host of other
denigrating descriptions because I challenge the fake
conservationists.

You began the present situation by deciding that you were going to
answer all my posts with a one liner which was abusive of the person you
choose to call DR Thick.


Sure because I was responding to Dr Thick and said to you "See my
responses to Dr Thick" You're not Dr Thick's keeper or protector. I
certainly wasn't abusing you.

And Dr Thick abuses me on many occasions which you seem to ignore.

I responded it kind.

I am quite happy that you either respond or not to my posts.

If you respond with abusive one liners etc. I will respond in kind.

But I'm not abusing you. I'm referring you to my responses to Dr
Thick.



If you don't respond fair enough. However when I ask a question and you
don't respond it is hard to know if you have missed the post or are
trying to avoid the post.

That's why I responded.


Can you suggest a way in which I will know?


By seeing my response that refers you to my responses to Dr thick.


I am quite happy to bring all this nonsense to a close if you are
prepared to post sensibly.

Angus I feel that all I do is use usenet. You have as does anyone else
the choice of responding or not.

Which I have been doing and not abusing you.


I will respond if I feel I have a point to make or a question to ask.


So will I.


If I am met by abuse to myself OR OTHERS I will respond in kind.


So are you setting yourself up as this ng's protector?

Or just a sock puppet for Dr Thick?


I am also not stupid enough to let this go on for "months or years".

Good. I however am if necessary.

So you're stupid enough?


Please read this carefully try to understand my point of view and then
either respond or not as you feel fit.

However I WILL NOT stop posting merely because you would like me to.

Nor me. And if I think it is fitting to refer you to my responses to
another poster.


I am sorry that I have replied to a large number of posts before this.
That is due to the way my news reader presents them to me.

I shall not reply to any more of your cut and pastes in this session
until I see what sort of a reply ( or not ) I get to this post.

Good, so I shan't respond to your until I get an answer.

But before all this I would like you to consider the responses I have
copied and pasted about Malcolm Ogilvie.

He is a PhD and advisor for a leading government agency and yet comes
away with some amazing garbage. In my view that qualifies me for
calling him Dr Thick and I don't consider it abuse; it is merely a
label he has well and truly earned.

The one smart thing he's done in the past few days is leave you to
carry the can of repetitive posting which he sensibly abandoned after
one day :-))

Do you never feel used?




Angus Macmillan
www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
www.killhunting.org
www.con-servation.org.uk

All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident.
-- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)